What solutions for decent, sustainable and affordable housing in the EU?

This resource, “What solutions for decent, sustainable and affordable housing in the EU?”, is a video published by the European Parliament. In a plenary-style debate, speakers from the European Parliament and the European Commission discuss the scale of the EU housing crisis and outline policy levers under consideration. The page lists the Publisher as European Parliament and the Authors as “not named”.

Speakers cite rapid cost increases and affordability stress across the EU. A headline figure used in the debate is that between 2010 and 2020 EU house prices rose by 61% and rents by around 30%. Another statistic cited is that in many European cities roughly 1 in 10 households spend more than 40% of family income on housing costs. The debate frames the problem primarily as demand outpacing supply, alongside cost pressures and regulatory friction.

Multiple interventions focus on increasing housing supply and accelerating delivery. The discussion notes a reported 20% drop in the number of permits over the last five years (as cited in the transcript), linked to bureaucracy/red tape, lack of developable land, high construction costs, labour shortages, and limited funding. One concrete target mentioned is permitting within 60 days as part of a proposed “housing simplification” approach, combined with wider efforts to cut administrative burden and digitise procedures.

A recurring theme is that public funding alone is described as insufficient to close the gap, with calls to mobilise EU, national, and private capital. The European Investment Bank (EIB) is repeatedly referenced as a potential amplifier of investment, alongside more efficient use of European funds. The debate also highlights access to credit and financing conditions as key determinants of whether projects proceed and at what cost, with some speakers linking affordability to lending rules and interest-rate conditions.

Beyond new construction, the transcript references renovating and improving energy efficiency, and using brownfield sites, abandoned properties, and empty buildings to expand supply. Renovation and energy performance requirements are discussed as both necessary for sustainable housing and, by some speakers, as potential drivers of cost when standards are perceived as prohibitive. The overall framing is that renovation and construction are both required to increase decent housing while reducing energy bills.

The debate highlights distributional impacts and groups most affected. It references young people unable to buy first homes, families struggling with rent, students facing shortages, and key workers (such as police, teachers, doctors, nurses, and transport workers) who cannot afford to live near workplaces. Homelessness is discussed as an urgent concern; one speaker cites “over 400,000 homeless children in Europe” in the debate. Several interventions call for more social/public housing and for policies that prevent exclusion.

The Commission side presents a “European affordable housing plan” and signals follow-up actions. It references forthcoming work on short-term rentals, scaling up investment for sustainable quality housing, improving transparency to discourage exploitation and speculation, supporting skills and innovation in construction, and promoting energy-efficient homes and renovations. It also mentions plans for an EU anti-poverty strategy and proposals related to fighting housing exclusion, alongside coordination mechanisms such as a European housing alliance and a housing summit.

Speakers stress that reliable data is essential for diagnosing needs and designing effective interventions, with the view that without data policy-makers are “blind”. The debate repeatedly returns to subsidiarity: housing policy is presented as primarily national/local, with EU institutions positioned as catalysts through funding, rule simplification, coordination, and targeted regulation (notably on short-term rentals and market transparency).