Alright, but what about eating… self sufficiency on food.. and nature.. and carbon sequestration.. they’re good too. Shame they don’t have a vote I guess.
Can’t wait to hear the cries of people who don’t want houses in the field next to them.
Their own houses of course having stood in the same field since the dawn of time.
Looking forward to more sprawling housing estates (go to Northanmptonshire and see the way every town has had huge new “villages” suddenly spring up around its edges) yet with not a single school, shop, hospital, doctor, dentist, swimming pool, cinema/theatre, etc. built. Therefore, the new influx of 2,000-20,000 people just join the queue for already overwhelmed, insufficient services – for schools, a GP appointment, treatment at hospital, gym classes, and every single other aspect of everyone’s lives. Fucking genius.
Annoyingly I bet we all know at least one local brownfield site which has been abandoned for years and could provide land for dozens of houses but is either in need of depoluting which is too expensive or just in an undesirable area.
Why not just tax additional houses and force buy to let landlords to release existing stock onto the market?
It would be a win, win if he had the balls to carry it through.
We don’t need to build on the green belt we just need to build on brown fields and tell the NIMBYs to fuck off.
This guy wants to lose doesnt he?
All well and good, but what about schools, hospitals and infrastructure to support these new building projects.
What about getting a grip on immigration? And I don’t mean the people in boats, actual net immigration that just keeps rising.
Queue the cries of “whatabaoutary”
Why can’t we redevelop brown field sites? There are plenty of those
We need to make sure that by law, new mega-developments must come with proper infrastructure (and public transport), schools, shops, NHS facilities, etc.
There are effectively entire new towns popping up around Edinburgh, and neither the local council nor developers give a single shit about providing any of the aforementioned things which leads to existing services being massively overstretched.
By all means, build houses. But please can we get serious about also building the things people need to go along with their house?
With the necessary services, right? It would be really stupid to make an entire large town without a hospital or community centre
I love how the answer to people not being able to buy their own home is always “we’ll build more!”. Often they are just bought up by institutional investors, for private rent. This drives up house prices, as they have very deep pockets and can afford inflated prices, then leads to increased rents as there is little competition and “more demand” for rental properties – because these f*ckers have bought them all!
Yes let’s build more, mean while there’s empty shopping centres and offices whilst the hybrid working war rages on. It’s almost like some of those spaces could be imaginatively re purposed. Maybe with some rent control and stop selling to oversea landlord groups. But nah, let’s get rid of green belt because everyone needs a house in areas with awful transport links and no intention to improve the links and infrastructure around them.
Yet we are repeatedly told that we need to protect the environment.
He means sell off nature to private developers at peppercorn rates and then sit back and watch them rake in obscene profits selling cookie cutter hell holes.
It’s a bit weird how some people on the left have spent years arguing for more housing to be built but as soon as Keir Starmer proposes it they suddenly hate the idea.
Not the biggest Starmer fan in the world but I swear there are some people who instinctively react to everything he says by taking the opposing view.
Now, whether or not he actually keeps this vow is another matter entirely.
The attitude of this sub is why we have a housing crisis. We can put conditions on new houses once we have solved the housing crisis, right now we need to stem the bleed that’s keeping an entire generation locked out of somewhere to call their own.
Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good enough and don’t be a sodding Nimby.
Edit: add “put”
Create a concrete hellscape; but watch those Carbons!
There’s 5000 homes being built in the fields near us. No issue with that. But there’s nobody enforcing that for X new homes being built, you also need to build a school, doctor, shop etc. Get some rules in place to ensure that extra services are available, funded by the builders.
> “Very often the objections that people have to housebuilding on the green belt are valid because the control by landowners and developers mean that the houses are proposed in areas where it’s quite obvious that there’s going to be a local concern.
> “Give local authorities, local areas more power to decide where it will be and you alleviate that problem. So it’s not as binary or straightforward as ‘green belt, not green belt’. It’s how you direct where the housing will be.”
That’s not exactly “I’m going to build on ALL THE GREEN BELT”
The attack on Labour is going as planned. Conservative win at the next GE it is, then
We need more residential supertalls too in the cities, places like Manchester (does have a fair few going up tbf), Leeds, Liverpool, Birmingham, young people want to live in the city but the demand is so high the prices are crazy… and no not the old 60s grey tower blocks, modern, sleak skyscrapers with good residential facilities
Look at the state of comments. No wonder we have a housing crisis.
Keir face these nimbies down
Everyone wants affordable housing in an abstract sense.
But no homeowner wants their particular property to become affordable (i.e. Decline in value)
So they’ll oppose new construction and say its because they want to save the badgers or whatever.
