THE EDITOR, Sir:
I THINK the government is in error when it conspires to divert five billion dollars from the trust fund for housing to shore up the finances of enterprises other than the providing of homes for contributors to the fund. This raises serious questions as to whether the directors have the authority to permit a non-contributor to access the trust funds without mortgage obligations or collateral. It will be interesting to see if the Opposition or the duly authorised forces of law and order are prepared to do their duty in this case.
Blemished behaviour aside, I think the manipulation of funds underscores a point I have long tried to make: that the National Housing Trust Act should he drastically revised, so that the tax imposition be abolished and the institution begins to operate with voluntary contributors only. I suggest that after the abolition, the former housing tax be cut in half and then added to the fund for education. Such an arrangement would ease the burden of taxation on workers and their employers, legally increase the funds available for education and at the same time do no harm to the legislated objectives of the National Housing Trust (NHT).
POOL OF FUNDS
The NHT was introduced some 30 years ago for the expressed purpose of creating a pool of funds to assist low-income contributors to become house owners. The Housing Trust Act makes it crystal clear that "The functions of the Trust shall be to add to and improve the existing supply of housing by promoting housing projects to such extent as may from time to time be approved by the Minister ..." This purpose has been well served in the past and should continue accordingly. However, the NHT has become so flooded with funds that it is getting into various projects that have nothing to do with housing for the people.
Money for the NHT's capital and operating expenditures now vastly exceeds that of any private company in the business; and at last counting it had more than $36 billion of mortgage loans on its books. Its declared assets are much more and in addition it has a guaranteed intake of at least a billion dollars of new tax funds every year. Despite this, the Government continues to forcibly milk the overburdened workers and their employers for more and still more money.
Every working person, citizen or not, getting at least the minimum wage, is required to contribute to the NHT. The contributor paying a mortgage to the NHT still has to give up another two per cent of his or her wage to satisfy the ever-growing belly of the institution; and those who fall behind are subject to usurious penalties. The majority of contributors are generally denied participation in the benefits of the fund, but now we see that the non-contributing Government can get five billion dollars by simply saying it needs the money for a good cause. What message does this send to the hungry person with an eye on his or her neighbour's goods! This act is immoral and, further, its legality should be tested in the courts.
Any organisation with the NHT's enormous capital base and state backing should be able to operate successfully on its profits and without this everlasting imposition of taxes even where there is no need for it. It is time for a voluntary system that could attract contributors who may wish to borrow NHT funds at mortgage rates higher than that given to low-income participants. It should be possible by effective screening to adjust mortgage rates without violating the objectives of the Trust; and in the end, every contributor would have the right to borrow on terms favourable to housing development and the viability of the NHT.
I am, etc.,
KEN JONES
alllerdyce@hotmail.com
