David Cameron: Generation Rent will become Generation Buy

martinsurrey

stator wrote: »

Typical Torries. Their solution to the problem is to con young people into taking on a life time worth of debt for a pile of bricks and mortar that is a glorified matchbox.
The real solution is to take control and build actual houses, abolishing the silly green belt.
Cameron likes to look like he is doing something, but really he just wants house prices to keep going up to protect the wealthy.

I think he's doing what every party is doing, trying to look like he's getting the numbers up without tackling the core issue, as its politically toxic, planning, and more to the point planning NIBYISM.

Everyone agrees we need to build more houses, just they then say "not where I live as its <already too dense/services are already stretched/part of the greenbelt/ ruin the character> (delete as appropriate)."

A party that comes out and says we'll rip up the planning rule book, and the most important thing will be to get the number of builds up, will be shredded in the polls.

cells

I think its a very good start

One of the reasons home-ownership is falling is because new developments need to be 50% affordable rented homes (each council varies but for London the target is 50%). Well if only half the new developments (MAX) are to be owned clearly the trend in home-ownership which is currently higher than 50% is going to be DOWN

If the idea is to sell a portion of homes at a modest discount I think this is a very good idea it should help get new homes built.

For example in London it could be 50% normal homes and 50% for sale at a modest discount.


I think a 20% discount would be good and workable. Available only to FTBs of any age. The banks should also see this 20% as a deposit so if the home is for sale normally at £400,000 the FTB should be sold it for £320,000 and the banks should give them a £320,000 loan so its no money down for them but the bank still has 20% as security for the loan

michaels

I presume he must have meant 200k new properties a year rather than just a useless gesture that 200k housing association properties would now be ftb properties with a net impact of zero on total housing shortage?

Mistermeaner

a bit like pensions; the grey vote is generally the most opposed to planning (partly because they have the time, partly because they already have houses, partly because they live next to the nice green fields) - no party wants to !!!! off the pensioners so no party messes with planning

CLAPTON

It would be wonderful if all our political parties could agree on the need for more housing and so those nasty old people had nowhere to turn

princeofpounds

Labour had housing schemes, conservatives had housing schemes, little has been achieved.


What we need is the freedom to become Generation Build.


Youth of Britain, cast off your chains of NIMBYism! You have nothing to lose except your dignity on a program of Grand Designs.


etc.

cells

michaels wrote: »

I presume he must have meant 200k new properties a year rather than just a useless gesture that 200k housing association properties would now be ftb properties with a net impact of zero on total housing shortage?

depends on the detail there will be quite a factors at play

for a start a lot of people wont buy in a new estate where half the residents are social if it goes to a full private estate its going to be a lot more attractive to more people

If the discount is used/seen as a deposit by banks and it should be then it becomes a zero down venture adding demand to new builds

overall it can be quite significant especially in London where half of developments need to be rentals for the poor

cells

princeofpounds wrote: »

Labour had housing schemes, conservatives had housing schemes, little has been achieved.


What we need is the freedom to become Generation Build.


Youth of Britain, cast off your chains of NIMBYism! You have nothing to lose except your dignity on a program of Grand Designs.


etc.

a one off new build will cost the average new builder a good deal more than the average price to buy an existing home

we need volume builders with experience and economies of scale

ukcarper

Mistermeaner wrote: »

a bit like pensions; the grey vote is generally the most opposed to planning (partly because they have the time, partly because they already have houses, partly because they live next to the nice green fields) - no party wants to !!!! off the pensioners so no party messes with planning

I'm not sure why you have to blame it on pensioners, it's generally people who live in area and will be effected. Just because a large percentage may be pensioners the vast majority of pensions do not live in love country areas. Only one of my friends has a view of fields from his house and they have just be built on he didn't object.

PasturesNew

I've had an application put in adjacent to me.... I've replied to say I don't object, "people have to live somewhere" ... I just had 2-3 simple comments re the outline plans, which are for a dozen homes.