I want to see more brownfield development. I’ve seen this be done successfully in places I’ve lived at before, but it’s not common enough. Sure it’s more expensive to develop on that kind of land, but that’s where the government needs to step in to make those sites more attractive to develop on via subsidies and suchlike.
What the hell is up with the number of idiots in this thread?
We need more houses. It is literally the single biggest issue facing the country.
More houses mean prices will stabilise, people can start raising families again, rents will come down provided some are rented out, businesses WILL BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE LOWER RENTS provided some places for businesses are built, this will in turn cause everything to be CHEAPER FOR EVERYONE.
Huge infrastructure investment is the single best thing we can do for our economy right now (except maybe rejoining the single market), and yet people in this thread are ranting about so much nimby stupid shit? Fuck me this country is a mess
They should build on brownfield sites instead, so that the residents can soak up all of the industrial toxins in the ground and turn into superhuman mutants. Don’t build on greenfield sites, because those are next to where the richer people live and they wouldn’t like it. And don’t build upwards because that’s what they do on the continent.
We need to start building up, making it affordable, safe, spacious, accessible and properly soundproofed (so important, the law is decades behind on this). Not high-rise up, but 4-8 storey flats kind of thing.
That’s good. We need house building. There aren’t enough brownfield sites. For Starmer to not be afraid of coming out and just saying this is so reassuring. I hope he sticks to it. The next generations need somewhere to live.
“We want to protect the environment”
“We want to rip apart the green belt”
He’s actually just going to give local planning offices more power to decide what suits them.
Personally, I’d like to see more good quality high-rise. We should be considering minimum heights for new housing developments on brownfield sites. If you are going to develop such a site, make it count.
If a party actually fulfilled the promises they made when asking for your vote, that party wouldn’t have to ask for a vote again.
Always the same problems, that never seem to get solved…
i hate that it has to be greenbelt, where i live there are so many abandoned factories and year after year they just become more dangerous. We could knock them down and build there but noooo thats expensive, greenbelt
England doesn’t have the infrastructure to support a population as large as it is now. This idiots plan will be the start of the destruction of the countryside. I don’t know what the solutions are, but this isn’t it and neither are inner city flats that cost more than a house.
One step closer to American style housing pockets where you need a car to exist. We have one right next to a motorway exit and no effort to join paths or cycle routes to the town, must be lovely for all the kids growing up there.
34 comments
Alright, but what about eating… self sufficiency on food.. and nature.. and carbon sequestration.. they’re good too. Shame they don’t have a vote I guess.
Can’t wait to hear the cries of people who don’t want houses in the field next to them.
Their own houses of course having stood in the same field since the dawn of time.
Looking forward to more sprawling housing estates (go to Northanmptonshire and see the way every town has had huge new “villages” suddenly spring up around its edges) yet with not a single school, shop, hospital, doctor, dentist, swimming pool, cinema/theatre, etc. built. Therefore, the new influx of 2,000-20,000 people just join the queue for already overwhelmed, insufficient services – for schools, a GP appointment, treatment at hospital, gym classes, and every single other aspect of everyone’s lives. Fucking genius.
Annoyingly I bet we all know at least one local brownfield site which has been abandoned for years and could provide land for dozens of houses but is either in need of depoluting which is too expensive or just in an undesirable area.
Why not just tax additional houses and force buy to let landlords to release existing stock onto the market?
It would be a win, win if he had the balls to carry it through.
We don’t need to build on the green belt we just need to build on brown fields and tell the NIMBYs to fuck off.
This guy wants to lose doesnt he?
All well and good, but what about schools, hospitals and infrastructure to support these new building projects.
What about getting a grip on immigration? And I don’t mean the people in boats, actual net immigration that just keeps rising.
Queue the cries of “whatabaoutary”
Why can’t we redevelop brown field sites? There are plenty of those
We need to make sure that by law, new mega-developments must come with proper infrastructure (and public transport), schools, shops, NHS facilities, etc.
There are effectively entire new towns popping up around Edinburgh, and neither the local council nor developers give a single shit about providing any of the aforementioned things which leads to existing services being massively overstretched.
By all means, build houses. But please can we get serious about also building the things people need to go along with their house?
With the necessary services, right? It would be really stupid to make an entire large town without a hospital or community centre
I love how the answer to people not being able to buy their own home is always “we’ll build more!”. Often they are just bought up by institutional investors, for private rent. This drives up house prices, as they have very deep pockets and can afford inflated prices, then leads to increased rents as there is little competition and “more demand” for rental properties – because these f*ckers have bought them all!
