Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Angela Rayner set up to fail

159 replies

billysboy · 25/05/2025 06:39

I can help think that Angela Rayner has been set up to fail on her housing targets
having promised to build ( not convert old offices ) 1.5m new homes by the end of her term the government seems woefully behind
for the next 4 years 370k homes will need to be built each year to achieve this as currently 225 k new homes last year

I can’t help think that she is doomed to fail without massive planning reforms and a huge social housing building programme

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Wherewillitend25 · 25/05/2025 18:33

bombastix · 25/05/2025 18:20

All of that is a bit moot if you do not intend to sell. If you are building social housing for rent only, or intend to, this is a sensible start. Rayner presumably sees a much lesser need to support the profit motive because she’s a left winger. So to her, if she does get power or gives it to a local council to obtain land, with a power to fine, this would probably mean the start of a structural change on social housing where the land, design and building is dominated by the state. As it once was…

Show quote history

Funded how? I agree we need social housing and a large programme of social housing construction but CPO and actually building the houses costs money. I am all for it, the number of people in entirely unsuitable temporary accommodation is horrendous, but I’d like to see how she actually plans to fund it.

bombastix · 25/05/2025 18:36

I think part of this is probably related to her leaked tax plans to Reeves in the Telegraph. This woman does not strike me as stupid at all, whatever some might say. In fact she seems to be operating rather well

EasternStandard · 25/05/2025 18:37

bombastix · 25/05/2025 16:17

She shares some of her left wing opinions with Corbyn. However the critical difference is that she’s in power which he never managed and is likely to do something which Corbyn never managed either.

What do you mean here? That the Labour leader will go after all

BIossomtoes · 25/05/2025 19:22

Livelovebehappy · 25/05/2025 16:11

Absolutely is like Corbyn. He had her in his cabinet, and everyone knows he would ignore/cut out anyone who didn’t agree with his own policies. I would say she is very much to the left, and is nowhere near as vocal about her opinions as she used to be. Very much muted since Labour came into power.

Show quote history

Corbyn had Starmer in his shadow cabinet. He’s a red Tory.

BoredZelda · 25/05/2025 19:54

CurlewKate · 25/05/2025 06:52

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.

Aye, the old glass cliff.

Same for Rachel Reeves.

Badbadbunny · 25/05/2025 23:44

Wherewillitend25 · 25/05/2025 18:33

Funded how? I agree we need social housing and a large programme of social housing construction but CPO and actually building the houses costs money. I am all for it, the number of people in entirely unsuitable temporary accommodation is horrendous, but I’d like to see how she actually plans to fund it.

Show quote history

Lots of councils have huge reserves that they can’t currently spend on housing as they’re restricted reserves. The government could change the laws so that such reserves could be repurposed. At the moment, lots of councils are investing such funds to bring in revenue from interest and dividends as well as commercial property rental income. There is some money, it just needs laws changed to release it.

TempestTost · 26/05/2025 10:50

teksquad · 25/05/2025 10:55

I don't think shes been set up to fail. I think she either not listening properly or doesnt understand the issues. I kmow someone who is a director of a large buikding firm and has regular meetings with her and her people. He says she and they don't listen to what they are telling them about how impossible their targets are. I can well believe this.

He feels that she surrounds herself with people that have come up with her through the unions and that their collective lack of experience in commercial companies/private sector is a massive problem. He tells me it's like both sides are talking in a different language.

A close fmaily member works for a union and I can also see this. It is a different, slightky cult-like, environment to a commercial building company with shareholders (has own issues with ethics, im sure, but clearly understand targets).

I have no idea about her as a person and I think the fact that she is a woman is not really relevant, much as I would like to support her on this basis. I think its about ideological capture and the power that unions have in politics.

This is very similar to what Matt Goodwin described about his group giving a presentation to Labour MPs and workers before - I think it was the election with Boris as leader? It was a presentation about attitudes of voters. He said the Labour people seemed to be not one bit interested, and were very focused on their own ideological ideas. As opposed to the Conservatives who asked a lot of questions about the data.

I wouldn't be surprised if Raynor was one of the people he presented to, so maybe a continuation of that approach. It's easy for politicians to make that mistake i think, because they tend to be focused on partisan thinking, but it can be a very costly error.

TempestTost · 26/05/2025 11:01

One possibility, rather than forcing builders to build, is to put high taxes on land intended for building that is sitting unused.

However I am concerned about the fact that they seem keen to build on sensitive ecosystems that really should be under conservation measures.

BIossomtoes · 26/05/2025 11:33

One possibility, rather than forcing builders to build, is to put high taxes on land intended for building that is sitting unused.

Better still - both.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page