“A comfortable home is a great source of happiness. It ranks immediately after health and a good conscience.” — Sydney Smith
The above quote from Smith perhaps captures one of the rights of a citizen that the State should provide, shelter, aside from health, water, education, and food security. These rights are to be guaranteed by a State as part of its covenant with its citizens, the people it is supposed to serve. The citizens, for their part, are to conduct their business in a legitimate way — the state provides the environment, the justice system and law and order so that citizens can create viable enterprises that will allow them to pay the taxes that the State needs to provide these essential services with a minimum level of quality. That is basically the two-way covenant, and for it to survive, the State needs to create a vigorous middle class. A strong and participative citizenry conscious of its civic obligations is therefore essential to the survival of a democracy, if not civilization itself.
Smith captures the role of housing/shelter in a human being’s life and how it promotes good order in society. Smith was regarded as one of the foremost English preachers from the late 1770s to the time of his death in 1845. He was also known as a wit and moral philosopher whose father was an equally popular preacher. He had obliged Sydney to become a cleric rather than pursue a career in law. Sydney studied chemistry and medicine and was known to have performed community work. Proof of his credibility was the huge, standing-room-only audiences he attracted.
How relevant is this quote from Smith and tidbits from his life to our present situation as a country? Especially with respect to having a comfortable home which Smith believed “ranks immediately after health and a good conscience”?
Secretary Jose Rizalino Acuzar of the resuscitated Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development (DHSUD) has, with the approval of the Philippines’ top chief executive, Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., and with the support of Congress and the Local Government Units (LGUs), has come up with the long-delayed but ambitious housing program called the Pambansang Pabahay Para sa Pilipino Housing (4PH) Program. The aim of 4PH, a brainchild of Acuzar which he took up with Marcos Jr. as early as the 2022 presidential campaign period, aims to bridge the country’s housing backlog, pegged at more than 6.5 million units as of the end of 2022. This will hopefully be achieved by building one million houses per year for the next six years, or up to 2028.
Some housing advocates and lawmakers have described 4PH as “innovative and out-of-the box” because they claim that it “is unlike the traditional housing program that depends solely on government funding in the implementation of housing projects.” Data shows that if the same traditional approach is adopted, the country’s housing backlog could balloon to about 11 million units by 2028, according to DHSUD.
The brains behind 4PH state that the program’s strength is that it addresses the two main bottlenecks in the housing sector — affordability and access to funds. Taking a different tack, the program focuses on the provision of interest support (estimated at P35 billion a year) to beneficiaries.
Reflecting on the innate multiplier effect of housing programs, the DHSUD asserts that full blast construction could trigger economic activities to 80 allied industries like cement, steel, lumber, etc., and create job opportunities for 1.7 million workers a year.
The program taps investible funds from government financial institutions and the private sector by promoting public-private partnerships and joint venture agreements in the housing sector.
In a recent update, DHSUD emphasized that the Pag-IBIG Fund has allocated P250 billion for 4PH while both the Land Bank of the Philippines (a financial institution created to support the agrarian reform program) and the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) have expressed willingness to support it. We, however, wonder how the proposed merger of the two banks or the rumored absorption by LANDBANK of the DBP could affect these well laid out plans of Acuzar.
At the operating level, the 4PH strategy is to prioritize vertical housing and mixed-use development, obviously to maximize land use where the topography of the area will allow full development of vertical housing. Part of the 4PH strategy is to focus on informal-settler families and low-income earners.
What are the respective roles of employers and LGUs whose support in any national program is essential? The LGUs are involved in the project conceptualization, identification of beneficiaries, and the sustainability of the program. One aspect worth seriously examining is to what extent, if any, will aspects of the program be devolved to LGUs? In general — and this may be a sweeping statement — the National Government has not been too effective in implementing national programs.
How has the 4PH progressed since its high profile launch several months ago, shortly after Acuzar was confirmed by the Commission on Appointments?
The DHSUD reports that 142 Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) were signed with LGUs and 25 ground-breaking ceremonies completed. In addition to soliciting the support of LGUs, the DHSUD is relentlessly engaging other stakeholders, most recently with the urban poor and Overseas Filipino Workers (OFW) groups.
The stakeholders are, of course, the lawmakers, LGUs, key shelter agencies, private developers, civic organizations, and other groups which have been keenly interested in housing as a key growth area.
After a few months on the job, Acuzar, who ought to know what he’s talking about having earned his spurs at the National Housing Authority (NHA) in the 1970s, proclaims that the program is inclusive and sustainable “so no one will be left behind.” He says he has engaged various cause-oriented groups, the urban poor, and even our OFWs to get their input and align their respective programs to 4PH.
Acuzar adds that “for some, building one million homes per year is ambitious, if not impossible. But I strongly believe that it can be done if we work together and synchronize efforts of all stakeholders in the housing sector, both public and private.”
Acuzar insists that 4PH has a twin goal of producing decent and affordable shelters and establishing sustainable and inclusive housing communities. The chief executive of the DHSUD, which is the lead agency in the management of housing and human settlements, says that in every housing project, “he espouses township development to ensure the livability of every family that will occupy these dwelling places.”
By township projects, Acuzar means “mixed-use development to provide the inhabitants easy access to sources of livelihood and basic services within their communities.” The program is also guided by the very definition of transit-oriented development to maximize the amount of residential, commercial and leisure spaces within walking distance or easy access to public transportation.
Solving the housing shortage is obviously a gargantuan task, and problems of this magnitude will always require, with no exception, an inter-agency, multi-disciplinary approach, bearing in mind that the problem of the mushrooming of communities of informal settlers appears to be, at first glance, a housing problem, and to a great extent, a livelihood problem. People go where money is to be made whether it is in vending cigarettes, washing cars, or doing other people’s laundry, or engaging in petty theft and street crime.
Philip Ella Juico’s areas of interest include the protection and promotion of democracy, free markets, sustainable development, social responsibility and sports as a tool for social development. He obtained his doctorate in business at De La Salle University. Dr. Juico served as secretary of Agrarian Reform during the Corazon C. Aquino administration.
