Open mike: Bermuda Homes for People

Another chance to talk about a subject of your choice.

First comment sets the topic for debate. As usual, if you ask a question, please provide your own thoughts on the subject too, even if it's in a subsequent comment.

» Loki asks: "Do you believe that the Bermuda Government is ultimately responsible for the failure of the Bermuda Homes For People scheme?"

Comments

[loki on 20.09.05 at 13:10]

Do you believe that the Bermuda Government is ultimately responsible for the failure of the Bermuda Homes For People scheme?

I believe that, yes, the Government is entirely responsible, especially as they had no difficulty in putting the scheme forward as a 'partnership' between the public and private sector.

Discuss.

[Kate on 20.09.05 at 13:32]

I find it hard to discern exactly what happened from the media coverage (this, of course, may just be that I'm dim). As it was, or appeared to be, a joint enterprise then the Government must shoulder at least some of the blame. However, with everybody blaming someone else it is hard to see the wood for the trees.

Funny though, the Government has no difficulty in finding new residences for the Premier, ex-Premier and for Gus Logie. I guess that this is an indication of where their priorities lie.

[blovator on 20.09.05 at 13:46]

The government is not particularly forthcoming with information and so interpretting events from Media coverage is difficult.

[SmokingGun on 20.09.05 at 13:56]

Pie in the sky, money making get rich quick scheme without a solid basis for making it actually work or just a bunch of do gooders without a clue or connection. Was the government really involved from the get go? Were the initial proponents promising more than they could deliver? Once too many fingers got in the honey jar did some choose to cut bait and split? One massive botched up job all around. Blew in like Nate. All wind and no action. Hopefully some lessons learned and something will come out of it but not the way this was thrown up. Square one.

[loki on 20.09.05 at 13:57]

For me, the main points that make me tend to think that Government must shoulder the blame here are:

1. They took credit for the scheme when it was first announced;

2. They sold people false hope and tried to score huge brownie points in relation to "The Price is Right" scenes that we winessed at Ruth Seaton James Auditorium;

3. The Minister could, and should have ordered the BLDC to hand over the property. He didn't do this;

4. The project was ambitious at best from the get-go, and yet no one in Government seemingly had the foresight to see this;

5. They can intervene to find Gus Logie and family affordable housing, and yet trying to get a public affordable housing scheme off the ground is too much work for them?

Do these people have no shame?

[Tiger Bay on 20.09.05 at 14:07]

"The Minister could, and should, have ordered the BLDC to hand over the property."

I disagree. BLDC has had a long range development plan for SouthSide - including both commercial and residential - that they have been plugging away at for years without Government interest, funding, or support. If the PLP wanted results they should have stuck to the existing mechanism and helped it fulfill its plans - instead of overriding it with the whim o'the day.

The PLP Government has gotten used to "free gifts" from intl business. They forget that businesses and people who want to "do good" do not want their energy wasted through political idiocy.

The PLP were inexperienced and inept leaders in 1998. The sad thing is that they still are in 2005. After 20 years in opposition, all Alex Scott knows is smooth words and "back room politics" and this has translated very poorly into public leadership.

[sandgrownan on 20.09.05 at 14:23]

Without knowing all the details (perhaps I shouldn't even comment!) it seems to me that if a party (in this case government) stands up and hails a new initiative, takes the credit to much fanfare, create hope for many and so on, that when the scheme fails that same party has to take the responsibility.

Sadly, it's not really a surprise with this government and "Tiger" sums it up nicely.

"The PLP were inexperienced and inept leaders in 1998. The sad thing is that they still are in 2005"

[loki on 20.09.05 at 14:25]

"I disagree. BLDC has had a long range development plan for SouthSide - including both commercial and residential"

That's not the point or, indeed, my point: I don't believe that the project was properly thought out, at all. However, once Government had decided to go through with the project, it should have used the powers at its disposal to ensure the project's completion. What actually seems to have happened here is that, once they'd got some good publicity, they dropped the BHP in the deep end and did nothing to assist.

[Tiger Bay on 20.09.05 at 14:31]

Agreed on that point. They take the credit for BHP but don't think through the implications (for example, BLDC needed the income from the Marginal Wharf commercial tenants in order to pursue its overall development plan).

