Labour's Shocking Plan to Revolutionise UK Housing Crisis | IEA Podcast
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 сер 2024
- FOLLOW IEA INSIDER: insider.iea.or...
In this episode of the IEA Podcast, Tom Clougherty and Matthew Lesh are joined by Sam Dumitriu, Head of Policy at Britain Remade, to discuss Labour's ambitious plans for housing, infrastructure, and economic growth. The conversation delves into the party's strategy to reform the planning system, restore housing targets, and streamline infrastructure projects. Sam provides insights into the challenges faced by previous governments and explores whether Labour's approach can overcome the long-standing obstacles to development in the UK.
The discussion covers a range of topics, including the impact of NIMBYism, the complexities of the planning process, and the potential for private sector involvement in infrastructure projects. The panel examines the role of judicial reviews in delaying major developments and debates the merits of Labour's proposed National Wealth Fund. This episode offers a comprehensive analysis of the UK's housing and infrastructure challenges, providing listeners with a deeper understanding of the issues at stake and the potential solutions on the horizon.
Our goal is to bring you a public affairs podcast with a difference. We want to get beyond the headlines and the shallow political commentary you'll get elsewhere and focus instead on the big ideas and foundational principles that classical liberals should care about.
00:01:07 - Introduction and overview of Labour's growth plan
00:05:42 - Housing targets and planning system reforms
00:15:19 - Infrastructure challenges and costs
00:27:50 - NIMBYism and its impact on development
00:37:29 - Labour's National Wealth Fund and investment strategies
00:40:59 - Private sector involvement in infrastructure projects
FOLLOW US:
SUBSTACK - insider.iea.or...
TWITTER - / iealondon
INSTAGRAM - /
FACEBOOK - / ieauk
WEBSITE - iea.org.uk/
![АЛАУДИНОВ у Скабеевой: эти их ВСУ нас НЕ ДОГОНЯТ 😁 [Пародия]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/an0anqU4WGQ/mqdefault.jpg)
The only thing you can trust the private sector to do these days is maximise their profits.
@@sidney001 And that's exactly why you can trust the private sector. It does what it says on the tin. The only thing Govt does is flush money down the drain for political reasons and gaslight the public about it.
As it should be!
@@paulcassidy8130not when its at the expense of the tax payer
@@timingswrongor to gouge the public for the bare essentials of life. Housing, food, education and health care are basic human rights not a cash cow for foreign billionaires.
The only thing you can guarantee is the state will make things worse. Can you name a single occasion where the state has been effective?
We are already the most densely populated country in Europe, how about fix the problem at source.
I don't want more of our beautiful land concreted over just because of GDP and growth, there are more important things in life.
Yes this is an immigration problem, 700 000 net last year. This is ridiculous.
Not even close to the density of the Netherlands. Globally, not densely populated at all.
Scotland is almost empty. Thanks to the genocide of the 18th and 19th centuries
@@LWylie Possibly not, but we are clearly not coping as well as those nations...... aka the recent riots, if our pop density continues to grow then i see a lot more trouble ahead.
The UK needs mass social housing as the previous stock has been sold off with the right to buy scheme and councils never replaced the homes they sold...thats why private landlords can charge whatever they want because those tenants cant find a council house anymore
Couple of reflections on early exchanges on this - I live in the East of England, I don't recognise a single syllable of the claim that house building has 'ground to a halt'. That is completely false in this part of the UK, houses have and to continueto be builtat a veryfast rate. Linked to this, a detail that is unclear, but crucial is who determines the housing targets, what methodology and process is deployed to arrive at the target, and, what are the appeals, mitigation, and penalty measures that surround it? In addition, where are the materials and resources coming from to achieve this? All the logistics operators I speak to are running on wafe thin margins and can't find space to accommodate current demand, while construction companies are desperately short of labour and skills across the board. Houses don't build themselves because you super-duper believe in them, they need the enablers listed above, plus the appropriate levels of accompanying infrastructure: road, rail, utilities, schools, medical facilities, commercial space to make the 'housing policy ' actually work for people. I hope that government departments and the civil servants that run them don't keep to their current silo thinking, but this would be a cultural change, so perhaps a forlorn hope.
They do not have a mandate, all the polling data argues against that. They have a political opportunity due to the general publics disdain for the Tories.
What is this guy waffling about in terms of building around train stations? Our train stations are already in densely built locations, where there is no land ip for grabs???? Quite apart from the fact that our trains are crap and unaffordable.
@@simonpapworth8974 there’s a report from a highly respected engineering firm that highlights 250k potential homes around rail transport infrastructure in Greater London…..
Modular factory built housing addresses the skill shortages and the supply issues….who cares how they got there….just need to house people with dignity…… housing is a verb not a noun
@@simonpapworth8974 WSP out of thin air
@@jonnygemmel2243 there is not the capacity in the construction industry to build as many hoses as Labour wants to.
Sending electricity underground has major heat problems hence why they use pilons I was told by an energy expert when I asked this question of him many years ago.
