Joint webchat with Conservative and Labour housing minister and shadow housing minister, MONDAY 2 MARCH 1pm

[RowanMumsnet]

We're pleased to announce something a bit different to shake up your Monday lunchtime: a joint simultaneous webchat with the Conservative Housing and Planning Minister Brandon Lewis, and the Labour Shadow Housing Minister Emma Reynolds. They’ll be joining us live for an hour on Monday March 2 at 1pm.

We know that lots of MNers are interested in housing issues, so here's your opportunity to quiz Brandon and Emma about house-building, the Green Belt, planning restrictions, new towns, private landlords, rent levels, sustainable building, social and affordable housing, and their long-term plans for making supply meet demand - and anything else that catches your eye. How do the Conservatives and the Labour party plan to build and fund housing for the next generation - and what do they want to do about short-term housing issues? Now's your chance to find out.

Brandon Lewis MP is Minister of State for Housing and Planning. He was elected as the Conservative MP for Great Yarmouth in May 2010.

Emma Reynolds MP was elected as the Labour MP for Wolverhampton North East in May 2010. She is the Shadow Housing Minister attending Shadow Cabinet.

Please join us on Monday at 1pm. As ever, if you can’t make it then, please do leave your questions on this thread in advance. And (also as ever) please remember our webchat guidelines.

Thanks
MNHQ

[HelenaDove]

And the useless plumbing and heating company i mentioned in this thread has just been awarded a TEN YEAR contract with yet ANOTHER housing association. They cant even honour the appointments they were already doing.

[AlphaBravoHenryFoxtons]

isitmebut www.theguardian.com/business/2012/aug/23/britains-richest-gained-quantative-easing-bank

[Isitmebut]

AlphaBravo ….. I am sorry, but I fail to see how wrinklies like me (and over 60, lol) under Labour benefited from Mr Brown’s Quantitative Easing, producing the LOWEST interest rates on record since the Bank of England was formed in the 17th century; what did that do to any nest egg savings rates and the pee poor annuity rates when trying to buy a non Final Salary pension MP’s enjoy, ALREADY savagely raided by Mr Brown in 1997?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2613609/Revealed-Labours-stealth-raid-took-118BILLION-pensions-paving-way-end-final-salary-schemes-suddenly-unaffordable.html

And are you aware that most western stock markets are only reaching new highs from those of around 15-years ago – so anyone one over 40 years old to retirement, should be stringing that bugger up, not saying 'thank you'.

The predicament of our youth, that saw taxes, debt levels, real earnings start to fall and their unemployment levels rise under the last government, as we hit the worst recession in over 80-years is the not the oldies fault for heavens sake.

Are you not reading about the current (and growing) old age crisis, in care, housing, dementia and other costs, as we live longer, who can we trust to pay for that, the 'here and now' pro budget deficit (£2 trillion plus national debt) parties?

Did you ever see that old film Soylent Green, with Chuck Heston I believe; why don’t you suggest we do what they did, after a certain age TURN THEM INTO FOOD, it will get rid of the ‘kin Food Banks as well, leaving even MORE money for those who smoke, drink and have Sky as priorities over feeding their families.

[Isitmebut]

Hi bedunkalilt ……. Unlike politicians I rarely make unqualified political statements about the problems this country faces, as I am getting on, have three children over 21 years old I am concerned about who will have to pay for our mess, and while I remember lots from the 1970’s when their age onward, what detail I can’t remember, I look up rather than rant blaming ‘the other party’. Mr Miliband please take note.

Firstly you are correct, the current housing problem COULD re traced back to Thatcher’s 'Right To Buy' council homes scheme, which few Conservative’s would ever apologise for, as to this day, trying to help people that want to get onto the housing ownership ladder, has been a core Tory policy since John Wayne was a cowboy – if any apology is due, it is on the build rate of replacement council/social homes, by successive governments STILL selling them.

But that isn’t the whole picture as there are two home building sectors, the public/social sector and the private sector, both of which the Labour administration somehow failed abysmally to support and provide for our population as we hit the 21st century - when over their first 10-years the tax receipts/spending doubled mainly due to the financial bubble AND they were stimulating NON EU migration, before the prospects of a large 2004 EU migrant workforce was known.

