Just a quick note on housing. I think I have mentioned on this blog before that housing, and its costs, is a growing social issue in the UK. It interests me because it is not debated as much as other issues of similar importance. Or at least those issues I deem to be of similar importance. It has been remarked for example, that unlike the press coverage regarding other domestic price increases, news of an increase in housing costs is greeted with cheer. Often the news of an increase in house prices is illustrated by the press with images of sunny days and riches. Rarely do I read any negative comment regarding house price increases.
I have more recently however, read numerous articles on how it is increasingly harder for younger people to get on the property ladder, but any solutions proposed are nearly always directed at 'The Banks' who are both an easy target and easily digestible for those who want their news in under 30 words. The true solution lies in plain and simple, supply and demand. Restrictions on planning and local campaigns against new builds limit supply to such an extent that prices rocket. I will come back to my more detailed suggestions for solving this problem at a later date. But to illustrate the problem at least, I came across a number of statistics today in the Q1 2011 Residential Property Focus by Savills Research which leapt of the page to me.
Yolanda Barnes, Head of Research, comments that "The coming decade could be seen as the beginning of a deep and permanent schism in housing between the equity haves and the equity have nots"
70% of the total value of UK housing stock is held as equity. Or conversely only 30% of the value of all the houses in the UK are mortgaged.
The UK housing stock was valued in 2000 as worth £2 trillion. In the past ten years it has more than doubled to £4.15 trillion today.
The over 45s hold around 83% of the equity held in housing, with the over 60s some 40%. By contrast the under 35s hold just 5%.
Just 5% of the properties, the ones over £500,000, account for 18% of the value of the stock.
The housing stock in both London and the South East is worth more than the total stock of Wales, the Midlands, and the whole of the North of England combined. Moreover the housing stock of London alone is worth more than combined value of the urban counties of the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Tyne and Wear, South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire.
These stats taken alone are of course not the whole story, but some of the implications of what is going on in the market are quite striking. Residential property has doubled in price in the last ten years. That is a massive windfall to home owners, perhaps even epic. 83% of the equity in this incredible deal is held by the over 45s. Virtually none of this windfall, or appreciation, was or will be taxed. The average first time buyer now needs at least one years salary as a deposit for a house. It is also true almost everywhere, that renting £100,000 by mortgage, costs less (£5,000 @ 5%), than renting a property worth £100,000 (£6,000 @ £500p.m.), but only if you have equity.
There is a huge risk that by not confronting these issues, a whole generation of people, who are not fortunate enough to call on the 'Bank of Mum and Dad' for help with a deposit, will never own a property, and by that measure their children won't either.
If you would like to comment on this post, please click 'comments' below.
Monday, 21 February 2011
Thursday, 17 February 2011
A sprinkling of Democracy
Ok, it's been a while since I wrote my last blog. I have decided that while I often read articles with which I agree, I don't want this blog to become Ant's News, repeating verbatim other peoples views. Also, when I find an article that articulates my views on any given topic, I often don't feel the need to then write about it. If someone has done the work for me then it is already out there for people to read. A problem however, is that I can overlook the big issues of the day which are well covered in the press and on the 'blogosphere'. So be it. Until someone kindly offers to employ me to articulate my viewpoint, this is a hobby and I shall stick to what ever takes my fancy.
Annoyingly, and a gripe of mine in itself, Welsh issues are not well covered in the broader media. This is not to say that I think Wales deserves special attention, far from it, but I worry that Welsh issues are not subject to the same rigorous level of scrutiny that national and international issues are subjected to. This could also be said of any region in the UK but as we have our own semi-legislature, semi-government, in the Welsh Assembly, we could be leaving the door open for semi-tyranny, or worse. As a more positive result however, it does provide me with a feast of issues where my views are not articulated elsewhere.
The Western Mail, a much flawed publication in my opinion but the only 'National Newspaper of Wales', has brought an interesting issue to my attention, and one that points exactly to my concern. A new law has been passed by the Assembly requiring ALL new homes built in Wales to be fitted with automatic fire sprinklers. Wow you say, I haven't heard of that. Well, I'd wager that even if you live in Wales your unlikely to have heard of, or been consulted on, this issue. The AM that introduced the idea, Labour AM Ann Jones, proudly states "Wales has just become the first country in the world to pass a law making sprinklers mandatory in all new homes". Knowing Wales reasonably well, such a bold statement causes me immediate pause because whilst we are a modern developed nation, we are not often the first in the world to do anything.
