2013年9月9日 星期一

重建房屋階梯 居屋至關重要


<轉載自201399日 明報 社評>

政府公布長遠房屋策略諮詢文件,建議未來10年每年平均建屋4.7萬個單位,當中六成是公屋及居屋,並指要建立有效的房屋流動階梯。過去香港的房屋階梯明顯分為3層﹕公屋、居屋、私樓,但政府最新的建議,居屋到底所佔比例為何,仍然是未知之數,若只是每年約5000個單位,肯定無法提供足夠誘因讓公屋住戶走進置業階梯,公屋住戶也會千方百計留在公屋系統,房屋流轉無從說起。要重建房屋階梯,居屋是公屋與私樓之間的重要橋樑,數量必須足夠,才能吸引住戶交還公屋,讓給更有需要的家庭,流轉才有機會成事。

居屋數量大減 數據證明階梯斷層

根據上周二公布的長遠房策諮詢文件,推算未來10年房屋供應目標為47萬個單位,即每年平均供應4.7萬個單位(公營房屋28,200間,私人住宅18,800間,比例為64)。在公營房屋之中,政府仍未決定公屋與居屋的比例,但對於青年及首次置業家庭的需求,長策會建議長遠年均需興建超過5000個居屋單位。運輸及房屋局長張炳良清楚表明,「自置居所有利於社會穩定及向上流動」,又指政府「主張重建房屋階梯」。

近年經常有評論指出,香港的房屋流轉階梯已經出現斷層,基層住戶一旦上了公屋,即使富起來也不願意遷出,即使繳付雙倍租金也不願意轉買居屋,即使買居屋也只透過分戶讓年輕家庭成員上車,父母仍然拒絕交出公屋,不單被指享有「二次資助」,公屋也無法騰空讓更有需要的人入住。政府這次的新建議,是否真的有助促進房屋階梯?這要從過去曾經行之有效的房屋階梯說起。

房屋流轉階梯的理念,主要是先透過遠低於市值租金的公屋系統,讓基層家庭有一段長時間的休養生息期工作掙錢,儲到足夠首期就可以市值折扣價買居屋「上車」,再過一段時間就可補地價或轉投私樓市場,做真正百分百的業主。就是這樣,基層就可一步一步由公營房屋逐步晉身為私樓業主,逐步實現置業夢。這個階梯的關鍵,就是市場要有足夠數量的居屋,作為公屋與私樓之間的橋樑。

根據歷史數據,在19932002年這10年內,香港共興建了21萬間公屋、22萬間資助房屋(居屋、夾屋等),以及27萬間私宅,由此可見,這個隱隱然的334比例,正正就是這個房屋流轉階梯,讓基層看得到一個向上流動的機會。要注意的是,資助房屋(即居屋夾屋等)共佔了三成之多。

反觀20032012年這10年,香港共建了15萬間公屋、15萬間私宅,但資助房屋只有7000間,而數據也顯示,公屋住戶自願交回單位(包括因為買居屋或獲得其他置業資助)的數量,也由1999年高峰期的1.7萬個,急跌至2012/13年度的約7300個。階梯可謂徹底斷層了。

政府的新建屋目標,又能否重建這個階梯?根據政府最新建議,未來10年將興建19萬間私宅,公營房屋則有28萬間,但居屋的比例仍未決定,若真的只有5萬多間(以每年約5000間計算),這個公屋、居屋、私樓的比例將變成514,當中居屋只佔一成,橋樑作用根本難以發揮。

要富戶交還公屋 須蘿蔔棒子並行

要吸引富起來的公屋住戶離開公屋系統投身私人市場,必須蘿蔔與棒子並行。棒子當然是指富戶、寬敞戶等政策,以大幅加租的方式逼令已富起來的公屋住戶交還單位,不過,若私樓樓價居高不下,即使多大的棒子也無法把住戶請走,甚至會觸發民憤,指摘政府麻木不仁,把公屋住戶送進樓市大鱷之口。因此最佳的方法,是同時出動蘿蔔,以居屋的折扣優惠吸引富戶「上車」,交還公屋,流轉階梯才會成事。

居屋是過去30年最成功的房屋政策,套用今天的語言,其中最主要的原因包括﹕

一、居屋就是真正的「港人港地」,只有合資格的港人才能購買;

二、買樓者都是首次置業,杜絕購買「二套房」囤積居奇;

三、價格不會與市民負擔脫節。
未來10年香港的新房屋政策,若真的希望重建房屋流轉階梯,居屋絕對不能缺席,而且數量絕不可以聊備一格,否則一切難以成事。

Editorial

Housing ladder

 
IN its consultation document on its long term housing strategy the government suggests that, in the next decade, on average 47,000 units should be built a year, of which public rental housing (PRH) and the Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) together should account for 60%. It also suggests that it is necessary to build an "effective housing ladder". The HOS is a bridge between PRH and private housing (PH). Only when there are sufficient numbers of HOS units will PRH tenants be inclined to surrender their units in favour of families that need them more. Only then will there be housing mobility.

