Will the Midlands/ North always be cheaper than the south east?

[Thomasparker10012]

How will the government plans to level up and major transport construction like HS2 affect property prices in the midlands and the north? Will they rise to the same level as London and the South East? Any advice given will be greatly appreciated

It’s a tough, on the whole
I think the south will always be more expensive, but parts of the north are already on a par with the south east. If you look at Hale, alderly edge it’s similar to Home Counties when you take into account the lower wages in the NW.

However on the whole, I can’t see HS2 having much of an effect overall.

The other thing to factor in is the weather, that will always be better in the south, and no amount of investment will change that.

@Thomasparker10012

How will the government plans to level up and major transport construction like HS2 affect property prices in the midlands and the north? Will they rise to the same level as London and the South East? Any advice given will be greatly appreciated

No, not overall. Being so close to London will always be most expensive.

But some areas away from London are also expensive. Areas that HS2 connects to London will get some price hike, but how much will also depend on the area, schools etc. But strategically!

No, because house prices are set by supply and demand. Demand will go up with government plans but increasing supply is still easier in many northern cities.

Obviously there will be pockets, but in general houses will be more expensive in London for at least a generation imo.

The Golden Triangle in Cheshire is on a par with the South East.
I know certain areas of the East Midlands are pricey too, especially around the Vale of Belvoir.

yes because living in the north is generally less desirable and those factors are unlikely to change for generations

Even the Golden Triangle doesn’t come close to London house prices. For the price of a Victorian terrace in Hackney, you can get a 5 bed detached with large garden in Alderley Edge. London / SE prices will always be high whilst the work is there. If that changes, perhaps there will be more parity across the country. If you’re asking if the north or SE is a better investment - probably certain parts of the north, because prices in the SE are unlikely to rise as quickly as some parts of the north could with the investments and infrastructure changes you mention.

Governments have been saying they'll level up or boost regional growth or whatever forever. It is actually a very hard thing to do.

Most countries of our size can only boast one "major global" city which is where finance, business, culture is concentrated. Cities grow around knowledge based economies and companies will flock to the same city (or small number of cities) for their industry because it is then easier to attract the right staff, poach someone elses employees, buy smaller rival firms and merge them etc.

The UK is only big enough to support one global level mega city - so the south will always be lifted by its proximity to London. Same as the regions around Paris in France or Milan in Italy (note it's not necessarily connected to government, Milan is a bigger, wealthier and more expensive city than Rome)

Better rail links could lift specific towns in the Midlands or North by making it faster for people to get to London but it won't be that widespread an effect.

Improving public transport from deprived regions to their nearest city of any size would be best for lifting local deprivation. If people can easily access more diverse work and education opportunities in Newcastle, Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham, Cardiff etc then that would go a long way to pulling particularly deprived places up. Public transport from the Valleys to Cardiff or from parts of the NE to Newcastle is poor - if it was good, reliable, fast and affordable, it would do more to level up the Valleys towards Cardiff than almost anything else. But it won't make them as expensive as London and commutable reach of it.