Housing for Refugees in the European Union. Dutch Refugee Council/VluchtelingenWerk Nederland, ECRE Taskforce on Integration Lead agency on housing

Transcription

1 Housing for Refugees in the European Union Dutch Refugee Council/VluchtelingenWerk Nederland, ECRE Taskforce on Integration Lead agency on housing

2 Housing for Refugees in the European Union 1999 VluchtelingenWerk Nederland (Dutch Refugee Council), Amsterdam This report can be ordered at: Dutch Refugee Council, P.O. Box 2894, 1000 CW, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Tel Fax

3 PREFACE This report is the result of a research carried out in 1998 by the Dutch Refugee Council as a lead agency for the ECRE Taskforce on Integration. It is part of the multi-annual project "European Network for the Integration of Refugees". This project was made possible through the financial support of the European Commission, Directorate General V. We would like to thank those individuals and organisations, too many to mention, who were prepared to offer time and share their information and expertise with us. Among them the organisations mentioned in Appendix II and the experts who attended the expert meeting on housing. Without their input this research would not have been possible. Special acknowledgements go to Mirjam Hartstra, project officer in 1998, who wrote the report, and to Hesther Kapteyn, both project officers in 1998, Ariane den Uyl, policy officer and Roswitha Weiler, senior policy officer and project manager of the Dutch Refugee Council. June 1999, Sander Mateman, research officer on the housing project, Dutch Refugee Council/ECRE Taskforce on Integration

4

5 Contents Chapter 1: Introduction General introduction Structure of the report Working procedure 2 Chapter 2: General Housing Policies Policy issues Reception and housing policies in groups of countries 5 Chapter 3: Countries with a comprehensive reception system and high housing policy expenditure Housing stock Accommodation on arrival Housing allocation Rent allowances In depth: Sweden Housing options Access to housing The Integration Programme 10 Chapter 4: Countries with a comprehensive reception system and low housing policy expenditure Housing stock Accommodation on arrival Housing allocation Rent allowances In depth: Belgium Accommodation on arrival Housing policy in Belgium Policy tools Housing options for refugees The rent guarantee scheme 18 Chapter 5: Countries with a limited reception system and high housing policy expenditure Housing stock Accommodation on arrival Housing allocation Housing allowances In depth: Austria Accommodation on arrival Housing options for refugees Housing allowances 23 Chapter 6: Countries with a limited reception system and low housing policy expenditure 24

6 6.1 Housing stock Accommodation on arrival Housing allocation Housing allowances 25 Chapter 7: Problems and obstacles General problems and obstacles Specific problems 27 Chapter 8: Conclusions, good practice and recommendations Introduction Conclusions Examples of good practice Recommendations 31 Appendix I: References 32 Appendix II: Overview of projects and activities 36 Appendix III: Figures and data on housing in the European Union 47

7 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 General Introduction Over the last decade, there has been a considerable increase in the number of people applying for asylum in Europe. The increase appeared in all 15 member states of the European Union, not only in those countries with a long-standing experience of receiving asylum seekers and refugees. Countries with a surplus of emigration until recently, have now become immigration countries for refugees as well. This means that newcomers arrive in every country within the EU. One of the tools the European Commission has established to promote integration of refugees into the host societies is budget-line B The ECRE Task Force on Integration is one of 62 projects funded under this budget-line in The ECRE Task Force on Integration is a consortium of six lead agencies and a secretariat working under the auspices of the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), which is responsible for policy development. The secretariat at OCIV in Brussels is responsible for the co-ordination of the project and each lead agency is responsible for one integration issue: Organisation: ECRE British Refugee Council France Terre d Asile World University Service Dutch Refugee Council Greek Council for Refugees Italian Refugee Council Issue: Policy development Employment Vocational Training Education Housing Community and Culture Health The activities of the lead agencies in 1998 include among others identification of NGOs, private and governmental organisations and other social actors with a special interest in each of the integration topics as well as stocktaking of legal & social context, projects and activities. 1.2 Structure of the report With regard to housing for refugees, there are two relevant articles in the 1951 Geneva Convention and one in The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Geneva Convention, Chapter IV, Article 21: As regards housing, the Contracting States, in so far as the matter is regulated by laws or regulations or is subject to the control of public authorities, shall accord to refugees lawfully staying in their territory treatment as favourable as possible and, in any event, not less favourable than that accorded to aliens generally in the same circumstances. Geneva Convention, Chapter V, Article 26: Each contracting State shall accord to refugees lawfully staying in its territory the right to choose their place of residence and to move freely within its territory, subject to any regulations applicable to aliens generally in the same circumstances. 1

