Ukip Housing Policy

[camem']

UKIP are the only party apart from the greens to state we should build *less* housing than we are now by not using any greenfield sites. Our county council just got a load of ukip members who, if they follow their manifesto, will start blocking the larger developments going through increasing housing costs for everyone in the county. They also support very localised decisions on planning (ie asking the people who have housing rather than the ones that would use new housing, which results in no new housing, a tragedy of the commons)

Anyone want to defend ukip's policy or have a rosier view of it ?

Edited May 4, 2013 by camem'

[inflating]

UKIP are the only party apart from the greens to state we should build *less* housing than we are now by not using any greenfield sites. Our county council just got a load of ukip members who, if they follow their manifesto, will start blocking the larger developments going through increasing housing costs for everyone in the county. They also support very localised decisions on planning (ie asking the people who have housing rather than the ones that would use new housing, which results in no new housing, i.e the tragedy of the common homeowner)

Anyone want to defend ukip's policy or have a rosier view of it ?

We're stuffed whoever we vote for, right?

[The Masked Tulip]

UKIP is what was once the anti EU part of the Tory party - or is certainly attractive to them. Their demographic is probably mainly baby boomer retirees.

[SarahBell]

Are they against building on brownfield sites?

Brownfield first should be a policy.

[winkie]

Are they against building on brownfield sites?

Brownfield first should be a policy.

All gardens then.

[gf3]

UKIP are the only party apart from the greens to state we should build *less* housing than we are now by not using any greenfield sites. Our county council just got a load of ukip members who, if they follow their manifesto, will start blocking the larger developments going through increasing housing costs for everyone in the county. They also support very localised decisions on planning (ie asking the people who have housing rather than the ones that would use new housing, which results in no new housing, the tragedy of the common homeowner)

Anyone want to defend ukip's policy or have a rosier view of it ?

Have you got a link to this?

I thought they had a policy to build more social housing to reduce HB.

If my memory serves me right there was a thread on here about a month ago. I will see if I can find it.

Found it http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=188988&st=0&p=909289022&hl=ukip&fromsearch=1entry909289022

Edited May 4, 2013 by gf3

[Bruce Banner]

We're stuffed whoever we vote for, right?

The promise of house prices rising forever is a vote winner and all parties need votes for their career politicians to further their careers.

[StuG III]

Well if we arent importing several hundred thousand new people every year, the need to build several hundred thousand new houses every year goes with it.

[camem']

Are they against building on brownfield sites?

Brownfield first should be a policy.

no probs with that, but to fix housing you want to build on 11% of the land rather than 9%. this needs some greenfield. ukip can't be a fan of all those actual fields anyway if they want to lose the eu cap subsidies, so there are some spare...

Edited May 4, 2013 by camem'

[silver surfer]

This is the high water mark for UKIP, from here on they'll start to crumble away.

1. It was a protest vote

2. Cameron will come up with some weasel words that'll appear to offer an EU referendum

3. The media will stop giving UKIP a free pass and will start to scrutinise their policies

4. UKIP elected members will become embroiled in damaging scandals that will expose their fruitcake nature

UKIP aren't the Canadian Reform party, they're not even the SDP, they're a flash in the pan that will be history after the next election.

[deflation]

Maybe, as you say, AFTER the next election.

In the meantime, it completely stuffs the chances of a majority govt for the Tories in 2015. And although they won't admit it, Labour couldn't get a majority at the moment.

[pjw]

UKIP are the only party apart from the greens to state we should build *less* housing than we are now by not using any greenfield sites. Our county council just got a load of ukip members who, if they follow their manifesto, will start blocking the larger developments going through increasing housing costs for everyone in the county. They also support very localised decisions on planning (ie asking the people who have housing rather than the ones that would use new housing, which results in no new housing, the tragedy of the common homeowner)

Anyone want to defend ukip's policy or have a rosier view of it ?

Yes, their policy is for a five-year moratorium on immigration, which would reduce the need for housing.

[dances with sheeple]

UKIP are the only party apart from the greens to state we should build *less* housing than we are now by not using any greenfield sites. Our county council just got a load of ukip members who, if they follow their manifesto, will start blocking the larger developments going through increasing housing costs for everyone in the county. They also support very localised decisions on planning (ie asking the people who have housing rather than the ones that would use new housing, which results in no new housing, the tragedy of the common homeowner)

Anyone want to defend ukip's policy or have a rosier view of it ?

Thet know property prices are driven by credit, they want less immigration, they know too many have BTL and second homes, so why ruin the countryside for houses that won`t be needed when the inevitable economic meltdown comes to the UK and is compounded by the unravelling mess in Europe? I think the meme that there is a desperate shortage of housing has run it`s course, outside central London it doesn`t stack up?

[dances with sheeple]

This is the high water mark for UKIP, from here on they'll start to crumble away.

1. It was a protest vote

2. Cameron will come up with some weasel words that'll appear to offer an EU referendum

3. The media will stop giving UKIP a free pass and will start to scrutinise their policies

4. UKIP elected members will become embroiled in damaging scandals that will expose their fruitcake nature

UKIP aren't the Canadian Reform party, they're not even the SDP, they're a flash in the pan that will be history after the next election.

Not sure about this, the Farage bloke, although "posh" seems to chime with the common punter, there was a shot of him on Sky yesterday talking to a group of people and a cabbie passing by shouting encouragement with a thumbs up, bet that doesn`t happen to Clegg, Cameron or the other bloke much? Also the shot of him lighting a fag and striding away to celebrate makes him look normal, can you imagine Milliband with a fag and a pint talking like a normal human being? No? Neither can I, he is just a coached political drone, as are the other "leaders", and it looks like the sheeple have had enough.

