With the stroke of a pen, you would have almost doubled the number of home applicants who would qualify for a home loan

The housing policy debate is now in danger of moving from being non-existent to becoming a series of proposals that may work directly against its purpose.

It is not missing on the good will, because the care is basically well distributed for those who are victims of the housing shortage. But the urge to find the original angles, to be able to promote completely new ideas and to be remembered for “action”, apparently counts more for editors and politicians than the effort to get measures implemented that would actually have made a big difference.

Because we know quite a lot about which measures will have a major effect on the housing market.

1: Amendment of the mortgage regulations

Let’s get removed the requirement that the home buyers must provide equity which must also cover the joint debt in a housing association. With the stroke of a pen, you would have almost doubled the number of home applicants who would qualify for a home loan. The requirement for “double” equity came into place as a consequence of the global financial crisis, and is outdated today. Both editors and politicians should get involved in this, and it is difficult to understand why care for the banks is so much more widespread than care for those who do not get into the housing market.

The mortgage regulations in practice, this means that the financial industry, through regulation, requires that if you rent a home today and are going to buy, you must not only provide equity for the home you are going to buy, but also for the home you rent! Sparebanken Nord-Norge earned NOK 3.27 billion in 2023, DNB earned NOK 50 billion. They are by no means destitute, so why can’t we move on and let the banks consider what makes sense to finance or not?

2: Reduced processing time

We KNOW that long municipal processing times lead to lower construction rates, higher construction costs and higher house prices. Therefore, we also know that a more efficient case management would have led to more being built. But instead of discussing how the processing time can be reduced, or how the regulatory processes concretely contribute to increased house prices, the debate has become a ritualistic and party-political shadowboxing: The right-wing promotes its demands for the efficiency of the public sector as a primal cry, as if this solved all the world’s problems, while the red-green side protects the public servants, as if municipal procrastination were a social democratic virtue. Isn’t it time we moved on?

3: Strengthening the Housing Bank

A strengthening of The House Bank, or an increase in the limits of the House Bank, will give the municipalities the opportunity to help more people enter the housing market in the form of “Start loans”. In this way, you will also have better opportunities to help those who do not have the opportunity to raise 15 percent in equity, or the finances to withstand possible interest rate increases. Husbanken has long been an important key for housing construction in Norway, and should remain so again – also with regard to the construction of rental housing and student accommodation. All parties, both in politics and industry, agree that it is important to strengthen the Housing Bank, and yet it is not happening.

It can also be an idea and look towards our neighboring countries, where the proportion of fixed interest rates is significantly higher than in Norway. What if you could offer a fixed rate of 50-60 years? Then the banks may not have to take into account an imaginary interest rate increase, as this would have been predictable for many, many years.

“Let’s talk about something else”

When it exists some concrete measures that appear so obvious, and yet these get so little space in the political discussion, this is because there is an urge to want to talk about something completely different. Some completely different measures. There are several such, and in the first category there are measures that are good and effective, but which nevertheless do not make sense in the larger context.

“Rent to own” and “Sharing” are examples of such. Bonord has committed to getting these in place, and it is of course inspiring to be able to contribute with schemes that help people. Nevertheless, such measures will not be able to compare with everything that could have been achieved if the mortgage regulations had been changed, the municipal regulation processes had been made more efficient – or if the Housing Bank had been strengthened.

This should be done don’t believe when the microphone is handed over to central politicians, who will talk about “Rent to own” in breath and breath as the beatific. They would rather not have to talk about the three important measures. They would rather talk about something else entirely.

Outright dangerous proposition

The next category is even worse than the measures that do not make sense in the larger context. The worst proposals are those that can actually work directly against their purpose – most recently illustrated when Eiendom Norge invited to a housing conference. Here there was no shortage of ideas for how politicians could show themselves to be active and creative in housing policy. Already in the regulatory process, it must be decided how many homes will be built in different sizes in different locations and in different projects. In the regulation process, it must also be decided which form of ownership will be chosen when the housing project is completed. And the developers will be required to sell a certain proportion of the homes below the asking price.

How many people think that more housing will be built because the builders will have a poorer overview of costs and income for the projects they will commit to?

How many people think that the municipal processing time will be shorter by making it even more detailed and complicated?

The best had been if we stopped talking about everything else.

The best had been if we discussed how we got the arrangements in place that we know would have worked.