Labour’s plans to build thousands of new homes

[dnac]

Anyone else feeling dismayed at the plans announced today to build huge numbers of new homes on the “grey” belt? Why not just concrete over the UK? It’s not just the homes, it’s the infrastructure that will need to go with it that will almost certainly involve cutting down trees, spoiling natural habitats and losing more green space. Plus the boundary between grey and geeen belt will blur over time. Why can’t we put more effort into refurbishing existing properties (or just rebuilding on the same sites?). So much for refreshing, positive ideas from the new administration. Just more of the same ill thought out sound bites that make me despair for the future of the planet.

I really hope you are right

There’s a housing estate by Whitney that is standing almost entirely unsold for over a year. Nobody buys. And fair enough, I wouldn’t even consider buying a new built with the poor quality building that they do nowadays! So many people who did buy new builds in Chelts and Gloucestershire ended up with mild in the kitchen, one friend had to break the entire wall off the house and re-build it. New houses are horrid. And people who have funds for them, wouldn’t consider them for their homes as it’s just not smart investment.

oh and prices won’t ever go down from “building more” in this country. It’s same in Gibraltar and Malta. No space. But also no government in their right mind will ever allow prices to go down considering our entire economic structure relies on house prices, not to mention hedge funds

You might not care about badgers, but you might want to care about rising temperatures, flooding, bad air quality and declining mental health.

We cannot outbuild the demand and demand will keep rising with the rising population.

We need to put an end to the low paid economy relying on importing huge numbers of people and we need to look into why thousands of people who have property abroad have been given council housing.

Seriously guys, to all those desperately wishing for more houses built at penny cost, would definitely recommend buying and reading Thomas Sowell book “Basic Economics”. It’s a mouthful, but is superb at putting a few social and economic constructs into place.

The book won’t solve the problem of housing issues, I don’t think anything will in the UK anymore… but it will show you what personal financial priorities you and children need to have in order to make your dreams come true.

read it when was 18, was an eye opener.

I'd like to point out that the UK has an exceptionally low vacancy rate. See the chart.

There is massive cognitive bias here. If you are someone who really doesn't want any new homes, the occasional case of vacancy will feel infuriating and stick out in your mind, making you think vacancy is far commoner than it is.

If people think the vacancy rate should be zero, please remember that all housing markets HAVE to have at least a little bit of vacancy to create the "flex" that allows people to move, relocate, upsize, downsize, etc. If the vacancy rate was zero, nobody would be able to move because everyone would be stuck in one massive chain.

I'm saddened by it soon we will have no green spaces left I'm surprised they haven't announced building on top of houses that already exist so we all end up on top of one another that's how it feels these days too many people on a small rock.

Also so many unused buildings that are just falling apart why not take them back off the owners turn them into homes or flats help the homeless on the streets.

We saw it during covid people clamouring for houses with gardens and those houses going for record prices. People want green spaces. I can see the more.built up we get and the loss of green spaces any houses with hardens will be more sought after.

You might not want to live on an ex -power station site but you could put a wind farm on it.
Labour has cancelled the onshore ban for wind farms - this would be a helpful solution to using such areas rather than leaving a blight on the scenery. I live in a semi rural area within view of some wind farms and see them as being quite tranquil - but I realise that isn't everyones' viewpoint.
Not all of Labours' grey field sites are beyond redemption they just need sensible planning and investigation so the green belt is left well alone.
Regarding building housing there are plenty of derelict housing areas that could easily be re-generated with modern housing - my local northern town has demolished several areas of back to back derelict terraced housing and replaced it in this way - its a vast improvement.

My husband has been a builder for 40 years
He cannot get any labourers the ones he did take on were just looking at their phones all day, it's hard put very rewarding work
The workmanship on new build sites is appalling and your right they need to get the infrastructure in place my lovely village has turned into a place I do not know any more

"2 bedroom terraced house for sale in Warrington Road, Dagenham, RM8" https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/149139740#/?channel=RES_BUY

After the war the government built a huge number of properties. My grandparents raised four children in this house which was three bedrooms back then with a bathroom downstairs
At the back next to the kitchen.

There were acres of houses just like this in Dagenham with greens for the children to play on. There were trees on the greens. There was a train station and plenty of buses.

It brings it home when you see these previous council properties are now privately owned and fetching £400k.

this is a very simplistic view.

The average savings in the UK is now £1k, how can people use that as their deposit? People cannot save for the deposits needed for the huge prices of homes nowadays because of the COL. Yes you were able to do that, but that does not mean that your experience is the norm, it very much isn't. Well done on your achievement, can you clarify how you 'got off your arse' to achieve that?

I earn more than double what you did when you 'complained' yet i am unable to buy a house. Not because i'm on my arse, but because the system we have in place is working against me and many others. I wish this idea that we are not wanting starter homes but only homes above our station was rightfully called out more. I want a little 2 bed, nothing extravagant. I'd be happy with a fixer upper. So don't tar us all with the same brush.

traytablestowed · Yesterday 20:39
I grew up in the Cotswolds but couldn't afford a house there, so moved up north and bought a house here. In doing that, I am aware that I priced someone local out of being able to live here. It's a vicious cycle that could be broken, in part, by building affordable housing in all parts of the U.K.

Including those places where selfish people like you live.