Yes let’s build more, mean while there’s empty shopping centres and offices whilst the hybrid working war rages on. It’s almost like some of those spaces could be imaginatively re purposed. Maybe with some rent control and stop selling to oversea landlord groups. But nah, let’s get rid of green belt because everyone needs a house in areas with awful transport links and no intention to improve the links and infrastructure around them.
Yet we are repeatedly told that we need to protect the environment.
He means sell off nature to private developers at peppercorn rates and then sit back and watch them rake in obscene profits selling cookie cutter hell holes.
It’s a bit weird how some people on the left have spent years arguing for more housing to be built but as soon as Keir Starmer proposes it they suddenly hate the idea.
Not the biggest Starmer fan in the world but I swear there are some people who instinctively react to everything he says by taking the opposing view.
Now, whether or not he actually keeps this vow is another matter entirely.
The attitude of this sub is why we have a housing crisis. We can put conditions on new houses once we have solved the housing crisis, right now we need to stem the bleed that’s keeping an entire generation locked out of somewhere to call their own.
Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good enough and don’t be a sodding Nimby.
Edit: add “put”
Create a concrete hellscape; but watch those Carbons!
There’s 5000 homes being built in the fields near us. No issue with that. But there’s nobody enforcing that for X new homes being built, you also need to build a school, doctor, shop etc. Get some rules in place to ensure that extra services are available, funded by the builders.
> “Very often the objections that people have to housebuilding on the green belt are valid because the control by landowners and developers mean that the houses are proposed in areas where it’s quite obvious that there’s going to be a local concern.
> “Give local authorities, local areas more power to decide where it will be and you alleviate that problem. So it’s not as binary or straightforward as ‘green belt, not green belt’. It’s how you direct where the housing will be.”
That’s not exactly “I’m going to build on ALL THE GREEN BELT”
The attack on Labour is going as planned. Conservative win at the next GE it is, then
We need more residential supertalls too in the cities, places like Manchester (does have a fair few going up tbf), Leeds, Liverpool, Birmingham, young people want to live in the city but the demand is so high the prices are crazy… and no not the old 60s grey tower blocks, modern, sleak skyscrapers with good residential facilities
Look at the state of comments. No wonder we have a housing crisis.
Keir face these nimbies down
Everyone wants affordable housing in an abstract sense.
But no homeowner wants their particular property to become affordable (i.e. Decline in value)
So they’ll oppose new construction and say its because they want to save the badgers or whatever.
I want to see more brownfield development. I’ve seen this be done successfully in places I’ve lived at before, but it’s not common enough. Sure it’s more expensive to develop on that kind of land, but that’s where the government needs to step in to make those sites more attractive to develop on via subsidies and suchlike.
What the hell is up with the number of idiots in this thread?
We need more houses. It is literally the single biggest issue facing the country.
More houses mean prices will stabilise, people can start raising families again, rents will come down provided some are rented out, businesses WILL BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE LOWER RENTS provided some places for businesses are built, this will in turn cause everything to be CHEAPER FOR EVERYONE.
Huge infrastructure investment is the single best thing we can do for our economy right now (except maybe rejoining the single market), and yet people in this thread are ranting about so much nimby stupid shit? Fuck me this country is a mess
They should build on brownfield sites instead, so that the residents can soak up all of the industrial toxins in the ground and turn into superhuman mutants. Don’t build on greenfield sites, because those are next to where the richer people live and they wouldn’t like it. And don’t build upwards because that’s what they do on the continent.
We need to start building up, making it affordable, safe, spacious, accessible and properly soundproofed (so important, the law is decades behind on this). Not high-rise up, but 4-8 storey flats kind of thing.
That’s good. We need house building. There aren’t enough brownfield sites. For Starmer to not be afraid of coming out and just saying this is so reassuring. I hope he sticks to it. The next generations need somewhere to live.
“We want to protect the environment”
“We want to rip apart the green belt”
He’s actually just going to give local planning offices more power to decide what suits them.
Personally, I’d like to see more good quality high-rise. We should be considering minimum heights for new housing developments on brownfield sites. If you are going to develop such a site, make it count.
If a party actually fulfilled the promises they made when asking for your vote, that party wouldn’t have to ask for a vote again.
Always the same problems, that never seem to get solved…
i hate that it has to be greenbelt, where i live there are so many abandoned factories and year after year they just become more dangerous. We could knock them down and build there but noooo thats expensive, greenbelt
England doesn’t have the infrastructure to support a population as large as it is now. This idiots plan will be the start of the destruction of the countryside. I don’t know what the solutions are, but this isn’t it and neither are inner city flats that cost more than a house.
One step closer to American style housing pockets where you need a car to exist. We have one right next to a motorway exit and no effort to join paths or cycle routes to the town, must be lovely for all the kids growing up there.