by Leonard J Sherrott

Created on: July 26, 2008

There is only one conceivable advantage to public housing being tendered to private management. It is possible that a profitable organization specializing in public housing would be able to reduce the waiting lists by increasing the number of properties available.

Public housing however, is a by-product of a welfare state. It is designed to provide a home for those living in low socio-economic circumstances. For many reasons there is no sense whatsoever in allowing privatisation of such a program.

Historically, the most problematic issue of privatisation is the increased cost of infrastructure maintenance, generally magnified by the government's manipulation of accounts for the purpose of marketing the sale. In short, the organization that buys a government service has no hope of matching the budget as it is purported to be.

As a result, one of two things will inevitably occur. Either the rent will almost immediately increase, thereby defeating the purpose of the scheme, or support services would dramatically deteriorate. (e.g) Would the alternative managers be prepared to absorb the cost of despatching emergency repairers after hours?

Who in their right mind would want to manage a poisoned chalice like public government housing anyway? The occupants of those dwellings are unlikely to be in a position to meet increased costs. Many may be unemployable. It would take a court order in the least to have them removed, if that was possible. In a lot of cases the properties will be in a state of disrepair, whether deliberate or not and costs will not be recovered from the perpetrators of any damage incurred.

Taking the hypothetical question of eviction to its final conclusion, one obvious question remains: Where does a family live after being evicted from public housing? The answer is simple. We have travelled the full circle and the government finds itself responsible once again for the welfare of its people.

The government elected by the state must provide for the state. Taking away their basic needs by selling them off will breed poverty and ensure a reduced tenure.
Any government which offloads essential services is on a collision course with its constituency. Public housing is the most fundamental of services and could never
be managed adequately by any other body.

In some countries public transport, telecommunications, roads and even utilities have been privatised. Generally, the first major adjustment is in employment. People have been replaced by ticket machines and robotic answering machines. One can only wonder where costs would be cut in the essential maintenance of privatised public housing.

Learn more about this author, Leonard J Sherrott.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.