@traytablestowed If you think it’s fine to build lots of houses in the Cotswolds what about building a couple of new towns on the Yorkshire Moors? Plenty of room there.

The Yorkshire moors is a national park.
Lots of the places the governments have previously suggested for housebuilding is unremarkable farmland. There is a place near me on the outskirts of expensive villages that is just farmland, nothing special. But locals keep objecting successfully to building. This is the kind of building that should be happening.

We have national parks and SSSIs.

We lived rurally, had geese, ducks, hens on two acre garden/field. A student from Bangor university came one day said could he look around the garden for fauna. I said yes naively.

Next thing a government department said a rare lichen had been discovered and there would be an inspection.

Inspector arrived couldn't find said lichen but inferred that the geese ducks hens guinea fowl might be responsible so they needed to go and he'd reinspect.

Husband sent a very firm letter asking them probing questions as to the ability of the student and photographic proof of the rare lichen.

We managed to get some of the garden de SSI but there's still around half an acre they won't budge on.

We're awash with national parks and SSSIs here. These will never be built on.

Our planning across the counties in north Wales are very anti building in many areas, they also respect all the objections and in council chamber vote against.

A student from Bangor university came one day said could he look around the garden for fauna. I said yes naively.
Next thing a government department said a rare lichen had been discovered and there would be an inspection

What an unpleasant, sneaky thing of the student to have done.

I can't tell what your angle is. When I lived in the Cotswolds there was a petrol station and local shop which both closed down because the very small number of locals were not providing enough income for them to be profitable. The two buildings + joint car park were demolished and about 6 new houses were built on the space. They were built in local stone and in keeping with the other houses in the village. At the time they stood out a bit because the brand-new stone was so clean-looking, but I bet if you drove through the village now you wouldn't even be able to tell that they were relatively "new" builds.
This is exactly the type of "grey" development that labour are talking about. I'm struggling to understand what exactly is the problem with it? It should be happening in the Cotswolds, Yorkshire, anywhere and everywhere that it is needed and possible. I couldn't tell you about the moors because as PP said that is a national park, so presumably subject to completely different rules and therefore not even in scope of this proposal from Labour.
Honestly, talk about clutching at straws.

I don't agree. "Unremarkable farmland" is needed to feed the population. It is time those in power recognised our need to be able to go it alone because of Brexit (which Labour did not oppose).

Some building is needed in rural areas, but is should be the sorts of properties that meet existing local need. This will mean two bedroom units and social housing, preferably in multi-unit buildings to reduce land use, not "executive homes" no farm labourer can afford.

Lets not forget that a key purpose of the 'green belt' was not to protect natural envirnonments, but to provde physical seperation between villages / towns to prevent the countryside becoming a suburban sprawl. That unremarkable farm land provides biodiversity, food and maintains the rural nature of the area.

However, I wouln't worry too much...as despite the lovely sound bites uttered by our new government, actual housebuilder who run actual businesses and undertand the issues around demand, cost, interetts rates and availibility of labour are actually cutting the mumber of houses they plan to build, despite sitting on signicant land banks. Easier planning will not solve the demand side. Unless its purely social housing, but the Government have already said they don't have the funds and need private money to execute their plan... Which,a smnay of us suspected, isn't actually a plan at all, but an aspiration without substance

https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/barratt-developments-to-build-fewer-homes-in-coming-year-v6srwjx2t

OK. Stepping back a moment, if we want fewer people in the UK, we need to address the labour shortages that are driving legal migration (which is the biggest cause of our population growth.)

Over a third of all business are reporting a problem in getting people due to:

• early retirement
• Ill health
• long term sickness.
• Brexit (because previously, people were coming over here for a few years from Europe to do jobs, with a base in their own country. Now we are recruiting from the rest of the world and they are looking to be here long term and bring their family because there's better prospects).

I'm not going to get into a bullfight about Brexit, but if you want less housing pressure, we need to get people off long term sick or persuade them to take semi retirement instead of opting out entirely.

That means fixing mental health services, addressing the operations backlog in the NHS and making it culturally and practically easier to be more flexible with job shares, job downsizing and part time options. A lot of workers with early retirement are also juggling care for their older relatives and get penalised for daring to work whilst doing so.

Our housing crisis is a symptom of all the other pressures across the UK.

There are millions of inactive or partially inactive people who are able to do it because of the benefits they receive.

Maybe retraining and encouraging them might not be a bad idea.

Friend involved in the big retrofit of homes, there are 23 million homes that need a retrofit. Said that the government expects houseowners to foot the bill, there will be no grants.

Cowboy workers will spring up to do the work because there's precious little training.

It's going to mean the outside of properties being clad, every window will need to be removed and reset further out. That's before we start on the viability of solar panels, heat pumps.

Government employees, architects, surveyors, are doing the courses, learning the theory, which materials to use. But where will we find workers who are knowledgeable enough.

Yes definitely- a lot of this is just sprayed and over fertilised intensive grassland with a lot of nitrate pollution.
If the hedges are retained and sufficient space is left then nature can actually thrive there too.

I personally know people waiting for operations who should be able to work afterwards. That is why a functioning health system enables a strong economy.
I also know people who have retired early on a low income because they have had enough of how employers treat staff. We need a better deal for employees. I suspect most well paid people have no idea how badly many employers treat their lower paid staff.

Also the uncertainty about the state pension encourages people to cash in their pensions and retire early.