Twenty-six government were on board, but it was not enough. The Council of the European Union did not reach consensus on the Commission’s affordable housing plans on Monday. It hit a familiar roadblock—Hungary used the unanimity rule to scuttle the deal.
After months of haggling, Denmark, which holds the rotating presidency, had stitched together a 20-page set of conclusions urging Brussels to “support and complement national, regional and local efforts” on housing. Then on the 1 December agenda of the EU’s employment and social-affairs council (EPSCO), Hungary was opposed.
The veto surprised none of the diplomats in the room, yet the abruptness jarred. Katalin Molnár, Budapest representative at the meeting, said, in a tone so flat it sounded procedural, “While Hungary agrees with the importance of addressing housing crisis, as you rightly mentioned in your introductory remarks, housing falls under the national competence of the member states.” She added that “no further work on this matter is necessary at EU level.” A plan crafted to highlight subsidiarity had just been felled on grounds of subsidiarity.
Sophie Hæstorp Andersen, Denmark’s employment minister and chair of the meeting, did not try very hard to mask her irritation. She reminded delegates that “consensus required for approving the conclusions on the future European Affordable Housing Plan has not been achieved—Hungary has expressed its opposition to the text and I must say I find this very unfortunate.” She proposed re-labelling the document as “presidency conclusions”, short of formal council endorsement. Twenty-six nods signalled assent.
You might be interested
Homes and sovereignty
Weeks earlier Ms Andersen had toured capitals to drum up backing. Presenting the draft she stressed its limits. “The Council conclusions clearly states that the competence for housing policies lies with the member states,” she told ministers. The text nevertheless invited the Commission to focus on four areas: better access to EU funds, easing construction bottlenecks, cutting red tape in planning and, above all, linking housing to social inclusion. “Housing security is of fundamental importance for people’s well-being,” she said.
Denmark’s four-point plan echoed the thinking inside Ursula von der Leyen’s Commission. Its president insists that “This is more than a housing crisis, It’s a social crisis.” Her officials have prepared an Affordable Housing Plan scheduled for release on 16th December. A senior bureaucrat told ministers, “On the 16th of December, the European Commission will present the first-ever European Affordable Housing Plan.” The Hungarian veto means that plan will debut without a formal mandate from governments, yet officials promise to push ahead.
It’s good that we have managed to get this document. Ideally, it would have been unanimous, but if 26 member states share it, I think it’s along the right lines. — Isabel Rodríguez García, Spain’s housing minister
Ms Andersen grudgingly accepted that outcome. “The presidency…therefore suggests transforming the draft conclusions into presidency conclusions,” she said. That linguistic downgrading robs the text of legal force but keeps political pressure on the Commission. It also leaves Hungary isolated—at least in the housing debate.
Budapest digs in
Ms Molnár’s intervention fits a pattern. Budapest routinely blocks dossiers it deems to trespass on national prerogatives or to siphon funds away from domestic priorities. Housing is a sensitive example. Hungary’s government champions home-ownership through tax breaks and subsidised loans; it scorns Brussels’s talk of housing as a social right. In the council Ms Molnár warned that systems “vary considerably” across the continent and concluded that Brussels should step back.
Behind the sovereignty rhetoric lie fiscal worries. Hungary fears that a new EU housing scheme could one day muscle in on cohesion-policy money which it views as its due. It has already fought proposals to reallocate subsidies towards Ukraine and dislikes Commission ideas linking renovation aid to green-building standards. Blocking the conclusions costs Budapest little yet signals that, on budgets or migrants or housing, it will wield its veto whenever it pleases.
Such tactics exasperate partners but rarely change minds in Budapest. One diplomat notes that Hungary’s house-price index has jumped 200 per cent since 2015—twice the EU average—and suspects the government frets that EU rules on rent caps or social housing might expose policy failures at home. For now, the veto helps Prime Minister Viktor Orbán burnish his sovereignty brand without paying an obvious economic price.
Twenty-six against one
The rest of the table tried, with varying degrees of politeness, to mask annoyance. Isabel Rodríguez García, Spain’s housing minister, sighed that “It’s good that we have managed to get this document. Ideally, it would have been unanimous, but if 26 member states share it, I think it’s along the right lines.” She urged Europe to curb speculation in tourist hotspots and called for “a specific fund, European resources to build an affordable housing amount of houses.”
Constantinos Ioannou, for Cyprus, struck a moral note: “Affordable, sustainable, decent and adequate housing is a social right for all European citizens.” His country, which takes over the presidency in January, promises to revive the file at an informal housing summit it will host in May. Diplomats in Nicosia already wonder which paragraph Budapest might object to next.
No further work on this matter is necessary at EU level. — Katalin Molnár, Hungarian representative at EPSCO Council
Commission officials sought to play down the drama. They insist the 16th December plan will outline ways to blend EU funds, promote energy-efficient renovations and protect vulnerable households—none of which, they stress, compels member states. Yet the veto forces them to rely on soft coordination and voluntary platforms rather than binding council guidance. The danger is that capitals pick and choose, leaving the EU with patchy progress and endless graphs showing house prices outrunning wages.
A patchwork of pressures
Europe’s housing woes differ by city and class yet share a bleak arithmetic. Since 2015 prices have risen by about 60% across the bloc, twice as fast as incomes. In big capitals a tenth of residents already spend over 40% of earnings on rent or mortgages. Supply lags demand, construction costs soar and green-renovation rules tighten budgets. Most ministers, including France’s and Germany’s, view EU involvement as inevitable, if only to co-ordinate finance and share data.
Hungary’s veto thus grates. One diplomat groused that Mr Orbán blocks EU talk on housing while boasting at home about generous baby loans for first-time buyers. Another pointed out that the October European Council—where Mr Orbán sat alongside the other 26 leaders—invited the Commission to draft the plan. Yet in Brussels unanimity rules give each capital a brake. For Hungary, wielding that brake telegraphs leverage to be spent on other battles, from Ukraine aid to rule-of-law funds.
When ministers left the Brussels meeting, aides updated talking points. The Danish presidency declared the outcome “unfortunate” but hailed the support of 26 states. Spain promised fresh proposals. Cyprus listed priorities for low-income households. Hungary issued no statement. Its veto spoke louder.
Limits of consensus
Attention now shifts to the Commission’s launch. Without council blessing, its plan lands with political, not legal, heft. Ms von der Leyen can still map out investment platforms and suggest ways to trim red tape. She cannot force Budapest to join. Yet most capitals are keen to co-finance social housing, leverage the European Investment Bank and, perhaps, craft an EU-wide mortgage guarantee.
Hungary has expressed its opposition to the text and I must say I find this very unfortunate. — Sophie Hæstorp Andersen, Denmark’s employment minister
In the spring the issue returns. Cyprus will try to broker a compromise; Ireland, which follows in July, readies fallback texts. Officials mutter about splitting files so that Budapest can abstain without killing proposals. Others warn that dilution risks turning a continental crisis into an orphan policy.
For now Europe’s housing crunch grows sharper. Homeseekers in Budapest, Barcelona or Berlin find that wages lag rents regardless of council quarrels. Ms Andersen, her term as chair nearly done, sounded philosophical as she closed the meeting. “We will indicate the support on the cover page of the document which will be published as outcome of proceedings after this meeting ends,” she said. Homes may be local, but in the EU even cover pages reveal the limits of consensus.
