2013
REPORT ON THE MOTION ON HOUSING AND TRANSPORT
CONDITIONS OF URBAN WORKERS IN NAMIBIA BY THE
PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE ON HUMAN
RESOURCES, SOCIAL ANDCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
National Assembly
27 February 2013
1. INTRODUCTION
Honourable Ignatius Shixwameni tabled the Motion on Housing and Transport Conditions of
Urban Workers in Namibia in the National Assembly on 15 July 2010. After the debate in the
second reading, the Motion was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human
Resources, Social and Community Development on 22 July 2010 for further consultation
with stakeholders and report back.
Members of the Committee:
Hon. Juliet Kavetuna (Chairperson), Hon. Maureen Jankowski (Deputy Chairperson), Hon.
Festus Ueitele, Hon. Lucia Witbooi, Hon. Agnes Tjongarero, Hon Clara Gowases, Hon.
Agnes Limbo, Hon. Kuaima Riruako, Hon. Anton von Wietersheim, Hon. Elifas Dingara and
Hon. Ben Ulenga. The Committee is served by three staff: Mr. Chippa Tjirera, Mr. Cornelius
Kanguatjivi and Mr. Tutu Haukena.
2. PURPOSE OF THE MOTION.
The purpose of the Motion is to urge the Government to encourage employers and companies
to provide housing and transport subsidies to their workers, and to suggest some possible
ways to solve the current housing problem in Namibia.
3. ACTION TAKEN BY THE COMMITTEE
On 07 March 2011, the Committee invited the Ministry Regional and Local Government,
Housing and Rural Development to brief it on the status of housing in Namibia. The
Namibian Employers Federation presented their views on the Motion to the Committee on 08
March 2011. Following that, the Shack Dwellers Association of Namibia (SDFN) briefed the
Committee on their efforts in providing shelter to their members. The National Housing
Enterprise made their presentation on 19 March 2011, and the Institute for Public Policy
Research gave their views on Motion on 22 March 2011. The Municipality of Windhoek
commented on the Motion on 12 July 2011.
4. FINDINGS
The following are the main findings obtained from the consulted stakeholders. Only
Namibian Employers Federation and the Windhoek Municipality gave their views on both
transport and housing. The other stakeholders focused merely on the housing part of the
Motion.
PART 1: HOUSING
4.1 OVERVIEW OF HOUSING IN NAMIBIA
According to the Ministry Regional and Local Government, Housing and Rural Development
(MRLGHRD), housing was identified by the Government as one of the priority areas of
development along with health, education and agriculture. This commitment to housing led to
the formulation of the first National Housing Policy in 1991, which was reviewed in July
2009.
2
The Ministry Regional and Local Government, Housing and Rural Development is
responsible for the formulation and review of housing legislation. It also facilitates funding
for the Build Together Programme (BTP) for the Regional Councils (RCs) and Local
Authorities (LAs) to provide housing to the low income households.
Regional Councils and Local Authorities are responsible for providing and making serviced
land available to the public. They are also responsible for the formalization of informal
settlement areas (squatters) and implementation of low-cost housing such as the Build
Together Programme
The National Housing Enterprise (NHE), a parastatal under the MRLGHRD provides home
ownership through project development and credit facilities in the form of housing loans to
low and middle income households.
The Shack Dwellers Association of Namibia/ National Housing Action Group and other
community based organisations organise low-income communities to establish saving
schemes in order to assist with the servicing of land and the construction of houses for their
members.
The Private Sector (financial institutions, banks, private property developers) is involved in
the provision of housing loans according to commercial banks’ lending rates.
Achievements





Political will – the recognition of housing provision by the Government as a priority
area and continuous budget allocation is an indication of its commitment to housing
delivery in Namibia.
Housing policy – the review of the National housing Policy in July 2009, which
provides a strategic and policy framework within which public and non-state entities
are expected to undertake their housing development and financing operations and
activities.
Decentralization – during 1998, the implementation of the Build Together Programme
was decentralized to Regional Councils and Local Authorities. Since its inception, it
is said to have benefited 17 320 people in Namibia at a cost of N$ 360, 477, 710.50,
under category Social Housing Sub-Programme, about 599 people are said to have
benefited at a cost of N$ 26, 439,600.00
Establishment of the Habitat Research and Development Centre as a focal point for
research and development of the Namibian housing sector aimed at promoting
sustainable human settlements.
Community Land Information Project (CLIP) which emerged from the collective
efforts of NHAG/SDFN in collecting information on the needs of the people in the
informal settlements and the work of the Secure Land Tenure Committee of the
National Habitat Committee
Challenges
Urbanization rate – the increasing rate in rural-urban migration has resulted in tremendous
pressure on the formal housing delivery and basic services in urban areas.
