When governments build housing we end up with disastrous 'social housing' projects. We do not need any more of that. Squats at best could never create more than a small amount of very bad housing.

But at least some factors within the three levels of government want to encourage small, innovative housing providers. The machinery is there to support small self-housing societies, the best option for real housing activists. But so far there is little take up of these programs.

The city is sitting on a great deal of vacant land. It cannot sell most of it. So, instead of all this foolishness of trying to 'take over' these properties, we could simply ask the city for them.

Public land should stay in public hands. The main line of attack against co-operative housing, that has shut it down for ten years, is that people get public land and make a capital gain on it. A self-housing collective should lease the land from the city for a dollar a year, and own only the buildings on it.

A low income housing collective will be saving the city a lot of money in social costs and so should pay little in property tax. It would also use city services; sewer, trash pickup, transportation, etc, much less than other housing forms. So it should pay less taxes for these services.

The Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC), the city's main housing arm, says that its average operating cost (utilities, maintenance, administration, insurance, etc) is $180 per unit per month. We can be fairly sure that an activist housing collective could do it for a lot less than that.

A bachelor type unit using modular construction could be built for $25 000, using a rule of thumb of $50 a square foot. A 15 year mortgage on that would be $210 a month. You would want to pay everything off over a 15 year cycle because that is when replacement and refurbishing needs to begin.

The present housing allowance paid by 'Ontario Works (OW)' is $340 a month. If we give $120 for operating costs, this bachelor unit is viable.

It would be more viable if a zero interest loan were provided. The federal government is allowed to do this through the bank of Canada act; that is how the St. Lawrence sea way and other public works were financed. This would reduce monthly payments to about $140.

The way to build new housing is through modular, factory built units which can be bolted together on site. In many countries most new homes, public and private, single owner and multiple occupancy, are now built this way.

For some reason it is not catching on in Canada, except in the west. When you try to discuss it with 'housing' bureaucrat types in Toronto, they tend to snap something like, "no, there are problems with it" and do the fast exit before they have to explain.

One suspects this has something to do with the construction unions and builder associations, and possibly, the 'Build Nothing Anywhere' (BNA) mentality. Modular housing is still associated in some minds with trailer parks.

Modular housing is well proven to be superior to 'stick built' or 'site built' housing in every way. It is cheaper even with transport costs factored in, quicker to build, and of a higher quality and consistency. It is better engineered, more energy efficient, and increasingly flexible and varied in design.

The experience of housing societies, which develop single ownership housing communities for its members, is that the way to start is to identify a suitable plot of ground. Then you draw together a group of interested people, and then arrange financing and choose an architect and builder.

There are many resources available, especially through Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), to help in starting such a project. You can apply for a $10 000 start up grant, and a further $10 000 no interest loan. And CMHC's main business, as an arm of government, is to insure mortgage loans for medium and low cost housing.

This type of project could work as a housing co-operative, but an assisted ownership collective would be better. Most people would rather pay off a mortgage and own something at the end, than to pay rent all their lives. The collective could hold the land for the city, and run all common services for the residents, who would all have a democratic vote.

the trip-ups

People on welfare and disability pensions are not supposed to hold assets beyond a small amount. If an exception cannot be secured to this rule, the collective will have to hold the land in trust for the residents, who can cash out their equity if they move or leave welfare. Or, when welfare is finally abolished in favour of a Citizen's Income.

This would be a pioneering project. As with getting anything done in Toronto, there are a thousand petty power holders with a thousand petty reasons to stop something like this from proceeding. They will all have to be overcome.

This kind of project could allow people to survive while doing something else with their lives besides being an 'employee.' That will greatly upset some people. That makes it more important to get started on getting a pilot project through.