Firstly turning to the actual sprinkler issue, the paper states that the policy has the backing of Wales' three fire and rescue services and the National Fire Sprinkler Network, no surprises there. Supporters of the law claim "it could prevent up to 25 deaths a year and save the Welsh economy £128m at minimal cost to the building industry". I have not looked at the stats, and I state openly that my only source of information on this subject is a single article in what I have already said is a deeply flawed publication. But its all we've got!
Having said that, some thoughts have occurred to me. Up to 25 deaths a year. . . so we can safely say less than 25 houses a year. 25 houses at the average house price of £150,000 comes to £3.75m. There are of course other costs, the fire service, police, hospitals etc, but £128m?
Minimal cost to the building industry. . . of course the cost of installing the system will be passed on to the house buyer. Oh, and servicing the system, and dealing with any accidents when your mad uncle sets it off whilst playing twister at Christmas, and replacing it when it gets to old. Its a shame the public weren't asked to comment.
How much do these systems cost to install you ask? Each system is estimated to cost £5,000!!! Added help for all those first time buyers out there, who can't possibly afford to buy a house at the moment, save up an extra five grand while your at it!
I would also like to see the raw data for myself. My experience of home fires via the Welsh news is often that in most incidents where there are fatalities, there is inevitably more than one, meaning we are talking of even less actual incidents. They also often appear to occur more often in social housing. In terms of private dwellings I would guess we are talking about less than 5 incidents a year. Should the authorities decide its worth installing sprinklers in social housing, I bow to their expertise, but to mandate it on the rest of us seems over the top.
But what about the value of human lives Ant? In terms of the £128m figure we could for the sake of the exercise add in the victims future salaries as societies loss of productivity, but unless there is a rash of top earner home fires we are still a way off. I have not been callous enough to forget the 'human' loss. In terms of the non-quantifiable personal loss of losing a loved one, well, it simply can't be quantified. But what I will say is that fire prevention systems are available at your local DIY stores and if people value their loved ones safety enough to warrant it, they are free to fill their boots and improve their home fire safety. Given that I have never encountered such serious concern for fire safety, I assume I am right in thinking that the majority would believe this measure to be un-warranted.
This leads me back to my primary concern, is this process democratic? This law, like most the Assembly has the power to introduce, was required to be signed off by Westminster. The up coming referendum in Wales is precisely to end the requirement for UK Government sign off. Indeed the length of time it has taken to pass the sprinkler law is cited as an example of why this practice needs to be ended. I shudder to think what kind of 'debate' was had in Westminster, I mean if the Welsh are for it who are they to say no? But if they do support the measure, why are they not proposing it at a national level for the whole of the UK?
Ms Jones says that she does "not accept the idea that our laws are being packed off to London to be interfered with", again I'd love some details, sadly the Western Mail has none. Whilst the idea of the UK Government signing off Welsh issues seems a ludicrous state of affairs there is one upside. By 'packing our laws off to London' we have in effect a second chamber. At present the Welsh Assembly is a single chamber legislature, far from ideal and democratically unsound. By removing the need for national sign off, we are left with a potentially dangerous regional government, what is the Welsh for checks and balances anyway? What with the lack of consultation, media scrutiny, public awareness and with further reductions in the checks and balances of the current system proposed, this issue highlights the flaws in the current system.
As for the Welsh peoples enthusiasm for such a change and reduced oversight of government, we will have to wait and see. I could go on for days, literally days, on why devolution is a bad idea, but when our Assembly member's efforts are spent conjuring mad ideas such as our new sprinkler law I return to my opening comments, someone is already fighting this battle for me!
If you would like to comment on this post, please click 'comments' below.
Annoyingly, and a gripe of mine in itself, Welsh issues are not well covered in the broader media. This is not to say that I think Wales deserves special attention, far from it, but I worry that Welsh issues are not subject to the same rigorous level of scrutiny that national and international issues are subjected to. This could also be said of any region in the UK but as we have our own semi-legislature, semi-government, in the Welsh Assembly, we could be leaving the door open for semi-tyranny, or worse. As a more positive result however, it does provide me with a feast of issues where my views are not articulated elsewhere.
