Stanovanjska politika dobiva nov zagon: 100 milijonov evrov letno za gradnjo javnih najemnih stanovanj

Slovenija se sooča z eno največjih stanovanjskih kriz doslej: mladi ostajajo pri starših, cene stanovanj in najemnin strmo rastejo, javnih najemnih stanovanj je premalo. Ministrstvo za solidarno prihodnost se je zato sistematično lotilo stanovanjske politike. Kot je v GOVSI podkastu povedal državni sekretar, država vsako leto namenja 100 milijonov evrov za gradnjo novih javnih najemnih stanovanj.

Državni sekretar Klemen Ploštajner je v pogovoru z voditeljico GOVSI podkasta Petro Prešeren Golob poudaril, da je v zadnjem desetletju nastal ogromen razkorak med ponudbo in povpraševanjem. Da se na srednji in dolgi rok ponovno vzpostavi ravnovesje, bo država občinam in stanovanjskim skladom dolgoročno zagotovila stabilen finančni okvir, kar jim bo omogočilo načrtno pripravo projektov. Poleg tega država sistematično pregleduje in aktivira javna zemljišča, da bi na ta način pospešila gradnjo. Do leta 2035 bo zgrajenih kar 20.000 javnih najemnih stanovanj.

Javna najemna stanovanja bodo namenjena širokemu krogu prebivalcev – mladim, družinam, zaposlenim v ključnih poklicih ter starejšim, ki potrebujejo prilagojena oskrbovana stanovanja. Najemnine bodo ostale bistveno nižje od tržnih, hkrati pa bo država za najbolj ranljive skupine prebivalstva še naprej zagotavljala subvencijo najemnine.

»Stanovanje ne more biti privilegij, ampak je temeljna pravica,« je dejal Ploštajner. Do leta 2035 naj bi v javnih najemnih stanovanjih živelo približno 150 tisoč ljudi, kar bo pomenilo pomemben premik k bolj dostopnemu in pravičnemu stanovanjskemu sistemu.

Vabljeni k ogledu in poslušanju zadnje epizode vladnega podkasta.

[ENGLISH VERSION]

Housing policy with new momentum: €100 million annually for public rental housing

Slovenia is facing a severe housing crises: young people are living longer at their parents’ homes, housing prices and rents are soaring, and public rental housing is scarce. The Ministry for a Solidary Future has systematically addressed housing policy. As State Secretary in the GOVSI podcast, the government is investing €100 million each year in the construction of new public rental apartments.

State Secretary Klemen Ploštajner talked to the host of GOVSI podcast Petra Prešeren Golob and emphasized that in the past decade a massive gap has emerged between supply and demand. To restore balance in the medium and long term, the state will provide municipalities and housing funds with a predictable long-term financial framework, enabling them to plan projects more effectively. In addition, the government is systematically reviewing and activating public land to accelerate construction. By 2035, as many as 20,000 will be built.

Public rental housing will be available to a wide range of residents – young people, families, employees in essential professions, and the elderly who need adapted assisted-living apartments. Rents will remain significantly lower than market rates, while subsidies will continue to be available for the most vulnerable groups.

“Housing must not be a privilege but a fundamental right,” Ploštajner stated. By 2035, around 150,000 people are expected to live in public rental housing, marking an important step towards a more accessible and fair housing system.

Tune in on your favourite platform to listen or watch the episode of podcast and enjoy the experience!

Transcript

Vladni podkast GOVSI

Voditeljica Petra Prešeren Golob: Pozdravljeni in dobrodošli v 27. epizodi podkasta GOVSI. Z vami sem Petra Prešeren Golob. Tokrat bomo govorili o še eni temi, ki je zelo pomembna za vse nas - o stanovanjski politiki. Dom je več kot le fizični prostor. Je osnovna človekova potreba, ki vpliva na našo varnost, dostojanstvo in duševno zdravje. A za mnoge je postal nedosegljiva želja, privilegij za tiste z močnim finančnim zaledjem ali veliko sreče. Mladi vse dlje ostajajo doma in to ne nujno zato, ker bi si to želeli, ampak ker pogosto nimajo izbire. Za nakup stanovanja in posojilo potrebujejo približno 20 % lastnih sredstev, najemnine gredo v nebo, javnih najemnih stanovanj pa je premalo.  Slovenska Ustava pa v 78. členu jasno pravi: Država ustvarja možnosti, da si državljani lahko pridobijo primerno stanovanje.

Na Ministrstvu za solidarno prihodnost so napovedali največji val gradnje javnih najemnih stanovanj po osamosvojitvi. Namenili bodo 100 milijonov evrov na leto za javna najemna stanovanja. Prilagodili bodo tudi postopke za dodeljevanje stanovanj, da dom ne bo več privilegij, ampak temeljna pravica. Z nami je državni sekretar Klemen Ploštajner, ki na Ministrstvu za solidarno prihodnost vodi področje stanovanjske politike. Lepo pozdravljeni.

Prvič po osamosvojitvi se na ministrstvu nekako sistemsko lotevate vprašanja stanovanjske politike. Narediva nek pregled: kakšen je slovenski stanovanjski trg v številkah?

Državni sekretar Klemen Ploštajner: Razmere so zelo zaostrene, tako kot po celotnem svetu, in pogoji oziroma razlogi za to so relativno podobni na neki sistemski ravni. Če jih povzamemo z nekimi zelo osnovnimi gabariti, pomenijo to za Slovenijo in tudi za svet: da se je v zadnjem desetletnem obdobju prebivalstvo večalo, predvsem se je večalo število gospodinjstev, za Slovenijo je to precej izrazito. Hkrati se je v vmesnem obdobju zagotovilo izjemno malo stanovanj, deloma tudi kot posledica gospodarske krize 2008, pa tudi kasneje nekega padca gradbene industrije, in ponudba in povpraševanje sta ustvarila zelo ogromen razkorak v tem obdobju.

V Sloveniji imamo še dodatno težavo, da se je ta trend v bistvu »usedel« na razmere, ko smo imeli manj stanovanj na število prebivalcev, kot je povprečje v Evropski uniji, manj javnih najemnih stanovanj, se pravi nekih dostopnih stanovanj, in vse to je v bistvu pripeljalo do stanja, ki ga imamo danes. In še dodatna komponenta, ki se je prilepila k temu, je pa ta, da so se v zadnjem obdobju tudi drugi interesi vpletli na stanovanjsko področje. Ključno je recimo turistično oddajanje, ki je precej stanovanj na ključnih lokacijah iztrgalo iz stanovanjskega.

In ko damo cel ta tržni aspekt skupaj in pogledamo, kaj je država v zadnjem obdobju oziroma v tem nekih 10-letnem obdobju naredila, po mojem samo en podatek pove vse: da od 2015 do leta 2022, se pravi do nastopa te vlade je bilo v gradnjo javnih najemnih stanovanj iz proračuna vloženih manj kot 14 milijonov evrov, se pravi praktično nič. In če damo vse to skupaj, dobimo pač »kompot«, ki ga imamo: rastoče cene, premalo stanovanj in naraščajočo nedostopnost.

Voditeljica: Ste dober poznavalec stanovanjske politike, ker ste se tej temi posvečali že kot raziskovalec, pa tudi kot aktivni član civilne družbe. Doktorirali ste prav na temo nepremičninskega trga v Ljubljani. Sodelovali ste pri številnih publikacijah in raziskavah, prejeli ste tudi naziv sociološki up. Zakaj vas to področje tako zanima in kakšen je bil ta prehod iz neke akademske civilnodružbene sfere v to izvršilno vlogo v državni upravi? Vas je kaj presenetilo?

Gost: Če začnem mogoče, kako se s tem začel ukvarjati. To je bilo v bistvu popolnoma po naključju. V osnovi se nisem zanimal, niti ne za prostor niti za stanovanjska vprašanja. Večinoma sem se ukvarjal s politično, pa ekonomsko sociologijo. Po naključju sem se začel s to temo ukvarjat, ker me je nek profesor povabil, da začnemo to področje bolj podrobno gledat. Se je pa tema »prilepila« na mojo osebno izkušnjo. Moja osebna izkušnja pa ta, da sem kot študent prišel bivati v Ljubljano, živel sem na zasebnem najemnem trgu in v času študija zamenjal osem stanovanj. Se pravi, nenehno sem se selil. Tako, da sem zelo močno občutil to negotovost bivanja, kar se tiče najemnega trga. Tudi sam sem se že zaradi tega spoznal z nekimi najemnimi pogodbami, razmerami, pogajanji z najemodajalcem. Predvsem pa sem to eksistencialno negotovost občutil, ki je značilna za stanovanjsko področje, in iz tega je potem zraslo tako osebno, kakor tudi akademsko, pa potem tudi neko politično zanimanje.

Po akademskem obdobju sem, kot ste rekli, sem prestopil v neko čisto drugo funkcijo. Presenetilo me je veliko stvari, tudi mojih osebnih, ampak najbolj me je pa v bistvu na stanovanjskem področju presenetilo, kako je bilo to področje v Sloveniji zanemarjeno. Ko sem prišel na ministrstvo, je bilo na direktoratu oziroma takrat je bil sektor za stanovanje zaposlenih 6 ljudi. Ti so bili zaposleni v zelo slabih razmerah, tudi s strani vodstva, kako se je z njimi pogovarjalo, na kak način, v bistvu so imeli odnos, kot da so nek zadnji sektor na ministrstvu, s katerim se ni nihče aktivno ukvarjal.

Drugi šok pa je bil, kako stanovanjska politika - kljub temu, da je to ključna razvojna politika, na državni ravni ni bila reprezentirana v nobeni drugi temi. Ko si šel npr. na ministrstvo za kohezijo ali pa prostor, se s stanovanji tudi oni sploh niso ukvarjali. Tema je bila popolnoma zanemarjena in je bil zelo velik izziv v bistvu sploh zgraditi te povezave med ministrstvi, med uradniki, med akademsko sfero in ministrstvom, med stanovanjskim skladom in ministrstvom, kjer tudi ni bilo močnih povezav. Tako da je ta stvar bila na začetku kar šokantna.

