John Redwood Wants Your Hpc Solutions

[winkie]

Bleedin hell. They didn't call him "The Vulcan" for nothing.

...is that Mr Bean....?

[SNACR]

That was a cringeworthy performance wasn't it?

That's the problem with Oxbridge graduate career politicians they just don't have the background on the karaoke pub circuit.

[Patfig]

Lending for house pruchase to be limited to 3 times salary. All this lending on "affordability"........ stick it up your arrse.

[jonb]

John Redwood is MP for Wokingham and Conservative Party's Policy Review Group on Economic Competitiveness - and apparently relatively sane, for a politician.

He has just done a blog post about HPC in which he accepts there is a problem and invites ideas for your solutions http://www.johnredwo...able-housing-2/ which I encourage you all to reply on - he does read the comments personally.

I've seen a lot of threads around lately saying "what can we do" - I would say persuading the likes of John of our case is a critical part of that, policies in parties only change slowly by chipping away at them and John will have some influence if he remains in the Torys win and he remains in the economics team. Ken Clarke mentioned the house price bubble on Question Time on thursday too. Perhaps there's a glimmer of hope.

My reply, currently awaiting moderation:

Firstly, I don’t think there is a shortage of housing in this country. If there was, then rents would have increased at broadly the same rate that property prices have increased. They have not. In fact, over the last 12 years or so that I have been renting a house, they haven’t really increased at all, while the price of everything else has about doubled.

So the situation is that there is an increase in demand for people wanting to buy property, but not much of an increase in demand for people wanting to live in them. The main reason I believe is due to Gordon Brown’s mismanagement of pensions. People no longer trust pensions as a way to provide for retirement, so they looked around for something else to invest their money in. They found residential property. Also the credit bubble meant lots more money available to purchase property.

The credit bubble has now been reversed, but the pensions crisis has not, and people have not yet lost faith in the ability of residential property to protect their retirement nest egg. I think they will when interest rates increase, which they inevitably will at some point, and their buy-to-let properties switch from being income generating assets to liabilities.

[Timm]

Thanks for the heads-up. Since this could be the eyes of a future TPTB, I've taken the trouble to post (...)

Me too:

Builder Stuart makes some good points in post one. As a Local Authority planner, perhaps I can add to some of them:

1. “increase supply”

I would add: I’s time to allow building on some greenfield sites in areas of high demand. There is plenty of low grade arable land that also has low amenity value on the edge of settlements. Ameliorate the limited harm this loss creates by increasing access (allotments, and recreation in more attractive areas). Let landowners offer such deals as part of the development process.

2. “review the workings of section 106 agreements ~ these are now routinely used way beyond the scope of the 1990 Act.”

I would add: S106 agreements should bring forward / contribute to the infrastructure that the development needs, not fund separate political projects such as Affordable Housing.

3. “look again at social housing provision”

I would add: Why on earth are we restricting the supply of housing that is affordable to workers, by determinedly increasing the supply of housing that is free to the unproductive? This is not merely moral hazard; it is negative social engineering.

(...)

I remember the odious Mr Redwood last time around.

Horrible, horrible man.

So?

PS. That missing "t" is really bugging me, especially as I proof read it twice.

[Home_To_Roost]

-

Edited April 5, 2010 by Home_To_Roost

[porca misèria]

He has moderated my reply but failed to answer...so my follow up....

Give him time. It hardly seems realistic for him to reply individually to each of over 100 comments. Most sensible IMO would be a followup post dealing collectively with the feedback on this one, but give him time!

[mightytharg]

Well, I just advise anyone thinking that the repulsive Redwood will do anything to reduce social inequality in housing to review his record as part of the last Tory government.

This is a good thing for people wanting a house price crash. Basically Gordon Brown wants to reduce social inequality in housing - this means that your taxes are paying for ludicrous amounts of housing benefits - for example, keeping jobless immigrant families in million-pound London mansions. Since Brown is willing to print limitless amounts of money to pay for the scroungers, it is difficult for house prices to fall to their natural level.

If Redwood increases inequality, this means that the scroungers and parasites would live in lower quality housing than hard-working industrious people. Overall, prices would go down, benefitting almost everyone (except for the BTL mob).

[Lambie]

Give him time. It hardly seems realistic for him to reply individually to each of over 100 comments. Most sensible IMO would be a followup post dealing collectively with the feedback on this one, but give him time!

bump to say he has done another post outlining his solutions. not great but it's a start i suppose :

http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2010/04/06/sorting-out-housing/

[porca misèria]

bump to say he has done another post outlining his solutions. not great but it's a start i suppose :

http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2010/04/06/sorting-out-housing/

Time for another bumper response

You have my positive suggestions on your previous post. So here are some reactions to your suggestions, avoiding those that are well-covered in the mainstream media.

I have to disagree strongly with your point (2) about HIPs. As a prospective buyer, you invest considerable time and effort into every property you view, especially if you’re in a rural area and don’t drive. Take it any further and you’re committing money too. So it’s a huge blow if the vendor turns out to have been a timewaster who isn’t serious about selling. The need for a small up-front investment improves the likelihood that your vendor is serious about selling and your journey isn’t wasted.

On the subject of new development, we need to drop the immensely damaging “low cost” mantra. Contrast Germany since 1945, where they’ve built high quality instead (including high rise), and consequently have far lower actual costs than us, as well as far better quality.

I disagree about credit being too tight, too. Look at income multiples going back to Thatcher’s time, and bear in mind that you can’t support both below-market-value interest rates and the pound. Looser mortgage credit while there’s still a bubble is the fast track to Weimar.