Ditto for the "trailer homes" that they have brought in - they buy them without thinking through where to put them (never mind the fact that they are an inefficient use of space). Expensive knee jerk effort that backfires.

DeVent is an embarrassing and destructive failure.

[Slowhand on 20.09.05 at 14:33]

Should we consider this question first?

Who would have taken most if not all the credit, had the initiative actually taken off?

[Onion on 20.09.05 at 14:34]

Kate writes:

"Funny though, the Government has no difficulty in finding new residences for the Premier, ex-Premier and for Gus Logie. I guess that this is an indication of where their priorities lie.

Posted by Kate on 20.09.05 at 13:32"

Kate, as far as Gus Logie goes he is our national cricket coach, a paid employee of the Bermuda Cricket Board and a part of his contract includes getting housing, no different from the XL executive. He is not a Bermudian who cannot afford housing.

[Slowhand on 20.09.05 at 14:37]

"DeVent is an embarrassing and destructive failure."

But he has Dreads! And he's so cool, has lots to say..... he even had his own radio show!!

[loki on 20.09.05 at 14:37]

"DeVent is an embarrassing and destructive failure."

Agreed, but he's only one member of Cabinet. This is a much wider problem with this Government that Mr. DeVent. It's a shame that the PLP never seems to let the brightest and most capable sparks in the party rise through the ranks.

[sandgrownan on 20.09.05 at 14:41]

Loki is right too, he is only one member of Cabinet. For example, I think the Minister for Holistic Affairs and Blakeney exist only to make people like De Vent and the rest look good!

[kate on 20.09.05 at 14:42]

Onion

My point exactly. He is not a government employee but the government have found him a government home. He is an ex-pat, not a Bermudian in need.

The implication being that the Government feel that the performance of the cricket team is more important that Bermudians in need. If XL could not find housing for a member of staff the Government would not step in to help.

[observor on 20.09.05 at 14:44]

"It's a shame that the PLP never seems to let the brightest and most capable sparks in the party rise through the ranks."

In fariness to the brightest and most capable, who would want to rise to the top of the shit heap the PLP have created?

[Kate on 20.09.05 at 14:50]

I would also know how many of the M.P.s make income from rentals. These people would have nothing to gain from solving the housing problems, it is the very reason that landlords can charge the rents that they do.

[Slowhand on 20.09.05 at 14:52]

Good point Observer. In my opinion, the only people who should be in politics, are the ones who don't want to be in it.

[kate on 20.09.05 at 14:56]

Slowhand

I just thought the same thing as your comment came up on the screen.

[Onion on 20.09.05 at 15:01]

Kate, you cannot equate low cost housing with housing being provided for a national coach. His situation is no different from any English or Canadian consultant government has always hired and given housing to. LCH is subsidized by government for those who cannot afford market prices. Logie, a world-class player and coach, is being well-paid (rightly so) for his services to Bermuda cricket and has been given housing as part of the package - no different from our English Chief Justice. (I don't hear anyone complaining about that one.) Your example does not apply in my book.

[Kate on 20.09.05 at 15:05]

Onion

I just feel that Bermudians in need should take available government homes before ex-pats, whatever their job.

[SmokingGun on 20.09.05 at 15:06]

"I don't believe that the project was properly thought out, at all."
Loki: my sentiments exactly. There were certain players involved who had various positions in business and with political connections. They came up with a somewhat credible idea and presented it to government. Taking into consideration that not much seems to happen in Bermuda for the sake of altruism when it comes to land and development either that was a good idea or a bad one. First of all the initial developers were going to expect a return on their time and investment. Secondly the BLDC were going to expect the same. And it would appear that Government would expect the same. Fine, if the true goal was to make it happen. But people bailed because they saw their investment going south quickly. When you have people with a need for housing and you combine it with people with the ability to make it happen and the project can afford a modest return then this project should never have derailed. I think too many individuals got greedy somewhere along the line.

[Onion on 20.09.05 at 15:11]

Kate says:

"I would also know how many of the M.P.s make income from rentals. These people would have nothing to gain from solving the housing problems, it is the very reason that landlords can charge the rents that they do.