Voditeljica: Zanimivo, tudi zato, a ne, ker se ne pogovarjamo od včeraj ob pomanjkanju oziroma o neki stanovanjski politiki, ki je bila neobstoječa. To se že leta govori. Že vi ste izkusili to kot študent, hkrati pa je to - kot ste rekli - neka tema, ki povezuje, ki je medresorska. V bistvu res šokantno, da to prej ni bilo bolj povezano in bolj v ospredju.

Gost: Ja, saj veliko različnih razlogov je za to, osnovni je pač ta, da smo v devetdesetih sprejeli neko odločitev, kot država in družba, da se bomo umaknili s tega področja. Bile so neke politike, neki poskusi, ampak predpostavka je bila, da bo stvar kar sama od sebe rešila. Evidentno se pač ni. Razmere so se zaostrovale in dovolj dolgo so vse vlade gledale stran, da smo prišli do situacije, kjer smo, na to pa so se seveda prilepile še neke makro razmere tudi v svetovnem merilu, ki so dodatno zaostrile situacijo.

Voditeljica: Že precej dobro ste orisali nekako zgodovino tega stanovanjskega problema oziroma problema stanovanjske politike. Ampak - pred leti ste dejali: želja Slovencev, da bi se za stanovanje globoko zadolžili, je perverzna posledica desetletij zanemarjanja stanovanjske politike in prodaje javnega fonda. In prav to je to, kajne, o čemer govorite?

Gost: Ja, v bistvu smo vso odgovornost … Saj ni to edina sfera družbe … Ampak vso odgovornost smo prevalili na gospodinjstvo oziroma na posameznika. Tudi ustava, ki ste na začetku citirali, je odmik v bistvu že od osnovnega načela. V Jugoslaviji je bilo načelo, da država zagotovi stanovanje in je tudi aktivno vlagala. Imeli smo izjemno kakovostno stanovanjsko politiko, tuje države, ne vem, Švedska, recimo tudi Dunaj deloma, so se zgledovali po jugoslovanskem sistemu. Potem smo pa v devetdesetih rekli – ne, ne, ne, država nima nič s tem, trg bo zagotovil in sami ste odgovorni, država mora pa pri tem pomagati.

Ja, pomagala je bolj slabo, sicer ne, ampak vso odgovornost smo dali na posameznika. In kaj se je zgodilo v tem tridesetletnem obdobju, da so vsi mehanizmi, ki so prej nekako kompenzirali to odsotnost države, odpadli? Ključni mehanizem je bil recimo to, da smo si sami zgradili hiše. To je pač ta znana slovenska sorodstvena pomoč: ko je treba, pač pridejo sorodniki, gajba piva in pač pridejo vsi delat na hišo.

Ta mehanizem v bistvu tudi odpovedal na nek način. Nimamo več tako močnih sorodstvenih povezav, nimamo več zemljišč, ki bi to zagotavljala, ni več tako enostavno zidati v lastni režiji, pravila so tudi drugačna. In če pogledamo en podatek – npr. zagotovljena stanovanja, ki si jih ljudje sami zgradijo, se je od 90. v bistvu več kot prepolovil. V začetku 90. je približno 6000 stanovanj letno bilo zagotovljenih s strani fizičnih oseb, zdaj je številka okoli 2500 letno. To je recimo en mehanizem, ki je popolnoma odpovedal. 

Odpovedal je tudi tržni mehanizem, tj. kar se gradi na trgu. Gradilo se je zelo malo, zdaj malo več, ampak se gradi tudi za drago prodaja – kar je spet mehanizem, ki je odpovedal - država pa tudi ni vstopila. Tako da vsi mehanizmi, da prideš do stanovanja v naši družbi, so na nek način odpovedali, in naloga države sedaj je, da vzpostavi nove. In to je to, kar sedaj počnemo. 

Voditeljica: In preden se dotakneva točno tega, kaj počnete, kakšni so načrti, kakšni so ti ukrepi stanovanjske politike, predlagam, da si pogledamo kratek video, ki te ukrepe povzema.

Video: 

Se mi zdi danes stanovanje pogosto precej luksuz.

Svojega stanovanja si ne morem privoščiti. 

Ne, dejansko si ga ne morem, ker je nizka plača, ni dovolj visoka.

Ali ste vedeli, da v naslednjih letih Slovenija načrtuje gradnjo javnih stanovanj? Poglejmo, kaj dela država in ministrstvo, da bo lahko vsak živel v svojem domu. Danes smo tukaj na gradbišču, ker se gradijo nova javna najemna stanovanja. Prvič se stanovanjske politike v Sloveniji lotevamo sistemsko. Ne zagotavljamo samo finančnih sredstev, ampak dejansko gradimo javna stanovanja. Za gradnjo novih stanovanj namenjamo 100 milijonov evrov letno, to v prihodnjih 10 letih pomeni 20 tisoč novih javnih najemnih stanovanj. To niso samo obljube. Že v letošnjem in prihodnjem letu Stanovanjski sklad začenja z gradnjo dva tisoč novih javnih najemnih stanovanj. Sodelujemo z občinami in z lokalnimi skladi. Pomagamo mladim, mladim družinam in tistim zaposlenim, ki so zaposleni v poklicih, ki so pomembni za lokalno okolje. Na ta način jim zagotovimo dom. Imeti svoj dom, ne more biti stvar sreče, ampak mora biti znak, da sistem deluje.

Voditeljica: Kot smo videli v videu 100 milijonov evrov letno za 20 tisoč javnih najemnih stanovanj do leta 2035. A lahko razložite ta načrt nekako po fazah?

Gost: Prva faza je ta, da obstoječe projekte, ki so že v gradnji ali pa so tik pred tem, da se začnejo graditi, da jih finančno podpremo, ker bi ti projekti drugače ostali v predalu in se ne bi realizirali. Teh stanovanj je kar precej. Državni stanovanjski sklad je zelo jasno navajal pod vsemi vladami, da ima projekte, pa jih ne more realizirati, ker nima finančnih sredstev. Enako je trenutno z ljubljanskim stanovanjskim skladom in tudi še nekaterimi drugimi akterji.

Prva faza je zato v bistvu zagotoviti finančna sredstva za vsa stanovanja, ki so pripravljena, da gredo v gradnjo. Drug del pa je, kako zagotoviti, da se bodo novi projekti zagnali s temi sredstvi. Osnovna stvar, na katero so opozarjali tako občine kot stanovanjski skladi, je, da rabijo predvidljivo finančni okvir - torej, da bodo vedeli, kakšna sredstva, v kakšnem obsegu, pod katerimi pogoji so na voljo - ne samo danes, ampak jutri pojutrišnjem v naslednjih letih. To jim bo omogočilo načrtovanje in tudi stabilno pripravo projektov. In s tem finančnim okvirom jim to zagotavljamo.

Zakon zagotavlja obseg sredstev. S koncem letošnjega leta, v začetku prihodnjega bodo zaživeli mehanizmi prek državnega stanovanjskega sklada ali pa SID banke. In to bo nek finančni okvir, ki bo omogočil občini, da reče - aha, država je namenila sredstva, mi imamo zemljišče in vemo, kaj lahko s tem zemljiščem naredimo in razvijemo projekte. Tako da, to je druga faza. Tretja faza je pa potem še, kako zagotoviti dodatno zemljišča, kako spodbuditi dodatne akterje? To je pa tudi tretja faza programa, na katerem delamo. Delamo nov nacionalni stanovanjski program in to je osnova, kako usposobiti lokalne skupnosti, da bodo delale projekte, kako zagotoviti dodatna zemljišča, predvsem, da se bodo zemljišča zagotavljala vnaprej, ne pa, ko pride investitor in se šele takrat začnejo stvari delat. S tem paketom, s temi finančnimi sredstvi bomo zagotovili kontinuiteto projektov.

Voditeljica: Po drugi strani pa tudi neko predvidljivost in načrtovanje za naprej, a ne?

Gost: Najbolj osnovno komponento tudi mednarodne študije, kažejo, da u stanovanj stanovanja je oziroma vsaka vlaganja v prostor potrebujejo načrtne posege in predvidljivost. Če tega ni, se odvija ali se ne odvija ali pa se odvija stihijsko in pa imaš zmedo.

In ključno je zagotoviti to dolgoročno predvidljivo, zato je tako pomembno, da smo zagotovili 10 letni okvir financiranja, ker to daje dovolj veliko stabilnost za vse akterje, da znajo načrtovati tudi vnaprej.

Voditeljica: Kot ste omenili - tudi to vprašanje zemljišč, ki se večkrat pojavlja, kot neka težava ovira na poti boste reševali?

Gost: Ja, zemljišč so dotikamo na več načinov. Prva je, kot sem že omenil, da projekti, ki trenutno že imajo zemljišča, ki že imajo nekaj načrtov. Zdaj vedo, da jih lahko realizirajo v smeri gradnje stanovanj. Drugi del, na katerem aktivno delamo, je, da izvajamo projekt pregleda vseh javnih zemljišč, tako državnih kot občinskih, ki bi bila primerna za stanovanjsko gradnjo in bi jih bilo možno aktivirati v nekem srednjeročnem obdobju. Se pravi, da imamo sploh bazo. Tretji, ki bo pa potem tudi ključen še za naprej, ko to  osnovo porabimo, kako zagotoviti dodatna zemljišča? Tukaj zelo intenzivno delamo z ministrstvom za naravne vire, ki je pristojno za zemljiško politiko in razmišljam o različnih oblikah - od načrta preskrbe zemljišč na lokalnih ravneh, potencialno tudi sklada stavbnih zemljišč na nacionalni ravni. Torej, možne so različne rešitve, osnova pa je predvsem to, da začnemo kot država načrtovati to področje. Ker če ne načrtuješ, tudi zemljišč ne moreš zagotavljati.

Voditeljica: Večkrat se omenja v kontekstu stanovanjske politike tudi birokracija, dolgi postopki. Ali se obetajo kakšne spremembe na področju pospešitve razpisnih postopkov? Krajši upravne postopke? Omenili ste že boljšo vključenost lokalnih skupnosti. Nam lahko kar s kakšnim primerom mogoče ponazorite, koliko časa traja od načrta pa do vselitve recimo prvih stanovalcev ali je to preveč zahtevno?

