Discrimination in favor of the construction lobby: Opposition in Budva criticizes government for housing loan subsidies

The decision of the Budva authorities to subsidize the repayment of housing loans in the monthly amount of 300 euros for a period of ten years is considered by the opposition to be discriminatory, but also agreed upon with the construction lobby and individuals close to the current government for whom, as they claim, the competition conditions were precisely defined.

Opposition representatives are unanimous that the conditions of the public call must be changed to enable all citizens of Budva to compete under equal conditions.

From the Office of the Mayor Nikola Jovanović They did not respond to the opposition's accusations.

The Secretariat for Social Affairs issued a public call, thereby fulfilling an election promise of the city authorities - the informal coalition "Budva Our City", the Democratic Party of Socialists and the European Union.

The public call caused a stormy reaction in the public, because the right to subsidies can be exercised by married couples if one of the spouses from the (extra)marital union is not older than 40 years, or if he is a single parent or an individual who is not older than 40 years on the date of publication of the public call. It also states that only Montenegrin citizens with a permanent residence in the territory of the municipality of Budva for at least three years continuously, or foreign citizens with a permanent residence permit for at least 10 years continuously, have the right to apply.

It is also controversial that only those who took out a housing loan in the current or last year are entitled to the subsidy.

Leader of the "Movement for the City" and councilor of that group of citizens Đorđe Zenović He points out for "Vijesti" that it is obvious that almost every major and important decision made by the authorities in Budva contains procedural or substantive shortcomings:

"So now numerous decisions are subject to review before the competent authorities, either before the Constitutional Court or some other institution. From conditionally 'good stories', such as zoned parking, prefabricated garages, Grđevica, the purchase of JRB, the Temporary Facilities Program, and now the subsidization of housing loans, we have come to or will come to the point where all of them are being questioned before the competent institutions. In the last two days, I have received several questions from citizens about why, for example, someone who took out a housing loan in 2023 or 2024 and meets all the other criteria from the public call cannot participate in the subsidy award procedure and immediately said that I do not know the answer. It is clear to me that this is negative discrimination because this issue is not regulated by Article 2a of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination, which prescribes cases that are not considered discrimination."

Zenović assessed that on the one hand it is a legal issue and concerns the protection of fundamental human rights, and that he expects "the Ombudsman, and tomorrow the Constitutional Court, to give their judgment and opinion."

"On the other hand, this prescribed condition also raises logical questions because last year someone accidentally or intentionally announced to someone 'take a housing loan this year and next year we will only subsidize you, and exclude everyone else from the procedure'. This puts everyone else in a disadvantageous position, and the essence should be to provide everyone with equal and fair conditions. To be fair, I have to say that this decision does not only exist in Budva, but some other cities, such as Herceg Novi, have prescribed the same condition even earlier, and now ours has probably been rewritten."

The Budva committee of the opposition New Serbian Democracy (NSD) told "Vijesti" that populism linked to the construction lobby and dubious capital is the biggest threat to the future of Budva.

"It is clear as day that the municipal decision was tailored exclusively to the needs of the construction lobby. While the construction ban is in force, citizens witness on a daily basis that works are being carried out in Dubovica without hindrance, while the municipal inspection stubbornly remains silent about it. Today it is clear why. The goal of this decision is to accelerate the sale of apartments in Dubovica and provide a safe market for investors who build while the construction ban is in force with the support and/or tacit consent of the local authorities. If the intention was truly to help citizens, socially vulnerable categories and numerous families who came to Budva from the north and enriched our city, the decision would certainly not have been to grant the right to a subsidy to young families who, in the year of the public call for proposals or in the year preceding it, were granted a housing loan by a commercial bank for the purchase or construction of a residential building."

They add that such a condition does not help those who need help the most, but rather directly directs buyers towards new construction, which benefits investors.

"That is why this decision is not a social measure, but a measure in the interest of the construction lobby connected to the local government. The only sure winners of this policy will be investors who will have their apartments sold at the expense of public money. Thus, at least half a million euros annually of the money of the citizens of Budva will be directed to the benefit of the construction lobby that has been building intensively for days, despite the construction ban and numerous warnings from citizens."

Democrats: People over 40 aren't valuable enough for them

Budva Democrats assess that the local government has introduced gross and unacceptable age discrimination.

"Only those who are not older than 40 years old on the day of the announcement of the call have the right to apply. All citizens older than 40 years old - regardless of whether they do not have an apartment, have low incomes, have lived and worked in Budva for years, are single parents, or live in difficult conditions - are automatically excluded."

They assessed that this was not social policy, but discrimination:

"In a municipality where the prices of square meters are among the highest in Montenegro, where a large number of families live as tenants or in substandard buildings, the local government decides to distribute public money exclusively by age, and not by actual need. This sends a clear message: if you are over 40, the municipality no longer considers you 'worthy' enough to help you with a roof over your head."

They emphasize that subsidies for social housing must be available to all citizens who meet the financial and social conditions, and not just to one age category. "Age must not be a basis for denying someone the right to a dignified life. We call on the Mayor and the Secretariat for Social Affairs to immediately amend the terms of the public call and abolish the discriminatory age limit. If they do not do so, it is clear that this measure is not designed as real assistance to citizens, but as a selective political gesture."