Why do governments do this? We all know it’s not going to happen.
ThatHuman6 on
An announcement about an announcement that hadn’t been made yet.
(This is my announcement about this announcement)
IXMCMXCII on
> And she will say that with political turmoil in the France and the US, Britain is now back as one of the most stable places for international investment.
In the France. Yes BBC, in the France. Good England.
Possible-Pin-8280 on
This would be lovely, but endlessly building houses for unsustainable population growth isn’t the answer. I’m worried for the green belt.
ferrel_hadley on
>Ms Reeves is expected to announce some immediate loosening of planning red tape that has held back construction, infrastructure, and the energy grid.
>It will be done in the hope that investors will unleash tens of billions of pounds of investment in green industry and housebuilding.
>Mandatory housebuilding targets are also expected to return.
Chancellor says manifesto to be implemented.
Greenbelt suddenly realises they never read the manifesto.
AcademicIncrease8080 on
So more indefinite urban expansion into England’s already heavily urbanised countryside due to endless population growth. Is this really leftwing?
Boorish_Bear on
The South East is finished. Roads are completely overcrowded, infrastructure is stretched to breaking point, housing estates everywhere, and Labour want to build even more down here on what little there is left.
JimJonesdrinkkoolaid on
I look forward to the countryside being entirely concreted over. We have far too much public land available.
Alert-One-Two on
> She told the BBC on Friday that she was “willing to have a fight” with those who have delayed and rejected housebuilding and infrastructure investment in the planning system.
There’s an area of land in the centre of my town which has planning permission for new homes (this was issued in 2006). The area has been boarded off and there has been some work done but no where near the 200+ homes promised (they built something like 12). The previous government has said they had zero powers to do anything about it. The builder either lost interest or ran out of money but also doesn’t seem to want to sell. So instead we have had to live with a building site in an area that could be a thriving development.
Apparently the key issues are there is no requirement within law for them to finish developing within any particular timescale. And every time a borough council has tried a compulsory buy order the developer has done a tiny bit more to fend it off and prevent it from happening. Fixing things like this where planning already exists and other companies would likely jump at the chance to finish it would be an easy win, surely.
And having fixed timescales would also help with situations like on my development where roads cannot yet be adopted by the council as remedial work is needed by the developers to get them up to code. But the developers have little incentive to actually do the work so they just don’t get fixed and the council has no sticks. We need better contracts with penalties attached if work is not completed without good reason.
MrPloppyHead on
I hope that this aligns with the idea of more evenly geographically distributing the economy. And also you need the infrastructure too. Councils also need to build more council houses to replace all their stock.
rwinh on
Hopefully it’s not just to make it easier to build homes. Other Regulations need to change so that houses must come with either eco features as standard such as solar panels, rain water collection or heat pumps in them (at least 1 but ideally 2 like in some countries), and also wider garages seeing as home builders with their new builds still seem to think everyone drives around with an old Vauxhall Nova in the garage with room to spare.
If they’re just going to make it easier to build the current low standard houses then not much is going to change with the housing stock. It’ll just be a lot more of an underwhelming thing.
PlasticDouble9354 on
The issue with this country isn’t the overcrowding, it’s the inefficiency with public transport/infrastructure that is the issue.
There’s plenty of room for more houses, but we need everything else that comes with this
circle1987 on
Let’s be honest. We are all really fucking hoping Starmer is able to inflict positive change. Like, it will never be easier for any future government to make such a massive impact on Britain’s society. All they have to do is pick one major topic; NHS, Social Care, Energy, Cost of living, Pensions, Benefits, Housing, Corporate tax evasion, drugs, Care Homes. Fucking, anything, and just change it so it benefits society.
Lots of people say nothing will change but we must have hoped that Starmer and Co. are genuine and can actually change things.
Bonodog1960 on
Need to update the national grid first these politicians are clueless
Dragon_Sluts on
Please make dense housing in urban centres and follow it up with making walking/cycling/public transport a realistic option for those people in particular.
• Uses brownfield
• Helps businesses in city centres
• Makes city centres feel alive
• Prevents people needing to also pay for a car
• Lessens negative impacts of new houses, namely congestion
• Makes cities other than London more attractive
Countries like the Netherlands and Germany do this successfully, we have done this a bit but turn the dial to 10 please.
dandotcom on
Oh sweet, its been far too long before the government did a social housing program. Right? This is going to benefit social housing and not the private sector?
Right?
Flying_Wilson17 on
Can we fish the flats that have been built with flammable cladding 1st please.
Trapped in a fire hazard!
Appropriate-Divide64 on
Targets mean nothing without a plan. Hope they have one.
Conveth on
So long as the homes are decent sized and dual aspect.
And please convince bus companies up their game on connectivity
infpmmxix on
Sounds like progress to me. If we want to keep growing the population, we need the infrastructure to support it. Goooo Rachel!
