We have a political opportunity to (re)create a new generation of Conservatives who are the proprietors of capital.
Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves are welcome to copy this policy if they wish. But they won’t because they don’t believe in aspiration. We do.
Denouncing second home ownership for others is not the way to solve the housing shortage.
Planning at times has become politicised to the point of paralysis. NIMBYism dominates, and the loudest voices too often drown out the needs of young families, renters, and first-time buyers.
Governments of this country have, too often and at too great a cost, learnt the penalty of failing to take long-term decisions at the time when the opportunity is most ripe.
We need to face up to the hard truth that every planning rejection in a high-demand area is not just a lost home—it is a lost voter, a lost future, and a fraying thread in the Conservative social contract. This is not about abandoning our principles. It is about applying them.
Unlike Labour-controlled local authorities, Conservatives set out their proposals and action them. As the Party of aspiration, actively promoting low cost home ownership would be a great achievement.
If we are serious about winning the next generation, then we need real reform.
Those young (and youngish) voters who switched to Labour out of a desire to get on the housing ladder were perversely reflecting the most quintessential of Conservative ambitions.
We should use our time to seek reform of central banking if we have any hope of unlocking housing for future generations. This is a big ask, considering central banks tend to take their direction from the Federal Reserve.
Public policy ought to facilitate choice and enable people to live the lives they wish. Beyond that, there are other key reasons why home ownership is important.
By working with Labour on housebuilding while championing a conservative approach, we can help address one of the most pressing issues facing the country.
With pledges to decarbonise housing stocks to achieve net zero by 2050, many council properties are going to have a lot of costly energy efficiency works.
When asked during surveys, especially in the USA and to a lesser extent in Europe, most economists are against this policy.
It is gravely concerning for younger generations. But on present trends, this shift will be equally consequential for older generational cohorts in both the medium and long-term, as well as for the size of the state.