Cogently argued. I think the issue of space (square metres) is under discussed. It's a shame the proposal to regulate the estate and lettings agents market failed to gain traction; one change I would advocate is to advertise the square metres of all properties, rather than the "one bedroom, private balcony" etc. Londoners in particular are getting very pricey new builds with dimensions squeezed in the most cynical and miserly way.
There is not even a need to compare countries. Just the fact that the lawmakers stop you from building is a proof of the shortage. The gov and councils deciding how much to build, what and where to build will always lead to a shortage according to economics science.
Can I commend Andy Burnham's key note speech on the Resolution Foundation on the 29th April 2025. His remarks on housing policy chime with the points you make.
How to spend £100 billion wisely
Which areas of public investment should be prioritised at the Spending Review?
Tuesday 29 April 2025
The UK’s record on public investment is poor by international standards – spending less than the OECD average for much of the past two decades. To her credit, the Chancellor has boosted capital spending plans by over £100 billion over this Parliament and put in place fiscal rules that reduce the likelihood of cutting investment when fiscal belt-tightening is needed. But that £100 billion won’t go as far as some might think, with much absorbed by reversing cuts planned by the previous Government. And with Britain’s social, economic and defence infrastructure all under strain, tough choices await on 11 June.
The problem is not that there is not enough housing, but that there is not housing that the people most in need of can afford to buy (or rent). Of course its easy to say this is because of a simple supply - demand equation, and that more houses would mean cheaper. The problem with this is that even were it true that enough could be built to start pushing prices down - there are massive vested interests that would resist that. This includes the entire housebuilding industry, plus landlords, oh, and everyone who owns a house already. And banks, and the whole finance industry. Assets going up are essential for the whole system. Property is asset number one. There is no way on earth that these interests will allow house prices to fall to the level necessary to resolve the affordability issue. Get real.
I always thought it was the Campaign to Protect Retirees Equity.
Campaign to Prevent a Recovering Economy.
Cogently argued. I think the issue of space (square metres) is under discussed. It's a shame the proposal to regulate the estate and lettings agents market failed to gain traction; one change I would advocate is to advertise the square metres of all properties, rather than the "one bedroom, private balcony" etc. Londoners in particular are getting very pricey new builds with dimensions squeezed in the most cynical and miserly way.
There is not even a need to compare countries. Just the fact that the lawmakers stop you from building is a proof of the shortage. The gov and councils deciding how much to build, what and where to build will always lead to a shortage according to economics science.
Can I commend Andy Burnham's key note speech on the Resolution Foundation on the 29th April 2025. His remarks on housing policy chime with the points you make.
How to spend £100 billion wisely
Which areas of public investment should be prioritised at the Spending Review?
Tuesday 29 April 2025
The UK’s record on public investment is poor by international standards – spending less than the OECD average for much of the past two decades. To her credit, the Chancellor has boosted capital spending plans by over £100 billion over this Parliament and put in place fiscal rules that reduce the likelihood of cutting investment when fiscal belt-tightening is needed. But that £100 billion won’t go as far as some might think, with much absorbed by reversing cuts planned by the previous Government. And with Britain’s social, economic and defence infrastructure all under strain, tough choices await on 11 June.
The problem is not that there is not enough housing, but that there is not housing that the people most in need of can afford to buy (or rent). Of course its easy to say this is because of a simple supply - demand equation, and that more houses would mean cheaper. The problem with this is that even were it true that enough could be built to start pushing prices down - there are massive vested interests that would resist that. This includes the entire housebuilding industry, plus landlords, oh, and everyone who owns a house already. And banks, and the whole finance industry. Assets going up are essential for the whole system. Property is asset number one. There is no way on earth that these interests will allow house prices to fall to the level necessary to resolve the affordability issue. Get real.