Posted by Kate on 20.09.05 at 14:50"

Kate,

If you are looking for wealthy landlords the PLP MPs are not where you would start. Who has owned all the Pitts Bay Road and Fairylands properties charging $10k a month to international executives? Who owns the most commercial properties in town that rent out office space to international businesses? In any event, many Bermudian homeowners across the board, certainly those who owned homes pre-1999-2000 have benefited tremendously from high rents and rising housing costs. But the PLP MPs and even most of the present UBP MPs certainly have not cornered the market.

[loki on 20.09.05 at 15:13]

"Kate, you cannot equate low cost housing with housing being provided for a national coach. His situation is no different from any English or Canadian consultant government has always hired and given housing to. LCH is subsidized by government for those who cannot afford market prices. Logie, a world-class player and coach, is being well-paid (rightly so) for his services to Bermuda cricket and has been given housing as part of the package - no different from our English Chief Justice. (I don't hear anyone complaining about that one.) Your example does not apply in my book."

The issue is, Onion, that the Government specifically intervened to secure housing for Gus Logie. This, alone, I do not have a problem with. What I DO have a problem with is the fact that Government hasn't been sufficiently concerned enough about the provision of low-cost housing to intervene over the BHP debacle. They've left BHP to wither on the vine. Government has its priorities upside down when the provision of housing for a national cricket coach demands more attention from Government than the collapse of a low-cost housing scheme for which Government sought to take credit.

[Onion on 20.09.05 at 15:13]

"Onion

I just feel that Bermudians in need should take available government homes before ex-pats, whatever their job.

Posted by Kate on 20.09.05 at 15:05"

I agree. But was Gus Logie put up in a low cost house? I'm not being cynical, I honestly don't know.

[Kate on 20.09.05 at 15:15]

I didn't mean to imply that they had, sorry! All I meant to say was that people who are in control (whatever party they may represent) that make money from the houseing market have a vested interest in not solving the problem. The people you mention above, solving the house crisis in not in these people interests either! Money is power. Wish I had some :-)

[Kate on 20.09.05 at 15:17]

Whether the house is low-cost or not is it still a property that could house a Bermudian family rather than an ex-pat family. It is a government owned house. Therefore, belongs to the people of Bermuda (Oh no, I sound like Citizen Smith)

[Onion on 20.09.05 at 15:20]

Loki, Kate,

I understand your points with respect to housing generally and I do agree that Government must make it a priority to intervene in BHP. I am not a fan of the way they have handled housing.

1. I do not like the way Ashfield patronizes and talks down to the Bermudian in need.

2. I am unsure why Col. Burch is always labelled as "the man who gets things done." The man evicted a couple of people and now he is seen as the answer to housing.

3. The best and brightest are not in charge right now - even within the PLP.

[Kate on 20.09.05 at 15:24]

I have been thinking a lot about this recently and I cannot come up with a solution to the housing market that results in a win-win situation. Solve the situation, rents decrease, mortgages don't get paid. Just as well I'm not in control!

[jake on 20.09.05 at 15:27]

Back to the topic, I disagree that BHP was a failure of Government. In my opinion it was doomed from the beginning.

I am a believer in the free market. I think that the Bermudians enlisted in the BHP were well meaning, but amatuers. Development requires market analysis, tight deadlines, budgets and most of all RISK.

It is only when the risk is assessed against the reward that it can be understood. Where there is no reward, the risk does not become less.

Where I blame the Government is for the side-show of crying people "winning" a lottery. I had to work for my house - very hard. I had to save. My family had to help me. We did not win anything. When you remove the work from the reward you diminish the reward.

There are 35 people who are interested in housing. Great. There are people who make an honest living building homes - taking risk and providing a product. The Government should not be in competition with the market. It is unfair. Those same builders pay the taxes that fund this kind of thing.

[loki on 20.09.05 at 15:30]

"3. The best and brightest are not in charge right now - even within the PLP."

Not by a long-shot. I've said several times on this site that, whilst I am a UBP supporter, I don't have a problem with the PLP, per se. The biggest problem the PLP has is, in my opinion, a central clique of mediocrity and arrogance that seems to dominate the party. I've never understood why this is the case, but what we're left with is a deeply ineffective Government that has consistently come up short over all of the pressing issues since they took power in 1998. The failure of BHP, after all the Government-assisted hype and hoopla is symptomatic of a Government with no direction and no principles beyond solidifying its own power (which it's making a hash of, anyway, but that's another story).

