As the Conservative leadership contest reaches its climax, it is worth comparing the housing policies of the two remaining candidates, Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss.
“Brownfield, brownfield, brownfield”
Rishi Sunak recently promised Tory voters that he will ban building in “green belt” areas by instead encouraging building in areas that have already been used for building. Mr Sunak explained that, under his government, planning policy will be “brownfield, brownfield, brownfield”. He went on to say:
“Green belt land is extremely precious in the UK. Over the last few years we’ve seen too many examples of local councils circumventing the views of residents by taking land out of the green belt for development, but I will put a stop to it.
Under my plans, if a local community has clearly judged a development to be inappropriate there are no circumstances in which planning permission should be granted.
More homes can be built while protecting the green belt and our most precious landscapes.”
Sunak’s policy has, however, faced criticism from certain corners of the property industry. “Rehashing promises to ‘protect the green belt at all costs’ amid a crippling housing crisis means Britain’s property industry is certainly not ‘Ready for Rishi’. The UK needs to deliver at least 300,000 new homes a year to combat this crisis.”, said David Woolman, Director at Woolbro Group. He continued:
“This is simply not achievable by redeveloping brownfield land alone – sensible and strategically-placed greenbelt development is the only viable course of action.
Mr Sunak may well garner the favour of party members in Tory heartlands by promising to leave the greenbelt alone, but future generations who find themselves completely priced out of the housing market will not look back on this policy with fondness.
As long as politics dictates housing delivery in this country instead of an unbiased, expert-led and independent body, the same old rhetoric about protecting the greenbelt at all costs will endure — as will the housing crisis.”
As well as encouraging house building, the former Chancellor has stated he will ensure new homes will have appropriate facilities first, so new homes, and their owners are supplied with doctors, roads and schools.
Sunak has also followed previous Conservative policies, most notably taking inspiration from Michael Gove, by promising to allow renters, and those living at home with parents, to become “capitalists” by becoming home owners by building enough affordable housing as part of the Conservatives “levelling up” strategy.
Although, he has come under fire from all sides of the political spectrum after a video emerged of him speaking to Tory part members in Tunbridge Wells, Kent where he stated he reversed Labour policies which “shoved all funding into deprived urban areas”. There have been calls for Greg Clark, the Levelling Up Secretary to investigate Sunak, as allegations that the Conservatives are purposely neglecting poorer areas to favour wealthier ones. Labour Deputy Leader, Angela Rayner branded Sunak “Reverse Robin Hood Rishi” via her Twitter account.
An end to “Stalinist” housing targets
Truss has provided a similar housing policy to her opponent, as she also has pledged to encourage building in brownfield areas and has promised to make this process easier.
However, she differs from Sunak – as well as previous Conservative governments – with her promise to remove “Whitehall-inspired Stalinist housing targets” in favour of tax-cuts and deregulation for firms to reduce building delays. She has, therefore, pledged to abandon the government’s target of 300,000 houses a year. This, she claims, would be detrimental to creating economic growth, much to the dismay of her party colleagues.
This approach is contradictory with previous reforms proposed by herself. In 2018, she stated the government should increase house building in rural areas, and in 2019 said that “we do have to be prepared to take on those who don’t want a house built in the field next to them”.
Truss has also promised to make it easier for tenants to buy houses by allowing rent contributions to count towards acquiring a mortgage on first homes. She has also promised to give back control to housing projects to local councils, stating:
“As a former councillor, I remember those painful hours sitting through planning committees. I’ll put power back in local councillors’ hands who know far better than Whitehall what their communities want.”
In addition to this, Attorney General Suella Braverman, a previous leadership candidate, has backed Liz Truss in the leadership race and claimed Truss has promised, if elected, to review whether the Bank of England “is fit for purpose”. She stated:
“Interest rates should have been raised a long time ago and the Bank of England has been too slow in this regard.
Liz Truss has made clear that she wants to review the mandate that the Bank of England has, so that’s going to be looking in detail at exactly what the Bank of England does and see whether it’s actually fit for purpose in terms of its entire exclusionary independence over interest rates.”
However, the Governor of the Bank of England, Andrew Bailey, hit back at these claims, stating it is important the BoE are able to make policy decisions independent of government intervention. This statement came after the BoE raised interest rates from 1.25% to 1.75%. Truss has stated an intention to increase interest rates to 7%.
Simon Gerrard, managing director of Martyn Gerrard Estate Agents and Abbeytown Ltd, has stated that these planned interest rate rises by Truss have the potential to be apocalyptic for the housing market. This comes after the latest Nationwide House Price Index, which found that annual UK house price growth increased in July from 10.7% to 11%. He claimed:
“These figures reflect a very scary time for buyers with so few properties coming to the market and mortgage rates seemingly going up by the day.
However, if Liz Truss’ economic plan leads to interest rates rising to the region of 7%, as has been widely predicted, the housing market would likely face an almost apocalyptic, once-in-a-generation crash… it is incredible that the housing supply crisis isn’t further up the agendas of both prime ministerial candidates.
While it may not be an immediate vote winner, the reform of our antiquated planning regulation would get Britain building the new homes we so desperately need.”
One Response
The Government should reconsider its policies on flood and encourage redevelopment of brownfield sites even in flood zones as long as the buildings are flood resistant.
Local planning authorities should not refuse planning permission if the Environmental Agency has no objections to a proposal.
The current requirement to provide safe access and escape routes, which is almost impossible in flood zones, ought not by itself be a reason to refuse planning permission. This requirement effectively bars redevelopment of existing built structures in flood zones.