When housing experts from across Europe convened in Cardiff earlier this month, one thing was clear in delegates' minds: the need to break through red tape to get European projects off the ground.
There is much scope for change. The European parliament has been busy voting on the future of EU structural funds, while the European Commission is due to present its proposal for the next financial framework before July.
First, some context. In 2009, the European Commission changed the European regional development fund regulation which allowed member states to redirect up to 4% of their allocation to social housing retrofit projects. Wales is set to benefit from a £37m pot (including £29m from the European regional development fund) to help eradicate fuel poverty and to boost the low-carbon economy and green jobs through demand for the manufacturing and fitting of energy efficient products.
This project will be the successor of a £30m Welsh government initiative known as Arbed, meaning "save", which saw nearly 8,000 properties retrofitted in some of Wales' most deprived areas by housing associations and local authorities.
Investing in this activity will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, create employment and lift people out of the poverty created by high energy bills – all EU 2020 objectives. Community Housing Cymru has been calling to increase the percentage of regional development funds from 4% to at least 8% for this reason.
In order to achieve the EU 2020 objectives, there must be a move towards strategic programming. At present, European funding pots such as the development fund and the social fund cannot be used alongside each other. This must be amended.
The green agenda is generally viewed as new and high risk by investors; making existing funds and new finance (from the European Investment Bank, for example) available as a first-loss guarantee would help attract investors and enable the housing sector to benefit from cheaper loans.
The legislation amendment to allow EU member states to redirect up to 4% of their development funding to social housing retrofit projects was made halfway through the 2007-2013 programming period, when investment priorities had already been agreed and monitoring committees had been created that did not include representation from the housing sector.
Amending the programme or changing the investment priorities has been a real challenge for most member states. The fact that only a small number of them may have made use of the legislative amendment for this programming round and all the funds that are available does by no means signify that there is a lack of interest for this investment priority. These barriers and developments must be considered.
Common investment priorities must be found and agreed at EU level, and only then cascaded down as the next set of projects are delivered.
Shea Jones is political research and information officer at Community Housing Cymru.
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. Join the housing network for more like this direct to your inbox.
