How do you plug a shortfall of 250,000 homes in the UK’s national housing provision – and who bears responsibility? Ask some of the best commentators in the land and their replies are as varied as the issue is complex. However, frustration has given way to some bold ideas.
Many came to light at an Estates Gazette roundtable session during the London Real Estate Forum on 11 June.
Veteran property developer Sir Stuart Lipton suggested a housing tsar with the “guts” to execute policies for the benefit of housing that no other current figurehead holds.
“Let’s go to the root of it, stop blaming developers and people hoarding land and have a free supply of housing, which means having a housing tsar,” he said.
“This would be someone in charge who treats London and the South East differently from the rest of the country, and has a right over planning.”
Such a person would be empowered by a group of advisers with diverse interests and would be able to override local authorities – but in a “civilised way”, said Lipton.
Lipton’s proposal was examined prudently by the experts and the parameters of a tsar’s powers set out.
As the analysts swapped ideas, from outside at the conference came the hubbub of delegates toasting a new wave of urban development.
Inside the room, there was fervent support for new powers that would free land for more development.
They were concerned that a tsar would wrest authority from local councils.
“Why would you penalise a pro-development borough like Wandsworth, which is doing regeneration in a thoughtful way, by imposing a housing tsar?” asked Andy Algar, head of property services at Wandsworth borough council. “Why not just expand the mayor’s powers in London?”
As the debate continued, large public landowners, such as the NHS and Ministry of Defence, were put in the frame, and some panellists suggested imposing a hard-line “use it or lose it” ultimatum on them.
“There is plenty of land tied up in quangos, arm’s-length organisations and trusts,” said Robert Evans, partner at Argent. “They should be asked why they are holding on to it, and if there is no good reason, then take it.”
The headline question, however, was: “Whose responsibility is housing?”
Central government, powerful yet ineffective, and UK plc, profit-driven and frustrated, have to work together, said our panel of experts.
But there was recognition that, in such a partnership, roles and responsibilities become a point of conflict.
It was suggested that housing zones, which require large-scale assembly of land for development, should be an arena for those responsibilities to be ironed out.
“I think housing zones could be a test-bed for much more radical policies – pro-PRS policies,” said Evans.
“A lot of these sites don’t come forward because no one wants to pay for infrastructure, so a lot of this is about creating a master developer model that can create surface sites, manage phasing and bring in players. There is a role for someone to bring those elements together.”
Talking points
Andy Algar, head of property services, Wandsworth borough council
“If you want something not to happen give it to central government. It is the worst arm of the executive in terms of delivery. It can do great strategy but it can’t deliver anything.”
Sara Bailey, head of residential real estate, Trowers & Hamlins
“Solving the housing problem involves all sectors working together properly and the government incentivising correctly.”
Robert Evans, partner, Argent
“We need to re-energise the registered providers sector to work with us. They are very large organisations with massive balance sheets, they have skills and they are regulated, but they’ve been given mixed signals over the years about what their role is.”
John Gooding, chief executive, Dolphin Living
“We’re going to have to face the reality of capital gains tax on our own homes if we want renting to be seen as a viable alternative.”
Simon Hodson, head of residential land team, JLL
“We end up going to Hong Kong, Singapore and the Middle East to sell flats, but what we’re actually doing is selling sterling in an apartment shape. That has completely displaced Londoners, and that is why PRS is the way forward.”
Darragh Hurley, investment director, Mount Anvil
“We need to set clear targets, punish those who don’t perform and reward the ones that do. That’s a system people will buy into.”
Sir Stuart Lipton, partner, Lipton Rogers
“Have you got a tent? It’s going to be very valuable because soon there will be nowhere else to live. We need to produce more homes.”
Andrew Pratt, senior adviser, UK residential, Patrizia Immobilien
Housebuilders are not interested in PRS because of the discount issue. For us to compete in London with the ‘for sale’ market is very difficult once you start talking those numbers and that is why it is a lot easier to build for the PRS in the regions.”
Henry Pryor, buying agent/commentator
“I still don’t think the industry has made the case for what is described outside of W1 as a housing crisis and I am yet to find a government minister that has uttered the two words together. And I fear it’s going to have to get a lot worse before we get anyone signing up for the role of tsar and something is done.“
Thomas Stevenson, national director, residential, JLL
“The NHS has major landholdings but it doesn’t see it as a way to address housing, it sees it as a receipt. They’ll sell it to the PLC house builder that can give them the biggest receipt, which will then downscale the quality of its product or remove affordable housing to pay for it. The NHS needs to understand that with longevity there are better ways to maximise.”
Listen to a podcast of this debate at www.estatesgazette.libsyn.com
Watch the video www.estatesgazette.com/videos
