Monday 8 July 2024

House Rules

Except perhaps in the deepest inner cities, no one who has ever been so much as a realistic parliamentary candidate has not participated in a NIMBY campaign, while between them, NIMBY and WASPI account for a third or more, and often a very great deal more, of the constituency work that an MP does in a typical week. Mostly with small minorities and frequently with tiny ones, Labour has just acquired constituency responsibility for great swathes of rural England. Rachel Reeves has ruled out any new council housing, thereby giving the NIMBYs all the ammunition that they could possibly need.

After all, the blockers are the builders. Property developers are hoarding land so as to maximise prices by restricting supply, thereby also thwarting competitors. Land banking is their business model. The Green Belt was a Labour idea. Look at it, and of course it was. But it is now a giant subsidy to horseyculture and golf. The State decrees and pays that more of Surrey be occupied by golf courses than by housing.

We need a minimum of 100,000 new homes every year for at least 10 years, including council homes with an end to the Right to Buy, with the capital receipts from council house sales released in order to build more council housing, and with councils empowered to borrow to that end. We need a minimum of 50 per cent of any new development to be dedicated to affordable housing, with affordability defined as 50 per cent of average rents. We need rent controls, action against the buying up of property by foreign investors in order to leave it empty, repeal of the Vagrancy Act, and the outlawing of practices such as "poor doors" and discrimination in children's play facilities based on the nature of their parents' tenure. We need Tenant Management Co-operatives.

We need a statutory requirement of planning permission for change of use if it were proposed to turn a primary dwelling into a secondary dwelling, a working family home into a weekend or holiday home; there are signs of progress on that under the previous Government. Since the last century, I have been using the available platforms to call for this. The last Labour Government was completely unresponsive, just as throughout its three terms, it left section 21 in place. Such evictions ought of course to be banned by Statute.

That requirement of planning permission for change of use would set the pattern for the empowerment of the rural working class, assisted both by the Land Value Tax and by a windfall tax on the supermarkets in order to fund agriculture and small business, with strict regulation to ensure that the costs of this were not passed on to suppliers, workers, consumers, communities, or the environment. Rent-to-buy schemes also demand serious attention, and we should be setting up one or more non-profit lettings agencies.

Try and explain leasehold to anyone from almost anywhere else in the world. Yet again, give three cheers for the three-term Labour Government that never abolished it. And note carefully how feudalism has morphed into global capitalism, so that nostalgia for the former does not ultimately provide the basis necessary for resistance to the latter. Leasehold should simply be abolished. People who wonder why I keep up the politics, no one else is saying things like this.

"It is entirely undesirable," wrote Aneurin Bevan, "that on modern housing estates only one type of citizen should live. If we are to enable citizens to lead a full life, if they are each to be aware of the problems of their neighbours, then they should all be drawn from different sectors of the community. We should try to introduce what was always the lovely feature of English and Welsh villages, where the doctor, the grocer, the butcher and the farm labourer all lived in the same street."

In 1979, two fifths of people lived in council housing, an impossible figure for a mere "safety net for the poor". Public provision, by definition, never is such a net. Not the NHS, not state education, not public transport, none of it. As recently as 1980, what is now a breathtaking 20 per cent of the richest tenth of the population lived in social housing. Now, after four decades of selling off the stock and of not building any more, the stringent criteria for new tenants effectively guarantee a large number of single mothers of dependent children who are thus unable to work full-time, if at all, and of people newly released from prison or newly discharged from psychiatric institutions.

Margaret Thatcher's assault on council housing is the one thing that her supporters still feel able to defend unconditionally. But in reality, it created the Housing Benefit racket, and it used the gigantic gifting of capital assets by the State to enable the beneficiaries to enter the property market ahead of private tenants, or of people still living at home, who in either case had saved for their deposits. What, exactly, was or is conservative or Tory about that? Or about moving in the characters from Shameless either alongside, or even in place of, the respectable working class? Shameless began under Tony Blair's model for this Labour Government. The fight goes on.

10 comments:

  1. "NIMBYIST" is just a pejorative term for 'conservatives.'

    It is conservative to wish to preserve the small and the particular from big developers, and to preserve our green and pleasant land from the ugly sprawl of concrete.

    It is also conservative to oppose the mass immigration including illegal cross-Channel migration that drives much of this demand, as Nigel Farage rightly points out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He says that about everything. Just how much of it does he think that there is?

      Delete
  2. There’s been 700,000 a year net (that’s subtracting those who’ve moved abroad) so rather a hell of alot. And it accounts for an enormous proportion of the totally unnecessary housing demand in this country.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where to begin?

      By your reckoning, the most conservative party must be the Lib Dems, whose principal method of recruitment is NIMBY campaigns.

      Delete
  3. NIMBYISM is of course conservative. There's absolutely nothing conservative about watching our ancient landscape disappear under the bulldozer because of Net Zero ideology and the endless demand for housing driven by mass immigration and family breakdown.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes, when even Blair’s telling the PM we need immigration controls to “stop the surge of the Right” you know the message is finally getting through. https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/09/tony-blair-keir-starmer-labour-immigration-far-right

    As no party to the Left of Labour got even 1% of the vote this election, it is the Right that Labour worries about. And rightly so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does Blair tell Starmer to end arms sales to Israel and to recognise Palestine, seeing as the Left Independents took as many seats as Reform UK, and took them all from Labour, whereas all of Reform's were from the Tories?

      Delete
  5. What a loss to Parliament you are.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are other ways of influencing events.

      Delete