not the Barker housing report

[james armstrong]

NOT THE O.D.P.M. BARKER REPORT
THE HOUSE NEEDY ARE 347 TIMES WORSE OFF TO-DAY THAN THEY WERE IN 1947 WHEN 
THE ACT TO PLAN FOR THEIR HOUSES  WAS MADE.
THE PRIME ROLE OF A PLANNING ACT IS NOT PROTECTION OF THE COUNTRYSIDE FROM 
DESPOLIATION BUT PROTECTION OF THE PEOPLE FROM EXPLOITATION BY LANDOWNERS
ADDED TO THE CURRENT HOUSING CRISIS IS AN EXTREME  DEMOCRATIC CRISIS
Extract from the Town & Country Planning  Bill, 1947
      "The T & C Planning Act, 1932 enabled local authorities to  prepare 
planning  schemes and the Town and  Country   Planning  (Interim Development 
) Act 1943 extended interim development control throughout the country……
The defects of this system are ; it is static, planning schemes having  the 
force of law and being difficult to alter; it is localised; local 
authorities are not obliged to prepare plans; and it is negative.
The Bill replaces the Planning scheme with a more flexible development 
plan……………
In order to give positive powers for executing plans  by making land 
available  local authorities will be given wider powers to by (sic) land 
compulsorily  for leasing to the private developer , and be able to 
designate for compulsory purchase  land likely to be required within ten 
years for development  by governing departments, local authorities and 
private enterprise.
       So far planning has been governed by short term financial  
considerations     The Uthwatt Committee argued that over valuation due to 
floating value  produces an aggregate value two or three times greater than 
the value based on actual possibilities . The burden of compensation falls  
on the individual authority , which may not be able to bear it, so that 
local authorities have tried to keep shifting values  in their own areas  
and have had to allow building in too haphazard a manner.  Under the Bill no 
development may take place without  consent and where permission is refused, 
there is no right to compensation  But if no compensation were paid hardship 
might be caused , and £300mn will be set aside  out of which payments will 
be made to owners."

It is worth comparing the situation  prior to the 1947 Act  with the actual 
situation to-day.
A major  reason (SEE ABOVE)  for introducing the 1947 Act was the  
impossibility of  local authorities buying land for houses which jumped two 
or three times in value when it was needed for development.

To-day, in spite of the Act, land jumps in value by typically three hundred 
and fifty seven  times .
This is based on the 2004 figures of the  Inland Revenue comparing the 
average price of agricultural land at
At £3,500  per acre   with that of development land  with planning 
permission at £1,250,000  per acre
Because  Local Authorities  no longer build Council Houses the burden now 
falls directly on the private housebuyers. In so far as houses are out of 
reach of people even on average salaries, let alone unfunded people  in poor 
, inadequate (or with no) houses, it has been shifted from Authorities to 
people.

By another count the  cost of a building site has risen by a multiplier of 
4,000. The  357:1 ratio underestimates the increase in  site value, because 
the present basis is a comparison with agricultural land which itself has 
increased  because of the  £3 billions pumped into it annually by the C.A.P. 
since 1973.  A truer measure of the increase  price of  building site over 
the years  would be of the order of four thousand to one c.f. the increase 
in house  price by 'only' 11:1 since 1927 ( comparisons are for  an estate 
of houses in Exeter.)
The conclusion is that    Government has withdrawn from vulnerable  people 
their  protective umbrella against  exploitation.     So added to the 
Housing Crisis is a  democratic crisis.

The  Barker Report takes a lot of highly educated  people,  a lot of time,  
366 pages at a cost of  several £million  and fails to pinpoint the cause of 
the housing crisis as the illegal monopoly  of land with p.p. used against 
the public interest to jack up house prices, and   fails  to suggest the 
cure which will save both the Government £billions annually  and  
Housebuyers £thousands individually , which is to redirect the planning 
permission for houses to the house needy not to the landowner , and to 
encourage community- and self-build by giving individuals preference over  
Companies   for planning permission for new  houses.
James Armstrong        3rd March 2004