We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Two thirds of private rental landlords will leave sector if Labour win
Comments
-
If you believe that it is not possible to satisfy the housing needs of all the people then you have your own answer already, but my own best guess is
3,145,562.5
This is assuming that housing benefit is unreformed, immigration is continues, economy continues to improve, Putin doesn't invade, SNP don't declare UDI
I like the detail in your ans perhaps you could explain your workings and clarify which part of the property the 0.5 will be.0 -
I like the detail in your ans perhaps you could explain your workings and clarify which part of the property the 0.5 will be.
well, the 0.5 is because there is already half a house awaiting completion so it seems fair to allow for that.
The detailed working are commercially sensitive so reluctantly I can only speak in general terms.0 -
The private sector isn't building enough due to the planning rules and regulation.....
Under the last Labour government, the way it worked was that the government decided on the national housing requirement, the regional planning authorities would then set a target based on that requirement, and divide up that target between each local planning authority who would, in turn, make a development plan which would make provision for the land to be available to build the required number of houses.
So the number of houses built by the private sector was determined by central government. So any failure to build enough would be entirely the fault of the government for setting too low a target....If the councils zoned sufficient areas for redevelopment then the private sector would build.
It's a bit different now because of 'localism'. But basically, yes.0 -
Yes, I see you haven't yet grasped the point that it has nothing much to with Thatcher at all.:)
So if it wasn't to do with her why was the largest fall under her and Major. When the Tories came to power council house building was about 145,000 a year and when Major left office it was about 5,000 the majority of that fall happening while she was prim minister.0 -
Under the last Labour government, the way it worked was that the government decided on the national housing requirement, the regional planning authorities would then set a target based on that requirement, and divide up that target between each local planning authority who would, in turn, make a development plan which would make provision for the land to be available to build the required number of houses.
So the number of houses built by the private sector was determined by central government. So any failure to build enough would be entirely the fault of the government for setting too low a target.
It's a bit different now because of 'localism'. But basically, yes.
That's assumes the numbers were meet.0 -
Under the last Labour government, the way it worked was that the government decided on the national housing requirement, the regional planning authorities would then set a target based on that requirement, and divide up that target between each local planning authority who would, in turn, make a development plan which would make provision for the land to be available to build the required number of houses.
So the number of houses built by the private sector was determined by central government. So any failure to build enough would be entirely the fault of the government for setting too low a target.
It's a bit different now because of 'localism'. But basically, yes.
They were TARGETS, not LIMITS. If private house builders wanted to build more houses they could have. The point of the targets was to encourage councils to allow house building, it wasn't to force house building, which is what this country needs. The whole scheme was doomed to failure because you can't control the free market. Even if you zone an area for development you can't force the land owner to sell it to a private house building and you can't force the house builder to build any specific number of houses. The council can do all of these things themselves however.Changing the world, one sarcastic comment at a time.0 -
They were TARGETS, not LIMITS. If private house builders wanted to build more houses they could have. The point of the targets was to encourage councils to allow house building, it wasn't to force house building, which is what this country needs. The whole scheme was doomed to failure because you can't control the free market. Even if you zone an area for development you can't force the land owner to sell it to a private house building and you can't force the house builder to build any specific number of houses. The council can do all of these things themselves however.
There is no evidence that house builders are deliberately failing to build nor is there evidence that builders aren't applying for planning permission.
There is plenty of evidence that some councils put up enormous barriers to permitting development.
The reason there are so few small builders producing property is the difficulty and expense of getting planning permission.
I know of no evidence that landowners are reluctant to sell. In many parts of the country farm land is 10-20k per acre: with planning permission it can be £1 million: many willing sellers at that price.
If there were really lots of land with planning permission and the building profits were high, then there would lots of 'greedy' smaller builders willing to undercut the big boys and so make less but still huge profits.0 -
Within a 3 mile radius from me planning permission has been granted for two large developments amounting to 5000 homes we will see how long they take to build and what effect they will have on local prices. The timescale is 25 years so I may not be around to report.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards