Angela Rayner set up to fail

No, I don’t think she has been set up to fail. This government, like all the others, makes big promises that sound great to the electorate, whilst seemingly hoping that said electorate won’t understand that they are empty promises?
The only way to meet this target would be for the government to invest billions in the building of social housing. That would be fantastic and we definitely need it but funding it would be nigh on impossible, we as a country simply don’t have the money.
But AR or KS or any politician simply don’t have the power to force private companies to build. Private companies will continue to build what they can profitably sell and if the economy continues as it is, people won’t be buying much of anything.

Starmer can't get rid of her, because she was voted for by Labour members.

When he tried to take some responsibilities away from her while in opposition she came out of the meeting with more titles.

I'm sure they'd love for her to go.

I don't agree with her politically, but I thought she was good when she stood in for Starmer at PM questions while in opposition.

Most governments set targets for various things. Few are met and it rarely makes much difference in the long run.

There are things we aren’t talking about with the housing shortage.

One of them is the demise of multi generational housing. Granny no longer moves in with one of the dc when she’s older.

The other is divorce. Many families have two houses big enough for the DC but only fully occupied part time. So what was one family now spread across two homes.

I’m not saying that the above should/shouldn’t happen, just highlighting that it does and impacts the number of homes we need to build.

Rayner's description of the Tories as 'scum' was her downfall. I can say that, you can say that but politicians should be above name calling. She gave herself away as not having the level of emotional intelligence to be a true politician. In a time where several politicians have been physically attacked or murdered, the way she spoke was, at best, unsophisticated and, at worst, dangerous and inciting hatred. It's nothing to do with class or misogyny, it's simply because she is not fit to hold a position in office. I'm astounded that Starmer appointed her, she's an embarrassment to the party.

I thought you meant set up to fail generally. Certainly the misogynist, classist way she is frequently talked about must make it very difficult for her- it makes my blood boil.

Every housing minister has failed at meeting their house building targets, so I doubt it will do her much long term damage.

Theres far too much reliance on the big home builders, who aren’t really incentivised to build too many homes. Plus the process of buying land, planning, building… can take years in itself!

TBH as long as we are growing the population by 500k-1m people a year, even these targets are woefully low. Maybe we should be addressing that challenge too, as it’s part of this story.

Everyone tasked with this for the last 20 years has failed . I'd rather she had ambitious targets that acknowledge the scale of the problem.