Keir Starmer seems intent on exploiting the rising divide between Nimbies and Yimbies as we move towards the general election. With polling showing many of Labour’s target seats are in the most pro-development parts of the country, the party is looking to reject the orthodoxy that blocking housing wins more votes than it loses. Instead, Labour is embracing those who see increased supply as the only way to ease the housing crisis.
This year’s election is sure to see housing as a new and stark dividing line between the parties
The electoral logic is clear. The cost-of-living crisis, combined with surging rents and house prices, has pushed housing towards the top of the electoral agenda. Now, a swathe of swing seats are showing more support than opposition for development, and Labour seem to be the party paying attention to this trend.
In his latest announcement, Starmer has promised what amounts to a strategic review of the green belt. This means that rather than entirely opening up green spaces for development, the government will root out so-called ‘grey belt’ land. This is usually derelict or scrubland which sits geographically within the green belt but is generally unattractive and suitable for building. It is a policy which many Tories have backed but it has failed to find favour with the broader party.
It’s a smart move from Starmer. This approach entrenches Labour support in Yimby demographics, without scaring the wider electorate. It gives local candidates some leeway to lobby for the protection of the green spaces that matter in their patch, with the hard decisions of what might be built where left until after the election. On a policy level, it is unclear how much it will help ungum the supply of homes.
Releasing land from the green belt will make some development easier, but houses will still have to be planned and built. Local objections are likely to remain, and without a major change to the planning system, this will still mean costs and delays for developers. Labour is still tinkering within the current system, rather than attempting the sort of big change like introducing a zoning system that has helped increase supply significantly in New Zealand and some US cities.
Plus, the supply of land is only one barrier to building more houses. The industry is used to the current constraints on building rates. Scaling up will be a big operational challenge, compounded by inflation and other global factors. Shortfalls in materials have hampered supply and driven up prices in recent years. The Federation of Master Builders reports some construction firms waiting over a year for new bricks.
Similar issues plague the labour market. The industry reports tens of thousands of vacancies across all the major housebuilding trades. This has an obvious impact on both supply and costs. If Labour is going to create a housebuilding surge new planning rules will only do so much. It’s hard to build houses when you lack both bricks and the people to lay them. With the country having missed housing targets for years, it takes more than announcing a big housing target to move the dial.
This year’s election is sure to see housing as a new and stark dividing line between the parties. Labour has obvious incentives to court younger, less well-off voters with promises of reform. The Tories, on the other hand, seem to be focusing on their base of older, securely housed voters. Shifting public opinion shows that the former might be a more successful approach, particularly in the suburban swing seats that routinely decide general elections. The intensity of the housing crisis, combined with demographic change, is pushing the country towards being more pro-building than ever before.
Continued success, however, depends on actually solving the issue. In government, Starmer will find himself assailed by noisy Nimby forces. The very essence of Nimbyism is supporting development in theory, but opposing it when it comes to your constituency. At the same time, many who are looking for Labour to solve the housing crisis will be disappointed if these measures fail to significantly increase housing supply. The promise of 1.5 million new homes in the next parliament is similar to previous missed promises. Hitting it will require systematic change.
Overall, Starmer’s approach to housing is similar to his broader offering – politically astute, but lacking in detail and determination. Some of this may be fleshed out closer to the election or in government. With polls as they are, this will likely be enough to satisfy the electorate. Actually fixing the housing crisis though is a very different matter.
Will Keir Starmer be the Yimby prime minister?
7
5
03.04.2024
Keir Starmer seems intent on exploiting the rising divide between Nimbies and Yimbies as we move towards the general election. With polling showing many of Labour’s target seats are in the most pro-development parts of the country, the party is looking to reject the orthodoxy that blocking housing wins more votes than it loses. Instead, Labour is embracing those who see increased supply as the only way to ease the housing crisis.
This year’s election is sure to see housing as a new and stark dividing line between the parties
The electoral logic is clear. The cost-of-living crisis, combined with surging rents and house prices, has pushed housing towards the top of the electoral agenda. Now, a swathe of swing seats are showing more support than opposition for development, and Labour seem to be the party paying attention to this trend.
In his latest announcement, Starmer has promised what amounts to a strategic review of the green belt. This means that rather than entirely opening up green spaces for development, the government will root out so-called ‘grey belt’ land. This is usually derelict or scrubland which sits geographically within........
© The Spectator
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
