Why Labour’s 1.5 million new homes target is unachievable

The Government’s plan for 1.5 million homes is doomed.

Governments don’t build houses. Builders do. But no one builds at a loss or for a miserable profit that doesn’t reward risk or effort.

In 1988 there were more than 12,000 small/medium registered builders.

By 2017 less than 3,000 survived because of increased costs, unrealistic demands and over regulation.

Traditional family firms in York were squeezed out when York Council hiked “affordable” targets from 25 per cent to 50 per cent while reducing the threshold from 25 to 15 dwellings; a ludicrous two dwellings in villages.

As predicted by myself and Paul Cordock planning applications dried up and outturn plummeted – despite City of York Council claiming hostel bed spaces and Lawful Use certificates as new homes.

York’s council blamed anyone but its own policies. Particularly the banks; but many builders had cash reserves and didn’t need to borrow.

Read next:

Those that did couldn’t receive funding because financiers would not take risks where “affordable” demands stripped out profits leaving no headroom for contingencies.

There is a reason why many more homes were built in the 60s and 70s and why people could afford to buy them. There wasn’t the excessive regulations and financial burdens that have since been heaped upon house builders.

Today, even big companies are struggling. They pick and choose sites to proceed and are scaling back operations. Apprenticeships are reduced and the skilled workforce declines. Many entrepreneurs have left the industry. Newcomers are rare because the incentive has largely been destroyed.

Those of us with a lifetime’s construction experience know Labour’s housing targets are unachievable.

Matthew Laverack,

Retired architect and housebuilder,

Lord Mayors Walk,

York

What do you think?

Feel strongly about an issue? Write us a letter. Please write no more than 250 words and you must provide your full name, address and mobile number. Send your views by email to: letters@thepress.co.uk

Write a comment

Join the debate and leave a comment in our comments section below this article – we may use your comments for a follow up article.