London has been given almost 100 times more housing zone funding than the rest of England combined, but has only built twice as many houses, new research has revealed.
Calling for housebuilding investment to be more fairly distributed across the country, the Housing and Finance Institute thinktank concludes that it is a “cultural myth” that the greatest need for homes is in the biggest cities.
The organisation cited figures that show nearly 80,000 more people are on housing waiting lists in regional local councils than in the capital and metropolitan areas combined.
The IHF report used housing-zone funding – money awarded to councils by central government to aid development on specific brownfield sites – to support its argument that funding is skewed towards major urban centres.
London has secured £600m of housing-zone funding, which will be used to build 75,000 homes, while £6.3m has been allocated to the rest of England in the same period that will be used to build 34,000 new homes.
The privately funded body was launched by the coalition government in March 2015 to provide advice to local authorities on housebuilding. It argues that the housing crisis should be solved by refocusing government funding efforts on coastal communities, country villages, market towns and the historic cities and counties of England.
“Undoubtedly there is more that can be done in London and other major urban centres to build more homes, but those areas already have huge resources to do more,” the report says.
“The demand for new homes is as great in the regional local areas, the opportunity to turn planning permissions into new homes is greater, and they need a fairer share of funding. They should not be asked to pay over a greater and greater share of their, much smaller, resources.”
The institute argues there has been a longstanding emphasis on funding housebuilding in big cities and metropolitan areas, while they were only responsible for building about 30% of new homes planned and built in 2015/16. Some 70% of homes planned and built over the same time period are in district and unitary councils.
HFI chief executive, Natalie Elphicke, said energetic local councils that were working hard to build houses without the help of comfortable cash flow or big balance sheets should be rewarded. “Too often it has been the noisy major metropolitan cities or the massive housing associations already awash with cash who ask for even more,” she said.
“Yet the beating heart of sustainable housing delivery is in the counties, ordinary towns and districts of England. It’s time to harness the energy across the country in building homes and regenerating communities. The government needs to put more of its housing money where the opportunity to deliver is, and that means right across the country.
“If a council can show it is housing-business-ready, has a good track record and will commit to minimum housing targets, why shouldn’t it get the type of individual deals, powers and money given to the big devolved city authorities.”
When it came to housing delivery, Elphicke said biggest was not always best. “Some of our coastal communities, country villages and market towns, post-industrial heartlands and historic cities and counties of England are absolutely brilliant at making housing delivery happen and are delivering the majority of our new homes.”
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/27/refocus-housebuilding-towns-villages-housing-finance-institute
No comments:
Post a Comment