Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

David Cameron Defends 'starter Homes' That Only The Richest Can Afford

Recommended Posts

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-defends-starter-homes-that-only-the-richest-can-afford-a6693751.html

David Cameron has defended his housing policy after an analysis found that his so-called “starter homes” would only be affordable by Britain’s very highest earners.

An analysis published by the charity Shelter found that homes build under the scheme in London would only be available to the richest four per cent – those on salaries of over £76,957.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said he had received 3,500 emails in the last week asking him to grill the Prime Minister on the unaffordability of housing, especially in the capital.

“Does he really believe that £450,000 is actually an affordable price for a new home for someone on an average income to try and aspire to?” he asked the Prime Minister at Prime Minister’s Questions.

David Cameron replied by arguing that the homes would actually be cheaper than what he called the “upper limit” of house prices in the policy.

“The honourable gentleman quotes the figure of £450,000 because what we’re saying is that should be the upper limit for starter homes in London,” he said.

“We want to see starter homes in London built for £150,000, at £200,000 so people … can stop renting and start buying.”

I wonder how long a starter home in London for £150k would remain at that level for? The only way to keep them affordable would be to link any increases in prices to inflation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the obvious argument is, if only the rich can afford to buy a starter home, how will they climb the pyramid, who will they sell to, what happens when the wife gets pregnant. who the #### thinks this is sustainable.

Edited by TheCountOfNowhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the obvious argument is, if only the rich can afford to buy a starter home, how will they climb the pyramid, who will they sell to, what happens when the wife gets pregnant. who the #### thinks this is sustainable.

Maybe they'll need Help To Upsize, just in time for the 2020 election

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only £1m allocated from £525m Builders' Finance Fund

fund to kick-start construction of houses in England launched in April 2014, aimed to "unlock" hundreds of housing projects stalled by the economic slowdown.

But just two projects have so far benefited from the fund which ends in March 2017. The government said there had been "high levels" of interest from builders and "many" schemes would get funding. When it was launched, the government called it a "key part" of its long-term economic plan.

"Work on nearly 13,000 homes stalled by the 2008 housing crash are set to be restarted thanks to half a billion of government investment," the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) said in September last year when it announced 160 schemes had been shortlisted for funding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reliance on private building will only increase the problems, it's glaringly obvious that the country needs a massive effort to house it's people at a reasonable ratio to incomes, including legislation to take over empty property and a social building housing drive to Parker Morris standards, the simple fact is the UK "economy" is so broken that the pushing of housing debt is the only game in town, that and a vested interest in keeping housing on the verge of unaffordability by members of the political and aristocracy class who benefit financially from the general populations basic need for shelter, this simply has to stop.

The proposed building schemes are just a sticking plaster over the gaping chest wound that has been allowed to fester by successive governments over the years, it really is criminal and downright evil that governments allow this to continue in collusion with the banks.

The alternative is a future where generations of people will never have affordable access to living space and no stake in the society they are raised in, we all know where this will end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The alternative is a future where generations of people will never have affordable access to living space and no stake in the society they are raised in, we all know where this will end.

Er, don't we already have this right now? Home ownership is already at around 1 in 3 for the 25-34 year olds who in theory are supposed to be nesting and raising the next generation. Apparently the Conservative party feels that a 6-12 month AST on a poorly maintained private rental is a good enough nest for 1980s-born parents-to-be. Of course it would be "catastrophic" if house prices were to go back to 1990s levels relative to incomes. As we all remember, the 1990s were a terrible time in which unemployment was 85% and millions of Britons starved to death each year due to average houses being affordable to ordinary people in their 30s.

263B995B00000578-2975356-image-m-5_14252

Edited by Dorkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The proposed building schemes are just a sticking plaster over the gaping chest wound that has been allowed to fester by successive governments over the years, it really is criminal and downright evil that governments allow this to continue in collusion with the banks.

Let me give you my direct experience of the "Right to Build" scheme.

My local council was given £100k of funding to be a vanguard for the right to build scheme.

Over 100 families signed up for the scheme in 2013/4.

So far we've had one meeting where we were told there was likely to be very little building land made available as developers wouldn't sell it, what there would be was to be sold by the developers to us at commercial rates (e.g their profit margin if they built a house on it) and then the project officer resigned and hasn't yet been replaced.

As far as I can see they government came up with a slogan but haven't actually got any meaningful powers to deliver it other than a childish belief that landowners and developers would welcome giving away land at less than full price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me give you my direct experience of the "Right to Build" scheme.

My local council was given £100k of funding to be a vanguard for the right to build scheme.

Over 100 families signed up for the scheme in 2013/4.

So far we've had one meeting where we were told there was likely to be very little building land made available as developers wouldn't sell it, what there would be was to be sold by the developers to us at commercial rates (e.g their profit margin if they built a house on it) and then the project officer resigned and hasn't yet been replaced.

As far as I can see they government came up with a slogan but haven't actually got any meaningful powers to deliver it other than a childish belief that landowners and developers would welcome giving away land at less than full price.

full prices, 5k an acre.

got to laugh.

why can't they just CPO the land?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

full prices, 5k an acre.

got to laugh.

why can't they just CPO the land?

Part of me thinks that is what it would take

But then I refer back to an example locally. A guy gave the council a plot of land - on condition that it was to be used to build affordable houses.

The houses (18 of them in total) did eventually get built, but the shenanigans and debate about it went on for 2 years before anything started.

The issue being the number of people who wanted to get their snouts into the trough.

The housing association that did the build has, as far as I can see, not reflected the gifted land in the rent they are charging: miraculously and due to all sorts of "issues" with the free land that were expensive to remedy, the site cost the same per house to build as it would have done if they had bought the land on the open market....

Utter gammon of course, the site was beautiful for building on and the rents should be at least 33% less as a result of the donor's generosity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“We want to see starter homes in London built for £150,000, at £200,000 so people … can stop renting and start buying.”

If he's serious and he's going to build decent London homes for £150k, how many is he building?

There's an awful lot of pent up demand for housing. Most of under-40s this policy is aimed at have been priced out their entire working lives.

How many under-40s are there in London?

Who do I have to bribe to get my golden housing ticket?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of me thinks that is what it would take

But then I refer back to an example locally. A guy gave the council a plot of land - on condition that it was to be used to build affordable houses.

The houses (18 of them in total) did eventually get built, but the shenanigans and debate about it went on for 2 years before anything started.

The issue being the number of people who wanted to get their snouts into the trough.

The housing association that did the build has, as far as I can see, not reflected the gifted land in the rent they are charging: miraculously and due to all sorts of "issues" with the free land that were expensive to remedy, the site cost the same per house to build as it would have done if they had bought the land on the open market....

Utter gammon of course, the site was beautiful for building on and the rents should be at least 33% less as a result of the donor's generosity.

It's the way of the world we live in. Things will always be priced at what the market will stand, any gifted element will be "absorbed".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   94 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.