The strategy for build residences is so skewed towards the south, whole swathes of the country are having to go it alone

English housing policy has one objective: construct more. The country needs extra, and better housing. Right? On the surface, it might seem an obvious objective. But where? And should better housing always mean more homes, rather than refreshed the house and revitalised communities?

Currently, the government’s strategy is largely focused on fields facing what its housing agency calls “affordability pressures”. The rationale appears simple: build more, and assuredly house prices will fall. That neatly discounts the fact that its heavily criticised “help-to-buy” scheme, offering subsidised lends of up to 20% of a belonging price( 40% in London) has pushed up costs further and boosted the profits of the big house-builders. More contentiously, though, the strategy of Homes England skews fund overwhelmingly towards the south-east- and away from other townships, cities and once-thriving industrial communities, largely in the north.

Should better residence always mean more dwellings, rather than revitalized homes and revitalised communities?

Related: For England’s new councillors, current realities of life in our boroughs will hit hard | Peter Hetherington

Continue reading …

Read more: