[diggers350] Proof- CAP causes houseprice rises?
ilyan.thomas at virgin.net
Mon May 10 00:20:47 BST 2010
It might be more useful to require that all agricultural land used for
housing should be organised to produce as much food from its gardens as
was produced from the fields.
I had a Uncle who was invited to China, over forty years ago to advise
them on farming. He toured the country, and when he go back to Peking
reported that he had not seen one farm, what he had seen was endless
The crass stupidity now is EU farmers are paid to take their land out of
farming and plant trees. Foresters sit up and take note: Plant lots
of Walnuts and Monkey puzzle trees in your forests to feed you when the
On 09/05/2010 20:44, james armstrong wrote:
> I have asked Office of Fair Tradiing to investigate thefollowing.
> . *This defra web site traces a possible direct connection between CAP
> and high house prices*. Taylor Woodrow and Wilson Bowden, two of the
> very biggest housebuilders and who the Barker Report listed in 2003 as
> holding giant landbanks of permissioned or potential building land-
> are listed as receiving CAP payments. You may not have associated
> these builders with agri-culture-and you may be right!
> The implication is that CAP rewards builders for hoarding surplus
> permissioned land so that they can charge monopoly prices for the
> scarce houses they build (Barker calls it ‘Trickling out’) while
> receiving a further double reward, -once from CAP and again as the
> national scarcity of houses drives up the value of the undeveloped
> land. I count that as three bites of the forbidden fruit called
> The amount and value of their ‘landbank’, is advertised in the annual
> balance sheets.of the big national builders.
> Finding CAP payments to housebuilders establishes a direct causative
> connection between CAP and rising house prices. The House-builders’
> landbanks are listed on page 81 of the Barker Review of Housing Supply
> 2003. see www.//cap-payments.defra.gov.uk
> <http://www./cap-payments.defra.gov.uk> for cap payments.
> Builders buy agricultural land for its potential as building land. It
> jumps in value (the windfall gain) the day it receives permission for
> development (even when the cows are still grazing on it) A typical
> increase in value is X 125. Bulk land under Taylor Woodrow and Wilson
> Bowden ownership is likely to be potential building land.
> There is a more subtle and sinister implication. In order to qualify
> for CAP payments you must apply in advance , and commit the land for a
> certain number of years (5?) to a specific agricultural use. In other
> words there is no immediate or imminent intention of using such land
> for building houses. This demonstrates an institutionalized attitude
> to withdrawing land from potential building use – a clear indication
> of creating a monopoly of the worst sort. (Using a monopoly against
> the public interest is punishable by large fines by Competition
> Commission) This is an indication of the need for defra to use the
> existing compulsory purchase powers of the planning laws to release
> land earmarked for housebuilding to self builders who are only too
> keen to solve their own (and the nation’s) endemic shortage of houses
> at accessible prices.
> James, Dorchester 9 May.
> Get a free e-mail account with Hotmail. Sign-up now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Diggers350