Infrastructure is a problem…..make off grid a reality
We bury large power cables all the time , pylons are just cheaper
It's not so much the heat as the heat is a loss of power. On average 12% is lost getting electricity from the power station to the home.
@michaelgilday That is one reason. It's harder to dissipate heat underground
But it's simply cheaper to build above ground as the wires are bare aluminium, which is cheap and low maintenance
Plus the ground acts like a capacitor so losses are much higher if you bury the wires
Heat problems? I doubt it.
Labour making free market reforms is exactly why the Tories are where they are. Tories could have done this any time.
It's government, it's wise to only believe them once they've shown they can deliver.
@@osier769 True. But at least they got to the speak it phase.
Ive been working as an architectural assistant for the past 3.5 years now and still im yet to see a single shovel in the ground for a single building ive helped design, its genuinely infuriating and makes me feel like im not contributing at all to society, it makes me feel pointless. If labour can reform planning to make it easier for projects to get off the ground then they have my full support and i would vote for them in the next election too if they can prove competent in this matter.
The amount of work they'd have to do earn your vote is the big problem. It seems far easier to harvest votes from culture war nonsense than an informed citizen like you.
@@rns01111Culture war nonsense.... Like? The mutilation of young children and adults? The mass immigration of people from 3rd world countries, the decay and degradation of the moral fabric of our communities?
This problem has got so bad under the tories people have moved to a position where they aren't interested in the economic reasons for mass migration they just want to arrest the collapse of Britain.
Building more houses is a smoke screen.
Some London boroughs have well over 60% of their social housing occupied by non British people.
Community land auctions are all well and good, but they are a sop to landowners. Better to compulsorily purchase the land at the market rate for its current use. If the value rises after planning is granted then the public get the windfall.
There is no such thing as affordable housing without massive subsidies from the government which they don’t have the money for.
There are a surplus of new executive housing in my area with many being owned by investors for rent.
Is that moustache legal?
Not building for the British people are they
Yes, they are.
Check your facts.
The idea of building 6 or 8 tall density building ignores the current planning requirements on parking and visitor parking for residential developments. We had a development hit a brick wall when the requirement to provide charging points was introduced. The solution to provide infrastructure to accommodate future adoption of charging points was rejected.
This is partly why planning regulations need serious review. Car centric planning results in car dependency which increases costs for both the government and the residents. Urban3 does great analysis on this sort of problem.
A few landlords are making a killing on this market. UK Housing is sooo bad, no soundproof or energy efficiency at astronomical prices. The ratio of median income to house prices is 12 times in London.We need to limit the profit from renting to half them. How and when are we supposed to have “affordable” housing otherwise?
The base line for new housing is the cost to build. As a developer, I can tell you that the cost to build has gone up massively in the past few years. Started with covid shortages, but prices have not come down. We talk about supply of the end product driving down the cost due to increased supply as if the cost to supply is irrelevant. What can we do to drive down production costs?
My dad used to work for a company that built social housing and he would often tell me. Planning permission would often cause a project to stall for 3-4 years sometimes end up cancelled. Purely on the basis of one objection. Often on frivolous grounds.
There was once an idea floated about building and docking cruise ships on the thames. They can each house ~6,000 people
It might not be everyones idea of a great home, but london has hundreds of thousands of students, plus millions of young people who live in house shares renting a room
Somethign like this might be great for them and no additional burden on transport infrastructure as they are within walking distance of the three biggest employment hubs in the UK. Which are docklands. Westminster. City.
I dont know how many of these ships could reasonably fit on the thanes, but I'd imagine at least a few hundred
They could even be built in the UK. Building a few hundred would mean the first few would be expensive but the 100th would be cheap. It would even potentially set up the experience necessary to build other large ships for the navy or alterative uses
In devon they are building over farm land at a rapid rate which is fine but new builds arent desireble properties and the social housing usually goes to outsiders in other words non locals from other councils
The backlog of work is crazy. Truss made the right noise even if she didn't realise. I might look at some cement makers for my portfolio
You have a 'portfolio' you are part of the problem.
15 million immigrants they wont even address the actual problem.
Where are there 15 million immigrants? In your town?
@@therealrobertbirchall Ah more deflection!
@@marumaru6084 we need people and I doubt there are 15 million immigrants in the British Isles tbh. There may be 15 million second or third generation British people here, but they are not immigrants are they.
@@therealrobertbirchall You only need people if you dont invest and or you want to keep wages low. Perhaps if you run a crime gang called labour.
@@therealrobertbirchall Labour desperately trying to destroy the countryside to house more migrants. 2.5 million arrived in the last two yeas alone!
If you ever watch Homes under the Hammer,some poor sod buys a bit of land , with the intention of building a house,the hurdles , hoops you have to jump through just to get started, and it's not even green belt land , just a piece of waste land
It's great that they are trying to get building, but how in the heck are they actually going to make housing affordable. That's the problem. What will happen is they might manage to build the targeted number of homes each year, but they won't be 'affordable'. Why can't they do shared ownership, but without the rental charge. The government simply own ~30% of the home, so the buyer needs to stump up the mortgage for 70% of the home. The government profit when the house is sold. No rent costs on that 30%.