Obvious_Initiative40 on
Forget housebuilding targets, councils need to be forced to build social housing on all the land they’ve been banking for decades
Haulvern on
14000 homes…. fantastic. Enough to house a single week’s immigration.
22 Comments
Why do governments do this? We all know it’s not going to happen.
An announcement about an announcement that hadn’t been made yet.
(This is my announcement about this announcement)
> And she will say that with political turmoil in the France and the US, Britain is now back as one of the most stable places for international investment.
In the France. Yes BBC, in the France. Good England.
This would be lovely, but endlessly building houses for unsustainable population growth isn’t the answer. I’m worried for the green belt.
>Ms Reeves is expected to announce some immediate loosening of planning red tape that has held back construction, infrastructure, and the energy grid.
>It will be done in the hope that investors will unleash tens of billions of pounds of investment in green industry and housebuilding.
>Mandatory housebuilding targets are also expected to return.
Chancellor says manifesto to be implemented.
Greenbelt suddenly realises they never read the manifesto.
So more indefinite urban expansion into England’s already heavily urbanised countryside due to endless population growth. Is this really leftwing?
The South East is finished. Roads are completely overcrowded, infrastructure is stretched to breaking point, housing estates everywhere, and Labour want to build even more down here on what little there is left.
I look forward to the countryside being entirely concreted over. We have far too much public land available.
> She told the BBC on Friday that she was “willing to have a fight” with those who have delayed and rejected housebuilding and infrastructure investment in the planning system.
There’s an area of land in the centre of my town which has planning permission for new homes (this was issued in 2006). The area has been boarded off and there has been some work done but no where near the 200+ homes promised (they built something like 12). The previous government has said they had zero powers to do anything about it. The builder either lost interest or ran out of money but also doesn’t seem to want to sell. So instead we have had to live with a building site in an area that could be a thriving development.
Apparently the key issues are there is no requirement within law for them to finish developing within any particular timescale. And every time a borough council has tried a compulsory buy order the developer has done a tiny bit more to fend it off and prevent it from happening. Fixing things like this where planning already exists and other companies would likely jump at the chance to finish it would be an easy win, surely.
And having fixed timescales would also help with situations like on my development where roads cannot yet be adopted by the council as remedial work is needed by the developers to get them up to code. But the developers have little incentive to actually do the work so they just don’t get fixed and the council has no sticks. We need better contracts with penalties attached if work is not completed without good reason.
I hope that this aligns with the idea of more evenly geographically distributing the economy. And also you need the infrastructure too. Councils also need to build more council houses to replace all their stock.
Hopefully it’s not just to make it easier to build homes. Other Regulations need to change so that houses must come with either eco features as standard such as solar panels, rain water collection or heat pumps in them (at least 1 but ideally 2 like in some countries), and also wider garages seeing as home builders with their new builds still seem to think everyone drives around with an old Vauxhall Nova in the garage with room to spare.
If they’re just going to make it easier to build the current low standard houses then not much is going to change with the housing stock. It’ll just be a lot more of an underwhelming thing.
The issue with this country isn’t the overcrowding, it’s the inefficiency with public transport/infrastructure that is the issue.
There’s plenty of room for more houses, but we need everything else that comes with this
Let’s be honest. We are all really fucking hoping Starmer is able to inflict positive change. Like, it will never be easier for any future government to make such a massive impact on Britain’s society. All they have to do is pick one major topic; NHS, Social Care, Energy, Cost of living, Pensions, Benefits, Housing, Corporate tax evasion, drugs, Care Homes. Fucking, anything, and just change it so it benefits society.
Lots of people say nothing will change but we must have hoped that Starmer and Co. are genuine and can actually change things.
Need to update the national grid first these politicians are clueless
Please make dense housing in urban centres and follow it up with making walking/cycling/public transport a realistic option for those people in particular.
• Uses brownfield
• Helps businesses in city centres
• Makes city centres feel alive
• Prevents people needing to also pay for a car
• Lessens negative impacts of new houses, namely congestion
• Makes cities other than London more attractive
Countries like the Netherlands and Germany do this successfully, we have done this a bit but turn the dial to 10 please.
Oh sweet, its been far too long before the government did a social housing program. Right? This is going to benefit social housing and not the private sector?
Right?
Can we fish the flats that have been built with flammable cladding 1st please.
Trapped in a fire hazard!
Targets mean nothing without a plan. Hope they have one.
So long as the homes are decent sized and dual aspect.
And please convince bus companies up their game on connectivity
Sounds like progress to me. If we want to keep growing the population, we need the infrastructure to support it. Goooo Rachel!
Forget housebuilding targets, councils need to be forced to build social housing on all the land they’ve been banking for decades
14000 homes…. fantastic. Enough to house a single week’s immigration.