Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Milton

Coalitions Record On Ftb'ers

Recommended Posts

The paragraph below is Grant Shapps, the Housing Ministers Policy:

What the Government will achieve
  • Increase the number of houses available to buy and rent

For many years, too few homes have been built in this country. This has led to unsustainable price increases **which means people are locked out of the housing market by unaffordable prices, unattainable mortgages and high rents.

*The New Homes Bonus will mean that communities will see the benefit of welcoming new homes.

We will return decision-making powers on housing and planning to local communities.

Together with existing contractual commitments, bringing empty homes back into use and the new delivery model Affordable Rent *up to 150,000 new affordable homes will be built over the next four years.

**This will help create a market that sees a steady but slow rise in house prices and which is freed from the unnecessary cost and inconvenience of Home Information Packs that have been abolished.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can anyone explain these Ambiguous statements? How does a rise in House Prices help FTB'ers?

.............. **people are locked out of the housing market by unaffordable prices...............

This will help create a market that sees a steady but slow rise in house prices

Building More Homes:

*The New Homes Bonus will mean that communities will see the benefit of welcoming new homes.......up to 150,000 new affordable homes will be built over the next four years.

Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors Response to New Homes Bonus Scheme:

Simon Rubinson, RICS chief economist:

"The Government's own impact assessment suggests that the new homes bonus is only likely to deliver an additional 14,000 homes each year for the next ten years. This represents a drop in the ocean when the population is growing by roughly 220,000 households per year."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Government Calls Crisis Meeting for FTB'ers

Yet Grant Shapps private office told us they had no space to include any first-time buyers in the room.

Is it odd that first-time buyers aren't represented at a summit held in their name? Not really. That would upset the ill conceived status quo of inflated prices and vested interests. .

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the Conference, Vested Interests Bodies, like the Chartered Institute of Housing and the Home Builders Federation asked the minister to work with lenders to increase the availability of loans for shared ownership and shared equity homes.

[The Labour government also Marketed Shared Ownership as The Homebuy Direct Scheme.]

In 2009 Grant Shapps said of Labours Homebuy direct scheme:

"The government is making announcements that mean nothing. No-one has taken up the HomeBuy Direct scheme and yet it is pumping more taxpayer money into it."

"not a single sale had been made" since the scheme's inception. Shapps Said

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PricedOut, expressed deep disappointment at the announced measures on Capital Gains Tax.

"Raising Capital Gains Tax to the same level as income tax was the litmus test as to whether the government was committed to tax changes that spread the pain of deficit reduction fairly ............. It's hard not to think that the government has bottled it."

"The government has fallen down on fairness at the first hurdle."

"How is it fair to maintain tax breaks to property speculators who add nothing to UK economic growth, who have made us more vulnerable to the effects of the credit crunch and who are, overwhelmingly, wealthy?"

Raising CGT to the same level as income tax was important in helping to dampen speculative investment into the UK housing market.

It is also important in rebalancing the tax burden towards a fairer distribution between income and other forms of income.

"Hard working families and wage earners are being asked to pay more in tax than those who benefit from windfall gains from taking a punt in the housing market."

"More dangerously, it keeps in place the incentives for people to continue to take risky gambles in the housing market – doing little to address a key source of instability to the British economy".

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Coalition have had ten months in office now.

An Unimpressive start?

Edited by Dan1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple, they have attempted (failed both through the banks being edgy and FTB's no longer being that gullible) to put in place measures that allow FTB's to secure lending at rediculous multiples so that the Ponzi may continue and all thier banker friends can get big fat bonuses and when they lose the next GE they can get consultancies with said baker friends.

Fek um, keep your money out of the system and in real assets, let some other sucker get involved

Edit:was going to edit for the typo, but they do bake the books so thought I'd leave it

Edited by zebbedee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
**This will help create a market that sees a steady but slow rise in house prices and which is freed from the unnecessary cost and inconvenience of Home Information Packs that have been abolished
.

Schnapps wants a "slow rise" in house prices?

That seems to be the bottom line.

Same old same old. The man is a fool among fools.

Edited by Realistbear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The optimist in me thinks that saying that he wants a 'slow rise at rates lower than general inflation' is the closest he can get to saying that price falls are a good thing without being shouted down by the Tory right and the Daily Hex-press/Daily Hate.

I think he's a bit out of his depth, and he's learning the hard the way that he's in a very politically-charged role, with loads of lobbying interests, but without the kudos of one of the big 'offices of state'. This pretty much means he's not given much support in terms of PR resourcing, and the treasury don't really back him up when he makes statements which banks and the property industry find unappealing.