Taking council/social homes; using Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLC) figures, and using the full 18-year term of the last Conservative government (including a few recessions) but only the first 11-years under Labour (before the worst recession in nearly a century), the Conservatives averaged 50,761 new social housing sector homes a year, while the last Labour government averaged 24,299 per year.

Putting the decline rate in context, the new social housing sector build HIGH was 88,530 new homes in 1980 (around the time ‘Right to Buy’ was a policy) and the LOW was 130 new social homes in 2004 at the height of an immigration boom – no doubt STILL selling off Right to Buy Homes, with a resulting large NET REDUCTION of council housing stock for that year.

Taking Private Sector homes; Remembering that under the last Labour government the TOTAL builds of new homes averaged 115,000 a year, yet they knew early on that the declining new home trend was a major pre immigration issue (see ‘main findings’ below), one has to ask why only north of 100,000 new homes were built?

The (2004) Barker review: key points
www.theguardian.com/money/2004/mar/17/business.housing

“Kate Barker, a member of the monetary policy committee, was asked a year ago by Gordon Brown and the deputy prime minister John Prescott to carry out a review of the housing market in the UK.”

”She was specifically required to look at what was behind the lack of supply of housing in the UK and the inability of the housing market to respond to this. Also within her remit was the role of the house-building industry, the level of competition within it, its capacity, technology and level of finance.”

”The final review has now been published, just in time for Gordon Brown's budget.”

“The main findings”
• In 2001, around 175,000 houses were built in the UK. This was the lowest number since the second world war. Over the past 10 years, the number of new houses built has fallen and is now 12.5% lower than in the previous decade.

I will stop there bedunkalilt, so you now be the judge whether I have any right to wonder why more was not done to rectify this problem when the ‘boom’ tax money was no object.

Why it is a tough audience that blames the Conservatives when their previous housing record was better, while receiving a ‘bust’ £157 bil annual overspend in 2010 to address it – and why I was sceptical to any current Labour Housing Minister claims, that they can say they can NOW build 200,000 homes a year, when that nice Ms Barker told them to a decade before, yet they couldn’t, as our numbers under them increased by 4 million?*


P.S. I do not blame Labour for the sub prime crisis that triggered the inter bank money market closure, that triggered the financial crash, that triggered the economic collapse.

I blame Labour (see links below) for the extent of our banking problems, by forming in 1997 an ineffective regulatory tripartite including the new FSA, that relaxed banking regulations, allowing our banks to massively over leverage their balance sheets (lending to us in the main) – after all, how many other western countries had to virtually nationalise their main banks in 2008 (and after) to stop them going under due to their balance sheet weight i.e. RBS and Lloyds?

metro.co.uk/2011/04/11/gordon-brown-i-made-big-mistake-on-banks-before-financial-crisis-650630/
www.theguardian.com/business/2011/dec/12/labour-regulations-city-rbs-collapse

[AlphaBravoHenryFoxtons]

I would much prefer the Tories to be in power come May. But they do need to start thinking about older people.

Isitme - Pension funds benefitted from Quantitive Easing. As did anyone with investments. High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email [email protected] to buy additional rights. www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8d6f2b4e-94bf-11e3-af71-00144feab7de.html#ixzz3TKB0Oqqo

Young people have been unable to accumulate house equity, so they are subject to the ongoing higher costs of renting. When they get old they aren't going to have the financial resources to pay for their own elderly care. This is going to be a HUGE cost to the taxpayer. It's urgent that we shift wealth away from older people now (they have more than enough) and towards the young.

[bedunkalilt]

the party that BEGAN the homes crisis

Didn't it all really begin here with Right to Buy? Genuine question. The housing crisis has been building for decades, across different governments, I personally don't think we can just pin it one party and say they're at fault. There are just too many factors that contribute to the current housing issues. The banks are involved too, not just here but internationally, and I don't think we can pin the American sub-prime crisis on Labour.

