“Michael Gove accused the mayor of being too focused on building affordable homes in the capital, which meant a number of new developments were not going ahead” – maybe I’m thick but isn’t it good that the Mayor is focused on affordable housing?

5 comments

1. I think the Mayor first needs to define “affordable”. Building £700k 1 bed flats, flogging a 25% share with huge rent on the remaining 75% whilst carrying 100% of the liabilities, isn’t really “affordable” compared to the rest of the country where that 25% value buys you a lot lot more. Even in commuter towns.

   Building actual affordable homes paired with the average London salary isn’t a reality. Affordable fractional ownership is what they are selling imo.

2. This is developers sulking that they have to include X% of affordable housing, which cuts into their profits.

3. No, price is just a measure of supply and demand. It isn’t some magic thing that is determined by housing developers, and shared ownership schemes (which is what is usually meant by affordability) that are the worst parts of buying and the worst parts of renting are just a shit bandaid on the core problem. Increasing supply will inevitably lower prices if done at high enough rates, regardless of “affordability”. Affordability is just a red herring that NIMBYS use to distract people from the thing that actually matters: numbers of units built.

4. Gove’s housebuilder mates aren’t making as much money as they want to because the Mayor is insisting on including less expensive (“affordable”) housing.

5. Gove’s housebuilder mates aren’t making as much money as they want to because the Mayor is insisting on including less expensive (“affordable”) housing.