Gost: Izkušnje so zelo različne, so postopki dolgi. Tako povprečno se računa v bistvu ideje za razvoja projekta do njegove realizacije približno 5 let tudi 7 let, traja pa lahko tudi veliko dlje, lahko traja pa tudi manj. Ključno je pogledat, kdaj traja manj.  Traja manj - ne nujno zaradi tega, ker bi bili birokratski postopki tako dolgi. Čeprav tudi tam so ovire in trenutno sta dva zakona - zakon o urejanju prostora in gradbeni zakon v državnem zboru, ki poskušata to naslavljati. Osrednja težava pa je to, kar sem omenil: pomanjkanje načrtovanja. Če si kot občina recimo pripravil zemljišče z neko nenačrtno mislijo in se nato pojavi javni investitor za stanovanja, recimo državni stanovanjski sklad, in je njegova potreba popolnoma neusklajena s tem prostorskim urejanjem, bo seveda trajalo izjemno dolgo, da se bosta ta dva interesa uskladila in bodo pripravljeni ustrezni prostorski akti, dovoljenje in tako naprej. Če pa ti vnaprej načrtuješ in se jasno dogovarjaš, lahko marsikaj zelo hitro naredimo in en tak lep primer imamo recimo v Celju.

V Celju je državni stanovanjski sklad od občine kupil zemljišče konec lanskega leta. Trenutno so že zelo globoko v fazi za vložitev gradbenega dovoljenja in pričakujemo, da bo gradbeno dovoljenje za ta projekt, pridobljeno že s prihodnjim letom. Kar je zelo hitro izveden postopek. To pa zaradi tega, ker sta se občina in sklad v naprej usklajevala, dogovarjala, pripravljala ustrezne akte in sta bila nekako tudi glede interesov usklajena. In če imamo to, pride zelo hitro do realizacije.

Če imaš pa konfliktne interese ali pa stihijo, je pa valda v prostoru veliko neusklajenosti in to je potem v papirje zelo težko spravit.

Voditeljica: Omenili ste Celje. Mogoče je treba na tem mestu še povedati, da vse te investicije, načrti stanovanjske politike niso omejene zgolj na osrednjo Slovenije, kjer je sicer stanovanjski problem res najbolj pereč, ampak dejansko gre širše, a ne?

Gost: Ja. mi smo naredili anketo potreb, ki so jo izpolnjevale vse občine. Ugotovili smo, da primanjkuje približno 20 tisoč javnih najemnih stanovanj po celotni Sloveniji in tudi malo neko regijsko distribucijo. Seveda tudi anketa jasno kaže, da so potrebe recimo v Ljubljani daleč največje, ampak so povsod po celotni Sloveniji in skladno s tem načrtujemo razvoj projektov. In tudi obstoječi projekti, za katere vemo, so razpršeni po celotni Sloveniji. Trenutno recimo državni stanovanjski sklad gradi v Lendavi, na Jesenicah in v Lukovici. Aktivni so potem projekt v Ljubljani, Mariboru in Kranju, razvija se projekt v Kopru. Projekt se razvija v Pivki, Ilirski Bistrici, Črni na Koroškem, v Kobilju … Tako da v bistvu gre za pokrivanje celotne Slovenije, mora pa biti seveda ta preskrba usklajena z nekim smiselnim regionalnim prostorskim razvojem.

Voditeljica: Omenili ste, da nekako te potrebe, ki ste jih dobili, te povratne informacije, da primanjkuje 20.000 javnih najemnih stanovanj. V javnosti se vseeno pojavljajo kritike, da ta vaš načrt stanovanjske politike 20.000 javnih najemnih stanovanj v 10. letih, da je še vedno to premalo glede na potrebe prebivalstva.

Gost: Najprej bi dal kontekst: koliko je javni sektor v celoti zagotavljal v nekem prejšnjem obdobju? Povprečje zagotovljenih javnih najemnih stanovanj je bilo približno dvesto letno, v nekem srednjeročnem obdobju za nazaj. Gre torej za znatno povečanje investicij, znatno povečanje tudi števila javnih najemnih stanovanj, za 10 kratnik je na nek način načrt. Vedeti moramo, iz katerega temelje izhajamo. Ne moremo kar preskočiti ne vem kakšne znatne velike cifre. Že ta preskok je ogromen. Je pa treba tudi to dati v kontekst, da je to samo javni del. Tudi na zasebnem delu se zagotavljajo stanovanja. Tudi na trgu se zagotavljajo stanovanja s strani fizičnih oseb, tudi za prodajo. Seveda se je pa treba vprašat, komu so namenjena ta stanovanja za prodajo. Treba je pač zagotoviti, da bodo izpolnjevala stanovanjsko funkcijo. Če pa recimo zdaj gledamo za 10-letno obdobje … Če država zagotovi 20.000 stanovanj in rečemo, koliko je v zadnjem obdobju zagotovil trg, kar je približno 4000 stanovanj letno, pomeni, da bi v desetletnem obdobju kot družba v celoti zagotovili 60.000 stanovanj v desetletnem obdobju. Kar pa je kar znatna cifra. 

Voditeljica: Problem pri teh stanovanjih na trgu pa je … GURS je dal podatek, da so lani cene rabljenih stanovanj v Ljubljani ponovno dosegle rekordne vrednosti. Torej, samo rabljena stanovanja, bi za kvadratni meter v Ljubljani odšteli 4500 evrov. In to je rabljeno stanovanje, novogradnje pa so verjetno še višje vrednosti.

Gost: Razkorak med starimi in novimi stanovanji ni več tako velik, kar kaže, da je povpraševanje v bistvu lokacijsko in ni toliko vezano na kakovost. Je pa tukaj vezano marsikaj, kar sem opisal. Se pravi to, da je zdaj zaostanek pri številu stanovanj, ki so bila zgrajena, je tako ogromen …  Če pogledamo podatke, recimo 2015, so tržni akterji, se pravi zasebniki, zgradili, če se ne motim okoli 400 ali 500 stanovanj v enem letu. Se pravi praktično nič in to je bilo 5-6 letno obdobje s temi številkami. Tako da zaostanki so ogromni, povpraševanje je ogromno v primerjavi s ponudbo. Je pa še druga komponenta in to je, da imamo veliko tudi nakupov, ki niso za stanovanjsko rabo. Zato je pomembno, da je vlada sprejela zakon o gostinstvu, ki omejuje recimo turistično rabo, ki je ena izmed tistih, ki se v Sloveniji in tudi mednarodno prepoznano kot tista, ki se najbolj zažira v to stanovanjsko rabo in dviguje cene. Bo pa treba zagotoviti tudi kake druge ukrepe. 

Voditeljica: Če se vrneva k tem javnim najemnim stanovanjem. Kot ste že omenili v Sloveniji jih je premalo, smo tudi pod evropskim povprečjem. V Sloveniji predstavljajo štiri odstotke vseh stanovanj. Ali se pri teh spremembah stanovanjske politike zgledujete po Dunaju? Na kratko ste ga že omenili. Tam četrtina prebivalcev živi v občinskih stanovanjih, 76 % stanovanj je najemniških. Popolnoma drugačna slika kot recimo v Sloveniji?

Gost: Ja, zgled v številkah je seveda nemogoč, tudi ne vem, če bi bil idealen. Se pa zgledujemo po principih, ki so na Dunaju. In ti principi so nekaj, kar je vredno posnemati, in je tudi nekaj, kar smo v preteklosti že imeli. Osnova na Dunaj je, da je stanovanjska politika dojeta kot temeljna razvojna politika. Se pravi, da v javnem najemnem sektorju ali pa temu, kar imajo oni teh nizkoprofitnih, se pravi nekih družbenih stanovanj bivajo zelo različni sloji prebivalstva - od najrevnejših do srednjega in celo višjega srednjega sloja. Torej, je namenjeno širokemu krogu prebivalstva, in to z našo zakonodajo nekako izpolnjujemo. Drugo je, da je vpeta v vse druge politike, gospodarske, socialne, okoljske in tako naprej. Torej, je neka temeljna razvojna politika in to zdaj tudi na nek način se trudimo da bi dosegli. Mogoče en podatek, tak zelo zanimiv za omenit je, da celoten sektor teh javnih najemnih stanovanj v Avstriji v celotni k BDP prispeva približno milijardo evrov. Avstrijski BDP je višji zaradi tega sektorja, ker so najemnine to nižje, poraba toliko višja, ker so toliko vlaga. Torej, tukaj imamo spet neko močno povezavo z razvojem družbe. In tretja, ki je pa ključna na Dunaju, pa je načrtovanje in predvidljivost. Dunaju je jasno, koliko vlaga vsako leto, kakšna sredstva so na voljo, kako razvijati, vpeti razne podsisteme … In to je nekaj, po čemer se sploh skušamo zgledovat. In še mogoče en podatek iz Avstrije, ki je zelo zanimiv: kako javni sektor vpliva na trg na splošno. Zelo jasni so podatki, da povečanje števila javnih najemnih stanovanj vpliva tudi na tržne cene, tako prodajne kakor najemne. Ker imajo najemniki kar naenkrat izbiro: lahko gredo v bolj kakovostno, cenejše, javno najemno stanovanje, lahko se pogajajo z najemodajalcem in tukaj je ta posredni učinek na trg, na katerega tudi upamo v srednjeročnem obdobju.

Voditeljica: Ali menite, da je ravno to, da imajo na Dunaju tisti, ki najemajo stanovanja, nekako boljše pogajalsko izhodišče, tudi eden od razlogov, zakaj je najemništvo na Dunaju nekaj povsem običajnega, v Sloveniji pa je vseeno ta želja po lastniškem stanovanju. Po ena strani verjetno zato, ker če si najemnik, lahko praktično čez noč ostaneš na cesti, torej, nimaš neke zagotovljene varnosti, po drugi strani pa so cene izjemno visoke, javnih najemnih stanovanj je premalo … In še to, recimo, če so najemnine tako visoke, je to problematično, ne samo za mlade, ampak na primer tudi za upokojence. Stanovanje je v bistvu tudi nek temelj socialne varnosti?