I'm not Labour, I'm not Conservative, I don't think one has been brilliant or the other awful in absolute terms so I'm not here in defence of any party as a whole. Your posts are interesting but also read as strongly anti-Labour rather than just being about the issue, perhaps I am misreading or perhaps your argument is that it is solely Labour's fault, hence my curiosity.

[Isitmebut]

That is like saying 'what did the Roman's ever do for us' when we are where we are on private landlords overtaking the the public sector rental provision due to some pretty stupid policies that allowed banks to overextend loans/relaxing credit criteria and making pension savings in 'shocks and scares' (stocks and shares) less attractive.

Private landlords with fixed term mortgages will hardly all sell on the same day and drive down home prices, and even if landlords ONLY have a 20% equity in their homes and every tenant currently has a 10% deposit sitting in their bank accounts (unlikely), bank lending will have to replace that money in the UK's total housing stock that current selling landlords take out.

What is a Labour going to do, this time FORCE the banks to lend more to those with less than a 10% deposit and we get the 2007 result all over again?

If not, then selling landlord properties will not be replaced with new landlords, there will be less properties to rent for the several million who cannot afford their own homes = a worse housing crisis than we have NOW. IMO.

In conclusion; we don't need 'equality' soundbites and unrealistic home build targets with government control threats from the party that BEGAN the homes crisis - we need costed policies and private sector builders investment that can bring new home building results - with any Landlord reforms needed to help tenants, but don't force owners to cash in their investment before we have more than a 'cunning' populist plan.

[andango]

Well, let's hope landlords do head for the exits. Then maybe ordinary families can spend their monthly wage on paying their own mortgages, not someone else's.

Can't say the landlords will be missed!

[Isitmebut]

AlphaBravoHenryFoxtens ..... do you not think that older voters were put upon under those 13-years of Labour?

The Brown 1997 raid on Private Pensions saving over £120 bil in tax credits but costing pension funds including Final Salary schemes (most now closed) around £260 bil in lost returns AND the rises in the State Pension I doubt kept pace with just the rises in Council Tax of around 110% in total throughout their administration?

The "game of mass redistribution" has thus been going on for years, I just not sure where the money went - but they do NOT understand how markets work and I fear all these 'controls' on landlords they talk about not, hugely populist I grant you for obvious reasons, will get private landlords heading for the Letting exit, far quicker than they can be replaced.

[NBTA00]

Thank you Mumsnet for giving the space to raise boat dwellers' issues with Canal & River Trust and to Emma Reynolds for agreeing to look into this. In the mean time, please sign this petition, thank you.

you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/boats-are-homes-prevent-the-eviction-of-boat-dwellers?source=facebook-share-button&time=1424356599

[AlphaBravoHenryFoxtons]

The Tories continue to contort themselves trying to keep motivated voters wealthy older people happy and Labour (after 13 years in power behaving just like Tories) are currying favour with voters by taking a game of mass redistribution, most of it unworkable.

[Isitmebut]

I reminded Emma of Labour's pee poor record in housing during 13-years averaging 115,000 homes and quoting Shelter's 2009 figures, asked how a Labour government in 2015 could build 200k new homes when can't work with the private sector AND how they will stop private landlords selling reducing the rental supply stock - AND THIS WAS THE ANSWER I GOT.

"You're right that there is a huge shortage of council and housing association homes. As somebody who grew up in a council flat I am passionate about making sure that we boost the number of social homes. I am proud of the last Labour Government's Decent Homes Programme."

"Should I become the Housing Minister after the General Election, I am determined to make sure that the market starts to deliver the number of homes we need as a country because as you say the number of new households is increasing faster than the number of homes being built."

Key questions on key promises Labour made and not a whiff of an answer within her reply.

At least we know a Conservative administration don't scare businesses and their investment shitless.

[andango]

Poor Brandon - he's in a marginal seat, apparently. Can't imagine his performance here will do a lot to save him. Very unimpressive.

[andango]

I'd say that was pretty clearly Emma Reynolds 1 - Brandon Lewis 0.

Glad she's not a BTL landlord and has experience of living in a council flat and even attempted to answer some of the questions.