8 The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 12, Paragraph 1: Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence. These three articles have served as a starting point to look into the housing situation of refugees. In Chapter 2, an overview will be given of the development of general trends in housing policies in the European Union. Chapters 3 to 6 will focus on the housing situation in different groups of countries. In these chapters, the reception system is also taken into account, because the way asylum seekers are accommodated upon entering the country often influences housing careers and options in later stages. A more in depth description is given of a few countries, representing countries grouped according to comprehensiveness of the reception system and the housing policy expenditure as a percentage of GDP (Gross Domestic Product). In Chapter 7, specific problems and obstacles will be identified, whereas Chapter 8 will contain conclusions, an identification of good practice and recommendations. 1.3 Working procedure In 1998 five employees of the Dutch Refugee Council have contributed to the activities of the ECRE Task Force on Integration; two project officers have been recruited for the project: a researcher and an officer for communication and organisation. The policy department contributed through the senior policy officer for integration, the housing policy officer and a secretary. The research data in chapters 3 to 7 originate from three main sources: literature study (see list of references), interviews and meetings with experts and material from general and topic questionnaires developed by the ECRE Task Force on Integration. The development of the general questionnaires was a joint effort of all agencies involved in the Task Force on Integration; the project officers within the Dutch Refugee Council were responsible for developing the topic questionnaire on housing. A total of 75 topic questionnaires were sent out, around 25% of these were returned containing very useful information. A large number of refugee and housing experts were interviewed, representing refugee-assisting NGOs, antidiscrimination organisations, local and national governmental institutions and academic researchers. The expert meeting on housing for refugees, organised by the Dutch Refugee Council and held in Bergen, the Netherlands on 10 June 1998 not only proved to be an important source of information, it also served as a starting point for the creation of a network of refugee housing experts. Finally, the Internet was used to gather information on organisations addressing the issue of housing for refugees. The Internet was also from the very beginning intended to be one of the means to disseminate information from the Task Force and her member agencies. In order to build a website for this purpose, the Internet Working Group was established. The project officer for communication and organisation has participated in this working group from the start. The fifth paragraph in Chapters 3 to 5 contains more in depth information on Sweden, Belgium and Austria. General as well as supplementary information on these countries was gathered during research visits to the aforementioned countries. The emphasis during the visits was on meeting and interviewing people involved in housing related activities concerning refugees, either through projects or in day-to-day work. In Austria the research visit was combined with participation in the Integrationshaus Conference, at which the housing policy officer was one of the keynote speakers. The visit to Sweden included among others meetings with two project officers from the 'Stockholm-Integrated City'-project. 2

9 The chapter containing conclusions, recommendations and examples of good practice, is based on the information in chapters 3 to 7 and incorporates the outcome of the discussions at the Conference on Integration of Refugees in Europe, held in Antwerp, Belgium on 12/13/14 November. During this conference, the issue of housing was addressed in five working groups. In two working groups access and obstacles to the housing market were discussed, whereas two other working groups linked housing with community development issues. Themes discussed in these working groups were concentration vs. dispersal and combatting racism in refugee populated areas and public education. The working group devised to exchange good practice included a presentation of the 'Dobro dosli'-project of Volkshilfe Österreich, a decentralised housing project for Bosnian refugees. A description of this project can be found in Appendix 2. 3

10 CHAPTER 2: GENERAL HOUSING POLICIES 2.1 Policy Issues A home impacts on a great number of aspects influencing personal well being. A home is much more than a roof over one s head, a shelter from the elements. A home provides security and privacy from the outside world, a place to live, and feel safe. It is this notion of feeling safe that makes housing such a key-issue in integration for refugees. Once a refugee feels safe in the place where he is staying, one of the basic needs for starting to build on a new life has been fulfilled. However, the availability of accommodation in itself is not the only thing that matters; not only to refugees, but to every citizen in a country. The location of a house has an impact on access to employment, public services, educational opportunities, leisure, friends and relatives. Since the home touches upon so many elements that influence the quality of life, it is unsurprising that all European governments have developed some form of policy to improve housing conditions for lower incomes. In most European countries, a considerable share of the national population would not be able to pay their housing costs without some form of government intervention. The main instruments used include tax relieves, grants, subsidised loans and housing allowances for those who are unable to pay the full economic costs. Since the majority of refugees belong to the lower income section of the population in the first period after receiving a status and/or a residence permit, the emphasis in the report is on general housing policies for lower incomes as well as specific policies for refugees (when existent). Traditionally, housing policies for lower incomes concern: Quality, both in new construction and in regeneration of the existing housing stock Accessibility of adequate housing Affordability, involving restricting the burden of housing payments. Although all countries invest in instruments targeted at one or all of these issues, there is a wide variety in instruments and in the amounts spent on social housing policies. A relatively new development in housing policy is the growing notion that measures to improve accessibility, affordability and quality can be more effective when integrated, either with one another or with other policy fields. For example: urban renewal and renovation programmes have evolved over the last decades from improving sanitary facilities to policies to revitalise entire neighbourhoods. National approaches to housing policy are, in broad terms, reflected in the tenure structures of the housing stock and in the policy costs as a percentage of GDP. Table 2.1 on the next page shows the share of each tenure category in the EU-countries. 4

