Tories accused of blocking housebuilding

Housebuilding plans are being blocked by the government in the run-up to the general election to avoid antagonising voters, according to an analysis of official data.

Whitehall has rejected moves to build nearly 10,000 homes since the start of this year, data collated by property advisers Bilfinger GVA shows.

Communities secretary Eric Pickles is "pulling up the drawbridge [on housebuilders] in the run-up to the election", according to Neil Morton, a director at Bilfinger GVA. "He is dismissing schemes that are going to be controversial to the electorate," he said.

Housing has become a major issue in the general election campaign as high prices and stagnant wages have left a generation of potential first time buyers struggling to get on the housing ladder.

With home ownership at its lowest level in 30 years and housebuilding close to record lows, Labour has pledged to switch funding from the Conservatives' Help To Buy Isas into a fund to back housebuilders. The Tories have promised discounts on 200,000 new homes for first-time buyers.

Only 160,000 homes were started in 2013/14, according to official figures - the latest year for which data are available - well below the 200,000 to 300,000 which experts agree are needed each year to satisfy demand.

However, despite the UK's housing crisis, residents are often vocally opposed to construction in their area, with their "not in my backyard" approach creating a political headache for successive governments.

Mr Pickles has the power to call in planning applications in cases where the local council has rejected a developer's scheme, giving him the final say on whether a proposed housing development can be built.

The coalition government overhauled planning laws in 2012 to remove some of the obstacles to housebuilding and in the two and-a-half years until the end of 2014 Mr Pickles approved three-quarters of the applications that crossed his desk, Bilfinger GVA found.

But since the start of this year that trend has reversed, with Mr Pickles rejecting 90 per cent of applications to date in 2015, the figures show.

The communities secretary has refused housebuilders permission to build 9,200 homes on 18 sites since the start of January, giving permission for the construction of just 454 homes during the same period.

Brandon Lewis, minister for housing and planning, said that planning was a quasi-judicial process and "decisions are made only on the material planning considerations".

The figures indicating a slowdown in approvals reflect a change in planning guidance in the past year "to place a greater emphasis on protection of the greenbelt" and give local communities greater say, Mr Lewis added.

The number of planning cases decided by ministers has fallen since the rules were simplified in 2012. Just 0.9 per cent of cases were decided by ministers in 2014, according to official figures.

A senior figure at one leading housebuilder said it was common for politicians to stop approving new housebuilding schemes in the run-up to elections.

"The slowdown in planning at this point in the political cycle is a widely recognised issue in the housebuilding industry," he said.

"We anticipated that planning would get more difficult because of the election and put all the planning permissions we needed in place well before the campaign started. We have been very careful about not getting our development plans caught in the electoral crossfire."

Steve Turner, of the Home Builders' Federation, said planning decisions should be made "based on a robust assessment of long-term housing need and a site's individual sustainability".

Basing decisions on other factors "could threaten the industry's ability to address the acute housing crisis with which we are faced, and that all political parties have stated their commitment to tackle", he added.

© The Financial Times Limited 2015. All rights reserved.
FT and Financial Times are trademarks of the Financial Times Ltd.
Not to be redistributed, copied or modified in any way.
Euro2day.gr is solely responsible for providing this translation and the Financial Times Limited does not accept any liability for the accuracy or quality of the translation