[SarahBell]

no probs with that, but to fix housing you want to build on 11% of the land rather than 9%. this needs some greenfield. ukip can't be a fan of all those actual fields anyway if they want to lose the eu cap subsidies, so there are some spare...

Well once all the available brownfield has either been built on - or turned into amenity land for the additional residents to enjoy then move on to greenfield.

I do think there should be quotas for greenspace with new builds - so that they either have bigger gardens, plus parks and allotment spaces.

[EUBanana]

UKIP are the only party apart from the greens to state we should build *less* housing than we are now by not using any greenfield sites. Our county council just got a load of ukip members who, if they follow their manifesto, will start blocking the larger developments going through increasing housing costs for everyone in the county. They also support very localised decisions on planning (ie asking the people who have housing rather than the ones that would use new housing, which results in no new housing, the tragedy of the common homeowner)

Anyone want to defend ukip's policy or have a rosier view of it ?

I was voting ukip ten years ago before it became hip. And this is the first time I've not, for that very reason.

Libertarian my ****.

[billybong]

The thing about the United Kingdom *Independence Party is they have a name that everyone knows what it means. For a lot it must be a vote in proxy for the oft promised and reneged on eu referendum.

Conservative - these days the name can mean anything.

Labour - ditto

LibDem - especially ditto

etc

* no - not a city W Missouri E of Kansas City pop 113,288

Edited May 4, 2013 by billybong

[goldbug9999]

Id be quite happy to have a zero immigration + zero house building policy. Of course it would depend on immigration being genuinely zero i.e. without the current back doors which allow corporations to cycle indians through the country to take hundreds of thousands of medium and high skilled jobs.

[crashmonitor]

UKIP are the only party apart from the greens to state we should build *less* housing than we are now by not using any greenfield sites. Our county council just got a load of ukip members who, if they follow their manifesto, will start blocking the larger developments going through increasing housing costs for everyone in the county. They also support very localised decisions on planning (ie asking the people who have housing rather than the ones that would use new housing, which results in no new housing, the tragedy of the common homeowner)

Anyone want to defend ukip's policy or have a rosier view of it ?

I am not a UKIP supporter, but what makes the UK housing market comparatively expensive is space........or as UKIP would say it is space not race.

The main parties are very short termist as far as immigration policy is concerned and short term boosts to tax take are over-ridden by long term over-crowding and high house prices. The short term tax boost is equally lost by the years these immigrants will be dependent in their retirement and the social needs of the second generation. Thirty years working on low wages and then thirty years in retirment is never going to add up for the exchequer once the whole life sums stack up for these immigrants.

Edit. the only people immigration helps are those needing fresh ponzi layers ie. final salary public sector workers and those with property empires. In other words MPs.

Edited May 4, 2013 by crashmonitor

[DabHand]

Well if we arent importing several hundred thousand new people every year, the need to build several hundred thousand new houses every year goes with it.

Yeah l wonder how people would feel if it were food. We have allowed the population to go up but you're just going to have to fight over the same amount of food. Its ok though we'll make sure you can borrow real cheap to bid for it.

[(Blizzard)]

I am not a UKIP supporter, but what makes the UK housing market comparatively expensive is space........or as UKIP would say it is space not race.

The main parties are very short termist as far as immigration policy is concerned and short term boosts to tax take are over-ridden by long term over-crowding and high house prices. The short term tax boost is equally lost by the years these immigrants will be dependent in their retirement and the social needs of the second generation. Thirty years working on low wages and then thirty years in retirment is never going to add up for the exchequer once the whole life sums stack up for these immigrants.

Edit. the only people immigration helps are those needing fresh ponzi layers ie. final salary public sector workers and those with property empires. In other words MPs.

There is loads of space, the idea that Britain is somehow 'full' is a fiction, made up by people who want to keep up the value of their house, and people who are unjustifiably opposed to immigration.

The difference between brownfield and greenfield is also a made up nonsense. A childish debating tactic to try and justify not building on empty land.

Much of what passes for the countryside in the south east, much of the south as well really, is just wasteland or industrial farm land.

[StuG III]

Yeah l wonder how people would feel if it were food. We have allowed the population to go up but you're just going to have to fight over the same amount of food. Its ok though we'll make sure you can borrow real cheap to bid for it.

Its beginning to hit home with school places.

Sure, flooding the market with cheap labour is good for GDP but people forget about the extra infrastructure spending thats required.

[StuG III]

There is loads of space, the idea that Britain is somehow 'full' is a fiction, made up by people who want to keep up the value of their house, and people who are unjustifiably opposed to immigration.

The difference between brownfield and greenfield is also a made up nonsense. A childish debating tactic to try and justify not building on empty land.

Much of what passes for the countryside in the south east, much of the south as well really, is just wasteland or industrial farm land.

Britain is quite densely populated. England is actually very densely populated.

Care to explain how the south east if "wasteland or industrial farm land"? Seems to be farms and woodlands to me, looking out the window.

[(Blizzard)]

Britain is quite densely populated. England is actually very densely populated.

Care to explain how the south east if "wasteland or industrial farm land"? Seems to be farms and woodlands to me, looking out the window.

Vast areas of the South East are empty, and of no aesthetic, historical, or environmental value.

I'm not sure what evidence you need. Go and look.

There are some small areas that aren't like this, obviously, but they are rare.

Edited May 4, 2013 by (Blizzard)

[juvenal]

Will UKIP be forced to modify some current policies if they wish to expand their 'base'? Farage must know that younger people are the future, and over 60's voters won't alone make UKIP a serious rival to the big two parties.