[jake on 20.09.05 at 15:32]

Col. Burch is seen as getting things done because finally there was someone willing to stand up to people who refuse to help themselves and run to the media.

He is seen as getting things done because he brought closure to the Cement dispute. The lack of outcry over its closure is due to the fact that a viable offer was made, and for reasons we have not been able to understand, has been rejected by BCC.

[Kate on 20.09.05 at 15:38]

Jake

I agree with many of your points. It was an ill conceived plan and the lottery part of it was a stomach churning attempt to garner public praise.

I disagree though with your point that it should be left to market forces. There are families who need a roof over their head, now. They cannot afford to rent or buy at market price. The Government has a responsibility to these people.

Please don't get me wrong, I admire people like you (and my husband) who have worked very hard to get where they are today with little or no help. However, for whatever reasons, some people cannot do this.

[jake on 20.09.05 at 15:58]

I am not against helping people Kate, but there is a limit I think.

Subsidised rent is fine. We have that if your need is justified. But to tell people that they should get a house for less than it costs to build one is simply leading them down the path.

Where does it lead? To a failed building project that now the Govt. should build at a huge loss to the public purse? I still reiterate no. That just leads otherwise hard working people to seek their own free ride, and the problem gets worse.

You would have to be a sucker to work for a house when they are giving them away for free!

What of the descendents of these families who inherit homes that no one ever paid value price to own. How does that work? Will they sell them on the open market? Will they upkeep the house? Will Govt. have to come back to fix the things that do not work?

Where does the obligation end?

Better yet, how did it begin?

[Kate on 20.09.05 at 16:02]

Jake

I agree totally with your last post. Subsidising rent while retaining state ownership of the property, so that it may be used for other families in need in futire makes far more sense that basically giving someone most of the value of a house, well, unless you feel that you need to buy votes of course!

[sleepy on 20.09.05 at 16:05]

Generally I'm with Jake on the limited role Governments should have in competing with private markets, whether housing or otherwise.

BHP struck me as pie in the sky from early on. Why would people buy a house for a certain price when the idential one next door was bought for fractions of that?

But, and it's a big but, Government must shoulder the blame for elevating expectations and under-delivering. Remember Derrick Burgess dismissing the UBP's plan at the last election and saying the PLP would be building homes people could stretch their legs in? The Premier and De Vent were all over the BHP press events.

The Minister doesn't have a clue and has no experience ......in anything frankly. Nor does Premier Scott. He clearly was appointed because he's in the safest of safe PLP areas and will not suffer at the polls no matter how bad things get.

As has been well articulated here already, Government was quick to associate itself with the uphoria and hence must take their licks on the way down.

What worries me is how the PLP Ministers get played time and again by private developers. It's amateur hour at the Cabinet Office. They get talked into offering huge perks to private developers, whether Hotel concessions where the residential component never materialises or paying huge consulting fees as occurred at BHP, for nothing.

I'd prefer they just got out of the way. But that seems beyond them. They seemingly have a need to drive everything into the ground.

[Onion on 20.09.05 at 16:08]

Jake,

The BHC's mandate is to provide affordable housing. The Col. took a firm stand against certain tenants who were not pulling their weight - rightly so. But this is a small part of a broader mandate which is to provide affordable housing. In the scheme of things he added little to the equation and things are not better off than before he was at BHC. Anyone can evict a poor family. I am not criticising him, I just don't see where he is deserving of the lofty title of "the man who gets things done."

As for the cement dispute, whilst I believe that Jim Butterfield should stop whining as he and his family have had the benefit of favourable leasehold terms for the better part of 40 years with no real competition, I do not think the issue is yet to be fully resolved. It is premature to say that the Col. has dealt with this matter.