The idea of putting up an "effective housing ladder" is to provide citizens with housing for which the rent is way below the market level so that they will have a long "recuperation" period in which they can put away money. When a PRH tenant has sufficient savings, he may pay a sum down on an HOS unit (which is offered at a discount). He may, after some time, become a 100% property owner by paying the premium in respect of it or getting into the PH market. This way a grassroots citizen may step by step become a PH owner - realise his dream of living in his own property. A necessary condition for this is that there are in the market sufficiently large numbers of HOS flats, which bridge the gap between PRH and PH.

In the decade between 1993 and 2002, 210,000 PRH units, 220,000 subsidised housing units (including HOS units and sandwich-class housing units) and 270,000 PH units were produced. The ratio was roughly 3:3:4, which represented a housing ladder by means of which grassroots people could move upwards. It is worth noticing that subsidised housing (including HOS housing and sandwich-class housing) then accounted for as large a percentage as 30%.

However, in the decade between 2003 and 2012, while 150,000 PRH units and 150,000 PH units were produced in the territory, only 7,000 subsidised housing units were built. Furthermore, the number of PRH units voluntarily surrendered (because their tenants had acquired HOS units or obtained other housing subsidy) plunged from 17,000 (a peak) in 1999 to about 7,300 in 2012-13. The housing ladder, one may say, has broken.

Does the government's new housing target mean it can rebuild the housing ladder? Its latest recommendation is that, in the next decade, 190,000 PH units and 280,000 public-sector housing units should be produced in the SAR. However, the percentage of HOS units has yet to be determined. In the next decade, if only around 50,000 HOS units will be produced, or on average around 5,000 a year, the PRH:HOS:PH ratio will be 5:1:4. Then the HOS cannot possibly serve as a bridge because it will account for just 10%.

To induce better-off PRH tenants to leave PRH for PH, the government must wield both the carrot and the stick. To wield the stick is of course to compel better-off PRH tenants to surrender their units by hiking the rents payable by them. However, if PH prices remain high, they cannot possibly be persuaded to move out no matter how big the stick may be. This policy would even arouse such indignation that the government might be slammed for being so callous about PRH tenants' plight as to make them food for predators in the property market. Therefore, the best thing to do is to wield the carrot at the same time - to entice better-off PRH tenants to surrender their units with the HOS discount. Only if the government does so can it rebuild the housing ladder.

明報社評2013.09.09﹕重建房屋階梯 居屋至關重要

政府公布長遠房屋策略諮詢文件,建議未來10年每年平均建屋4.7萬個單位,當中六成是公屋及居屋,並指要建立有效的房屋流動階梯。要重建房屋階梯,居屋是公屋與私樓之間的重要橋樑,數量必須足夠,才能吸引住戶交還公屋,讓給更有需要的家庭,流轉才有機會成事。

房屋流轉階梯的理念,主要是先透過遠低於市值租金的公屋系統,讓基層家庭有一段長時間的休養生息期工作掙錢,儲到足夠首期就可以市值折扣價買居屋「上車」,再過一段時間就可補地價或轉投私樓市場,做真正百分百的業主。就是這樣,基層就可一步一步由公營房屋逐步晉身為私樓業主,逐步實現置業夢。這個階梯的關鍵,就是市場要有足夠數量的居屋,作為公屋與私樓之間的橋樑。

19932002年這10年內,香港共興建了21萬間公屋、22萬間資助房屋(居屋、夾屋等),以及27萬間私宅,由此可見,這個隱隱然的334比例,正正就是這個房屋流轉階梯,讓基層看得到一個向上流動的機會。要注意的是,資助房屋(即居屋夾屋等)共佔了三成之多。

反觀20032012年這10年,香港共建了15萬間公屋、15萬間私宅,但資助房屋只有7000間,而數據也顯示,公屋住戶自願交回單位(包括因為買居屋或獲得其他置業資助)的數量,也由1999年高峰期的1.7萬個,急跌至2012/13年度的約7300個。階梯可謂徹底斷層了。

政府的新建屋目標,又能否重建這個階梯?根據政府最新建議,未來10年將興建19萬間私宅,公營房屋則有28萬間,但居屋的比例仍未決定,若真的只有5萬多間(以每年約5000間計算),這個公屋、居屋、私樓的比例將變成514,當中居屋只佔一成,橋樑作用根本難以發揮。

要吸引富起來的公屋住戶離開公屋系統投身私人市場,必須蘿蔔與棒子並行。棒子當然是指以大幅加租的方式逼令已富起來的公屋住戶交還單位,不過,若私樓樓價居高不下,即使多大的棒子也無法把住戶請走,甚至會觸發民憤,指摘政府麻木不仁,把公屋住戶送進樓市大鱷之口。因此最佳的方法,是同時出動蘿蔔,以居屋的折扣優惠吸引富戶交還公屋,流轉階梯才會成事。

沒有留言:

張貼留言