The election is almost upon us and housing is high on many voters' agendas.
In light of this, the main parties have put serious thought into this emotive subject, proffering some radical plans.
Here we round up the key ideas from the main parties' manifestoes.
The Conservatives never appeared to have been terribly keen on social housing. But Theresa May says her party will build "a new generation of social housing”, stating that private homebuilders will never meet demand without “the active participation of social and municipal housing providers”.
"Municipal housing" is a term long gone the way of the do-do – and one that even Labour has shied away from. But, the Conservatives appear to be abandoning the notion that the free market will one day be able to solve the UK’s housing problems.
Former policies had focussed on helping private housebuilders create more housing stock by freeing up more sites. But the latest policy revamp states the Conservatives want to work with “ambitious, pro-development, local authorities to help them build more social housing”, in what it calls “Council Housing Deals”. They also want councils to pay less money for building sites.
However, delving further into the party manifesto, the policy appears to be not so radical after all. The proposed properties would be “fixed-term social houses” which would be returned to the market after 10 to 15 years.
Critics of long term Conservative housing policy suggest that right to buy has removed hundreds of thousands of social rent properties from state ownership in recent decades, forcing up rents and compelling councils to pay inflated sums to house social tenants. Some detractors argue that the 2017 manifesto does little to change this.
The manifesto does not include any figures as regards how many homes are proposed or how they will be paid for. Before the election was called, the autumn statement set aside £1.4 billion for affordable housing – which would pay for 40,000 new homes.
Labour, too, can be accused of failing to cost their housing plans. However, in terms of numbers of houses, they say they plan to build “at least 100,000 council and housing association homes a year for genuinely affordable rent or sale”.
John Healey, the Shadow Housing Minister, is regarded as an especially knowledgeable figure in the realm of housing. Healey argues that if housing associations and councils could build to their full potential, and if Section 106 contributions were paid in full by developers, Labour’s figures would be achievable. The target would be 50% higher than the coalition’s record number of houses built in 2014/15 – which stands at 67,000.
Labour claims it would also replace the Homes and Communities Agency with a new Department of Housing. It also claims that restrictions on how many homes councils can build would be removed, as would the current ban on long-term tenancies. They state the bedroom tax would be abolished and right to buy would be restricted. They also claim that housing benefit for 18 to 21 year olds would be re-instated and intends to provide 4,000 homes for the homeless.
Labour would keep the Conservatives’ flagship housing policy, Help to Buy, in place for at least another seven years.
Critics of Labour’s housing policies say they do not go far enough and even the Conservatives have stolen a little of their thunder by offering to change the way councils buy land. Under Conservative proposals, councils will be able to buy land at below market value.
The Conservative manifesto also suggests they will engage in land reform, stating, “We will work with private and public sector housebuilders to capture the increase in land value created when they build to reinvest in local infrastructure, essential services and further housing ... making it both easier and more certain that public sector landowners, and communities themselves, benefit from the increase in land value from urban regeneration and development.”
However, some suggest such changes would never get through parliament. Land values are vastly inflated when planning permission is given, so the Conservative proposal to siphon this money away from landowners is unlikely to go down well with its own support base and MPs from all parties, many of whom own land.
In the past, the Liberal Democrats have also aimed to harness increases in land value for the benefit of surrounding communities. But in their 2017 manifesto the Lib Dems do not go into much detail in this area – but do say they are considering land value taxation.
The Lib Dems propose building 300,000 homes a year, supported by a new national Housing and Infrastructure Development Bank. Councils will be allowed to end right to buy, to borrow more for housing development and to discourage second homeownership with a 200% council tax. Developers will also be penalised if they do not build within three years of buying land – discouraging so-called ‘land banking’.
The Lib Dems also propose that renters will own their home after 30 years of tenancy. They will also be given first refusal if the landlord wants to sell up.
The party says it has already instituted the fastest house building program in the UK and will continue this. It also proposes to end the bedroom tax in Scotland.
Proposes building 100,000 new affordable, zero-carbon homes each year. It states it will also end mass council house sales and right to buy at a discounted rate and abolish the bedroom tax. Like the Lib Dems, the Green Party want to trial a Land Value Tax to discourage ‘land banking’. Housing benefit would be re-introduced for under-21s and local authorities would be given the same responsibilities towards single people and couples as they currently have towards families, with the intention of eliminating homelessness.
The party proposes building thousands of Factory Built Modular (FBM) homes in order to tackle the lack of affordable housing. It says these are not to be confused with pre-fab homes of the past. The party claims it will identify long-dormant land so it can be sold for affordable housing and it will make mortgages inheritable. The UKIP manifesto also takes a negative view of housing associations, stating it will review their operation.
Breakdown Cover from 