[Bald Eagle on 20.09.05 at 16:50]

Has anyone stopped to examine the phrase 'long term' as it applies to BLDC plans for this area. For how many years can these people pull big salaries with virtually no result. Take a look at the other end of the island too. WEDCO can't even fix roofs after hurricane Fabian and the buildings at dockyard continue to deteriorate before their very eyes.
Getting on with important developments, and maintaining vacant property for future use or adapatation is not rocket science, it simply needs a commitment and a desire to get things done.
There are plenty of buildings around on this island that belong to the quangos and government that could be adapted for housing. Forget this latest debacle and why it happened, get on with the job and use what we have elsewhere...starting tomorrow!

[Tiger Bay on 20.09.05 at 17:08]

WEDCO are truly pathetic. BLDC at least have some progress to report.

[Sandys Man on 20.09.05 at 17:09]

This is just another example of ego prevailing over common sense.

The government tried to do the right thing (provide housing for people who need it) using the right people (hiring people with the best of intentions - rather than ability) for the right price. Unfortunately the egos of people got in the way and prevented anything going forward.

As Bald Eagle said, it’s the same with WEDCO. It’s not a lack of money or manpower. Its a lack of motivation and bruised egos.

If the government and country got together to hold a we love WEDCO day every other weekend, the west end would be a sparkling panacea – no more derelict buildings, all fixed up with happy families residing within. Dockyard would be full of upwardly mobile families travelling to town by fast ferry.

Unfortunately as soon as we forgot to celebrate WEDCO day, or a government minister or even lowly backbencher made an inappropriate comment – we’d go back to where we started, no work being done and a general go slow.

If only some people could get over their own ego, this island would be a lot better place to live.

[Bill Cook on 20.09.05 at 17:37]

Over the years many of us have put forward suggestions with regard to providing housing for Bermudian residents.

The proposition of using one of the hotels that folded to house single workers probably but not exclusively for guest workers who by and large only need a room and some facilities, the use of a pool and a simple restuarant would cut overheads for those in a modest income bracket.

The idea that all people would like to own a home is not accurate and many are happy to rent and use their income in other ways.

That governments have a responsibility to provide accommodation at a reasonable or affordable rent is a given unpopular though that may be to some there is in every community world wide those who for often good reasons never get into a salary bracket to afford at average rental prices.

Not to address those needs is not acceptable as the consequences are alarming social problems, that will cost dearly anyway in my opinion.

The crime is no one has ever put forward a plan to erect solid high rise housing with a simple design to reduce costs etc and regardless it is not possible to succeed unless it is subsidised.

I have no problem with a Bermudian lottery not with a property as a prize as ideally this lottery would be world wide with the express purpose to raise money to fund this project at least partially.

[SmokingGun on 20.09.05 at 17:49]

"If only some people could get over their own ego, this island would be a lot better place to live."

Posted by Sandys Man on 20.09.05 at 17:09

There is a lot of truth in that statement. Bermuda has a lot of issues with having too many self-centered and not enough self-confident.
Sometimes you just don't have to have it all to get the most out of something.

[John on 20.09.05 at 18:19]

Have you lost your commas ,,,,, Bill?

[Hard Worker on 20.09.05 at 18:24]

Solving the housing crisis by creating "low cost housing" is the wrong approach. There has always been, and will always be, a segment of the population that is not fit for home ownership. Give them low-cost housing, and they´ll want a low-cost car. Give them the car, they´ll want low-cost insurance. Then the´ll let the house fall down around them while they wreck the car driving without insurance. Throwing these people into a "trailer home" won´t change that.

The cure is to get more mid-cost housing so that those occupying resonably priced apartments will move out of the apartments and into the housing. This will create vacancies for those more suited for apartment dwelling.

If you have limited income opportunities due to educational deficiencies, lack of motivation, criminal record, or due to the fact that you chose to squirt out three kids by three fathers by age twenty, you´ve lost the right to complain about your housing situation. Responsible people make responsible home owners.

[Big Bad Wolf ^..^ on 20.09.05 at 18:31]

The PLP do not care about affordable housing....eight years and nothing to show....I guess they just want people to sing and dance in the rain.

[Bill Cook on 20.09.05 at 19:58]

Hardworker,

I hear you loud and clear,

But tell me what sins have the 3 kids by 3 diff fathers committed ?

Abortion may be legal but infanticide is not.

Being part of the human race brings with it certain moral responsibilities.

Not all people who cannot afford high rents are irresponsible.

There is no easy solution without facing some harsh realities.

