Today we have seen two “announcements” of Government policy from Housing Minister, Grant Shapps; a ‘build now, pay later’ scheme on surplus public sector land and an apparent push for better designed houses and a move away from “identikit lego-land homes.” Taking the latter first, it’s a little disappointing that Grant Shapps hasn’t recognised progress made on all aspects of home-building by the industry – which is, after all, customer-driven - borne out by our own consumer satisfaction surveys. Over 90% of new home buyers last year were very happy with their new home and would recommend their builder to a friend, yet Grant Shapps has written to the Design Council to ask them to help developers “to bring forward creative and innovative designs that respond to local character and identity.” A role for bodies to get involved in helping communities and house builders agree on the look and feel of new developments sounds like a nice idea in principle but in a true localist system is this necessary? Will we need a central body telling communities and builders what to think? On an individual unit basis, design is also driven by competition and, where possible, a free market, not a £6million quango (albeit one that is gradually moving into the third sector). The vital component - and a Government commitment – is increasing home building in general. To do this requires a removal of the endless national and local government bureaucracy on house-building and the creation of a system where local people are properly engaged with growth in their area. It’s a little like cars in India pre 1991where state rules & controls meant that virtually every car was still a Morris Minor. It wasn’t until competition and the market were opened up that more advanced cars were built and sold across the country. By reducing both the cost of regulation and the hoovering up of planning gain for unrelated policy objectives while increasing the supply of land available, home builders will be freed to do what they do best . With a truly pro-development system builders will no longer waste time and money fighting bureaucracy and unrealistic and inconsistent planning rules but instead can work properly with communities to ensure that new developments please local people. As more homes are built and competition on the homes themselves – rather than land and planning permissions – increases, communities and home-buyers will be able to vote with the power of the free market and competition behind them. To that end the other policy floated today – ‘build now, pay later’ on public sector land is a good one. The public sector owns huge amounts of surplus land and has been guilty of sitting on it for a long time – often in the hope of land values rising and maximising their pay off. This, in “best value” terms is understandable but in our current housing crisis with construction of all types vital to growth it is important that central government set the example on release of land at commercially sensible prices. Any means of increasing land supply alongside viability is welcome and this proposal recognises the sacrifices that home builders are currently having to make (to their own balance sheets) to sell homes, particularly to young people & first time buyers. It’s crucial that with massive land holdings themselves, local government follows suit.
