Labour - party of building?

We need a massive Council house building programme led by properly funded local authorities to meet the needs of those who can't afford to buy and who are stuck in the private rented market. So-called 'affordable' homes are not the answer because even with a discount most can't afford them. Labour doesn't seem to understand how expensive 'affordable' homes are and doesn't seem to understand that such homes don't usually carry a s106 contribution to local facilities.

SNP have been building council houses ,my area has hundreds of them Much needed and well built attractive houses and flats and pensioner bungalows .Labours last stint in government here saw them build just 6 ...SIX council houses ,yet they handed back over a billion of our budget to WM .You wonder why we dont want unionist parties in power? They have their strings pulled by the head office in London

New council houses are being built in Wales. Nowhere near enough because the Welsh Government’s devolved budget doesn’t enable enough allocation, but they have never stopped, and want to built a lot more than they are able to.
www.gov.wales/new-house-building-april-2022-march-2023-html
There are also significant incentives for social landlords. The key is investment, because otherwise there are no viable options for renters except private landlords.

Torn in two directions here. I agree wholeheartedly with Cadenza123 and despair at the ongoing trend for replacing green stuff (grass/trees/plants, etc) with grey stuff (concrete).

But my daughter is struggling to get a Council house despite living in dire conditions (we're semi-housing the grandkids but can't go the whole hog in case she's declined for housing!) So I would love more Council houses to be built for her sake and against my principles.

It's a quandary.

Cabowich

Torn in two directions here. I agree wholeheartedly with Cadenza123 and despair at the ongoing trend for replacing green stuff (grass/trees/plants, etc) with grey stuff (concrete).

But my daughter is struggling to get a Council house despite living in dire conditions (we're semi-housing the grandkids but can't go the whole hog in case she's declined for housing!) So I would love more Council houses to be built for her sake and against my principles.

It's a quandary.

To save on buying land in these difficult times, the ones I’ve seen in recent years are being built on land that councils already own, so are brownfield sites. Obviously that can’t be the case everywhere, but I think the demand is in cities and towns largely, so would hope that is the way forward as far as possible.

Houses are being built in areas where the infrastructure can't support the people who come to live there. Schools can already be full. Doctors and dentists' lists are closed and the extremely busy roads can't cope with more cars.
I have seen this happen where promises are made for a new school and shops and once the houses are built the facilities don't get built.

What’s really needed are new towns to be built. That way the infrastructure and council houses as well as houses to buy, doctors dentists libraries town hall, shops and so on are all factored in the planning.

I think building in areas which have already been used, such as old industrial sites is the best way to go. Lots of cities have redeveloped docklands for example, and people want to live there, because it’s close to jobs. There are often struggling GP practices, underused schools etc already in those areas too. I’m not in favour of developing ‘ghettoes’ of social housing at all, they need to be part of existing communities so that people can settle and feel they belong.

I think that Labours speech on housing needs to be looked at.

So.

They will prioritise brown field sites wherever and whenever possible..

They are to look again at possible development in green field sites, but always ensuring protection of our most precious natural environment.

The planning laws are to be reformed making it easier to build on greenfield sites.

Planning is to be speeded up when building new houses in an already developed area to ensure that infrastructure like schools, doctors surgeries, and such like are developed alongside the new building.

No wholesale building will be allowed on green belt. Local authorities and people will be actively involved.

Developers will be “encouraged” to build affordable houses.

Whitewavemark2

I think that Labours speech on housing needs to be looked at.

So.

They will prioritise brown field sites wherever and whenever possible..

They are to look again at possible development in green field sites, but always ensuring protection of our most precious natural environment.

The planning laws are to be reformed making it easier to build on greenfield sites.

Planning is to be speeded up when building new houses in an already developed area to ensure that infrastructure like schools, doctors surgeries, and such like are developed alongside the new building.

No wholesale building will be allowed on green belt. Local authorities and people will be actively involved.

Developers will be “encouraged” to build affordable houses.

All extremely sensible proposals.