3
Land development – land development is an expensive exercise for many local authorities
and that makes its cost unaffordable to the low-income population
Town planning and proclamation – the planning and proclamation process is outdated,
cumbersome and tend to inflate development costs, and thus, the prices of plots.
Limited budget – insufficient budget allocation to the housing sector, specifically for the
low-income groups.
High cost of building materials – high cost for building materials is another obstacle for the
housing industry in Namibia, because most of the materials are imported from South Africa.
Lack of capacity – At the regional and local levels, there is a lack of adequate technical,
planning, administration skills, and this has resulted in poor performance.
Employer involvement – little assistance has been given by employers to provide housing
for their staff.
4.2 National Housing Enterprise (NHE)
NHE provides financing to employees earning up to N$ 20 000 gross monthly income (or N$
30 000 combined for husband and wife). It can finance up to N$ 500 000 per customer, and
70% of NHE customers are government employees.
The majority of NHE customers earn less than N$ 5 000 per month but can still afford NHE
products. The reasons given for affordability are as follows: Government provides subsidy
and collateral and NHE products are apparently more affordable compared to private
developers.
Challenges in the housing sector, according to NHE, are as follows:




Limited and un-affordable financial resources/ credit facilities
Escalating prices of building materials, land and professional services
Lack of access to serviced land
Limited income at households level – affordability
4.3 Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR)
As achievements by the Government on the provision of housing in Namibia, the IPPR has
identified the review of Housing Policy in 2009, with programmes such as Build Together,
National Housing Enterprise and Non-Governmental initiatives such as Shack Dwellers
Association and Clay House project that have been successful in delivering housing for
limited number of people in low income groups.
Other positive developments in the housing sector, according to IPPR, were the easing of
requirements for obtaining mortgages and the Regulating Authority that is being set up, and it
is hoped that further regulation will follow in the housing industry.
However, a backlog of more than 80 000 houses, according to IPPR still persists. The
backlog is more among the low-income groups, of about 45 000 houses/56% for people who
earn between N$ 0 -1 500; 30 000 houses/38% for people who earn between N$ 1 501 to N4
600; 4 000 houses/5% for people who earn between N$ 4 601 to $10 500; and 700 houses/1%
for people who earn more than N$ 10 501
4
In agreement with the Ministry, IPPR identified the following as key issues as far as
provision of housing in Namibia is concerned:
(1) Availability of serviced land
 Affordability
 Lengthy process
 Lack of infrastructure
(2) Expensive construction
(3) Housing seen as consumable good
While there are different options for financing housing in Namibia, the backlog is high
because the supply of houses is low due to:
 Long waiting list for low-cost schemes, such as Shack Dwellers Federation and Clay
House Project
 NHE has delivered only about the half of the houses compared to targets
 Consumers accumulate savings while waiting
4.4 Housing Delivery in Namibia
According to a study by the Institute for Public Policy Research, housing delivery by NHE
has slowed since 2003. The NHE had delivered on average 220 houses from 2003 to 2007,
compared to 660 houses on average per year from 1990 to 2003. This was against the target
of 1 200 houses per year at a cost of approximately N$ 19 000 to Government per house (N$
6 000 only if subsidy is included).
In terms of Build Together Programme (BTP), centralised BTP had delivered about 10, 244
from 1992 to 1997; and the decentralised BTP had built 16, 428 from 1998 to 2010 at a cost
of approximately N$ 16, 500 per house to Government. This is by far the largest Government
programme in terms of funding.
With regard to Shack Dwellers Association of Namibia, 366 houses were delivered between
July 2009 to June 2010, and the total houses delivered since 1996 is 2 131. The average for
the last four years is 260 houses per annum at a cost to Government of N$ 3 800 per house. If
compared with the average of NHE of 220 houses per annum, SDFN delivered 40 houses
more than NHE.
There is no data available about the private sector’s involvement in the housing industry in
Namibia, except for the 2010 figures from the First National Bank of 50 000 houses
delivered.
4.5 Namibian Employers Federation(NEF)
One of the major problem with respect to housing, according to NEF, is the large number of
unemployed people who cannot afford any sort of a house and therefore ‘lodge’ with others
more fortunate, and with the latter sometimes charging excessive ‘rent’ by offering some sort
of shelter to the less fortunate.
NEF is of the view that whatever action is taken in the provision of houses to those who
cannot afford, cognisance must be taken of the economic effect of any blanket increase in the
cost of employment. In seeking possible solution to the problem of housing through
legislative and other interventions, Members of Parliament are being advised to bear in mind
5
the current level of unemployment in the country, hovering around 51%, which is
unacceptably high.