11 Country Table 2.1: Housing stock and tenure percentages Total housing stock Social rental in % Private rental in % Owner occupied in % Other/Unknown in % Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Portugal Spain Sweden United Kingdom Source: CEC, Statistics on housing in the European Community, Brussels 2.2 Reception and housing policies in groups of countries The next chapters include general and specific policies regarding the social and private rental sector as well as reception systems. The focus in general housing policies will be on data regarding quality, access and affordability. The private and social rental sectors are described, since they are the most important categories housing refugees. Owner occupation will not be included, because the number of refugees owning their own accommodation in the first years of settlement is negligible. Other tenure categories, such as co-operative housing have negligible shares in most European housing markets and the percentage of refugees finding accommodation in such housing is rather small as well. The distinction between social and private rental only concerns the question whether property is let with the objective of making profit. In each of the chapters 3 to 6, a group of countries will be described. The division into groups is based upon the annual percentage of Gross Domestic Product 1 (GDP) spent on housing policy and on the comprehensiveness of the reception system. One of the basic notions of the Dutch Refugee Council is that integration should start on day one and therefore accommodation upon arrival can be seen as an important starting point. The spectrum of reception systems varies from state-financed reception centres to emergency provisions for the homeless. In the Nordic countries, the Benelux and Germany, accommodation in centres is initially provided for every asylum seeker entering the country. In France, Austria, the United Kingdom and Spain there are a number of centres, but accessibility restrictions exist and the number of places is not sufficient to accommodate all applicants. Greece, Portugal, Italy and Ireland have very limited or no centralised reception 1 Source: Housing policy in the EU member states European Parliament, Directorate General for Research 5

12 facilities at all. The division between comprehensive and limited reception system is based on whether or not every asylum seeker entering the country can be accommodated with some form of governmental assistance. Combining the comprehensiveness of the reception system with the annual percentage of GDP spent on housing policy produces the matrix in Table 2.2. Table 2.2 EU-countries categorised by comprehensiveness of the reception system and percentage spent on housing policy Housing policy expenditure well over 1% of GDP Housing policy expenditure around or below 1% of GDP Comprehensive reception system Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden (I) Belgium, Finland, Luxembourg (II) Limited reception system Austria, France, United Kingdom (III) Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Spain (IV) The issues quality, access and affordability are addressed through descriptions of the housing stock, allocation of private and social rented housing and housing allowances paid to tenants. The situation for refugees is described if it differs from general measures or programmes. Subsidies targeted at construction or renovation of objects (brick and mortar subsidies) are usually not included. 6

13 CHAPTER 3. COUNTRIES WITH A COMPREHENSIVE RECEPTION SYSTEM AND HIGH HOUSING POLICY EXPENDITURE 3.1 Housing stock The four countries in this category are characterised by a relatively low percentage of owneroccupiers and therefore large rental sectors, especially when looking at private and social rental together. All countries have built considerable numbers of new dwellings after the Second World War as a result of which a large part of the housing stock is rather young and of good quality, with a few exceptions. The part of the private rental sector in the Netherlands owned by individual landlords usually consists of older property of lesser quality than dwellings in the social rental sector and those in the private rental sector owned by institutions. In Denmark the majority of dwellings in the private rental sector were built at the beginning of the twentieth century, but they are of good quality: in % of all houses in this sector had a bath and central heating. In Germany, housing quality in the former federal republic is good, but in those federal states that used to belong to the German Democratic Republic, major capital investments are needed to raise housing quality to the level of the rest of the country. 3.2 Accommodation on arrival Initial accommodation is available in reception centres. In Sweden, Germany and the Netherlands, people are transferred to asylum seekers residence centres after the first phase of the asylum procedure. Germany does not allow people to live outside the centres, in the other countries residence with relatives and in some cases friends is possible. The German authorities are legally obliged to take family ties into account when transferring people from reception to residential centres. Germany aims to transfer asylum seekers to residential centres and later on to community housing after a three months stay in a reception centre, but in practice this period is much longer. For example in Brandenburg, one of the pilot projects under budget-line B supports asylum seekers in finding independent housing after a minimum of three years in a residence centre. 3.3 Housing allocation In Germany and the Netherlands, access to social rental housing in general is limited to a maximum income, where allocation is concerned. Once a household has moved into a social rental dwelling and their income rises above the maximum, there is no obligation to move. However, in Germany a system of rent tax exists in six federal states, rising housing costs for people with a low rent compared to their income. This option is preferred over forced movement of higher incomes and an instrument to avoid segregation. In Sweden and Denmark, social housing is accessible to all income categories. In all countries, refugees have rights equal to those of national citizens regarding allocation of social rental housing. Denmark, Sweden and The Netherlands have centralised allocation programmes for refugees, run by governmental institutions. In Germany, no governmental assistance is given to refugees in finding permanent accommodation. A number of NGOs have set up mediation services to compensate this lack of provisions. In the Netherlands a change is occurring in the way most refugees find housing. Until two to three years ago, the vast majority of refugees had to wait until they were offered a dwelling by the COA (Asylum Seekers Reception Service). Municipal authorities supplied accommodation; the number of dwellings supplied depended on the number of inhabitants. In recent years, more municipalities have switched from a system of waiting lists for allocation to a model that uses the available 7

