The King’s Speech today sets out the new government’s legislative programme. I welcome the high profile given to new housing supply. Two decades ago, Tony.Blair’s second administration scarcely paid housing any attention, either in the Labour Party manifesto or in Parliament. But. twenty years ago is a long time. My fervent hope is that it will not take another twenty years to put new housing supply onto a credible policy foundation. Will today’s announcements achieve this outcome?
The King said achieving economic growth is one of the new government’s missions. Few will disagree. And that economic stability will a cornerstone of policy making. Few will disagree with this aspiration. But is this aspiration in this government’s gift so far as housing policy goes, within a five year electoral cycle? Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer says the will is absolutely there. I do not doubt her sincerity and I applaud it with nobs on. The Conservatives binned integrity. Labour seem to be determined to do the opposite. I welcome their endeavour. But am I convinced by these exhortations to have confidence we are turning the corner? At this point I have doubts, very big ones.
By far my biggest doubt relates to the express intention to remove the power of residents to object to new housing proposals that are contained in up to date local plans. They can input on aesthetics but not on spatial policy. How will this work? Local councils are run by councillors who represent local residents? Look at the very recents blogs highlighting attitudes towards change in Lewis Council, or East Hampshire Council. Or look further back at earlier blogs. For example Windsor and Maidenhead, not interested in Slough’s overspill or the Midlands council whose members were threatened with imprisonment for stamping on their own local plan. With new devolution powers being passed to them according to the Kings Speech they will rightly feel empowered, and able to drag their feet on housing supply.yet again with greater effect.
Why do I say so? Because the government must first win the local hearts and minds of those who oppose change. The crude truth is that at least in the south where the land is available and house prices are least affordable these fortunate areas want their cake, and they want to eat it too. They want continued and increasing prosperity for themselves and their families, but they do not want local change, especially if it is near them. Put it another way, they know new homes are needed, but they want their share exported to the neighbouring local authority area at no cost to them. No surprises here. It is how human nature works, and has driven the housing market to breaking point over four decades. So faced with these harsh facts, and a history book of examples, why does Sir Keir Starmer’s new government believe they can ride rough-shod over these blind, genuine, selfish and fanatical views without first winning their hearts and minds? And remember no one can achieve an enduring unity programme within five years unless they also have the support of the Conservative and Liberal Democrats from the start.
Starmer is right to hit the ground running. He is right to go fast and h grasp these stinging nettles, but now to convince the sceptics he can deliver he must also bring the other two parties on board too! With his landslide majority it is tempting to say this alliance type thinking is unnecessary and unrealistic. Now that it is clear Starmer is serious about planning reform, he must also be equally serious about overcoming local opposition to local change. Who are the new MP’s for these high demand, high growth potential but high opposition to local change areas? If he can’t persuade them to talk truth to their voters, he is entering a minefield which the local media will love. Without unity, the ability of the local vested interests who fear sequestration of the their land will far stronger. And given the opening they are a powerful lobby.
So the verdict. A very good start. The correct battle lines are emerging. If the war between central government and local powerhouses opposed to change with their land owning allies is limited to five years, followed by a policy U turn, today’s hopes for change at breakneck speed will be disappointment once more. But if central government can convince local opponents that not only is it serious about change, but that is has the essential long term political support to deliver local change then todays news marks a very important start.
Ian Campbell
17 July 2024