It is therefore imperative to retain and create as many jobs as possible in the shortest time
possible. This can be achieved by guaranteeing the sustainability of the current enterprises, as
well as the future expansion by creating new jobs. The economy cannot expand if saddled
with an increase in the cost of employment, which is not directly related to production
activities, and that will contribute to companies becoming uncompetitive, which may
ultimately lead to them shedding labour or ultimately closing down altogether.
4.6 Windhoek Municipality
One of the critical issues when it comes to housing in Namibia is the availability of land.
According to the City of Windhoek, though it may not be enough, land is available but
serviced land is the problem. Without subsidy it was difficult to service big areas due to
resource constraint.
However, with the introduction of TIPEEG, the Municipality of Windhoek is to receive more
than N$ 400 million for development purposes. It is with this money that the Municipality
intends to service an identified virgin land in Otjomuise Township for construction of houses.
This is just one of the projects identified so far, others may follow suit.
The City of Windhoek is also said to have developed several policies that are pro-poor. One
of which is the Allocation Policy and Procedure. The Municipality follows this policy when
allocating plots in order to make provision for housing on an installment basis or a credit sale.
People need to be registered, in order for the Municipality to be able to assist their credit
worthiness on the plots list. The target beneficiaries of this policy are people who earn
between N$ 5 000 minimum and N$ 8 000, in terms of the Allocation Procedure, which is
based on the consumer price index. This is what they call low income category.
There are also other complimentary policies such as the Built Together Housing Scheme of
the Ministry, where people can apply for a loan who are not able to afford borrowing rates at
Commercial Banks, as well as the Windhoek Housing Scheme which the Municipality is also
busy trying to change, in order to increase the amount that can be allocated as a loan to
people to be able to construct houses, once they have applied for a plot.
An important point that was raised during the meeting with the Windhoek Municipality was
the alleged high percentage of foreign ownership of houses in Windhoek. A factor that some
believe is pushing the prices of houses high in Windhoek area. Although the Municipality
denied that foreigners bought many houses in Windhoek, they were nonetheless noncommittal on the percentage of new houses that are owned by foreigners in Windhoek.
PART 11: TRANSPORT
4.7 Namibian Employers Federation
Namibian Employers Federation said that is common to see workers being transported free
of charge by their employers to their place of work in Windhoek and other urban centres.
Transport of workers to and back from work is subject to legal requirements. However,
transporting of passengers carries with it a serious responsibility for the lives of the passengers.
It is therefore important that all safety operating procedures are adhered to, which means that
6
all passengers must be seated. It is also important that passengers have enough room to keep
their bodies entirely within the top and sides of the vehicle. Passengers’ safety, according to
NEF, should not be compromised should the company decide to offer transport.
The problem is with the overloaded trucks and bakkies where workers are expected to stand up.
In this situation, workers are also exposed to the elements of wind, sun and rain. The workers
may also face injury if the vehicle is involved in a serious accident.
The transportation of workers to the place of employment has some positive elements in that
workers are transported free of charge, no need to hunt for taxis and no waiting for municipal
bus service. In other words, it is quick transport for the workers; it is punctual and easy to return
home.
4.8 Windhoek Municipality
The City of Windhoek is not only providing transport to the people that are employed, but
provides transport to all the residents of Windhoek, irrespective of their employment status. The
mandate of the Municipality to provide transport to local residents in Windhoek is provided for
in the Local Authority Act, 1992.
It is inherent practice worldwide for the Central Government to play an active role in local
public transport. Central governments all over the world provides for resources in their national
budgets to finance improvement and expansion of public transport, including local transport.
This is, unfortunately, not the case in Namibia.
In South Africa, for example, public transport is part of the five top priority of Central
Government. Local public transport has been subsidized in all the provinces in South Africa,
even before the World Cup of 2010.
In Namibia, many people are concern with the lack of efficient public transport system, more
especially at local level. This lack of efficient public transport is attributed to lack of support by
the Central Government to the local authorities.
The City of Windhoek also urged the Ministry of Works, Transport and Communication,
especially the Department of Public Transport, as the line ministry given the mandate to deal
with transport issues in Namibia, to extend its role of providing public transport to local
authorities.