[Bill Cook on 20.09.05 at 20:05]

John.

Yes you are right,

I may have lost my commas, but hopefully not my common sense!

Its a lazy trend just as some dont like hitting the caps lock, i not I, sorry about that, you are quite correct.

Also I cannot really type.

[SmokingGun on 20.09.05 at 20:20]

Hard Woker: Essentially the trickle down effect. Which I would agree with in this instance. The only way to build low cost housing in Bermuda is to use low cost design, low cost supplies and low cost labour. At the end of the day we head down the wrong path and besides there nothing low cost about Bermuda. Help develop solid well built mid cost housing and assisting people in purchasing and rehabing the older smaller dwellings will go along way in the right direction if people are willing to make the adjustment.

As far as the issue with too many fathers for too many kids, they should start by forcing the guys to pay their fair share. Even if it means time and labour in helping rehab a house for their offspring.
And mothers that have gotten themsleves into this kind of trouble shouldn't hold their breath that these guys will take care of them and their kids. Get started by changing ways and being there for the kids.
Get educated, get skills and if that means giving up some free time, so be it. That's the burden of the life they created.

[Silent Majority on 20.09.05 at 21:24]

The government is absolutely responsible for BHP crumbling to pieces. What support did they provide? What alternatives did they come up with? How could they go ahead with the lotterry without having the project details ironed out?

Look at the people involved with the project (eg Richard Winchell, Jan Spiering etc), they are respectable, well to do people, I would bet they were involved only to provide for the communnity as they saw the government doing nothing for the #1 problem in Bermuda. They were not in this for financial self-interest. These people could do a hundred other things more financially rewarding with their time if they were looking to make a buck.

As to the project falling apart due to a lack of land, How could the government not come up with an alternative piece of land? How could they not do everything possible to make this project a success?

How can people even pretend that this government has a plan to deal with housing? They order pre-fab houses without a location to put them? In the private sector,you'd be canned for that, but yet Ashfield stays around. He blames others, Nimby is the cause of all issues, yet vacant land sitting empty in St Davids, Morgan Point and next to Port Royal Golf Course, where is the development? Where is the plan?

Remember the original development government had that was costing $500 per foot? At least something was built! Why not come up with some sort of incentice program for developpers,if they build low cost housing, they can do so duty free, but the properties must be sublet to housing corp for 10 years, housing corp will then pay them a fair return with inflation protection and guarantee condition of units upon return. That took about 6 seconds to develop.

I get such a kick out when a PLP asset needs something, it gets taken care of quickly. Gus Logie's issue was taken care of quickly. Remember PAtrice Minor's father, he got his place pretty quickly after Patrice telephoned Ash.

YEt even more demoralizing is how BDAians just sit on their hands, maybe an odd snipe will be written in letter to the editor, but overall, its tolerated. Absolutely no accountability. Look at Ewart. He can not pay his business payroll or social insurance tax, uses his position sell a house to a gov quango at inflated prices, he can sell his influence to the highest bidder, his brother in law stiffs the company that was running the adverts at the aiport which Ewart overseas etc, and yet Ewart remains the deputy premier. Real nice. In retrospect, at least Ewart tries to do some good, eg the fast ferries, cleaning up TCD, taking on the cabbies, changing things at tourism etc. Thats more than the rest of these followers do. But at least their new $25K parking spots next to the House are ready.

Last rant-if the PLP have some bright minds, lets see them prove it. Looking at their CVs, we have a CA, several lawyers, an MD, some educators etc. Surely one of these people can either step up and do some good or resign and critisize their party and state their disproval publicly.

[Sandys Man on 21.09.05 at 08:27]

I do agree with some of what Hard Worker has to say. There will always by a small element in any society that will constantly be looking for the next handout, unable to cope with the realities of what modern life has become.

However, for the majority of upstanding, hard working, decent people who earn a normal hard working decent wage the cost of all housing on the island is unaffordable. To see the buildings in dockyard, for example, crumble due to lack of maintenance when they could be sold to people who could promise to do the work themselves.

We don’t need cheep housing, but we do need affordable housing. With interest rates on the rise I’m worried that too many ordinary Bermudians will lose their houses just because they tried to live a dream that was too far out of their reach.