14 housing stock as a starting point. Advertising vacancies and accompanying requirements place the initiative with the prospective tenants instead of with the housing authorities. Many refugees benefit from this change, raising the percentage that find housing independently from around 10% to nearly 50%. The Draft Integration Law in Denmark aims to include a quota system obliging all municipalities to receive a certain number of refugees, very much analogous to the old Dutch system. Municipalities will have to find permanent accommodation within three months of the refugees arrival. One of the implications of this law is that refugees will no longer have freedom of settlement/residence during the integration period. In all countries, everyone has access to private rented housing. In general, the private rental sector is divided into a cheaper section housing those who can t find accommodation in the social rental sector and an expensive section housing higher incomes who do not want to or can t buy their own house. 3.4 Rent allowances The four countries each have general systems of rent subsidies with the aim of lowering housing costs for those with inadequate means. The principle criteria for supplying rent subsidy are family income, family size, and rent level and in Denmark the size of the house in m². Sweden and Denmark have special schemes for the elderly. Rent subsidy is paid independent of the tenure category. Refugees have the same rights as national citizens towards housing allowances. 3.5 In depth: Sweden Asylum seekers without relatives or friends in Sweden are accommodated in investigation centres for a few weeks, before being transferred to a residence centre. Accommodation of asylum seekers is the responsibility of the Statens Invandrarverket (SIV) the National Immigration Board. Since 1 July 1994, the stay in centralised accommodation is no longer compulsory for asylum seekers with friends or family in the country. The SIV is responsible for adequate housing in all situations, inside as well as outside the centres. The residence centres usually contain furnished self-catering flats for families, whilst single asylum applicants have to share accommodation and facilities. Since many asylum seekers prefer to live outside the centres, less orthodox solutions are also found, especially in bigger cities like Malmö, Göteborg and Stockholm. Overcrowded apartments housing large numbers of single asylum seekers are not uncommon. Asylum seekers living outside centres receive extra money to cover the housing costs, but the amount is too low to enable people to afford adequate housing. About 60% of asylum seekers live in decentralised accommodation. Provision of permanent housing for refugees underwent drastic changes with the introduction of what has become known as the All of Sweden strategy, involving 95% of Swedish municipalities in receiving refugees. One of the reasons for introducing this strategy were complaints from politicians in larger urban areas, facing problems of rising unemployment and ethnic segregation. The willingness of municipalities to participate in All of Sweden is not only explained by reasons of sharing social responsibilities, but also by municipalities in rural areas (especially in the north) aiming to compensate declining population and accompanying housing vacancies. Nowadays, this strategy is still applied to find housing for the 40% of all asylum seekers living in centres during the asylum procedure. 8

