What is the Tories *real* intention?

I don’t understand what will be discussed between LT, KK and the independent OBR.

The fiscal analysis of the government’s policies will be what it is. There is nothing to discuss.

What is going on?

That all sounds rather muddled Katie. A few comments:

Developers wouldn’t want to build until such time as they know sales are ensured. A great many homes are sold off plan, well before construction has commenced. Only small developers rely on site-by-site finance rather than a revolving facility.

It sounds as though the developer of the site you mention either hasn’t costed the site properly, or the requirement for road improvement works only kicks in once a certain number of homes are occupied (not uncommon). Some developers then try to renegotiate the requirement, mothballing the site by way of blackmail. It sometimes works to their advantage.

It is frequently the case that an initial outline planning permission is granted, with approval of details such as access (often contentious for reasons such as safety and access for emergency vehicles), drainage and materials reserved for approval. The provision and approval of technical details can take some time but is not something on which corners should be cut.

When you say ‘less (sic) planning restrictions would lower the land cost’, you seem to be arguing for a ‘build them anywhere, anyhow’ system. That sort of approach resulted in insanitary, unsafe, Jerry-built back to backs in the past.

Interestingly, shares in two of the country’s largest house builders, former clients of mine, have risen significantly this morning. That would indicate that the market doesn’t share your views.

The cost of new build homes is pushed up by traditional build regulations, that is true.

Can you explain why, JJ?

The story you linked to seems to contradict this. Do the developers have special dispensation to disregard 'traditional building regs'?

We've had a number of timber framed houses built locally; though I appreciate that this is different from using timber panels as cited in the article.
We also have at least one local business producing modular housing. components...

Interestingly, shares in two of the country’s largest house builders, former clients of mine, have risen significantly this morning. That would indicate that the market doesn’t share your views.

Perhaps they sniff that a Labour government is imminent, GSM? they're promising to facilitate much more house building. Or is it the 'bonfire of regulations that Truss's controllers want to see?

The City likes the numbers they have built Maizie. Simple as that.

GSM

I didnt mention housing quality or siting of houses because if there is demand for them they have to be built somewhere.
I concentrated entirely on land cost then you expanded the topic to everything else, you are saying that everything is fine, nothing should change.

Whitewavemark2

I don’t understand what will be discussed between LT, KK and the independent OBR.

The fiscal analysis of the government’s policies will be what it is. There is nothing to discuss.

What is going on?

Members of the OBR left the meeting after 48 minutes. Thoughts?????

I'm a Conservative voter and I'm in as much dismay as you are. This strategy seems to me about 40 years out of time. Especially the attitude to the environment and climate change. If I thought Labour were serious about investing in nuclear power, I'd be sorely tempted at the next GE. Always a first time.

How would less planning restrictions reduce the land cost?

Dear oh dear Maizie , supply and demand surely you understand that, many of the developments are being built on green field sites, every town and village has development on agricultural land, we do not need to give a windfall to lucky landowners.

Daisymae

Whitewavemark2

I don’t understand what will be discussed between LT, KK and the independent OBR.

The fiscal analysis of the government’s policies will be what it is. There is nothing to discuss.

What is going on?

Members of the OBR left the meeting after 48 minutes. Thoughts?????

Easy, here is the plan justify it, you’ve got 8 weeks.

Katie59

Daisymae

Whitewavemark2

I don’t understand what will be discussed between LT, KK and the independent OBR.

The fiscal analysis of the government’s policies will be what it is. There is nothing to discuss.

What is going on?

Members of the OBR left the meeting after 48 minutes. Thoughts?????

Easy, here is the plan justify it, you’ve got 8 weeks.

It was a bit short, so I suspect nothing much was agreed.

Katie59

How would less planning restrictions reduce the land cost?

Dear oh dear Maizie , supply and demand surely you understand that, many of the developments are being built on green field sites, every town and village has development on agricultural land, we do not need to give a windfall to lucky landowners.

