Tackling the housing supply crisis requires a coherent vision for the future and a willingness to act across planning, regulation, training and construction, says John Keegan.
I have had a lot of time to ponder lately on issues which affect the efficiency and the direction of the social housing sector in Wales in particular and in the UK in general.
I have firmly come to the conclusion that the temptation to overthink this matter is great while the bravery required to resolve some of our major issues is lacking. It’s very obvious that we spend a huge amount of time and effort talking about the solutions and far less time and energy resolving the issues. The reason for this is complex, involving politics, human nature, access to funding, regulation and so forth. But it primarily stems from a lack of a coherent vision for the future and the willingness to deliver on any vision.
For the purposes of this modern day pamphlet I will concentrate on one of the great bones of contention, namely the development of new properties. The purpose of every organisation within the sector is to provide high quality homes for people in housing need. But the reality is rationing of a scarce resource, and the delivery of that resource to a very select few.
We live in a country where a significant proportion of the population will continue for the foreseeable future, to have jobs which will pay insufficient amounts for home ownership, or live in areas with insufficient social housing . Bearing that in mind, and understanding the benefits have a secure home physiologically and psychologically what are we to do?
I intend to approach the problem with quick insights into my major bugbears. For the purposes of entertainment let’s start with planning. There are two primary dimensions to this, namely the approach and constraints under which local authorities work on the vision that Welsh Government and parliament have for the country . Access to land is driven by access to capital and also the availability of land highlighted in the Local Development Plan (LDP). The process of agreeing an LDP is far too complex, time-consuming, politically divisive and expensive. I believe that the process should be divided into two parts :
- 90 per cent of any proposed plan meets only small amounts of opposition – even if vociferous. This can be discerned very early in the process. This 90 per cent should then be fast tracked in under one year.
- The 10 per cent, which causes countless delays in council time and Welsh Government approval, should be agreed piecemeal as exception sites over the following four years. This will speed up a process which takes in reality between three and five years and will create far quicker delivery of key sites
The environmental constraints on sites are now too restrictive. For example, carrying out bat surveys and the delays they entail (because they can only be carried out at certain times). I believe that any development of more than 10 houses should have a bathouse that should be delivered as part of their development. Many of the protected species we have found over time through our surveys appear far more widespread and plentiful than was originally thought. Therefore the level of protection required, I suggest, is less necessary than is deemed.
The main point is that the amount of legislation/regulation is impeding reasonable progress, a prime example being the bat tunnel on HS2, where organisations with no skin in the game outside of their overseer responsibilities were able to massively over specify the requirements to resolve the problem. Countless planning delays, then £100 million on a tunnel!!
We need to ensure that staffing levels within planning departments in both Welsh Government and local government are sufficient to deliver far speedier deliberations. This can only be done when proper consideration is given to the amount of economic activity generated by new developments and the social benefits stemming from those developments. But once again we need to do this in the context of society-wide acceptance that more development is required.
We must also question whether the universities and colleges are producing enough graduates to staff local authority housing departments throughout the country. This is why a comprehensive plan is needed, covering all aspects of the housing crisis, to have any hope of resolving it. This will range from producing the right number of graduates/apprentices to fund an expansion in the delivery of housing which the Welsh and Westminster Governments have committed themselves to.
Town centre regeneration as currently stands a is unviable in many cases. The determination of local authorities to continue to insist on retail units in new developments is a hark back to a time which will not return. Why insist on retail units on new developments when many retail units in town centres lie empty? The future is not completely online but we have not yet reached that happy (or unhappy as the case may be) balance
Training
Professionals within the sector constantly complain that young people would prefer to be playing on their playstations, laptops or other devices rather than working in the construction industry. This statement should always be vigorously challenged as any organisation recruiting apprentices will vouch that there are far more applicants that places. The colleges will tell us that the vast majority of students will stay in college to the end of NVQ level 2 and then have to drop out as they are unable to secure a placement. The statement from professionals within the industry is a smokescreen for their unwillingness to train people to staff the industry for the future. Why are these comments allowed to persist and linger.
As this has now become such a settled position within the industry, I can only see two solutions. In the first instance, it must become more financially attractive for construction companies to employ more apprentices. Sanctions will not work, so as I see it there are a couple of solutions.
I have already mentioned financial incentives but colleges need to play a more substantial role. They are allowing many hundreds of students to qualify to level 2 NVQ each year who can then not get placements to complete to Level 3 NVQ. Even completing to level 2 only allows for 18 hours of full-time education per week, and of that practical lessons are usually only for six hours. Full time should now mean 24 hours a week with at least 12 hours of practical lessons. Colleges attempting to accommodate this will need to take on fewer pupils but invest more in them to make them more work ready (higher capitation grant for certain courses will incentivise this) . As they cannot progress to level 3 without a placement, a further progression year at level 2 (which already happens) can continue but with practical classes moving to even more practical classes at say 15 hours per week. Students then coming out of college will be much more knowledgeable and useful on site giving a greater incentive to employers to take on students requiring just one year to complete NVQ level 3 and be fully qualified.
Utilities
The sad fact is that the country has not invested enough in our utilities. With their governance structures and funding mechanisms, there is no getting away from the fact that via our bills we will have to pay for significant infrastructure works in the coming decades. Some of this will be to improve water quality and much of the rest will be to improve the National Grid to cope with renewables. Until AI can help further, the intermittent supply is a real nuisance to help ‘balance the grid’.
It’s clear now that the race for renewables, which is the right race to be in, will not bear fruit in our bills at least, until the 2040s. We should then reconsider the race to install air source heat pumps in the absence of solar panels, as otherwise the energy costs are too high. We are still some years away from 30 per cent efficient panels, although they exist in lab conditions. So I suggest we only install air source in new build and where the roof orientation is most advantageous for solar panels in existing properties (around 30 per cent – which would still allow the Government to meet its targets for the most part).
Modern methods of construction
The whole industry needs to recognise that this method of construction is not yet ready for wide scale deployment, not is there a real definition of what it actually is. Unless the order books are full no factory can survive at scale. The ebbs and flows of the industry negate the efforts of even the deepest pockets . Yet the alleged savings will only be realised if it is deployed at very large scale. I can see its usefulness in building hotels, for example, where the same room specification can be repeated across a whole chain or McDonalds restaurants, but not housing where many different dimensions, style and materials are employed.
So in conclusion I would suggest that even with a massive push we are at least 10 years from agreeing any form of national consensus to resolve the housing crisis. Even in Wales, where the policy towards social housing is more supportive and benign compared to England, the building and planning regulatory environment makes it a very slow and time-consuming process. Many sites are taking 10 years from identification to completion (even when in the LDP).
If we want to be a country where aspiration for high quality homes, either through ownership of socially rented is to be achieved, we need to start today, right now, don’t delay, and don’t stop for anything! No more Great Excuse.
John Keegan is chief executive of Monmouthshire Housing Association. He is writing in a personal capacity and his views are not necessarily those of his employer.