Theresa May’s NPPF speech was expertly trailed by her advisers last weekend. So much so that Monday’s shake-up surprised no one. It left commentators to focus on what was perhaps an ill-advised background framing the PM: bricks, bricks and more bricks. Designed to signal that May meant business in getting Britain building, it gave the unintended impression that she was stuck in a chimney.
There was the expected developer bashing, with talk of planning policy that allows them to “game the system”. There was sense: allowances for some authorities to “build more council homes for local people”, reference to modern construction methods, celebration of Homes England’s “more muscular, proactive” role and an admission that “expecting the existing developers to build all the homes we need is pie in the sky”.
Loosening her grip
Yes, she briefly loosened her grip on accepted economic wisdom: “Bonuses paid to the heads of some of our biggest developers are based not on the number of homes they build but on their profits or share price… that creates a perverse incentive.” But there was nuance too: “I’d rather see an ugly, disused power station demolished and replaced with attractive housing than a wood or open field concreted over – even if the former is in the green belt and the latter is not.”
And there was commonality – between the government, industry and even the Labour Party. The spectre of rent controls is much feared. Rent transparency and security that offers longer tenancies and clarity on rent rises is something that tenants, landlords and politicians of all parties now seem willing to support.
More than that, there was the firmest endorsement yet for the build-to-rent sector. Already there are 105,000 BTR units in the UK complete, under construction or in planning – a fivefold increase in the pipeline since 2013, says Savills. Monday’s commitments will support that number’s growth.
Yet, just as the PM said that “families can’t live in a planning permission”, a problem as large as the housing crisis won’t be solved by a speech alone.
Simmering row
The scale of the challenge was evidenced in a simmering row in south-east London that exploded on to the back pages this week, as Meadow Residential and the football club whose ground it owns, Dulwich Hamlet, went to war.
In short, Meadow bought the ground, Champion Hill, out of administration in 2014, granting the club a licence to play there. It sought to replace the ground with housing and develop a new stadium. Southwark council refused permission, saying that insufficient affordable housing was promised.
Just before Christmas, footballer Rio Ferdinand submitted a £10m bid for the club, promising to develop sports facilities and affordable housing on the site through his Legacy vehicle. London mayor Sadiq Kahn and Southwark leader Peter John have urged Meadow to sell.
It’s a mess – and a stand-off that requires the council or Meadow to change tack. Meanwhile, Legacy waits. It may offer the only solution. For Meadow, if £10m isn’t enough, what is?
■ There’s collaboration, not conflict, elsewhere this week. The Department for International Trade’s stand at MIPIM boasts a packed events programme – put together by the BPF. It’s a highly visible recognition by government of real estate’s importance to UK plc post-Brexit. And it’s a vote of confidence in the industry too, trusting its trade body to curate the agenda.
Damian Wild is editor of EG
