Who really accesses social housing?

The observation is unanimous among all: the gap between civil servants’ salaries and the cost of real estate has become unbearable for the majority of these workers. This also contributes to the lack of attractiveness of certain professions like “healthcare workers, prison officers, and territorial agents”. However, the proposed solution sparks debate. The main focus of this text, supported by the government, is to introduce a “service clause”. This is a way to reclaim a social housing unit when a public servant changes jobs. For example, when a hospital reserves a housing unit for a nurse, it can be reassigned if she leaves the institution to accommodate a new arrival. Public administrations have a right of reservation for their employees on part of the social housing units. The link between employment contract and access to housing is at the heart of the debate. A pragmatic response to increase supply, according to the text promoters, while the left fears a weakening of tenants and their families.

In general, the text raises a burning question for a sector in crisis, where the waiting list reaches a record number of 3 million applicants: who are the social housing units for today? While the difficulty of many civil servants in finding accommodation is clear, shedding light on certain categories of social housing applicants raises questions. According to political scientist Fabien Desage, a lecturer at the University of Lille, this can be seen as part of a broader movement that implicitly prioritizes certain tenants over others.

Local officials have long been calling for a greater orientation in the allocation of social housing, says Fabien Desage. Among other things, he has worked on the “communal preference,” meaning the desire to prioritize applicants from one’s own municipality. The bill proposed by LR Senator Dominique Estrosi-Sassone in January at the Senate grants mayors a “motivated veto right” in the allocation of social housing. The National Rally party has long been demanding that social housing be reserved for French nationals.

The recent report by the Court of Auditors describes both the lack of equality among applicants and the opacity in allocation. However, the real issue lies in the type of social housing available, as it covers very diverse realities. Ranging from very social housing to intermediate housing for those with higher incomes and higher rents. Today, these latter types are proportionally more numerous in terms of construction.

A study published in mid-March by the National Agency for the Control of Social Housing (Ancols) notes that while the social housing stock has generally increased by 11%, it has not benefited the poorest: the proportion of “very social housing” has only increased by 4%. Yet, 62% of applicants fall into this category. This makes it even harder for the poorest to access social housing. The recent proposal by Estrosi-Sassone’s law suggests that local authorities who fail to meet their legal obligations regarding social housing catch up by providing these intermediate housing units.

But fundamentally, it is the massive shortage of social housing that reinforces competition among the publics eligible. This calls into question the system’s role in guaranteeing universal access to housing.