The trouble is, that all political parties in waiting say the sort of stuff that we all like to hear.
Saying it doesn’t mean it will happen. I hope they will do all these sorts of things but reserve judgement until they actually do it.

Oreo

The trouble is, that all political parties in waiting say the sort of stuff that we all like to hear.
Saying it doesn’t mean it will happen. I hope they will do all these sorts of things but reserve judgement until they actually do it.

All I can say is that this is what’s happening in Wales now, just on too small a scale because there’s not enough funding. I can’t imagine that Labour would not follow through what they have already started here?

Who knows?

Oreo

The trouble is, that all political parties in waiting say the sort of stuff that we all like to hear.
Saying it doesn’t mean it will happen. I hope they will do all these sorts of things but reserve judgement until they actually do it.

But first they have to be voted in, and that is by no means certain.

All anyone can do is look at their manifesto, and vote for the policies that suites their world outlook, plus of course of they can be trusted.

We can only assume that what Labour says will be carried out, however we know that what the Tories say will not be. Even during this past week, Sunak gave a long list of what would be spent on our infrastructure instead of the cancelled HS2.

1 day later, he said that this list was only an example and nothing would actually necessarily happen😮😮

Developers don't need much encouragement to build 'affordable' homes - quite often they convert a development to 100% affordable to avoid paying s106 money for community facilities or to sell off in bulk to a housing association. But what Labour doesn't grasp is that many cannot afford so-called affordable homes. They need social housing built by local Councils. Labour's tactic is to avoid having to fund social housing from public funds but it won't work.

The developers should be forced to use their land banks, enough to build over 300, 000 houses, as a start.

👀

From Labour’s site

“the next Labour Government will deliver the biggest boost to affordable housing for a generation – with social and council housing at the heart of Labour's secure homes plan

Another policy which might help would be one that ringfenced any money from the Right to Buy scheme so that it is used to build more social housing. This should have happened back in the days when Right to Buy was first brough in. Or am I being naive/stupid?

*brought, not brough

Whitewavemark2

👀

From Labour’s site

“the next Labour Government will deliver the biggest boost to affordable housing for a generation – with *social and council housing at the heart of Labour's secure homes plan*

I have many questions on this

Funding ?

Land (building on green belt is a big no for me)

Materials (building materials are in short supply and prices have continued to rise, Covid and more lately Ukraine)

Workforce (there is a shortage of skilled builders, plumbers, electricians etc)

Talk is easy as we have found out from Government on multiple occasions

It is good to question I think, but sometimes the answers are there if you read what they have announced.

Maybe they should introduce some policies to bring homes that are deliberately left empty are brought into public ownership. Ownership of property by foreign investors and just left unoccupied should be prohibited.

I have heard so many election speeches. Once in power promises melt like snow. It's depressing, I don't trust Keir, he supported Corbyn and Diane Abbot, who'd supported rogue factions, now he's distanced himself, through Covud he never had one idea, just sat there until he knew for certain a point was won and then supported that. Then there's conservatives, the Covid package for people not able to work was the best in Europe, now for most people thats forgotten but it still needs paying for. They don't mention west was positive, imagine if people hadn't had that. Truss what a fiasco, her few days in office must go down as the worst in history, she should not be on a Pension, it's a sick joke. A disgrace, but like most of them she takes the money as if she deserves it, it should be given back to help the people that suffered because if it. . I think I won't be voting, I don't any longer believe any of them, least of all Labour, at least Conservatives seem to support UK which other lot obviously don't. We need a change in government after do many years but you need a good opposition, there just isn't one.

I find Mark Carney’s endorsement of Rachael Reeves a bit disconcerting. It feels as if the Bank of England is only interested in maintaining standard orthodox banking practices and it suggests that Rachael Reeves is definitely one of their own. A safe pair of hands for the Bank. When Labour says the country needs a better growth strategy, that is acceptable to the Bank but when the Conservatives offer the same policy, the reaction is not positively received. Or have I misunderstood?