15 3.5.1 Housing options The housing market in Sweden clearly reflects the long Swedish tradition of pursuing a social housing policy. Generous housing subsidies, a well-developed set of planning and allocation rules and one of the highest housing standards in Europe indicate the importance of housing in Swedish politics. The goal for Swedish housing policy is officially stated in a 1967 bill: the whole population shall have access to healthy, spacious, well planned and suitably equipped dwellings of good quality at affordable prices. Between 1965 and 1974 the million dwellings programme was one of the main tools to implement the policy to abandon housing shortages, overcrowding and sub-standard housing, the aftermath of the Second World War. Industrialised construction techniques were used to build massive numbers of multi-dwelling buildings at relatively low costs. Initially, Swedes inhabited these high-rise estates on the outskirts of the cities, mainly people formerly living in low-quality housing quarters and those trying to escape unemployment in rural areas. With improvement of their financial situation and the focus of new construction shifting from flats to single family housing, many Swedes moved out of these neighbourhoods, making way for immigrants and refugees Access to housing New and existing dwellings in the public rental sector are allocated by either the Housing Allocation Institutions (Bostadsförmedlingen) or by the Municipal Housing Companies, the latter ones being the owners of municipal social rented housing stocks. Vacant dwellings are allocated according to the waiting period and naturally on the basis of meeting the tenants requirements. Private housing agencies mediate on the private rental market, and demand a subscription fee. This fee can be reclaimed if the agency fails to secure a tenancy. In practice, local authorities have few instruments to control movements in the private rental market. The Housing Acquisition Act of 1981 created the option for municipalities to establish Housing Acquisition Areas, where landlords operating in these areas have to report vacancies to the local authorities. However, most agreements between authorities and the federation of rented property owners are less formal, resulting in only some of the vacant private rented flats being reported. Compared to other countries, the co-operative sector in Sweden is quite sizeable: around 15% of the total housing stock. Access to this sector is controlled by cooperative housing societies. Prospective tenant-owners are eligible for a dwelling after having paid the initial fee. The prospective tenant-owner has to be accepted by the society, which owns and manages the estate collectively. Refugees have access to all types of housing, but usually find accommodation in the rental sector, with above average numbers ending up in those estates built under the million dwellings programme. However, some examples are known of Bosnian refugees with enough resources to make the down payments for cooperative housing in the outer districts of Stockholm. Nowadays, parts of neighbourhoods like Tensta and Rinkeby in the northwest of Stockholm and Fittja in the neighbouring municipality of Botkyrka (southwest of Stockholm) have populations of 80 to 90% ethnic minorities and refugees. In all neighbourhoods the majority of dwellings were built under the million dwellings 9

16 programme. The remaining Swedes in these neighbourhoods can be subdivided into three categories: 1. Elderly people, who have lived in the area since it was built. 2. People that actively choose to live in a neighbourhood where a wide variety of cultures are represented. 3. Socially disadvantaged with no other housing options. With the exception of the second group, the population structure obstructs the options for integration through frequent contacts with Swedes. Because of the separation from the rest of Swedish society, it is almost impossible to reach an acceptable level in speaking and understanding Swedish. Although Swedish is the common language in ethnically segregated neighbourhoods, the lack of communication with native speakers hinders one of the vital requirements for integration, sufficient working knowledge of the language of the host society The Integration Programme The notion that cities like Stockholm, Göteborg and Malmö are becoming more and more segregated both in the context of social status and in the context of ethnicity has lead to massive discussions and enquiries about the multicultural society and refugee integration. The city of Stockholm has recently launched the Integration Programme, with the aim of turning Stockholm into an open and integrated city. The City Council wants to be the first in the world to break the trend towards social and ethnic segregation. The programme includes a vision on what the city should look like and has developed five visions and thirty goals as elements of the programme. The five visions are: To have a city where all the inhabitants are needed and have a role to play and where everybody is able to share power and responsibility. To have a city, in which all the inhabitants have common legal norms, common meeting places and access to a common language. To have a city that is free from racism and discrimination. To have a city where all the children have a good up-bringing, and where all young people are provided with real possibilities to be educated and to find a job. To have a city where everybody lives in a safe and attractive district. The housing component in the Integration Programme is mainly expressed through the goals set with the last vision. Ultimate aims in this vision are an increase in the perceived social stability of areas where a substantial number of removals have a negative effect on the quality of life, as well as the security and well being of the inhabitants and a reduction in the crime rate by at least 10% in the year These rather broad aims are explained in more detail by structural goals and tangible tasks. The tasks mainly consist of a change in the way of thinking within the City Planning Committee, the Real Estate, Streets and Traffic Committee and the three City s housing corporations; plans, developments and activities should all be examined from an integration perspective. The structural goals are derived from the general idea that all of Stockholm s district should be attractive places to live in and that everybody should be able to live in any part of the city: 10