Will the rents for council houses be based on the land and construction cost or the market price of private rental accommodation?
Councils can't build these thousands of houses, they wont pay the going rates for the brickies, plumbers, chippies etc the private house builders can afford to as they make a profit. The supply chain of labour and a direct consequence of Blairs policies of mass immigration and not prioritising apprenticeships in the skills req. The local infrastructure ie schools, medical provision and then add in local opposition to new builds earmarked for immigrants and anyone with any foresight can see the problems. Good luck Ange who is perfectly qualified to build social housing.
The reason development is so messy, complex, time consuming and expensive is because of intense government regulation. Simple really...
Remember, we don't live for ever!!! We only live once. Why not help people whilst we are here??
Should councils support self build houses?
What's the betting I still won't be able to get my land rezoned for residential...
Exactly, I have some equestrian land in North East Essex/ South Suffolk border in an area designated as of outstanding natural beauty. (Constable country)
They are putting new pylons through this area but I can’t get permission for one residential property so I can live on land and be close to horses.
The council did say if I give up an acre for free to social housing they may look at it more favourably.
The whole system stinks to high heaven…
Why can't we have more homes in distant villages and towns?
Not everyone needs to commute into london to work
The biggest growing segment of the population are old retired people. They can happily live in the middle of nowhere, and it might even be better for their health
So dont turn down development just because it doesn't meet the needs of the mythical london commuter
Maybe not, but they still need access to infrastructure (hospitals, waste management) which gets more expensive the less dense and further away you place it.
All these economists and they cant work out the root cause. Pathetic.
1. STOP buy to lets on new builds/houses of any ages.
2. STOP investment companies buying housing estates.
3. STOP non UK passport holders buying propriety.
(Just like in the rest of europe!)
4. Empty properties charged 5x council tax.
5. Owned by a company or foreign investor? 10x council tax to disincentivise.
6. Have infrastructure outside of the m25. Like phone masts and roads.
-side effects, which is beyond you.
1. New Owner can build their own wealth.
2. New owners are much more likely to do home improvements which they wont as renters AND the land lords wont because its about maximising the profits to buy the next b2l.
You want to see growth? The best way is for individuals to grow their own, not land lords who pretend to be business owners.
3. Having a connected internet MAY make us more efficient so you can use your phone without constant issues, as updating the roads getting places faster. But im sure economists would rather us stuck in traffic wasting time thats free but burning fuel which helps gdp🤡
But because this is Britain, this is far too logical.
What ridiculous body did you clowns say you represent?
There are hardly any train stations in New Zealand 😂😂😂😂😂
If a loser has their costs capped on losing an environmental case then , again, it's incoherent government legislation and regulation where the incessant regulation in different "interest" sectors is clashing. It comes back to my earlier point, the government should intrerfere and regulate LESS. They can best serve us all by doing LESS and getting out of the way, but there is no chance of that. They genuinely believe they can fix everything, but they have no chance of that...
All property is theft.
Need to close the border nor there will be more homelessness in the uk
Wo wo wo people don’t watch this rubbish! This was recommended to me? The IEA is behind the INSANE Truss budget.
Daydreaming
Whenever the IEA puts out a hit-piece on a policy, I know it might actually be useful/functional
This podcast is nothing but a Tory think tank
More homes = more landlords. How many more times!
There was barely a mention of affordable social housing
Likely a similar number of landlords. Just with much bigger portfolios.
American with twenty plus year in the housing business, I have looked at your system and it is just madness, what does it really achieve but endless delays, ever higher cost, and housing being built other then for the wealthy, because the fight to build is so bad, you have to squeeze every pound of profit possible out of what you can built, so highest, best, use!!!
Suggestion, absolute bill by right, on land, that you own on lot sizes 2500 sq ft and above, subject to reasonable setbacks, and height restrictions, but no restrictions under three stories. Families who own agricultural land can build by right for their children, and grandchildren.
The other piece of madness in your housing system is the way you finance houses, you finance long term investments houses with short term money, so home buyers are always at the mercy of the market. If you want housing stability, and a health market adapt what the U.S. did with Federally Insured Home Loans, and Veteran Loans, low down payments 3.5%, 0% for Vets, and 30 year fixed rate mortgages, with the right to refinance to a lower rate if the rates go down.
Development cost fees, planning, permits, utilities hook ups, etc. should be fixed at the national leave, to make it an even low cost playing field wherever you build.
On green fields, what good are green fields if you can’t house your population?
What is needed to boost investment is THE CHANCE TO MAKE PROFIT. It's really not difficult. Why do you lot work? Primarily to make a living and to survive, ie to make your own profit. If you want people to invest their money, you must allow profit. Or you can steal our money in tax to invest, but that won't work either. All you'll do is kill the value in rhe economy...
All I can say is 20 years ago I listened to the same rhetoric by labour how they are going to build more houses etc. And nought happened. The the fact is by the time labour has jumped through all the hoops sifted through the objections legal battles and green lobbyists Conservatives will be back in power and were back in the same pile of !!!