Gost: V Sloveniji v trenutnih razmerah je totalno neracionalno razmišljati o tem, da bi najem si izbral kot izbiro. Razen v javnem najemu. Ta zagotavlja varnost, tudi cenovno  v smislu mesečnih stroškov, je toliko izrazito boljši kakor recimo nakup, da je racionalno.  Ampak kot ste rekli, je pač teh stanovanj premalo, da bi ljudje lahko to videli kot neko resnično rešitev. Na trgu je pa popolnoma neprimerno, da bi razmišljali o tem, in je zaradi tega logično, da je lastništvo nekaj, kar si vsi želimo ali pa želijo, ker je edina varna možnost. Je pa tudi, ko sem, ko sem bral ta vprašanja, pa sem razmišljal, sem pomislil, da Imamo pa v Sloveniji tudi izkrivljen pogled na lastništvo, ker zgodovina naša je bila, da si do lastništva prišel praktično zastonj, v preteklosti. Se pravi, ali si kupil stanovanje po Jazbinškovem zakonu v devetdesetih praktično za zastonj: ali si stanovanje podedoval ali pa si si ga zgradil spet z vikend delom brez velikih stroškov. Jaz sem recimo iz svojega otroštva ne spomnim ena pogovora širšega sorodstva o hipotekarnem kreditu, ker nihče ni imel hipotekarnega kredita. Vsi so bili pa lastniki. Tega obdobja zdaj ni več. Zdaj pač imamo popolnoma drugačno breme lastništva. Prinaša velike stroške, tako z vidika nakupa, prinaša velike obremenitve in tudi ni več tako varen, kakor je bil v preteklosti. Zaradi tega najem postaja, tudi v anketah se kaže, veliko bolj sprejemljiv. Mora pa ta najem biti izjemno dostopen, stroški najemnine znatno nižji od obroka kredita za primerljivo stanovanje, in seveda - kar je ključna komponenta - mora biti varen. In kolikor so te komponente prisotne, je z vidika statusa eksistencialne varnosti najem popolnoma enak kot lastništvo. Mogoče pogosto še bolj varen in ugoden, ker ti omogoča premikanje med različnimi stanovanji, nisi vezan na eno lokacijo, nisem vezan tudi obnovo tega stanovanja, tako da ima marsikatero prednost, ki pa trenutno v Sloveniji zaradi pomanjkanja predvsem javnih najemov ne pride do izraza.

Voditeljica: Morda pa bo v prihodnosti, če bodo ti načrti uresničeni?

Gost: Če bodo uresničeni. Zagotovo bo še vedno ta sektor obsegal …. Če se pač oziroma ko bomo uresničili ta cilj, bo teh stanovanj približno 50 tisoč, s trenutnih 30.000. To je že nek znaten obseg. To pomeni, da bi približno 150.000 ljudi živelo v tem sektorju, kar pa ni več tako mala številka.

Voditeljica: Ko govorimo o stanovanjih, stanovanjski politiki, se velikokrat osredotočamo večinoma na mlade, ki rešujejo svoj prvi stanovanjski problem. Kako pa odgovarjate na potrebe starajoče se družbe? Vemo - niso vsa stanovanja primerna za starejše, ki imajo različne potrebe, težava je tudi ogrevanje prevelikih hiš in podobno. Kako se soočate s tem izzivom?

Gost: Ja, trenutno imamo v Sloveniji kar izjemen privilegij kot družba, da lahko ta problem odvračamo, ravno zaradi tega, kar sem prej omenil zato, ker večino lastnikov v Sloveniji ni obremenjen s stanovanjskimi stroški v smislu kredita, ampak tudi obnove nujno ne, ampak s temi običajnimi stroški ogrevanja in tako naprej. Kar je še vedno velik problem, ampak za razliko od drugih držav je to … Biti star v velikem stanovanju, ni tak strošek, in se lahko ob temu problemu delamo, smo se ga izogibali. Se pa problemi večajo predvsem z vidika dostopnosti teh stanovanj: ni dvigal, niso urejeni dostopi, predvsem pa tudi lokacijsko, se pravi v bližini ni javnih stavb. Zaradi tega smo zdaj v zakonodajo pripeljali javno najemno oskrbovano stanovanje. To stanovanje je v bistvu arhitekturno prilagojeno starejšim. Ne pomeni, da prinaša oskrbo. Oskrbo je urejena preko dolgotrajne oskrbe, se pravi, prek drugega dela, ki ga pokriva naš naše ministrstvo. Pomeni pa, da so stanovanja namenjena predvsem preselitvi ali pa, da ljudje pridejo bivati v bolj primerno okolje iz oddaljenih vasi, kjer nimajo preskrbljene oskrbe, kjer nimajo dostopa do javnih storitev, kjer so oddaljeni od skupnosti, pridejo bivati v okolje, ki pač jim to omogoča in hkrati tudi se izognejo recimo nekim arhitektonskimi ovirami v svojem stanovanju. In namerno smo omogočili, da ta stanovanja lahko najamejo tudi lastniki stanovanj, ker je pač starejših najemnikov zelo malo. Omejitve so, predvsem v smislu, da morajo to lastniško stanovanje vseeno ponuditi v družbene namene. Ampak menimo, da ta sektor oskrbovanih stanovanj, ki se zelo razvija, tudi povpraševanje je zelo veliko, da bo deloma pomagal nasloviti izzive starajoče se družbe.

Voditeljica: Če se dotakneva še novele stanovanjskega zakona, ki je namenjena predvsem učinkovitejšemu upravljanju z javnimi najemnimi stanovanji. Z novimi ukrepi nekako želite olajšati dostop do stanovanja mladim, mladim družinam in kadrom, ki so pomembni za določeno lokalno okolje. Lahko poveste kaj več o teh ukrepih?

Gost: Že prejšnji zakonodajni okvir je bil zelo širok in je dostop do javnih najemnih - takrat neprofitnim – zdaj smo jih poimenovali - širokemu krogu prebivalstva, vendar je pač sistem točkovanja izvajanja razpisov v praksi pomeni, da so marsikatere kategorije bile izključene.  Ključen razlog pa je bil, da je seveda teh stanovanj bilo premalo. Tako da osnovni pogoj je, da povečamo število stanovanj. Z novim zakonodajnim okvirom prilagajamo, kako se delajo razpisi, predvsem v smeri tega, da lahko lokalne skupnosti bolje ciljno načrtujejo, skladno z družbeno sliko, ki imajo. Recimo, ciljajo neke socialne skupine, ki so v njihovem okolju bolj prezentne kot v nekem drugem, hkrati pa lahko tudi ciljajo, če temu rečemo tako razvojno komponento, torej mlade ali pa neke poklice, se pravi, v razpisu opredelijo, da lahko točno določeno število stanovanj namenijo določenemu profilu. Te primere že imamo tudi iz preteklosti, ko je bilo to že možno delat. Celje, recimo, je razpisalo stanovanja za medicinske sestre in to je lep primer,  ki kaže, kako to v prihodnosti delat. 

Zdaj bomo tudi na ministrstvu še v letošnjem letu obiskali vse regije. Naredili bomo 12 regijskih obiskov, kjer bomo z lokalnimi skupnostmi, skladi, regijami predstavljali te rešitve in tudi predstavili, kaj vse je možno delat v okviru razpisov, da bodo te razvojne cilje tudi izpolnili.

Voditeljica: Pri javnih najemnih stanovanjih se obeta tudi dvig najemnin v prihodnjih petih letih. Ker so to stanovanje, ki so namenjena tudi socialno šibkejšim, me zanima, kako boste to skupino zaščitili, da jih ne bi to preveč prizadelo.

Gost: Vprašanje urejene najemnine je bilo v bistvu eno najtežjih. Tudi meni osebno je bilo zelo težko vprašanje, ker se zavedam tudi profila, ljudi, ki bivajo v javnih najemnih stanovanjih. Je pa bilo zelo jasno, da pač moramo izpolniti kljukici. Prva je ta, da mora biti sistem vzdržen. Najemnina mora nekako pokrivati osnovne stroške, seveda v povezavi z ustreznim financiranjem. Ker če tega ne zadovoljimo - in to danes ni zadovoljeno - imamo težave z vzdrževanjem tega fonda (in imamo izjemno podvzdrževan javni fond), manj vlaganj, se pravi, gradimo precej manj, največjo težavo pa predstavlja, da se stanovanja prodajajo. Maribor je recimo v zadnjem obdobju izgubil 10 procentov javnih najemnih stanovanj, ker so jih odprodajali, tako da je treba to komponento zadovoljiti. Drugače pa seveda morajo biti te najemnine tudi izjemno dostopne. Tako da to matematiko sestaviti, je bilo izjemno zahtevno. Je pa osnova to, da smo pristopili na način, da bo prilagajanje najemnin oziroma dvig postopen, da je še vedno v veljavi in se krepi sistem subvencij za najbolj ranljive, da lahko tudi v javnih najemnih stanovanjih pridobijo subvencijo. Tretjič, da se najemnina dvigujejo na takšen način, da se bolj dvigujejo v tistih stanovanjih, kjer je najemnina izjemno nizka že danes, in manj v tistih, kjer je visoka: torej, stanovanja na boljših lokacijah, nova stanovanja imajo danes že relativno ustrezno najemnino in tam bodo dvigi zelo mali, medtem ko stara stanovanja, v katerih ne nujno bivajo bolj ranljivi, so pa tista, ki bodo deležna višjega dviga. Še vedno pa bodo stanovanja izjemno izjemno dostopna. Če mogoče povem številke: danes se recimo za 60 kvadratov veliko stanovanje v javnem najemnem sektorju se najemnine gibljejo med 170 in 390 evrov, odvisno od starosti, lokacije. Razpon je zelo velik, Povprečno je približno 250 evrov. To izjemno dostopna najemnina. Po spremembi bi bila pa nekako, v tem petletnem obdobju bi se pa gibala med 280 in 410 €, povprečna približno 100 evrov. Torej, govorimo še vedno izrazito dostopnih stanovanjih, z nižjimi od tržnih najemnin, vsaj v Ljubljani za dvakrat, če ne celo trikrat. Tako da smo nekako poskušali ti dve obe komponenti izpolniti.