17 All inhabitants should have the possibility to influence the management and maintenance of their own residential areas, irrespective of the kind of housing they have (rental, corporate or owner-occupied). The city should endeavour to have various forms of tenure in each of the districts. The local housing authority should be able to supply flats in all of Stockholm s districts, and in properties owned by private landlords as well as the municipal housing corporations. It should be possible for people with a low income and without personal contacts on the housing market to reside in the most attractive areas. All of Stockholm s districts should function as living communities where housing, schools and places of work, as well as various types of service and democratic institutions are available. So far the City Council has made available SKr 500 million or ECU 56,5 million to finance the programme up to and including The future of the project is less clear where available funding is concerned because of a shift in the political colour in the City Council as a result of this year s elections. Nonetheless, work has started in a number of districts, under the auspices of the Real Estate and Traffic Committee, implemented by the Outer City Project. This project develops and co-ordinates activities in the districts with the highest unemployment rates, the greatest dependence on social welfare benefits, etc. The innovative aspect of these projects is that inhabitants themselves have responsibilities in deciding which measures are to be implemented, albeit within the framework of funds supplied by the Real Estate and Traffic Committee. Another innovative aspect is that directives are that where job opportunities arise from the implementation of a project, precedence must be given to local unemployed. Although this is the first initiative at such a large scale to very actively combat segregation and promote integration of different cultures, it will take a lot of stamina from all parties involved to actually reach the very ambitious set of goals described in the Integration Programme. Undoubtedly local inhabitants will benefit from physical and social improvements in the environment, but turning around the negative spiral of ethnic and social segregation will also require a more balanced division of households throughout the entire city. The main question to tackle in the next decade will be if and how middle class Swedes will be convinced to move back into the neighbourhoods they have left. 11

18 CHAPTER 4: COUNTRIES WITH A COMPREHENSIVE RECEPTION SYSTEM AND LOW HOUSING POLICY EXPENDITURE 4.1 Housing stock The three countries in this category, Finland, Belgium and Luxembourg, are characterised by high shares of home-ownership and small social housing sectors. In Belgium and Luxembourg, the state has de-emphasised the pursuit of social policy objectives through social housing. In Finland housing policy measures include rent subsidies and state loans for housing production, but the resources available are considerably less than in the other Scandinavian countries. Expenditure on housing policy in Finland has also been influenced by the economic crisis in the early 1990 s, caused by the collapse in trade with the former Soviet-Union. All three countries largely focus on housing policy solutions within homeownership. The housing stock in Finland is very young, due to the late urbanisation of the country in the 1960 s and therefore of good quality. The Belgian social rental and institutional private rental sector are of good quality. Dwellings owned by private landlords are often older and of lesser quality. Housing quality in Luxembourg is generally good. 4.2 Accommodation on arrival All three countries have reception centres in which asylum seekers can be accommodated upon first entering the country. Finland and Luxembourg offer the choice to either stay in a centre or live with relatives or friends throughout the entire procedure. In Belgium, all asylum seekers are at first directed to reception centres run by the State or the Red Cross to await a decision on the admissibility of their application. When the application is declared admissible, there is a choice between staying in a centre or finding independent accommodation (for the complete picture: see paragraph 4.5.1). 4.3 Housing allocation Allocation of subsidised housing in Finland is based on housing needs, income and assets. Housing needs for special groups are addressed by earmarking special funds. For instance, there is a housing-savings scheme to assist young people in entering the owner-occupation market and 0.2% of the housing budget is used for programmes to house refugees and homeless. The social rental sector in Belgium is only accessible to people registered on a waiting list of one of the social landlords and limited to a maximum income. A few years ago, this limit has been lowered considerably, to ensure better access to social housing for the target groups, including refugees. Furthermore access has been improved by simplifying the registering system for social housing. Households living in the social rental sector can be forced to move when the income rises above the limit, but landlords prefer to raise the rent instead. Dwellings are allocated based on the date of registration. Applicants must be able to pay three months rent as a guarantee. This requirement considerably restricts access to the housing market for refugees. In the private rental sector there are no allocation rules except that discrimination is forbidden. However, a number of landlords require proof that tenants will be able to pay the rent and ask for payslips. Social welfare benefits are generally not considered to be a steady income, which reduces options for many refugees in this sector. In Luxembourg, social housing is allocated on the basis of waiting lists, with rather long waiting periods because of the small share of social housing in the housing stock. Socially 12