7
5.0 CONCLUSION
5.1 Although Government is aware of the housing problem as could be deduced from
statements by the Minister responsible for housing, data availability and transparency remain a
problem
5.2 Although the Housing Policy is in place, with programmes such as Build Together and
National Housing Enterprises, as well as Non-Governmental initiatives such as Shack Dwellers
Association which has succeeded in delivering houses to limited number of income groups, the
backlog of about 92 000 houses still persists
5.3 The Build Together Programme, which is the Government largest programme in terms of
the budget targeting low-income groups, has not succeeded in delivering houses to the target
group due to lack of capacity by the local authorities to monitor the implementation of the
programme and of diversion of resources meant for building of houses to other purposes by
some targeted beneficiaries.
5.4 It has emerged during the consultation process that the biggest challenges to housing in
Namibia is lack of serviced land, high cost of building materials and limited capacity of local
authorities to implement Government’s programmes at local level and high unemployment
5.5 It has become increasingly clear that the participation of rich foreigners in multiple home
ownership and the non-protection of first time-buyers from unfair competition with rich
developers, are some of the factors that make it difficult for the middle and income group to
afford houses in Namibia.
5.6 Due to current high unemployment in the country, many Namibians cannot afford to own
houses and unless some innovative ways are found to provide housing to the poor people, the
problem is likely to persist.
8
6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
HOUSING
6.1 Given the fact that it is difficult to plan without reliable data on house delivery in the
country, it is recommended that Government and other institutions involved in the provision of
housing should improve on data availability and transparency.
6.2 Since most of the targets set in policy documents on housing delivery by Government and
other institutions in the industry have not been met, it is recommended that more realistic and
achievable targets be set.
6.3 With the current backlog of about 92 000 houses, there is a need for the Government, using
the opportunity presented by TIPEEG, to embark on a large scale programme in housing
delivery by initiating other schemes, in addition to home ownership, such as high density
buildings (apartments) and rental housing.
6.4 Lack of available serviced land has been identified as one of the factors that hinder housing
delivery in Namibia; it is recommended that the Government should avail more resources to
NHE and other organizations, including local authorities that are involved in the provision of
housing to service land.
6.5 Given the critical role that local authorities are playing in service delivery, including
housing delivery, it is important that the financial and human resource capacity of local
authorities are strengthened, not only to service land, but implement other Government’s
programmes and projects effectively and efficiently.
6.6 Since the backlog for housing is more for low-income groups; it is recommended that this
category of people have more access to finance through home loan guarantee trust, saving
schemes and policy of rent to buy. Better information should be made available to low-income
groups on mortgage availability.
6.7 To reach the people in need, there is a need for Government to shift its focus of
encouraging home ownership by initiating alternative ways of providing houses to the poor
such as rental housing and rent-to-buy schemes.
6.8 To make houses affordable to middle and low-income groups, it is recommended that
moratorium should be placed on foreign buyers, and to limit the municipal auctions for first
time buyers to people of certain income groups.
6.9 The cost of building materials is high in Namibia because most of it is being imported from
South Africa, it is therefore important that the Government should encourage the use of
alternative local materials such as clay houses; promote the use of dry sewage systems; and the
use of solar energy
6.10 There is a need to increase focus on integrating housing projects with other development
projects; and to integrate different priced houses with different incomes by cross subsidization
through NHE and through arrangements with the private sector.
9
6.11 Involve the private sector by setting requirements for the private sector to include
affordable housing in their housing projects; and employers should be encouraged to provide
housing allowances that would serve subsidies to the housing needs of their employees.
TRANSPORT
6.12 The Ministry of Transport should get involved in the provision of transport at local level
by rendering financial and technical assistance to local authorities.
6.13 City of Windhoek should encourage the use of bicycles and encourage the installation of
cycle lanes in major towns such as in Swakopmund and Windhoek.
6.14 Drivers should be held accountable and traffic officers should ensure that workers are
seated in the vehicles, not standing and not hanging on the side.
6.15 Quicker or faster transport (express trains) should be considered to transport people
between Windhoek and the two nearby towns (Rehoboth / Okahandja) to reduce traffic jams,
and through that, reduce the high rates of accident on our roads.
…………………………………………………………………………
10
Members of the Committee
1. ………………………….
Hon. Juliet Kavetuna (Chairperson)
2. ……………………………..
Hon. Maureen Jankowski (Deputy Chairperson)
3. ……………………………..
Hon. Clara Gowases
4. ……………………………….
Hon. Festus Ueitele
5. ……………………………..
Hon. Ben Ulenga
6. ……………………………….
Hon. Anton von Wietersheim
7. ………………………………
Hon. Lucia Witbooi
8. ……………………………….
Hon. Agnes Tjongarero
9. ……………………………….
Hon. Kuaima Riruako
10. …………………………….....
Hon Elifas Dingara
11. …………………………….....
Hon Agnes Limbo
11