Edited by WageslaveX14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had high hopes for what I hoped was a collection of "New Whiggs".

Alas, they have turned out to be just another bunch of old pigs.

Here come the slops lads! Snouts at the ready!

commonsreturns.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had high hopes for what I hoped was a collection of "New Whiggs".

Alas, they have turned out to be just another bunch of old pigs.

Here come the slops lads! Snouts at the ready!

commonsreturns.jpg

You may be right Timm, but I am not sure about that yet. I think... well, actually I know that the UK economic situation was really horrible when they took power. When the new government say that we were on the brink, with Greece and Ireland, I am almost sure they are telling the truth. We had many reliable reports that near the election the only thing preventing a Gilts crisis was the prospect of a Conservative victory. And also reliable reports that s few weeks before the election Treasury officials (civil servants) informed the 3 competing parties about the seriousness of the crisis. And we are not safe yet. the new government main priority has been like "FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT ROCK THIS FECKING BOAT!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may be right Timm, but I am not sure about that yet. I think... well, actually I know that the UK economic situation was really horrible when they took power. When the new government say that we were on the brink, with Greece and Ireland, I am almost sure they are telling the truth. We had many reliable reports that near the election the only thing preventing a Gilts crisis was the prospect of a Conservative victory. And also reliable reports that s few weeks before the election Treasury officials (civil servants) informed the 3 competing parties about the seriousness of the crisis. And we are not safe yet. the new government main priority has been like "FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT ROCK THIS FECKING BOAT!"

I suppose you are probably right.

To be honest, if they had come in slashing hard, I might well have been one of the ones to lose out.

But I'd still like to see some more serious rebalancing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may be right Timm, but I am not sure about that yet. I think... well, actually I know that the UK economic situation was really horrible when they took power. When the new government say that we were on the brink, with Greece and Ireland, I am almost sure they are telling the truth. We had many reliable reports that near the election the only thing preventing a Gilts crisis was the prospect of a Conservative victory. And also reliable reports that s few weeks before the election Treasury officials (civil servants) informed the 3 competing parties about the seriousness of the crisis. And we are not safe yet. the new government main priority has been like "FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT ROCK THIS FECKING BOAT!"

What is your source for the story that the Civil Servants warned the politicians about a gilts crisis?

And if the warning was taken seriously, why havent the Tories done anything other than increase taxes, guaranteeing a reduction in tax collection thanks to Laffer logic, and promise increasing benefits to those on the take?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is your source for the story that the Civil Servants warned the politicians about a gilts crisis?

And if the warning was taken seriously, why havent the Tories done anything other than increase taxes, guaranteeing a reduction in tax collection thanks to Laffer logic, and promise increasing benefits to those on the take?

News, a few months after the election. This was not a secret. All 3 main parties were briefed by officials about the perilous situation back then. I don't remember the sources now, but I am sure you can Google about that. It is common knowledge, I think / or I thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose you are probably right.

To be honest, if they had come in slashing hard, I might well have been one of the ones to lose out.

But I'd still like to see some more serious rebalancing.

I know! I am "Tired of Waiting" too! :( I do understand your feelings, as I feel exactly the same. But unfortunately I think the gov. is right in trying to "land this sucker" as gently as possible, avoiding a full blown crash - and I don't mean just house prices, you know. I mean a huge recession, with huge unemployment, sterling going down hard, huge unemployment in the public sector, and in "bubble sectors" (most non essential products and services) , and then a fast grow of the (small now) export sector, OK, but it will take many years for this sector to grow enough absorb all the unemployed from the other sectors - and many individual people won't be able to "transfer" to the new sector, etc. :( It is a ... cr@p.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The less they do for FTB's the better. I want them to do NOTHING.

I would go a bit further, I want them to stop doing something.

Remove SMI. Remove Housing Benefit (we cant afford it anyway). Sell off all council houses. Sell off all Bank Equity and stop insuring bank loans. Stop housing non-UK nationals.

and two things I do want them to do.

Prosecute Liar Loans and other fraud at the banks.

Levy a Land tax that is progressive, based on who owns land or property, not on who lives there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Illuminate me on the specifics of the 'I hope they do nothing argument'

Because my gut is beginning to tell me, that the coalition will do just enough so that they can say, look, we did more in our five years, than Labour did in their 13 years.

But, by 2015, it will still be woefully inadequate for the millions of FTB'ers priced out of housing.

Edited by Dan1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would go a bit further, I want them to stop doing something.

