Local councils, many of which have judged the government’s centerpiece 1.5 million new homes in England over the next five years “unrealistic” and “impossible to achieve,” fiercely oppose the project. This mounting reaction risks putting local authorities in conflict with the government over one of its main agendas.
Why are local authorities displaying strong concerns?
Following a consultation run by Angela Rayner’s housing department earlier this year, most councils have expressed grave reservations about the government’s housing plan. According to the comments gathered under Freedom of Information rules, local officials feel the housing targets must be within reach. By the end of the year, the government promises to have reviewed the comments and released changes. However, the scope of the resistance highlights an apparent gulf between the aspirations of the central government and the reality municipalities deal with on the ground.
Local authorities are supposed to set goals for upcoming privately developed projects in their respective areas. Although many councils agree that more homes are needed, there is general uncertainty on whether the targets set for every one of the 317 authorities are realistic. An examination of 90% of the consultation replies reveals these issues spanning Labour, Conservative, and Liberal Democrat-run councils.
What Are the Key Issues with the Algorithm and Infrastructure?
Councils contend that the method used to determine the housing objectives ignores major strains on local infrastructure, land constraints, and a lack of capacity in the planning system and building sector, so the methodology utilized is a crucial question.
Nottinghamshire’s Labour-run Broxtowe Council described the suggested housing developments as “very challenging, if not impossible to achieve.” Another Labour-run council, South Tyneside, said the plans were “completely unrealistic.” At the same time, the independent-run Central Bedfordshire Council cautioned that the area would be “absolutely swamped with growth that the infrastructure just cannot support.”
Sometimes, the new housing targets differ significantly from those established by the former government. While some inner-city locations see their targets drop, rural areas are forced to bear excessive loads. For instance, rural West Lancashire will see a yearly housing objective increase from 166 new dwellings to 605 under the new approach.
Deputy Leader of West Lancashire Borough Council, Gareth Dowling, admitted the demand for more homes but voiced questions about the viability of the targets. “Unless you were to go and build especially on arable farmland,” he continued, “I don’t think the land is really available here to build that much housing on.” Dowling also expressed worries about the new approach for target setting not matching actual housing demand in his neighborhood and, therefore, asked ministers to review the consultation replies.
How Does the New Methodology Affect Demand for Homes?
Nowadays, housing targets are primarily based on forecasts of population increase in particular regions. However, the last Conservative administration locked in house targets based on 2014’s predictions. Unlike previous population projections, the Labour government’s new approach targets each area’s current dwellings and affordability.
This change in strategy has generated questions in places including West Lancashire and metropolitan areas. The labor-run local government in Salford, Greater Manchester, said that the government’s new plan was “divorced from need” and “loses any connection with future demographic change.”
Paul Dennett, the Mayor of Salford, underlined that house plans shouldn’t be predicated on abstract figures. “It’s about looking at your housing waiting list,” Dennett added. It’s about looking at the impacts around homelessness and rough sleeping and building the homes that communities and residents need.”
He also urged the government to provide municipalities more freedom to handle some local issues instead of imposing a one-size-fits-all solution.
How may the private sector help to ensure housing delivery?
Although they mostly rely on the private sector to develop new dwellings, local authorities are responsible for obtaining their planning clearance. Many municipalities expressed worries that the revised housing targets failed to adequately account for the private sector’s difficulties in satisfying demand.
Although Neil Jefferson, the Home Builders Federation’s chief executive, said the planning revisions were “very positive,” he underlined that further government action is needed to assist potential buyers. He also highlighted the need to ensure that local planning offices have enough capacity to handle house applications. Jefferson added, “We need to give suitable mortgages more access and assist local authorities in handling these applications efficiently.”
Will Labour Overrule Local Objections to Reach Residential Target?
Labor is firmly committed to the 1.5 million house target despite general worries. Reflecting the relevance of housebuilding to Labour’s approach to economic growth, the party has said it may reject local councils’ objections to reaching its housing targets.
While many councils favor creating additional homes, some—like Oxford—are only mildly hopeful about the new goals. The ambitious ambitions, which would call for the building of 24,000 additional houses in Oxford City Council’s territory, have been supported by the council. Local cabinet member for planning Louise Upton thinks Oxford can house 10,000 of these houses and is confident surrounding municipalities will take on the remaining 10,000.
“When you are a tightly constrained city like ours, which is bursting at the seams, you need your surrounding districts to collaborate with you to get the housing you need,” Upton said. “Although ambitious, the government’s proposal for these new dwellings is realistic. It must be realistic.
What Government Policies Address the Housing Crisis?
Rising from 300,000 homes annually to over 370,000, Housing Secretary and Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner declared in July that the government’s objective would be even more ambitious than first intended. Should all councils reach this aim, there would be more dwellings than the initial 1.5 million goal. Nonetheless, Matthew Pennycook, the minister of housing, reiterated last Wednesday that the government would not set yearly targets as recommended by Rayner.
A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesman stressed the need to solve the housing issue. The spokesman stated, “This is the worst housing crisis in living memory; we must build 1.5 million homes to fix this. “That’s why we have introduced mandatory housing targets for councils and laid out plans to support their delivery, including changing planning rules to allow homes to be built on green belt land and recruiting 300 additional planning officers.”
The Local Government Association (LGA) has urged the government to provide councils with the required instruments to build much-needed houses. “Any national algorithms and formulas would strongly benefit from local knowledge, as local councils know their areas best and can address unique challenges,” LGA housing spokesperson Adam Hug said.
The argument on the housing targets is constantly examined, and local authorities are critical of the government’s strategy.
