Do we really want more affordable housing in London?
Joe Wright, 11 February 2015
We are witnessing the collapse of NIMBYist Britain according to Steve Akehurst of Shelter. The housing charity found in recent surveys that ‘NIMBYism has collapsed across all voter groups. In 2010, there was not a single voter group who overall supported more homes being built in their local area. By 2013 there was not a single voter group who didn’t.’
The biggest change in attitude came among homeowners, the older generations traditionally perceived as the largest obstacle to building because of property price worries. The reason for their change of heart is unclear. It could be that housing provision is getting more attention from national media and politicians. Or perhaps owners are more annoyed with the continued presence of their now-graduate children, and concerned they have almost no hope of owning.
The national shift is likely to be due to private renters forming a larger proportion of the population. It is natural that this group, now a quarter of households, would see more building as a good thing. The larger this group grows, the more pressure they can exert – perhaps even beyond opinion polling. Housing and renting policies are big issues in Germany simply because renters form one of the largest voting blocks.
Though good news as it is to find NIMBYism is waning, it is difficult to see how this shift alone will unlock a wave of housebuilding in areas that need it most, particularly London. For one, the capital has a very real barrier in the form of the green belt, preventing expansion whether locally supported or not, and with influential national campaign groups intent in keeping the status quo. There is also the bigger political issue.
Current politics is captured by the narrative of the North-South divide. As Spectator columnist Rod Liddle points out ‘it’s not immigrants that Ukip voters hate: it’s London’ (see Demos Quarterly). The ‘London versus the country’ narrative is as pervasive among northern Labour, Conservative and SNP voters as it is Ukip.
Though we are generally more willing to accept new building projects around us, it does not mean we agree where more homes should be built. In the case of London, there is a powerful perception in the North that the country’s resources are being pooled in the South. It is a reverse-NIMBYism effect on the national stage where regions are fighting for investment and infrastructure.
There is merit in this point. London doesn’t hog the country’s resources – it almost bank-roles the country – but it does draw talent from other regions. A considerable part of the South East’s population is now made up by in-migration, mostly graduates flocking to the capital to find a job.
Unleashing a building boom in the South East could result in something similar to a Rebound effect. This theory was born out of the realisation that the gains from making appliances and houses more energy efficient – greener – were off-set by people using those appliances more or wasting energy in other ways.
Similarly, building more affordable homes in London might result in much higher in-migration to London, negating the attempt to make housing costs in the capital cheaper, drawing more talented people from other places and further unbalancing the UK. Perhaps a better option is to make London less desirable – here’s one suggestion.