Housing, Marine Tondelier
Emergency shelter: Unconditional shelter places, Housing First, end of seasonal management
Direction of change: increase, compared with current law.
The lever. Shelter places for homeless people, reception conditions, and the Housing First policy. Direction rule: ↑ more places and resources.
« Protéger les personnes sans-abris par l’accélération du « Logement d’abord » sur le modèle finlandais. Considérer le logement comme un droit et un socle qui participe à l’insertion sociale. Créer des places d’hébergement en accueil inconditionnel (besoin estimé à 200 000 places certains soirs). En finir avec la politique du thermomètre qui fait varier les droits en fonction des saisons car la rue tue été comme hiver. »1Translation by the editorsProtect homeless people by accelerating “Logement d’abord” (Housing First) on the Finnish model. Treat housing as a right and a foundation that contributes to social inclusion. Create unconditional emergency accommodation places (need estimated at 200,000 places on some nights). End the thermometer policy, which makes rights vary with the seasons, because the street kills in summer as in winter.
Encoding
No cost-schedule parameter for this position: see the costing for the reason.
Costing
Announced by the candidate
not announced
The programme does not cost this measure.
Published costings
none
No external costing of this position recorded to date.
Our calculation
not costed
Creation of places with no number; the 200,000 places cited refer to a need on some nights, close to the current stock (203,000), not to a number of new places.
Current law, sources and limits of the cost schedule
Current law. Unconditional reception (article L. 345-2-2 of the Code de l'action sociale et des familles). General-purpose capacity stable at 203,000 places since 2021. Programme 177: €3.07bn in payment appropriations in the PLF 2026, of which €1.34bn for general-purpose capacity (emergency shelters, hotels).
Horizon. full year 2032, €bn/year
Limits. Envelope announced in billions (plan with no number of places): the candidate's amount, taken as is (rule on amounts taken over, decision of 18 October 2026); benchmark: the whole of programme 177 is worth €3.07bn in payment appropriations in the PLF 2026. An envelope and places costed separately would overlap (overlap declared). Low value: €1.34bn / 203,000 ≈ €6.6k per place per year (general-purpose stock). High value: the whole of programme 177 / 203,000 ≈ €15k. The actual cost depends on the type of place: a CHRS (shelter and social reintegration centre) with support costs more than a night in a hotel. The programme is structurally under-budgeted, which makes the “current policies” baseline fragile. People in an irregular administrative situation in the general-purpose stock (excluding the reception scheme for asylum seekers) in 2024: at least 39,000 (low estimate; median 52,000, high 78,000), according to the spending review by the IGF, IGAS and IGA (May 2025), which considers the data fragile (status known for 52% of people).
- AN, rapport spécial PLF 2026, Logement et hébergement d'urgence, 2025-10: « 1 315,5 millions d'euros en AE et 1 340,3 millions d'euros en CP ... sont consacrés au parc d'hébergement généraliste ... maintien des capacités d'accueil à hauteur de 203 000 places ; 3,047 milliards d'euros en AE et 3,071 milliards d'euros en CP sont prévus au titre du programme 177 »
- IGF, IGAS et IGA, revue de dépenses sur l'hébergement d'urgence (mai 2025), tableau 13, 2025-05: « Dans le SI-SIAO, le statut administratif des personnes hébergées n'est connu que pour 52 % d'entre elles (soit pour environ 100 000 personnes sur un effectif total de 192 570 places en 2024). […] la Dihal dénombre 39 000 personnes en situation administrative irrégulière. ; tableau 13 : estimation basse 39 000, médiane 52 000, haute 78 000 »
How to read these amounts. These are static costs and revenues, with no feedback effect, over a full year: nothing on growth, employment or the revenue that economic activity would gain or lose. A higher net cost does not on its own make a worse policy, nor net savings a better one: each programme rests on an economic model (demand-led stimulus, lower compulsory levies, consolidation of the public accounts…) that the cost schedule does not settle. GDP itself measures a volume of activity, not well-being or the usefulness of what is produced. Economic models and feedback effects.
- Pour une prospérité écologique, programme des Écologistes, p. 119. Open the document at this page.
Contest this encoding (prefilled email; procedure and deadlines)