Voditeljica: In da je prehod čim bolj mehak …

Gost: Da je prehod čim bolj mehak, da se lahko prilagajajo. In tudi osnovna naša zaveza in cilj je bil, da bodo najemnine še vedno dostopne. Ker če niso dostopne, potem nima smisla teh javnih najemnih stanovanj delat. Morajo pa vseeno pač omogočiti to … Ker danes imamo situacijo, ko imamo izjemno izjemno dostopne najemnine, ampak je teh stanovanj premalo in vedno manj. Cilj pa je imeti, da damo možnost čim več ljudem, da bivajo v teh stanovanjih, da se ta sektor lahko razvija in tukaj pač mora biti tudi na tej prihodkovni ravni nekaj narejeno. Še vedno pa to ni na račun najemnikov. Številke, pač te najemnine, ki sem jih omenil, če kdo posluša, ki najema na trgu, si verjetno misli, da je to še vedno izjemno dostopna najemnina.

Voditeljica: Si verjetno želi, da bi lahko kandidiral za javno najemno stanovanje?

Gost: … in večina ljudi … To je morda treba poudariti, da ne bo mišljenja, da so to stanovanja, namenjena socialnemu zelo ranljivim skupinam, omejenemu krogu. Javna najemna stanovanja so dostopna praktično 80 procentov slovenskega prebivalstva, vezano na državljanstvo, sicer, ampak tisti, ki pač niso lastniki: 80 procentov jih je upravičenih. Dohodkovni in premoženjski cenzus so izjemno visoko postavljeni, v skladu s tem, kar sem prej opisoval. Cilj je, da notri bivajo čim bolj raznolike skupine prebivalstva.

Voditeljica: In če se bo fond teh stanovanj povečal, bo seveda tudi dostopnost po tem boljša …

Gost: … še večja, ja. 

Gostiteljica: Če se dotakneva še dveh perečih tem … Nekako sva se jih vmes med pogovorom že na kratko dotaknila, ampak vseeno: ta najemni trg na ena strani in prazna stanovanja na drugi. Nevladne organizacije so bile ob sprejemanju te stanovanjske zakonodaje kritične, da ste povsem spregledali največji problem: to pa je povsem nereguliran zasebni najemniški trg, kjer na tisoče najemnikov za slaba stanovanja plačuje oderuške najemnine in živi v negotovosti brez ustrezne zaščite. Kako odgovarjate na to? Delno ste že omenili ta problem …

Gost: Ja, razmere na najemnem trgu so zelo so zaostrene. Tudi v drugih državah so zelo zaostrene. Je pa treba povedati, da zakonodajni okvir, ki ga imamo, ki varuje najemnika, dejansko ni slab. V bistvu je zelo močna varovalka, da je najemnikom. Težava so pač tržne razmere - zelo veliko neravnovesje med ponudbo in povpraševanjem, ko na vsako najemno stanovanje trka 10 ali več najemnikov, je zelo težko, da se bo zakonodajni okvir ustrezno uveljavljal. In tudi če se, so najemodajalci v položaju, da dajejo najemnino, ki jo prosto določajo. Tukaj so posegi zelo težavni. In tudi dolžino najemne pogodbe določajo sami, kar imamo danes prakso, da je 11-mesečna do enoletna, recimo. In v te razmere poseči, je zelo težavno in posega se v bistvu lahko samo na srednji in dolgi rok. In to s tem, kar sem … kar je naš osrednji cilj: povečanje ponudbe dostopnih stanovanj, ki bo na srednji rok vplivala tudi na najemni trg, druga pa je zmanjšanje teh pritiskov drugih, ki povprašujejo po istem tipu stanovanj. Zato je recimo sprememba zakona o gostinstvu, ki omejuje turistično rabo stanovanj tako ključna. Ker turistična raba, recimo, v Ljubljani, se zajeda točno v tista stanovanja, po katerih najbolj povprašujejo najemniki. To so stanovanja, eno in pol do dvosobna, na pomembnih, prijetnih lokacijah. In če ta pritisk povpraševanja znižamo, se s tem deloma sprosti dodatna ponudba in s tem tudi deloma izboljša položaj najemnikov v smislu pogajanja z najemodajalci.

Voditeljica: Druga plat medalje, ki prav tako vpliva na najemni trg, pa so prazna stanovanja. Po podatkih Geodetske uprave je v Sloveniji praznih več kot 160.000 nepremičnin. Številni opozarjajo, da lastniki pogosto nimajo interesa, ker … Pa sami tudi mislijo, da niso dovolj zaščiteni, a ne?

Gost: To številko je treba z zelo veliko previdnostjo jemati, ker se notri skriva marsikaj - od neprijavljenih prebivališč do lokacijsko neprimernih stanovanj do dotrajanih stanovanj, ki niso več primerna. Je pa gotovo, da teh stanovanj, ki so praznih, je preveč. Razlogi so tudi zelo različni. Enega izmed njih ste omenili. So pa tudi razlogi, kot je investicijski nakup ali pa tudi kulturni: držiš stanovanje zato, da ga boš predal svojim otrokom in ga noben drug ne sme dobiti v tistem času.

Veliko dejavnikov se tukaj prepleta in ta pravna varnost najemodajalcev, ki ste jo omenjali, je zagotovo en izmed faktorjev, pri čemer je bila spet omenil, da zakonodajni okvir spet ni toliko napačen. Težava se pojavlja z dolgotrajnimi postopki, ki so vezani na sodno reševanje sporov. Toda tukaj smo z ministrstvom za pravosodje opravili že več pogovorov, bo pa potreben še zelo velik napor. Gre pa za precej težavno področje, ker ni tako enostavno v našemu neurejenem trgu reči, da lahko najemodajalec jutri odpove najemno pogodbo in vrže ven najemnika, ker moramo zaščititi - in to je treba poudariti najemnik je šibkejša stranka in mora biti bolj zaščitena. Še posebej pa je to težavno ob pogojih trga, kjer tudi najemodajalci ne prijavljajo ustreznih najemnin, da se plačuje na roko in takšnih primerih je zelo težko dokazati, ali je bilo plačano ali ni bilo plačano. Tako da tukaj se zelo veliko dejavnikov prepleta. Precej časa bo trajalo, da se bo tako kultura najema spremenila, kakor tudi pač neki ustrezni mehanizmi reševanja sporov, o katerihh bo treba v prihodnje razmisliti in razviti.

Voditeljica: Arhitekt Miloš Kosec je v eni izmed kolumn zapisal: Nepremičnine so lahko zlata naložba samo v državi, ki ne pozna nepremičninskega davka, ki ne ureja in ne nadzoruje najemnih razmerij, ki pušča lastnikom povsem proste roke pri odločanju, za kakšne nestanovanjske namene bodo uporabljali svoje stanovanje, in ki razume gradnjo javnih najemnih stanovanj kot samo še en socialni transfer.

Kako bo videti stanovanjska politika čez 10 let, če bodo te vaši trenutni načrtovani ukrepi uspešni?

Gost: Deloma je odgovor že nakazan v tem tej trditvi Miloša Kosca, predvsem če bodo ti, pa verjamem, da bodo, ukrepi uresničeni. Stanovanjska politika bo kot ena izmed temeljnih razvojnih politik prepletena tudi z drugimi razvojnimi politikami, kot so pač gospodarska, pa predvsem prostorska. Javna najemna stanovanja se bodo načrtno gradila, se bodo razvijala. Ne bi si upal trditi, da jih bo dovolj, ker stanovanj nikoli ni dovolj, jih bo pa pač večje število in tudi njihova preskrba bo stabilnejša. Lahko se bodo projekti razvijali in se bodo skladno s potrebami tudi gradili. V javnem sektorju bo živel širok krog prebivalstva. Ne bo to socialni korektiv ali pa da bo to namenjeno ozkemu krogu ranljivih skupin, ampak da bo namenjen tudi razvojnim politikam in širokemu krogu prebivalstva. Za tiste, ki so najbolj ranljivi, bo pa v sektorju poskrbljeno tako s stanovanjem kakor tudi z vidika neke podpore. Tak delujoč javni sektor bo imel tudi izjemne učinke na zasebni trg. Nenazadnje, če sta medsebojno prepletena tako z vidika gradbene operative, se to pozna, Recimo na Dunaju. Tudi zasebni sektor je potem bolj kakovosten, predvsem pa bo to vplivalo na dostopnost stanovanj z vidika višanja ponudbe, manj povpraševanja na trgu, nižanja cen oziroma bolj dostopnih cen, dolgoročnejših najemnih pogodb. Seveda pa treba opraviti tudi nalogo na področju omejevanja tistega investicijskega dela, kar je pa predvsem področje davčne politike.

Voditeljica: Veliko dela vas še čaka, ne samo vas, tudi ostale resorje. Za zaključek: kakšno sporočilo bi dali najinim poslušalcem, gledalcem glede prihodnosti slovenske stanovanjske politike? Veliko ste zdaj že orisali o prihodnosti, ampak morda na kratko?

Gost: Sporočilo, ki ga dajem, je, da je zelo jasno, da je ta vlada prva začrtala neko resno smer. Ne samo da ga je izrekla, ampak ga je tudi udejanjila. Številke so zelo jasne - tako z vidika vloženih finančnih sredstev kot aktivnosti. Razmere se bodo na srednji rok in dolgi rok, če se bo ta politika nadaljevala, zagotovo izboljšale in spremenile. In ključno je to, da se zagotovi kontinuiteto in da ta politika deluje res dolgoročno in da ni zgolj mandat ena vlade, ampak vseh prihodnjih vlad ali bo pač v tej sestavi ali pa v kaki drugi.

Voditeljica: No, pričakovanja javnosti so upravičeno visoka. Uspešno delo vam želim še naprej. Hvala za pogovor. 

Hvala pa tudi vam spoštovane poslušalke in poslušalci, gledalke in gledalci. Spremljate nas lahko na vseh platformah za podkaste in seveda na našem youtube kanalu. Nasvidenje.

