THE POLITICS OF HOUSING A report from the National Housing Federation NHF By Keohane & Broughton, published in 2013
รจ
Now this should be useful! And it starts well:
“The affordability problem dominates England’s housing
market: an increasing proportion of disposable household income being consumed by
housing costs; difficulties for younger generations seeking to access the
housing ladder, despite aspirations and expectations to do so; and, very long
waiting lists for social housing.
Brilliant! They get it. Houses are too expensive. Prices must
fall.
“The fundamental cause of the long-term affordability
problem is the effect of supply constraints in the context of growing household
demand.”
Oh dear. The authors Keohane & Broughton (K&B) work
for the SMF --- Social Market Foundation, a left-leaning think-tank. The NHF
who paid for the Report represent Housing Associations, who are the only
producers of Social Housing these days. So these are the good guys, and their
intentions are honourable.
The Report is also a treasure trove of facts and figures, as
well as historical analysis of Housing both privately-owned and publicly
provided in Britain since 1918. For example:
How big a political issue has Housing been over the years?
How much attention have politicians given to the Quality of Housing (slum
clearance), or the Quantity of Housing, especially Social (once called Council)
Housing? And how much effort have politicians devoted to keeping Prices down
(or subsidising buyers)?
‘Housing’ as an issue has now dropped off
the scale. The last time it was a major issue was during the bidding wars of
1950s/60s with promises to build 2, 3 or 4 hundred thousand new council houses.
Before that post-World Wars promises got the politicos enthusiastic.
What does motivate politicos
to action? K&B suggest
--Problems which are visible
of a kind they think they can fix.
--Voters’ interests and
aspirations
--Politicians’ own economic
and other ideology. Free market now endorsed by all, so private good, anything
public has to be erased, diminished, degraded.
What makes politicos lose interest
in acting on the housing market?
--Visible problem fixed.
Slums cleared, overcrowding ok, no need for vast newbuild programme
--Anything longterm, so future
housing needs can be ignored for now.
--Anything harmful to the
majority of voters who are owner-occupiers
--Anything which blunts the
aspiration of the 86% who wish to become home-owners.
(So falling house prices,
loss of capital appreciation, never do anything which harms that)
THE DOOMLOOP OF OWNER-OCCUPIED
HOUSING:
WHY HOUSEPRICES DRIVEN UPWARD
Home-owners are ‘insiders’ in economic jargon, and have the
power to keep outsiders (non-owners) priced out, and prevent new developments. ‘Help-to-buy’
and other demand-side supports makes it worse.
What are government doing to increase supply (the economists’ fallacious fix)? K&B point to pressure put on local and regional authorities to build more and cut red tape on planning delays.
K&B conclude inanely that the best that can be done is
1.
Make alternatives to owner-occupier status more
attractive, and hence
2.
Reduce the number of insider-voter
owner-occupiers.
Other highlights of the Report
on p42 Government has deliberately planned to snatch equity in
order to pay for Social Care for OAPs. (This is absolutely true. I’ve heard civil servants say so
at a conference)
on p45 Surveys show that asset appreciation is the MAIN
motivating factor in the aspiration to buy, and of existing home-buyers.
The Report can be downloaded from
No comments:
Post a Comment