Remove SMI. Remove Housing Benefit (we cant afford it anyway). Sell off all council houses. Sell off all Bank Equity and stop insuring bank loans. Stop housing non-UK nationals.

and two things I do want them to do.

Prosecute Liar Loans and other fraud at the banks.

Levy a Land tax that is progressive, based on who owns land or property, not on who lives there.

Ah the great Warren Buffet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither party wants to see house prices drop on their shift. The thing the conservatives will do is take the pain now with deeper and harder cuts in spending, than the labour government who would have tried to defer it for as long as possible, borrowing more and more.

Osborne seems quite content to see the bank of England sit on it's hands over inflation.

They will try and prop up the market. How successfully they can do that remains to be seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the only things we know for sure are:

Prices have fallen since they've been in.

Assuming they can give the housing market a 'soft landing' credits them with infinitely more competence than they actually have.

You can safely discount anything Shapps says - he's a politician. Most voters don't want prices to fall, therefore he would be a pretty bad politician if he said that's what he wanted to encourage. Instead, watch what he does - if he introduces serious 'stimulus' measures e.g. extend stamp duty holiday, FTB subsidies, forces mortgage lending to FTBs etc - then yes it would be fair to assume he wants the party to continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Building More Homes:

*The New Homes Bonus will mean that communities will see the benefit of welcoming new homes.......up to 150,000 new affordable homes will be built over the next four years.

Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors Response to New Homes Bonus Scheme:

Simon Rubinson, RICS chief economist:

"The Government's own impact assessment suggests that the new homes bonus is only likely to deliver an additional 14,000 homes each year for the next ten years. This represents a drop in the ocean when the population is growing by roughly 220,000 households per year."

Why The discrepancy? Shapps says 150,000 new affordable homes will be built in four years. RICS say only 56000 could be built.

I have to say, the link above, [pasted below], does appear to be NIMBYS and VI's flapping about Shapps policies?

The new homes bonus scheme is already running into trouble, with warnings that it could be illegal and in any case will not deliver enough new housing.

The Campaign to Protect Rural England says that the plans to incentivise councils to build more homes could be unlawful.

Yesterday, housing minister Grant Shapps announced that nearly £1bn will be set aside for the bonus in the next four years, of which £196m will be for the new financial year (2011-2012).

The Government will match the council tax raised from new homes for the first six years, which it says works out at more than £9,000 for each Band D home. The bonus for affordable housing will average almost £11,000 for a Band D affordable home.

The Government calculates that 326 local authorities will receive a share of the £196m for increasing the housing stock by 150,000 homes this year.

But the CPRE has suggested that any planning permission for new housing linked to the new homes bonus would stand a good chance of being overturned in a judicial review.

Neil Sinden, CPRE director of policy, said: “Many councils are currently facing hard financial choices. In these circumstances it will be very tempting to seek to fill shrinking coffers by permitting any development, regardless of its environmental impact.

“But decisions based solely on money, rather than on whether proposed development is appropriate and sustainable, could be hugely damaging. It could also undermine the fundamental principle that planning decisions should be taken in the public interest, taking account of land use consequences.”

Simon Rubinsohn, RICS chief economist, added his own warning: “The Government’s own impact assessment suggests that the new homes bonus is only likely to deliver an additional 14,000 homes each year for the next ten years. This represents a drop in the ocean when the population is growing by roughly 220,000 households per year.”

Meanwhile, figures yesterday revealed the number of house building completions in England fell to a record low last year, down 13% on 2009.

Just 102,570 new homes were completed in 2010 – the lowest number since 1923.

Ian Baker, group managing director for housebuilding at Galliford Try Homes, was scathing. He said: “The Government may believe that the new homes bonus is the panacea to the housing crisis: if only the solution was so simple. While acknowledging today that housebuilding is at an all-time low and will boost jobs and prosperity, the Government fails to take into account the sea-change of opinion that is needed at local community level to accept new homes.

“To dangle a financial carrot in front of communities already reeling from proposals to cut local services, as an incentive to accept new homes is to confuse two very different issues.

“The new homes bonus is not a rubber stamping exercise. Community buy-in is crucial to gaining planning consent, and while housebuilders already invest in this valued process, sensible housing proposals could still be high jacked.

“Mr Shapps says that the new homes bonus will sit alongside the Government’s current national planning policies, yet it is these that are in need of radical change, alongside a promised reduction in regulation that we have yet to see, and concrete plans to encourage lending to homebuyers.

“The question remains: what happens if the Localism Bill fails to deliver new homes in the volume required?”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 276 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.