[ENGLISH VERSION]

Government podcast GOVSI

Host Petra Prešeren Golob: Hello and welcome to the 27th episode of the GOVSI podcast. I am Petra Prešeren Golob with you. This time we will talk about another topic that is very important for all of us - housing policy. Home is more than just a physical space. It is a basic human need that affects our safety, dignity and mental health. But for many it has become an unattainable desire, a privilege for those with a strong financial background or great luck. Young people are staying at home longer and longer, and this is not necessarily because they want to, but because they often have no choice. They need approximately 20% of their own funds to buy an apartment and take out a loan, rents are skyrocketing, and there is not enough public rental housing. The Slovenian Constitution clearly states in Article 78: The state creates opportunities for citizens to acquire suitable housing.

The Ministry for a Solidary Future has announced the largest wave of public rental housing construction since independence. They will allocate 100 million euros per year for public rental housing. They will also adjust the procedures for allocating housing so that home will no longer be a privilege, but a fundamental right. With us is State Secretary Klemen Ploštajner , who heads the housing policy area at the Ministry for a Solidary Future. Greetings.

For the first time since independence, the ministry is addressing the issue of housing policy in a systematic way. Let's take a look: what is the Slovenian housing market in numbers?

State Secretary Klemen Ploštajner: The situation is very tense, as it is throughout the world, and the conditions or reasons for this are relatively similar on a systemic level. If we summarize them with some very basic dimensions, this means for Slovenia and also for the world: that in the last ten years the population has been increasing, especially the number of households has been increasing, for Slovenia this is quite significant. At the same time, in the intervening period, extremely few apartments have been provided, partly as a result of the economic crisis of 2008, but also later of a decline in the construction industry, and supply and demand have created a very huge gap in this period.

In Slovenia, we have an additional problem, that this trend essentially "sat down" on the situation when we had fewer apartments per capita than the average in the European Union, fewer public rental apartments, that is, some affordable apartments, and all of this essentially led to the situation we have today. And an additional component that has stuck to this is that in recent times other interests have also become involved in the housing sector. A key one is, for example, tourist rentals, which have torn a lot of apartments in key locations out of the housing sector.

And when we put this whole market aspect together and look at what the state has done in the recent period, or in this 10-year period, in my opinion, just one piece of information says it all: that from 2015 to 2022, that is, until this government came to power, less than 14 million euros were invested in the construction of public rental housing from the budget, that is, practically nothing. And if we put all this together, we get the "compote" that we have: rising prices, too few apartments, and increasing inaccessibility.

Host: You are a good expert on housing policy, because you have already dedicated yourself to this topic as a researcher, as well as an active member of civil society. You did your PhD on the topic of the real estate market in Ljubljana. You have participated in numerous publications and research, and you have also received the title of sociologist. Why are you so interested in this field and what was this transition like from an academic civil society sphere to this executive role in the state administration? Did anything surprise you?

Guest: If I could start with how I started working on this. It was basically completely by accident. I was not really interested in either space or housing issues. I was mostly involved in political sociology, but rather in economic sociology. I started working on this topic by accident, because a professor invited me to start looking at this area in more detail. But the topic "stuck" to my personal experience. My personal experience is that I came to live in Ljubljana as a student, I lived on the private rental market and changed eight apartments during my studies. In other words, I was constantly moving. So I felt the uncertainty of living very strongly, as far as the rental market is concerned. Because of this, I myself became familiar with some rental contracts, conditions, negotiations with the landlord. Above all, I felt this existential uncertainty that is characteristic of the housing sector, and from this grew a personal, academic, and then also a certain political interest.

After the academic period, I, as you said, transferred to a completely different function. I was surprised by many things, including my own, but what surprised me most in the housing sector was how neglected this area was in Slovenia. When I came to the ministry, there were 6 people employed in the directorate, or at that time the housing sector. They were employed in very poor conditions, including by the management, how they were talked to, in some way, basically they had an attitude as if they were some last sector in the ministry that no one was actively dealing with.

The second shock was how housing policy - despite the fact that it is a key development policy - was not represented in any other topic at the state level. When you went, for example, to the Ministry of Cohesion or Spatial Planning, they did not deal with housing at all. The topic was completely neglected and it was a very big challenge to actually build these connections between ministries, between officials, between academia and the ministry, between the housing fund and the ministry, where there were also no strong connections. So this thing was quite shocking at the beginning.

Host: Interesting, also because, but not because we haven't been talking about the shortage since yesterday or about some housing policy that was non-existent. This has been talked about for years. You already experienced this as a student, but at the same time, this is - as you said - a topic that connects, that is interdepartmental. In fact, it's really shocking that this wasn't more connected and more in the spotlight before.

Guest: Yes, there are many different reasons for this, the basic one is that in the 1990s we made a decision, as a state and society, to withdraw from this area. There were some policies, some attempts, but the assumption was that the matter would resolve itself. It obviously didn't. The situation worsened and all governments looked the other way for long enough for us to get to the situation we are in, and of course some macro conditions also added to this on a global scale, which further exacerbated the situation.

Host: You've already outlined the history of this housing problem, or rather the problem of housing policy, quite well. But - years ago you said: the desire of Slovenians to go into deep debt for housing is a perverse consequence of decades of neglect of housing policy and the sale of public funds. And that's exactly what you're talking about, isn't it?

Guest: Yes, we are basically all responsible... This is not the only sphere of society... But we have shifted all responsibility onto the household or the individual. The constitution that you quoted at the beginning is also a departure from the basic principle. In Yugoslavia, the principle was that the state should provide housing and also actively invested. We had an exceptionally high-quality housing policy, foreign countries, I don't know, Sweden, let's say even Vienna to some extent, were inspired by the Yugoslav system. Then in the nineties we said - no, no, no, the state has nothing to do with it, the market will provide it and you are responsible yourself, but the state must help with this.

Yes, it helped rather poorly, otherwise not, but we put all the responsibility on the individual. And what happened in this thirty-year period that all the mechanisms that previously somehow compensated for this absence of the state fell away? The key mechanism was, for example, that we built our own houses. This is the famous Slovenian kinship assistance: when needed, relatives just come, a crate of beer and everyone just comes to work on the house.

This mechanism has essentially failed in a way. We no longer have such strong family ties, we no longer have land that would provide this, it is no longer so easy to build on our own, the rules are also different. And if we look at one piece of data - for example, guaranteed apartments that people build themselves have essentially more than halved since the 1990s. In the early 1990s, approximately 6,000 apartments were guaranteed by individuals per year, now the number is around 2,500 per year. This is, for example, one mechanism that has completely failed.

The market mechanism has also failed, i.e. what is built on the market. There was very little construction, now a little more, but it is also being built for a high price – which is again a mechanism that has failed – and the state has not stepped in either. So all the mechanisms for getting housing in our society have in a way failed, and the state's task now is to establish new ones. And that is what we are doing now.

Host: And before we touch on exactly what you're doing, what the plans are, what these housing policy measures are, I suggest we watch a short video that summarizes these measures.

Videos:

I often find an apartment to be quite a luxury these days.

I can't afford my own apartment.

No, I actually can't because the salary is low, it's not high enough.

Did you know that Slovenia is planning to build public housing in the coming years? Let's see what the state and the ministry are doing so that everyone can live in their own home. Today we are here at a construction site because new public rental housing is being built. For the first time, we are tackling housing policy in Slovenia systematically. We are not just providing financial resources, but we are actually building public housing. We are allocating 100 million euros annually for the construction of new housing, which means 20 thousand new public rental housing units in the next 10 years. These are not just promises. This year and next, the Housing Fund is starting to build two thousand new public rental housing units. We are cooperating with municipalities and local funds. We are helping young people, young families and those employed in professions that are important for the local environment. In this way, we provide them with a home. Having your own home cannot be a matter of luck, but must be a sign that the system is working.

Host: As we saw in the video, 100 million euros per year for 20 thousand public rental apartments by 2035. Can you explain this plan in stages?

Guest: The first phase is to financially support existing projects that are already under construction or are about to start construction, because otherwise these projects would remain on the shelf and would not be realized. There are quite a few of these apartments. The State Housing Fund has stated very clearly under all governments that it has projects, but cannot realize them because it does not have the financial resources. The same is currently the case with the Ljubljana Housing Fund and some other actors.

The first phase is therefore essentially to provide financial resources for all the apartments that are ready to go into construction. The second part is how to ensure that new projects will be launched with these resources. The basic thing that both municipalities and housing funds have pointed out is that they need a predictable financial framework - that is, to know what resources, in what volume, under what conditions are available - not only today, but tomorrow and the day after tomorrow in the following years. This will enable them to plan and also to prepare projects stably. And with this financial framework we are providing them with this.

The law provides for the amount of funds. By the end of this year, early next year, mechanisms will be put into effect through the State Housing Fund or SID Bank. And this will be a financial framework that will enable the municipality to say - aha, the state has allocated funds, we have land and we know what we can do with this land and develop projects. So yes, this is the second phase. The third phase is then how to provide additional land, how to encourage additional actors? This is also the third phase of the program we are working on. We are working on a new national housing program and this is the basis for how to train local communities to carry out projects, how to provide additional land, especially so that land will be provided in advance, not when an investor comes and only then things start to be done. With this package, with these financial resources, we will ensure the continuity of projects.

Host: On the other hand, there's also some predictability and planning ahead, right?

Guest: The most basic component, as international studies show, is that housing, or any investment in space, requires planned interventions and predictability. If this is not the case, it either happens or it doesn't happen or it happens spontaneously and you have confusion.

And it is crucial to ensure this long-term predictability, which is why it is so important that we have provided a 10-year funding framework, because this provides enough stability for all actors to be able to plan ahead.

Host: As you mentioned - will you also address this issue of land, which arises repeatedly, as a problem or obstacle on the way?

