The politics of the UK housing sector

How seriously should a government take the housing issue? Arguably in a free market economy, every government should keep an arm's length watch over the provision of housing. Prices and supply will follow the market. But have we not learned in the past two years that the market needs political help?

There seems a consensus in the UK that the answer to that last question is undoubtedly: Yes. But just how serious is the current Westminster Government at exercising any meaningful intervention in the housing free market?

If you look at the way it has treated housing in terms of ministerial appointments, the answer would be: Not serious at all.

In 12 years of Labour governments since the day Tony Blair walked into Downing Street, there have been no fewer than 10 housing ministers. These have included formerly powerful figures like John Prescott (who was deputy prime minister when he was in charge of housing) and, more recently, political lightweights such as the inexperienced Caroline Flint and the elderly Margaret Beckett.

Those last two were in office as housing minister for just nine months each. Now it is the turn of John Healey who may be in the role for about 12 months at most given that a general election must be held by June 4, 2010 and may well take place earlier.

How much can an individual achieve in a short time? And with their tenure in office so short, on average, can they ever be encouraged to try anything experimental or large scale, because they will be out on their ear before an idea comes to fruition?

More importantly, perhaps, is the fact that most of the people who have been housing ministers have been in that role near the end of their 'top level' political careers.

Hilary Armstrong, Nick Raynsford, John Prescott, Lord Jeff Rooker, Keith Hill, Caroline Flint and Margaret Beckett left the Housing Ministry and disappeared into relative obscurity. Only two of the other housing ministers over the past 12 years – Lord Falconer and Yvette Cooper – left the job and moved to bigger things.

So what are we to make of this?

Is it that the prime minister in question (firstly Blair, more recently Gordon Brown) have put only their second division political colleagues into the role? Well, possibly.

Or is it that, in an increasingly privatised economy, the government has relegated the importance of public policy in housing? This seems more plausible.

Certainly if you ask most developers and estate agents about politicians, they will admit they have been able to get their own way surprisingly often about what to build and where to build it under the current Labour Government.

Indeed, many are downright suspicious about plans put forward in the UK by the rival Conservative Party (which is well ahead in the opinion polls) to increase public participation in planning decisions relating to what homes should be built, and where.

Chris Tinker, MD of Crest Nicholson's regeneration wing, says Labour's passion for targets and government-imposed performance criteria for councils meant planning permissions did at least happen "albeit at a very high cost, with great uncertainty and over too long a period".

Jon Neale of Knight Frank residential research says the Conservative desire to scrap current guidelines may be misplaced. "A lot of people blame them [the Labour government's policies] for the glut of apartments but ultimately that was driven by the buy-to-let and bulk purchasing for investment boom, which meant developers maximised units on individual sites."

All this is a big turnaround for the property industry.

Two decades ago it was, almost to a man, pro-Conservative. But 12 years of Conservative-lite policies from the Labour party means that advocates of the free market often now find more common ground with Labour than with Conservatives.

Labour no longer talks of council housing, and appears relaxed about a growing gap between rich and poor. Even a glance at the over-supply of unsold apartments in UK city centres will show that strategic planning has been of secondary importance to
the government.

In the main, the developers have done what they want, where they want.

Which may, of course, be why UK housing ministers serve for such short periods – in other words, the job is not very important because under the Labour government, the public intervention in housing is less now than at almost any time in living memory.

How times change. And how John Healey must be wondering how long he will last in this, the most transient of UK political roles.

Keep up with the latest business news from the region with the Emirates Business 24|7 daily newsletter. To subscribe to the newsletter, please click here.