[Lambie]

Time for another bumper response

I do agree, this was my response

I broadly agree with your points except number 2 – I think the HIPS packs are a benefit to buyers, especially first time buyers who may not know what to look for. And it ensures that only sellers who are actually looking to sell are on the market – rather than those looking for a speculative return (which drives up asking prices as they ask for unrealistic levels) However you miss out the only solution that will actually work – forcing banks to mark to market all the housing stock and toxic CDOs and other ridiculous financial weapons of mass destruction they hold on their books at inflated prices allowing them to record record profits and bonuses. That they insist on 25% deposits is ample evidence that they know the game is up.

Allowing the market to function properly is the correct answer. As a Conservative you should be pushing for it! Of course in the minds of politicos the short pain that that this would cause would outweigh the long term benefits and so a gradual deflation of the type you suggest is the most likely outcome.

I am not encouraged I have to say. But I will keep plugging away.

Are there any HPCers in Wokingham? nothing like a well timed constituent letter demanding action, especially at election time.

[D.C.]

His solutions seem designed to continue the problem.

He wants wages to go up and market to stagnate but intends to do this by

Deficit reduction and monetary policies designed to stop further falls in the pound

How exactly do you increase wages while we are already haemorrhaging jobs to Chindia?

credit for mortgages has lurched from being far too easy to being too tight

Fantastic. Not like lax credit rules go us into this mess in the first place, they are of course the solution...

Incentives for local homeowners and their Councils to accept new development – compensation for affected neighrbours, developer contributions for infrastructure and extra Council tax receipts for Councils

And who will pay for this?

His first idea was to slash stamp duty, but now he wants to give money to existing home-owners as 'compensation'. This makes it more expensive to build a house, not less. Developer contributions for infrastructure? Are developers going to start building houses at a loss or hang on, will they pass the expense on...?

Local people need to feel more in control of whether and where new development should go.

Great. That means more power to Boomer Nimby's to stop building that might damage their view.

Try again John, this time with your brain and not your ass.

[jonb]

Give him time. It hardly seems realistic for him to reply individually to each of over 100 comments. Most sensible IMO would be a followup post dealing collectively with the feedback on this one, but give him time!

And here it is

http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2010/04/06/sorting-out-housing/

[geoffk]

And what do you torys think of that......pathetic? mad? lunacy? same same same same as it ever was..

[right_freds_dead]

ALL it would take to end this problem is simple.

BAN buy to let lending, and levy large interest charges on all current buy to let mortgages, but exclude these additions to home owner loans.

all we have to do is go for the parasites. come down hard on the freeloading speculators and flippers. freeing up droves of panic sale property, and with no further buy to let speculators able to jump in, affordability for genuine first time buyers who simply need a home, not an investment will become available and with stable mortgages. not many votes will be lost for promising an end to property speculation in the uk and no one will have much sympathy for speculators who made the wrong greed based call and lost. no one politician promised them a paypout. they all made this choice themselves for profit.

with this banks can lend again safely to get the 'genuine' housing market moving. current owners may hit some negative equity and there will be some pain, but the onset of reckless buy to let lending has almost bankrupted our country. creating the potential for pain as never seen before. ending buy to let speculation is the first step in the real correction. people need homes for both stability and mobility. they need security for family production, schools and associates plus a stress free life. also with more disposable income due to falling first time buyer offers, economic activity will increase to local business. the sole losers will be the speculators.

this would end 80% of our current problems and make the country a fairer more happy little island. opportunities will arise from the increased economic activity, but also this may open up the gates for export of manufacturing as with this scenario our currency and wages can remain low.

will they do this ?

will they fµck.

Edited April 7, 2010 by right_freds_dead

[Prof]

^

Here, here !

[RentingForever]

ALL it would take to end this problem is simple.

BAN buy to let lending, and levy large interest charges on all current buy to let mortgages, but exclude these additions to home owner loans.

all we have to do is go for the parasites. come down hard on the freeloading speculators and flippers. freeing up droves of panic sale property, and with no further buy to let speculators able to jump in, affordability for genuine first time buyers who simply need a home, not an investment will become available and with stable mortgages. not many votes will be lost for promising an end to property speculation in the uk and no one will have much sympathy for speculators who made the wrong greed based call and lost. no one politician promised them a paypout. they all made this choice themselves for profit.

... chucking thousands of renters out onto the streets while the market resets itself. Nice.

[Si1]

And what do you torys think of that......pathetic? mad? lunacy? same same same same as it ever was..

the pro-boomer-generational favouritism is mind boggling from most political angles, gotta agree with you

[Snugglybear]

I was going through this thread again looking for the link to John Redwood's blog, and I've been laughing like a drain ever since. He thinks the answer is "a resumption of real income growth". He doesn't say wages, but that's where most people's incomes derive from.

You've got to hand it to the Vulcan, what a card, eh? What's he going to do? Maybe rock up to the CBI conference and say "Here, you chaps, you know all that squeezing wages in order to maintain competitiveness and maximise profits and shareholder value - well, it's got to stop, you've got to pay your employees more so that they can buy houses."

Oh my aching sides.

[Papa Serf]

Don't mention the welsh, I did but think I got away with it.

No this is what I posted.

John

You have the chance to get ahead of the curve here and speak out about a house price correction, because it will happen, it must happen, why, because the debt bubble that grew over the last 10 years got so big and bloated the whole financial system collapsed and bankrupted itself.

What has really changed? Can we return to this way and keep on inflating this bubble? You decide.

Vince cable seemed to do well against the other parties chancellors.