Next month, voters will decide if 10 Downing Street has a new tenant. Pollsters uniformly predict that the days of national blanket swings are behind us and, amid declining party activism and rising voter apathy, the smaller parties are looking to make significant headway.
The first-past-the-post electoral system will limit the number of seats that smaller parties can win, even though their ability to attract votes could well shape the eventual outcome of the election. A televised debate with an unprecedented seven party leaders will set the tone for what is to come.
Politics is on a journey of localisation. The results in May are likely to make the traditional swingometer even more redundant, as constituencies return MPs based on local campaigns, candidates and tactical voting.
Planning and development issues are at the heart of some of the more fiercely contested local battles, and a reminder that developers should treat the challenges on every individual project as unique and never generalise.
For better or worse, only two leaders have any real prospect of taking the top job. So there is not too much to fear from UKIP and their local planning referendums or Green plans to abolish economic growth.
The differences between a Cameron or Miliband-led government appear surprisingly small. Housing is high on the agenda for both sides, and there is a clear consensus solution – build more homes. Both parties have their own plans to increase the supply of development land, and while Labour promotes support for SME builders, self-builders are a major emphasis for the Conservatives.
Where the parties diverge is on tenure; Cameron would oversee an extension of right-to-buy, while Miliband would implement a new era of rent controls.
Other property policy areas, such as the National Planning Policy Framework and National Planning Guidance, will remain largely unchanged – Labour would tweak and amend some areas, but planning policy will face a period of relative stability.
The Mansion Tax is thrown around as having a significant impact on the housing sector but will it? Leaving aside the moral argument around levels of taxation, the tax is backed by both Labour and the Liberal Democrats, and will be a relatively small amount – akin to paying council tax twice.
What is clear, with the recent Conservative changes to stamp duty, is that all of the major parties now see those with big houses as an easy target for more revenue.
Infrastructure, as with housing, is important to both main parties – the Conservatives will stick with the National Infrastructure Plan while Labour will set up an Infrastructure Commission – and both promise big commitments and large investments.
The property sector as a whole should take comfort from an election campaign that will see the policies and ambitions of the major parties reliant on the expertise, capital and delivery of the industry. Governments can enable, promote, incentivise and support, but it is the developers and builders who actually deliver the goods.
With limited differences between the individual manifestos, the most significant impact for the property sector comes from the mechanics of the election itself. If the electorate fails to give any single party an overall majority in May, then there could be a period of uncertainty.
Decisions could be delayed because of protracted coalition discussions, minority government votes, a snap referendum on EU membership, or the almost inconceivable scenario of a UK government being propped up by a Scottish Nationalist junior partner.
It is impossible to predict the impact of such uncertainty, or even if the UK will avoid being plunged into a second general election later in the year, but it seems a period of nervousness in the housing market, decision-making and the wider economy could well be the legacy of the 2015 general election.
Phil Briscoe is managing director of Bellenden
