Ministers cannot simply continue to perpetuate a broken system because of the painfully obvious but so often unspoken political risk implicit in reforming the market.
Like Ridley in the 1980s, the Secretary of State can brute-force his way past the NIMBY’s blocking tactics by granting appeals.
It’s time to stop pretending there is any way to solve the shortage without building in the South and face up to what it will take to get that done.
We fear the worst after Cummings’ departure, but Johnson must now make the best of it. That means a Cabinet shuffle.
Finding a new Chief of Staff is only the start of the changes that Johnson needs to make his government work.
Whitehall must understand that if an algorithm offers up cherished green spaces to hungry developers, there will be a local backlash.
Together with tax cuts and less regulation, higher or more extensive benefits look like better support for hungry children than vouchers.
Nineteen Conservative backbenchers spoke against the policy. It’s doubtful whether a top-down targets system will pass the Commons.
Forty-six per cent of respondents back the plans and forty per cent don’t, which mirrors the divisions seen elsewhere.
There’s a Covid-19 debate today, the Internal Market Bill tomorrow, a housing measure on Wednesday – plus maybe the Brady amendment.
How can ministers claim to be ‘levelling up’ the country when they are slashing targets for the North and Midlands in favour of the overcrowded South?
My experience in local government has convinced me that change is needed to deliver the beautiful and affordable housing that communities need.
These figures will change substantially in the final version of the algorithm, especially because it will take into account green belt restrictions.
It’s important to stress that those generated for an area’s need will not necessarily be the same as its ultimate targets.
Instead of giving developers free licence to ruin communities, it should give local government the power to force them to build where they already can.