Brandon, on the other hand, apart from looking like he's aged 12 and being unable to spell (not his fault - presumably his secretary/mum does all the typing normally) failed to respond to a single critical point.

How surprising.

[Isitmebut]

P.S. I can hear the Labour gasted flabbers spotting there might be a return for shareholders and saying 'PROFIT, PROFIT, we'd rather the people do without than give any big company a profit'. lol

Private investors including fund managers screwed by Brown on pension saving in 1997 and to be put at a 'money purchase' disadvantage to fat cat quangocrat and MP's public sector Final Salary pension schemes by Miliband in 2015 capping the tax advantage, HAVE to look for additional returns.

So those who have their heads firmly up their own rear ends thinking people saving for THEIR retirement should only invest (in homes) for the social good, should realize the more citizens have to rely on a Labour government increase of the national debt for generations to come to fund their State pension, best think again, as they will.

[HelenaDove]

Thankyou for answering my questions.

[Isitmebut]

WhistlingPot .... How many private landlords know their own personal circumstances, the interest rates they are funding at, the conditions housing market (boom or bust), and what government policies will be over that time - so unless a single person, with loads of equity in the home so able to accept the future risk of a low rental yield on refunding/renewing a let - any landlord will be mad not to sell up asap if Labour gets in.

• Where will those tenants be then?
  

• Where is the guarantee any property will remain in the BTlet sector if a current landlord sells up, as potential new BTL entrants think the combination of a lower yield, less rights and an ONGOING over government regulated market is far too much of a risk?
  

• Where will the overall numbers of rental properties available be then, apart from lower?
  

The only way to get 2,3, to 5 year long term secure landlords is via the private sector companies looking to lock into long term yields, but they won't stand for too much political shit/risk driving down returns they could achieve in fixed income markets elsewhere, either.

“Pru plans foray into UK rented housing”
www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a35a999e-9893-11e2-a853-00144feabdc0.html#axzz330iRnEwP

“The Prudential is to become the first UK institutional investor to enter the UK rented housing market in recent times, paving the way for the growth of a corporate-backed letting market at a time of acute housing shortage.”

Clearly the most secure rentals are council, then social and then private investments, and any political attempts to change that BEFORE we have built more council social homes, could cause a rental home shortage crisis within a few years.

[WhistlingPot]

3 Year tenancies under labour might be an improvement on the instability given with 6 month contracts, but just what effect this will really have is anyone's guess. It still won't stop a family who anticipated a long let, and who are expecting a child from being evicted if their ll decides to sell.

And as for "by making the whole sector more long term we want to see the market develop so that a home can be sold but a tenant can remain in the property" - how will this work? Will they place restrictions on how rental properties can be sold?

[AlphaBravoHenryFoxtons]

In order to encourage people to move from the crowded SE/London to the North/Midlands/Wales/Scotland etc, perhaps they could offer a SDLT-free transaction?

[Arrowfanatic]

Still as clear as mud then.

Seems a lot of focus on affordable rented properties but what about everyone in the south stuck in mortgaged houses who cannot afford to move anymore? House prices here are easily £200k more than the north but we can hardly shift every homeowner who needs to move to the north. We bought at a time when even on my husbands salary of around £40k a year we could afford the area, 7 years down the line we need to move again but now the same houses are hundreds of thousands of pounds more expensive. How is it we can be considered a high earner and still not be able to afford to live where my husbands work is?

[WhistlingPot]

Yes PubeGardens, another case of there being more telling in what they didn't answer, than what they did.

[PlentyOfPubeGardens]

Thank you for setting this up, MN. I am quite disappointed that neither guest responded to either mine or HeeHiles' questions. What is happening in London with the mass loss of council homes is a disgrace.

[noideawhattoget]

thank you Emma for answering my question, but i notice that Brandon didnt answer it. Do you have an answer please sir?

[HeeHiles]

Whistling I'm none the wiser either - just heard the same old same old that I've been hearing for years but nothing has changed

[stubbornstains]

Brandon, I notice that, although Emma has answered my question about which way she voted on the Private Member's Bill to abolish bedroom tax, you haven't. Also, did you vote against Labour's attempt to stop letting agents charging fees?