19 disadvantaged groups, including refugees, are assisted in finding accommodation by an NGO called Wunnéngshëllef. They own a number of dwellings, but also rent accommodation on the private market, which is sublet at reasonable rates to people who cannot afford commercial prices. 4.4 Rent allowances Luxembourg does not have a general policy of subsidising rent for low-income groups, but exceptions are possible for needy groups (including refugees) for a maximum period of three years. During this period, up to 50% of the rent is subsidised, but at the same time the expenditure on rent may not exceed one third of the household income. After three years, tenants must be able to bear the housing costs by themselves. Belgium has no general system of subsidising rent for individual households either. Instead, for tenants of dwellings in the social rental sector, the amount of rent to be paid is calculated on the basis of the household income. In the private rental sector tenants have to pay the designated rent; no individual calculation is made with one exception: low-income tenants moving from unhealthy living conditions i.e. slums into private rented accommodation can claim a lower rent. Finland has a system of general housing allowances for all tenure categories, including sublet housing. Allowances cover reasonable housing costs, where the main criterion is the relation between rent and floor-space. Refugees have full access to rent subsidies. 4.5 In depth: Belgium Accommodation on arrival The Belgian reception system changed drastically in The new reception system is linked to the asylum procedure. During the admissibility procedure, asylum seekers can only obtain social aid in a reception centre. New centres have been opening during 1997, increasing the total capacity to approximately 2'500 beds. At the end of 1997 all centres were full. About 55% of all asylum seekers stay in a reception centre during the admissibility procedure. Those who wish to stay in private accommodation in a municipality cannot be forced to stay in the centre but they won t obtain social aid during the first phase of the asylum procedure. However, the rising number of applications during the summer of 1998 has forced the authorities to redirect asylum seekers to municipalities while they are still in the admissibility procedure. In this case, applicants are eligible for social support during the first phase of the procedure, even though they are not residing in a centre. After a positive first decision, when the request is studied in depth, asylum seekers are assigned to a municipality responsible for social assistance. A lot of problems are noted to organise the transit from the centres to the municipalities. Major reasons are the length of the admissibility procedure (ideally 3 months, which goal is not reached at the moment), the problem of finding housing in a municipality and the fact that social aid is paid approximately 6 weeks after the application. This makes it very difficult in most cases to sign a contract to rent a house and make the first payment. Social assistance is provided by a local governmental body, the Openbaar Centrum voor Maatschappelijk Welzijn (OCMW). The OCMWs have to offer suitable accommodation to the asylum applicant; this is no legal obligation, but if no accommodation is offered only half of the social aid given to asylum seekers 13

20 will be repaid to a municipality by the central government. This however does not prevent some municipalities from refusing to house asylum seekers. If accommodation is offered to an asylum seeker and he or she refuses the offer, the OCMW is not obliged to find an alternative. In practice, many asylum seekers who are allocated to smaller municipalities in rural areas never reside there, but choose to find their own lodgings in one of the bigger cities. The municipality to which the applicant has been assigned remains responsible for paying social support, which leads to a number of practical problems when people have to collect their money in person. Fortunately, it is only a small percentage of municipalities that gives such a strict interpretation to the rules. The reason behind this bureaucratic and complicated system is the dispersal plan, issued by the federal government and devised to relieve OCMWs in the bigger cities from the large number of assistance applications. In practice the dispersal plan s effectiveness is limited by the notion that freedom of settlement and residence must be respected and by the unwillingness of some communities to include asylum seekers. Exceptions to this general rule are those who enter the country with papers valid for more than three months. They do not have to live in a reception centre first and can find their own accommodation straight away without losing their rights to social assistance Housing policy in Belgium As stated before, the emphasis in Belgian housing policy has always been on promoting home-ownership and building single family housing. Construction of new dwellings has traditionally been one of the most important instruments to improve mobility on the housing market, through which ultimately all households would be able to move on to a better housing situation. A second focus-point is the generous definition of income limits for subsidies and benefits, mainly for homeowners. Access to the social rental sector has been limited by income, resulting in about 55% of all households being eligible for social housing. Because of the large scale of social housing complexes built over the last decades, lowering the income limit could cause segregation and even ghettoisation and is therefore inadvisable. The social rental sector in Belgium is not only very small (compared to the neighbouring countries), but at least in Flanders not very well adjusted to the changes in society over the last decades either. Nearly half of all the dwellings in the social rental sector consist of three-bedroom apartments or houses, where only 6% of households would qualify for this type of housing. On the other hand, nearly 20% of the dwellings has one bedroom, while two thirds of eligible households are either single or childless couples Policy tools Belgium suffered less from housing destruction in the Second World War than most of its neighbours, but as a result the average age of the housing stock is a lot higher and therefore the general housing quality is less. One tool devised to improve housing quality in general is the so-called slum-tax, a tax charged on owners of uninhabitable dwellings. However, the amount to be paid is very low and therefore does not encourage homeowners or landlords to invest in renovation. Apart from that, the tax is rarely actually collected, partly because many local authorities own a number of slums as well. In addition, the Flemish 14

