Yesterday’s Sunday Telegraph (15 January 2023) contains an in-depth analysis by Szu Ping Chan of the threats and opportunities housing policy failure presents to the political parties. His analysis of the splits in the market between renters, mortgage-holders and outright owners, particularly their differing reactions to changes in mortgage interest rates (depending upon their, or their landlord’s debt exposure) is worth a read to glean insight into voters intentions.
His analysis of housing supply side policy failure is incomplete.
Here he listens, perhaps not wisely to Wokingham’s MP, Sir John Redwood who has presided in 30+ years as their MP over the local residents increasing anger and disappointment with the erosion of their quality of life. He reminds us that last year the Conservatives lost control of Wokingham Borough Council. A Lib-Dem coalition is now in the hot seat. The new leader, Clive Jones, citing 40,000 new homes over 40 years says ‘enough is enough’. Jones has a point. In the meantime Sir John continues to sensibly say there must be decent levels of new house building due to additional arrivals but overlooks the impact of his ageing electorate on household numbers. Next, he adopts infrastructure deficit, as his culprit for the crisis. After 12 years in government and 30 years as an MP this excuse for too few unaffordable, tiny and aesthetically mediocre new homes is at best weak.
But failure to think on this grand scale is also informative. How is it explained? Redwood’s ideological commitment to an apparent free market in new homes stops him looking at other, more balanced solutions. Is it the same rigid mentality that has blocked realistic solutions to the underfunding of the NHS and functioning social services? After all, you cannot have free markets for housing land if you ration planning consents. Do health and social services markets also fail if you ration staff?
As Szu Ping Chan observes “The average house price of £541,720 (in London) is more than 10 times the average salary. Renting is much more expensive than the equivalent mortgage payment but people feel helpless to do anything about it because it will take a decade or more to save the deposit needed to buy”.
Simply changing the government next year is not the answer. It is plain that in Westminster and locally political leaders need to change the way new housing is provided. Neither party has a sustainable answer. Sir John says he believes in home ownership and more housing provision, but only if it is done in a sustainable way. I agree with him. But how in his opinion is this to be achieved? He dislikes the current system, so do his constituents. He knows levelling up will only succeed if the next generation of employers base their start-ups in the midlands or the north. And he knows government cannot force that outcome. Answers please, by the end of 2024.
Ian Campbell
16 January 2023
