Leave a comment
The supercilious comment about house building being blocked by local opposition and NIMBYish opposition to housing might carry some weight if accompanied by a link to evidence. But there is none. What Council is against more ratepayers? The problem is not opposition – opposition to uglification must surely generally be a good thing – but a hopeless planning system which fails to deliver locally acceptable results. If, as seems to be implied, your solution is more centralisation, more targeting at a distance, then No Sir! You are heading in entirely the wrong direction. Local consensus-building, devolution of power, and root-and-branch reform of the planning system to a properly plan-led system on the continental model, are the way forward.
Quite frankly, you appear to have only addressed one aspect of the problem and over-simplified the housing supply situation to provision of land vs nimbys!
Would suggest that housebuilders are behaving like oil producing countries in the Middle East….it is to their financial benefit to ensure there is a shortage of new housing as this keeps the prices nice and high. Land with planning permission for housing is not being developed and this may or may not be because of worker and skills shortages in the construction industry. There are 1000s of older empty homes in urban areas around the country that could be adapted and renovated to make decent accommodation. There are brownfield sites that are in need of re-development.
On the issue of political opposition to new homes, those cities like York, Cambridge, Reading and Bristol are taking their residents with them on the need for new development and l would suggest that these places are likely to have had more dialogue and involvement in the process rather than less.
Whether the government bites the bullet on this or not, there is and will likely always be a need for an effective level of public subsidy in affordable and social housing.
The level of new housing bought for investment purposes by finance organisations and foreign investors and not used to house anybody needs to be investigated, especially in London, because this activity may be artificially overheating the local housing market and exacerbating housing need.
The provision of new housing is only one aspect of accommodating an increasing population. There are all the other services and infrastructure that must be provided and developed in tandem. Once upon a time there were regional plans that addressed all this and tied required development to existing and required resources. Now we have a NPPF and these issues will again be addressed…we live in interesting times.
It’s no good bleating about building more homes without some reference to who actually needs them. Analysis I have carried out of recent household projections shows that around 90% of newly forming households in England over the next 20 years are currently under 25. Even with Help to Buy and bank of Mum and Dad not many of these will be able afford to buy – builders for sale target existing home owners (clue: they have the money). If more new building actually started to reduce prices, you can be sure the builders will stop building. In the meantime we are busy selling off non-market stock, leaving private renting as the remaining choice. Great!
Poor, one sided analysis of the data picture. Typically the developers only build out slowly, – what they can sell immediately – , to keep prices up. The only way to break through this logjam will be by land reform, like a land value tax, capture of more of the increase in value of land due to grant of planning permssion, and a major programme of public sector affordable house building.