21 government introduced a levy on unoccupied and neglected dwellings with the intention of broadening the supply of cheap rental housing and reducing the pressure on the private market. Charges are imposed on neglected buildings, dwellings that have been vacant for at least 12 months and those that have been condemned. The minimum amount charged for negligence is BEF 20'000 (ECU 500) and BEF 40'000 (ECU 1'000) for vacancy and negligence. The charges are raised each year up to maxima of BEF 100'000 and BEF 200'000 respectively. In practice, this instrument is not very effective either, partly because some local governments do not very actively try to collect the charges and partly because a rather effective homeowners and landlords lobby exists. The Urgency Programme for a Solidary Society was established in 1993 as a law. It grants mayors the power to claim vacant dwellings to accommodate homeless in general. Homeless refugees should be able to benefit from this measure as well, especially when the definition of homelessness includes those without independent accommodation (e.g. those who are staying with friends or relatives on a temporary basis). This instrument should also provide an alternative for people in slums and unhealthy living conditions seeking better housing. However, between January 1993 and December 1994, not a single dwelling has been claimed under the programme. The lack of effectiveness in the first two years is explained by a number of causes: - The right to claim only comes into effect when the OCMW or municipality has no vacancies left suitable for residence. - A building is not vacant when someone resides in it or activities are developed on the premises. This makes it rather easy for owners to claim that a dwelling is being used. Simply submitting an application for renovation is sufficient as proof that work is being done, without actually developing activities. - The procedure is too complicated in time and in criteria that have to be met. - There is no control on whether the right to claim is actually used and homeless have no place to complain if no action is undertaken by the authorities Housing options for refugees As stated before, compared to its neighbours Belgium has a relatively small rental sector and a very small social rental sector. In Antwerp for instance, only 10% of the housing stock consist of social rental and the national average lies around 6-7 %. During the asylum procedure, this section of the housing market is hardly accessible for refugees, because many landlords, including social landlords such as housing associations are very reluctant to rent out to people with a temporary residence permit. Therefore, the vast majority ends up in the private rental sector and usually in the bottom end of this sector. Depending on the influx, the situation improves or worsens, especially in the cities. Research in Antwerp has shown that the country of origin also influences accessibility. People from countries where refugees have come from for a number of years, can find accommodation more easily than those from newer refugee-countries. In itself the housing market in Belgium is not as tight as in many other European countries, which also improves the chances for refugees to find acceptable quality housing at a reasonable price. Single house hunters as well as couples usually find accommodation within one or two months after being given permission to move out of the reception centre. Large families, people with psychological problems and unaccompanied minors have a worse position on the housing market and need more time to find permanent residence. In exceptional cases, some large families even turn to the owner-occupied sector, because 15

22 buying a five or six-room apartment can be cheaper under circumstances than renting one. The union of large and young families supports home-ownership among large families by supplying mortgages at low interest rates to these families. Many single refugees as well as the smaller families end up in neighbourhoods with a vacancy rate above average. Unsurprisingly, these are usually not the best parts of town as far as housing quality and social facilities are concerned and often they are also the neighbourhoods with high percentages of migrant inhabitants. Segregation occurs in Belgium to more or less the same extent as in other European cities. Again compared to the surrounding countries, Belgium has a limited set of rules regarding housing for refugees. The question of whether or not a housing allowance is granted depends on the willingness and co-operation of the OCMW concerned. Applications for housing benefits can not be decided upon by the OCMWs independently, but have to be judged by a special committee as well. The allocation system described above has a limited scope and is not very powerful as a tool to actually accommodate people. One of the main problems in accommodating refugees is the fact that reception of asylum seekers is a federal responsibility, whereas housing issues in general are a provincial responsibility The rent-guarantee scheme The Overlegcentrum voor Integratie van Vluchtelingen OCIV (Flemish Centre for Integration of Refugees) established a rent-guarantee scheme in mid-1997 to improve the resettlement of refugees in municipalities. Lack of savings frustrated the access to independent housing and as a result, people had to stay in reception centres longer than necessary. The scheme was introduced in June 1997, containing BEF 600'000 (nearly ECU 15'000) and it was temporarily postponed in December of the same year, because all available funds had been used. The scheme provides interest-free loans to OCMWs and NGOs, who draw up agreements with individual refugees for the repayment of the rent-guarantee. The amount to be paid back each month usually lies around BEF 1'000 (ECU 25). The average amount borrowed is approximately BEF 10'000. The aim of the scheme, apart from assisting refugees in finding accommodation is also to demonstrate the needs of refugees, mainly caused by a number of OCMWs that are not willing to put much effort into resettling refugees in their municipalities. The problem has been raised with the Ministry of the Interior and the Minister for Social Integration. This has resulted in the possibility to pay the rent-guarantee out of the resettlement grant, which improves options for refugees to rent accommodation. 16