Guest: Yes, we are touching on land in several ways. The first is, as I already mentioned, that projects that currently already have land, that already have some plans. Now they know that they can realize them in the direction of housing construction. The second part, which we are actively working on, is that we are implementing a project to review all public land, both state and municipal, that would be suitable for housing construction and could be activated in a medium-term period. That is, we have a base at all. The third, which will also be key in the future, when we use up this base, is how to secure additional land? Here we are working very intensively with the Ministry of Natural Resources, which is responsible for land policy, and I am thinking about various forms - from a land supply plan at local levels, potentially also a building land fund at the national level. So, various solutions are possible, but the basis is primarily that we as a state start planning this area. Because if you don't plan, you can't secure land either.

Host: Bureaucracy and long procedures are often mentioned in the context of housing policy. Are there any changes expected in terms of accelerating tender procedures? Shorter administrative procedures? You have already mentioned better involvement of local communities. Can you give us an example of how long it takes from the plan to the first residents moving in, for example, or is that too demanding?

Guest: Experiences vary greatly, the procedures are long. So on average, it is calculated that the process from developing an idea to implementing a project takes about 5 to 7 years, but it can also take much longer, or it can take less. The key is to look at when it takes less. It takes less - not necessarily because the bureaucratic procedures are so long. Although there are obstacles there too, and there are currently two laws - the Spatial Planning Act and the Construction Act in the National Assembly, which are trying to address this. The central problem is what I mentioned: lack of planning. If, for example, you as a municipality prepared land with some unplanned thinking and then a public investor for housing appears, say the state housing fund, and its needs are completely out of sync with this spatial planning, it will of course take an extremely long time for these two interests to be aligned and the appropriate spatial documents, permits, and so on to be prepared. But if you plan in advance and negotiate clearly, we can do many things very quickly, and we have one such beautiful example in Celje, for example.

In Celje, the state housing fund bought land from the municipality at the end of last year. They are currently very deep into the phase of applying for a building permit and we expect that the building permit for this project will be obtained as early as next year. Which is a very quick procedure. This is because the municipality and the fund coordinated, negotiated, prepared the appropriate documents in advance and were somehow also aligned in terms of interests. And if we have that, it will come to fruition very quickly.

But if you have conflicting interests or things are out of control, there is usually a lot of incoherence in the space and it is then very difficult to put this into writing.

Host: You mentioned Celje. Perhaps it should be said at this point that all these investments, housing policy plans are not limited to central Slovenia, where the housing problem is indeed the most pressing, but actually goes wider, doesn't it?

Guest:

Yes. We conducted a needs survey, which was completed by all municipalities. We found that there is a shortage of approximately 20 thousand public rental apartments throughout Slovenia and also some regional distribution. Of course, the survey also clearly shows that the needs are by far the greatest in Ljubljana, for example, but they are everywhere throughout Slovenia and we are planning the development of projects accordingly. And the existing projects that we know about are also scattered throughout Slovenia. Currently, for example, the state housing fund is building in Lendava, Jesenice and Lukovica. Then there are active projects in Ljubljana, Maribor and Kranj, and a project in Koper is being developed. The project is being developed in Pivka, Ilirska Bistrica, Črna na Koroškem, Kobilje... So basically, it is about covering the whole of Slovenia, but of course this supply must be coordinated with some meaningful regional spatial development.

Host: You mentioned that somehow these needs that you received, this feedback that there is a shortage of 20,000 public rental apartments. However, there is criticism in the public that your housing policy plan of 20,000 public rental apartments in the 10 years is still not enough given the needs of the population.

Guest: First of all, I would like to give some context: how much did the public sector as a whole provide in a previous period? The average number of public rental apartments provided was approximately two hundred per year, in a medium-term period in retrospect. So it is a significant increase in investments, a significant increase in the number of public rental apartments, a 10-fold increase is in a way a plan. We need to know what foundation we are starting from. We cannot just skip over, I don't know, some significant large figure. This leap is already enormous. But it is also necessary to put this into the context that this is only the public sector. Apartments are also provided in the private sector. Apartments are also provided on the market by natural persons, including for sale. Of course, we have to ask ourselves who these apartments for sale are intended for. We just need to ensure that they will fulfill their housing function. But if we look at a 10-year period now... If the state provides 20,000 apartments and we say how much the market has provided in the recent period, which is approximately 4,000 apartments per year, it means that over a ten-year period, as a society, we would provide 60,000 apartments in total. Which is quite a significant figure.

Host: The problem with these apartments on the market is... GURS reported that last year the prices of second-hand apartments in Ljubljana reached record levels again. So, just for second-hand apartments, you would pay 4,500 euros per square meter in Ljubljana. And that's a second-hand apartment, and new buildings are probably worth even more.

Guest: The gap between old and new apartments is no longer so big, which shows that demand is essentially location-based and not so much tied to quality. But there is a lot of what I described here. That is, the fact that there is now a backlog in the number of apartments that have been built is so huge... If we look at the data, say 2015, market players, that is, private individuals, built, if I'm not mistaken, around 400 or 500 apartments in one year. That is, practically nothing and that was a 5-6 year period with these numbers. So the backlog is huge, the demand is huge compared to the supply. But there is another component, and that is that we also have a lot of purchases that are not for residential use. That is why it is important that the government has adopted the Hospitality Act, which limits, for example, tourist use, which is one of those that is recognized in Slovenia and also internationally as the one that eats into this residential use the most and raises prices. However, some other measures will also need to be taken.

Host: Let's go back to these public rental apartments. As you already mentioned, there are too few of them in Slovenia, and we are also below the European average. In Slovenia, they represent four percent of all apartments. Are you following Vienna's example in these changes to housing policy? You have already mentioned it briefly. A quarter of the population there lives in municipal apartments, 76% of apartments are rented. A completely different picture than, say, in Slovenia?

Guest: Yes, of course, an example in numbers is impossible, and I don't know if it would be ideal. But we are inspired by the principles that are in Vienna. And these principles are something that is worth emulating, and it is also something that we have had in the past. The basis of Vienna is that housing policy is perceived as a fundamental development policy. That is, in the public rental sector or what they have, these low-profit , that is, some social housing, very different layers of the population live - from the poorest to the middle and even upper middle class. So, it is intended for a wide range of the population, and we somehow fulfill this with our legislation. The second thing is that it is integrated into all other policies, economic, social, environmental and so on. So, it is a fundamental development policy and we are now also trying to achieve this in a way . Maybe one piece of information, very interesting to mention, is that the entire sector of these public rental housing in Austria contributes approximately one billion euros to GDP. Austrian GDP is higher because of this sector, because rents are lower, consumption is higher because there is so much investment. So, here we have a strong connection with the development of society again. And the third, which is key in Vienna, is planning and predictability. Vienna is clear about how much it invests each year, what funds are available, how to develop, integrate various subsystems... And this is something that we are trying to emulate. And perhaps one more piece of information from Austria that is very interesting: how the public sector affects the market in general. The data is very clear that the increase in the number of public rental apartments also affects market prices, both sales and rental prices. Because tenants suddenly have a choice: they can go to a better quality, cheaper, public rental apartment, they can negotiate with the landlord and here is this indirect effect on the market, which we also hope for in the medium term.

Host: Do you think that the fact that those who rent apartments in Vienna have a better negotiating position is one of the reasons why renting is something completely normal in Vienna, while in Slovenia there is still this desire for owner-occupied housing. On the one hand, it is probably because if you are a tenant, you can practically stay on the street overnight, so you do not have any guaranteed security, and on the other hand, the prices are extremely high, there are too few public rental apartments... And what's more, if rents are so high, it is problematic, not only for young people, but also for pensioners, for example. Housing is essentially also a kind of foundation of social security?

Guest: In Slovenia, in the current situation, it is totally irrational to think about renting as an option. Except in public rental. This provides security, also in terms of price in terms of monthly costs, it is so much better than, say, buying that it is rational. But as you said, there are simply too few of these apartments for people to see this as a real solution. However, it is completely inappropriate on the market for us to think about this, and therefore it is logical that ownership is something that we all want or want, because it is the only safe option. But it is also, when I, when I was reading these questions, I thought, I thought that In Slovenia, we also have a distorted view of ownership, because our history was that you came to ownership practically for free, in the past. That is, whether you bought an apartment under the Jazbinšek Act in the nineties practically for free: whether you inherited the apartment or you built it yourself again with weekend work without major costs. For example, I don't remember a single conversation between my extended family members about mortgages from my childhood, because no one had a mortgage. But everyone was an owner. That period is gone now. Now we have a completely different burden of ownership. It brings huge costs, both from a purchase perspective, it brings huge burdens and it is no longer as safe as it was in the past. Because of this, renting is becoming, as surveys show, much more acceptable. But this rental must be extremely affordable, the rental costs significantly lower than the loan installment for a comparable apartment, and of course - which is a key component - it must be safe. And as long as these components are present, from the point of view of existential security status, renting is exactly the same as ownership. Perhaps often even safer and more favorable, because it allows you to move between different apartments, you are not tied to one location, you are not tied to the renovation of this apartment, so it has many advantages, which are currently not being expressed in Slovenia due to the lack of public rentals, in particular.

Host: Maybe in the future, if these plans are realized?

Guest: If they are realized. This sector will certainly still comprise.... If or when we realize this goal, there will be approximately 50 thousand of these apartments, up from the current 30,000. This is already a significant amount. This means that approximately 150,000 people would live in this sector, which is no longer such a small number.

Host: When we talk about housing, housing policy, we often focus mostly on young people who are solving their first housing problem. But how do you respond to the needs of an aging society? We know - not all apartments are suitable for the elderly, who have different needs, the problem is also heating too large houses and the like. How do you face this challenge?