I perfectly understand the law of supply and demand, Katie59. Try reading my relevant post again.

It seems to me that you are saying that developers should be free to plonk housing anywhere they please?

When a meeting is so swift it seems to me that either all was agreed by both sides or nothing was.

Prentice

When a meeting is so swift it seems to me that either all was agreed by both sides or nothing was.

I am thinking that nothing was resolved.

OBR - it seems that Truss and Kwarteng have caved in and agreed for the OBR to issue their analysis on Oct 7th.

This will include the impact of last Fridays debacle.

Still sticking with the line that they will continue with their policies.

There seem to be two different versions of this meeting

The Treasury is saying that there won't be an OBR forecast until 23rd November

OBR say that they're delivering their 'first iteration' (anybody here speak civil service lingo?) on 7th October.

All on this twitter thread, scroll down for the OBR version

twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1575798119920304128

Speculation that Truss wants to develop her bonfire of the regulations plan for 23rd November, too. Presumably to present mini-budget and deregulation as one package.

Fingers tightly crossed that she's actually been ousted before then...

Oh, Xposts Wwmk

OBR are giving Kwarteng forecast Oct. 7th. But he’s not allowing it to be published, until 23 Nov.

Katie59

GSM

I didnt mention housing quality or siting of houses because if there is demand for them they have to be built somewhere.
I concentrated entirely on land cost then you expanded the topic to everything else, you are saying that everything is fine, nothing should change.

I’m not saying that at all. I’m trying to explain a few things based on my decades of experience working for developers and my husband’s too - he was chairman of one of the major house builders. Demand for land won’t decrease its price - quite the reverse due to competition between developers. They don’t make it any more.

Germanshepherdsmum

Katie59

GSM

I didnt mention housing quality or siting of houses because if there is demand for them they have to be built somewhere.
I concentrated entirely on land cost then you expanded the topic to everything else, you are saying that everything is fine, nothing should change.

I’m not saying that at all. I’m trying to explain a few things based on my decades of experience working for developers and my husband’s too - he was chairman of one of the major house builders. Demand for land won’t decrease its price - quite the reverse due to competition between developers. They don’t make it any more.

So the present system is fine and nothing is going to change.

MaizieD

What regulations are preventing these from being built, Katie59?

www.theguardian.com/society/2021/may/08/over-1m-homes-in-england-with-planning-permission-not-built

Land banking - that's what so many "builders" see as house building.

I have not said the present system is fine Katie. But checks and balances and proper scrutiny of plans are vital.

Land banks are essential to ensure supply of housing DaisyAnne. Developers don’t simply wait to buy land when they need to sell houses - the process from acquisition of land to sales isn’t simple. Also, all planning permissions have a finite life with no guarantee of renewal.

It has certainly been done by the landed "gentry" in the past GSM but I don't think there is a great history to it otherwise.

The Financial Services and Markets Act (2000) and Land Registration Act (2002) both encouraged the trade. I wonder why we didn't need it prior to those dates. It is the marketisation of yet another area of our lives. Something I am sure The Two Amigos approve.

Germanshepherdsmum

I have not said the present system is fine Katie. But checks and balances and proper scrutiny of plans are vital.

Land banks are essential to ensure supply of housing DaisyAnne. Developers don’t simply wait to buy land when they need to sell houses - the process from acquisition of land to sales isn’t simple. Also, all planning permissions have a finite life with no guarantee of renewal.

But the Guardian article I linked to was about the fact that the number of planning permissions granted were about 1million in excess of houses actually built. Land banking can't account for this, surely, because planning permission lapses after a certain number of years if no start has been made on the project?

Or do developers dig a few trenches so as to claim that work has started, then leave the land undeveloped?

The article explains a lot Maizie. In fact it says that the number will include houses which have been built. Planning permissions expire unless ‘a material start’ has been made. Just a few trenches may not be considered ‘a material start’, depending on the circumstances. Planning authorities have statutory powers to order completion of a development, and they may refuse to renew a permission when it lapses.