Guest: Yes, we currently have a rather exceptional privilege as a society in Slovenia to be able to discourage this problem, precisely because of what I mentioned earlier, because most owners in Slovenia are not burdened with housing costs in terms of credit, but not necessarily renovations, but with these normal heating costs and so on. Which is still a big problem, but unlike other countries, this is... Being old in a large apartment is not such a cost, and we can work around this problem, we have avoided it. However, the problems are increasing mainly from the perspective of the accessibility of these apartments: there are no elevators, access is not regulated, and above all also in terms of location, that is, there are no public buildings nearby. Because of this, we have now introduced public rental serviced apartments into the legislation. This apartment is essentially architecturally adapted to the elderly. It does not mean that it provides care. Care is regulated through long-term care, that is, through another part that is covered by our ministry. It means that the apartments are primarily intended for relocation or for people to come to live in a more suitable environment from remote villages where they do not have adequate care, where they do not have access to public services, where they are far from the community, to live in an environment that allows them to do this and at the same time avoid, for example, some architectural obstacles in their apartment. And we have deliberately made it possible for these apartments to be rented by homeowners, because there are very few older tenants. There are restrictions, mainly in the sense that they have to offer this owner-occupied apartment for social purposes. But we believe that this sector of supported housing, which is developing very much, is also in very high demand, so that it will partly help to address the challenges of an aging society.

Host: Let's touch on the amendment to the Housing Act, which is primarily intended to more efficiently manage public rental housing. With the new measures, you want to somehow facilitate access to housing for young people, young families and personnel who are important for a particular local environment. Can you tell us more about these measures?

Guest: The previous legislative framework was already very broad and provided access to public rental housing - at that time non-profit - we have now called it - to a wide circle of the population, but the scoring system for implementing tenders in practice meant that many categories were excluded. The key reason was that, of course, there were too few of these apartments. So the basic condition is to increase the number of apartments. With the new legislative framework, we are adjusting how tenders are made, mainly in the direction that local communities can better target planning, in accordance with the social picture they have. For example, they target certain social groups that are more present in their environment than in another, but at the same time they can also target, if we call it a development component, i.e. young people or certain professions, that is, they define in the tender that they can allocate a specific number of apartments to a specific profile. We already have these examples from the past, when this was already possible. Celje, for example, has put out an offer for apartments for nurses, and this is a great example that shows how to do this in the future.

Now, the ministry will also visit all regions this year. We will make 12 regional visits, where we will present these solutions with local communities, funds, and regions, and also present what can be done within the framework of tenders to meet these development goals.

Host: Public rental housing is also expected to see rents rise over the next five years. Since these are apartments that are also intended for the socially vulnerable, I'm curious how you will protect this group so that they are not affected too much.

Guest: The issue of regulated rent was actually one of the most difficult. It was also a very difficult issue for me personally, because I am also aware of the profile of people who live in public rental housing. But it was very clear that we had to meet the check marks. The first is that the system must be sustainable. The rent must somehow cover basic costs, of course in connection with adequate financing. Because if we do not meet this - and this is not met today - we have problems with maintaining this fund (and we have an extremely under-maintained public fund), less investment, that is, we build much less, and the biggest problem is that apartments are being sold. For example, Maribor has recently lost 10 percent of public rental housing because they were sold off, so this component must be met. Otherwise, of course, these rents must also be extremely affordable. So putting together this mathematics was extremely challenging. But the basis is that we have approached it in such a way that the adjustment of rents or the increase will be gradual, that the subsidy system for the most vulnerable is still in force and is being strengthened, so that they can also obtain a subsidy in public rental housing. Thirdly, that the rents are being increased in such a way that they are increasing more in those apartments where the rent is already extremely low today, and less in those where it is high: that is, apartments in better locations, new apartments already have relatively adequate rents today and there the increases will be very small, while old apartments, in which the more vulnerable do not necessarily live, are the ones that will receive a higher increase. However, the apartments will still be extremely affordable . If I may, I will give you the numbers: today, for example, for a 60 square meter apartment in the public rental sector, the rents range between 170 and 390 euros, depending on age and location. The range is very large, the average is approximately 250 euros. This is an extremely affordable rent. After the change, it would be, somehow, but in this five-year period it would range between €280 and €410, an average of about €100. So, we are still talking about extremely affordable apartments, with rents lower than market rents, at least in Ljubljana by two, if not three times. So we somehow tried to fulfill both of these components.

Host: And to make the transition as smooth as possible...

Guest: That the transition is as smooth as possible, so that they can adapt. And our basic commitment and goal was also that the rents would still be affordable. Because if they are not affordable, then there is no point in doing these public rental apartments. But they still have to make this possible... Because today we have a situation where we have extremely affordable rents, but there are too few of these apartments and fewer and fewer. The goal is to give as many people as possible the opportunity to live in these apartments, so that this sector can develop and something must be done here at this income level as well. But this is still not at the expense of the tenants. The numbers, these rents that I mentioned, if anyone is listening who rents on the market, they probably think that this is still an extremely affordable rent.

Host: He probably wishes he could run for public rental housing?

Guest: … and most people … This should perhaps be emphasized so that there is no perception that these are apartments intended for socially very vulnerable groups, a limited circle. Public rental apartments are accessible to practically 80 percent of the Slovenian population, tied to citizenship, of course, but those who are not owners: 80 percent of them are eligible. The income and property census are set extremely high, in line with what I described earlier. The goal is to have as diverse a population group as possible living inside.

Host: And if the stock of these apartments increases, accessibility will of course also improve...

Guest: … even bigger, yes.

Host: If we touch on two more pressing topics... We somehow already touched on them briefly during the conversation, but still: this rental market on the one hand and empty apartments on the other. When this housing legislation was adopted, NGOs were critical that you completely overlooked the biggest problem: this is a completely unregulated private rental market, where thousands of tenants pay exorbitant rents for poor apartments and live in insecurity without proper protection. How do you respond to this? You have already partially mentioned this problem...

Guest: Yes, the situation in the rental market is very tight. It is also very tight in other countries. However, it must be said that the legislative framework that we have, which protects the tenant, is actually not bad. In fact, it is a very strong safeguard that tenants have . The problem is the market conditions - a very large imbalance between supply and demand, when 10 or more tenants compete for each rental apartment, it is very difficult for the legislative framework to be properly enforced. And even if it is, landlords are in a position to pay rent that they freely determine. Interventions here are very difficult. And they also determine the length of the rental contract themselves, which we have in practice today, which is 11 months to one year, for example. And it is very difficult to intervene in these conditions and intervention can basically only be done in the medium and long term. And this with what I am ... which is our central goal: increasing the supply of affordable housing, which will also affect the rental market in the medium term, and the second is to reduce these pressures from others who are in demand for the same type of housing. That is why, for example, the amendment to the Hospitality Act, which limits the tourist use of housing, is so crucial. Because tourist use, for example, in Ljubljana, eats into exactly those apartments that tenants are in the most demand for. These are apartments, one and a half to two bedrooms, in important, pleasant locations. And if we reduce this demand pressure, this will partly free up additional supply and thus also partly improve the position of tenants in terms of negotiations with landlords.

Host: The other side of the coin, which also affects the rental market, is empty apartments. According to the Geodetic Administration, there are more than 160,000 empty properties in Slovenia. Many point out that owners are often not interested because... And they themselves think that they are not protected enough, right?

Guest: This number should be taken with great caution, because there is a lot hidden in it - from unregistered residences to apartments that are not suitable for the location to dilapidated apartments that are no longer suitable. But it is certain that there are too many of these apartments that are empty. The reasons are also very different. You mentioned one of them. But there are also reasons, such as an investment purchase or also cultural: you keep the apartment so that you will hand it over to your children and no one else can get it at that time.

Many factors are intertwined here, and this legal certainty for landlords that you mentioned is certainly one of the factors, and it was mentioned again that the legislative framework is not so wrong. The problem arises with the lengthy procedures related to the judicial resolution of disputes. But we have already had several discussions with the Ministry of Justice here, but a very great effort will still be needed. But it is a rather difficult area, because it is not so easy in our unregulated market to say that the landlord can cancel the lease tomorrow and throw the tenant out, because we need to protect - and this must be emphasized, the tenant is the weaker party and must be more protected. This is especially difficult in market conditions where landlords also do not report the appropriate rents, that it is paid in cash and in such cases it is very difficult to prove whether it was paid or not. So a lot of factors are intertwined here. It will take a long time for the rental culture to change, as well as some appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms, which will need to be considered and developed in the future.

Host: Architect Miloš Kosec wrote in one of his columns: Real estate can only be a golden investment in a country that does not know about real estate taxes, that does not regulate or control rental relationships, that leaves owners completely free to decide for what non-residential purposes they will use their apartment, and that understands the construction of public rental housing as just another social transfer.

What will housing policy look like in 10 years if these currently planned measures of yours are successful?

Guest: The answer is already partly indicated in this statement by Miloš Kosc, especially if these measures are implemented, and I believe they will be. Housing policy, as one of the fundamental development policies, will be intertwined with other development policies, such as economic and, above all, spatial. Public rental housing will be built and developed in a planned manner. I would not dare to claim that there will be enough of them, because there is never enough housing, but there will be a greater number of them and their supply will also be more stable. Projects can be developed and built in accordance with needs. A wide range of the population will live in the public sector. This will not be a social corrective or intended for a narrow range of vulnerable groups, but it will also be intended for development policies and a wide range of the population. Those who are most vulnerable will be taken care of in the sector, both with housing and in terms of some support. Such a functioning public sector will also have exceptional effects on the private market. Finally, if they are intertwined from the point of view of construction operations, this is known, for example in Vienna. The private sector is also of higher quality, and this will primarily affect the accessibility of housing in terms of increasing supply, less demand on the market, lowering prices or more affordable prices, longer-term rental contracts. Of course, the task of limiting the investment part also needs to be completed, which is primarily the area of tax policy.

Host: There is still a lot of work ahead of you, not only you, but also other departments. In conclusion: what message would you give to our listeners, viewers, regarding the future of Slovenian housing policy? You have already outlined a lot about the future, but maybe briefly?

Guest: The message I am giving is that it is very clear that this government was the first to outline a serious direction. It not only stated it, but also implemented it. The numbers are very clear - both in terms of invested financial resources and activities. The situation will certainly improve and change in the medium and long term, if this policy continues. And the key is to ensure continuity and that this policy really works in the long term and that it is not just the mandate of one government, but of all future governments, whether it will be in this composition or in some other.

Host: Well, the public's expectations are rightly high. I wish you continued success. Thank you for the interview.

Thank you also to you, dear listeners and viewers. You can follow us on all podcast platforms and of course on our YouTube channel. Goodbye.