The Western Mail, a much flawed publication in my opinion but the only 'National Newspaper of Wales', has brought an interesting issue to my attention, and one that points exactly to my concern. A new law has been passed by the Assembly requiring ALL new homes built in Wales to be fitted with automatic fire sprinklers. Wow you say, I haven't heard of that. Well, I'd wager that even if you live in Wales your unlikely to have heard of, or been consulted on, this issue. The AM that introduced the idea, Labour AM Ann Jones, proudly states "Wales has just become the first country in the world to pass a law making sprinklers mandatory in all new homes". Knowing Wales reasonably well, such a bold statement causes me immediate pause because whilst we are a modern developed nation, we are not often the first in the world to do anything.
Firstly turning to the actual sprinkler issue, the paper states that the policy has the backing of Wales' three fire and rescue services and the National Fire Sprinkler Network, no surprises there. Supporters of the law claim "it could prevent up to 25 deaths a year and save the Welsh economy £128m at minimal cost to the building industry". I have not looked at the stats, and I state openly that my only source of information on this subject is a single article in what I have already said is a deeply flawed publication. But its all we've got!
Having said that, some thoughts have occurred to me. Up to 25 deaths a year. . . so we can safely say less than 25 houses a year. 25 houses at the average house price of £150,000 comes to £3.75m. There are of course other costs, the fire service, police, hospitals etc, but £128m?
Minimal cost to the building industry. . . of course the cost of installing the system will be passed on to the house buyer. Oh, and servicing the system, and dealing with any accidents when your mad uncle sets it off whilst playing twister at Christmas, and replacing it when it gets to old. Its a shame the public weren't asked to comment.
How much do these systems cost to install you ask? Each system is estimated to cost £5,000!!! Added help for all those first time buyers out there, who can't possibly afford to buy a house at the moment, save up an extra five grand while your at it!
I would also like to see the raw data for myself. My experience of home fires via the Welsh news is often that in most incidents where there are fatalities, there is inevitably more than one, meaning we are talking of even less actual incidents. They also often appear to occur more often in social housing. In terms of private dwellings I would guess we are talking about less than 5 incidents a year. Should the authorities decide its worth installing sprinklers in social housing, I bow to their expertise, but to mandate it on the rest of us seems over the top.
But what about the value of human lives Ant? In terms of the £128m figure we could for the sake of the exercise add in the victims future salaries as societies loss of productivity, but unless there is a rash of top earner home fires we are still a way off. I have not been callous enough to forget the 'human' loss. In terms of the non-quantifiable personal loss of losing a loved one, well, it simply can't be quantified. But what I will say is that fire prevention systems are available at your local DIY stores and if people value their loved ones safety enough to warrant it, they are free to fill their boots and improve their home fire safety. Given that I have never encountered such serious concern for fire safety, I assume I am right in thinking that the majority would believe this measure to be un-warranted.
This leads me back to my primary concern, is this process democratic? This law, like most the Assembly has the power to introduce, was required to be signed off by Westminster. The up coming referendum in Wales is precisely to end the requirement for UK Government sign off. Indeed the length of time it has taken to pass the sprinkler law is cited as an example of why this practice needs to be ended. I shudder to think what kind of 'debate' was had in Westminster, I mean if the Welsh are for it who are they to say no? But if they do support the measure, why are they not proposing it at a national level for the whole of the UK?
Ms Jones says that she does "not accept the idea that our laws are being packed off to London to be interfered with", again I'd love some details, sadly the Western Mail has none. Whilst the idea of the UK Government signing off Welsh issues seems a ludicrous state of affairs there is one upside. By 'packing our laws off to London' we have in effect a second chamber. At present the Welsh Assembly is a single chamber legislature, far from ideal and democratically unsound. By removing the need for national sign off, we are left with a potentially dangerous regional government, what is the Welsh for checks and balances anyway? What with the lack of consultation, media scrutiny, public awareness and with further reductions in the checks and balances of the current system proposed, this issue highlights the flaws in the current system.
As for the Welsh peoples enthusiasm for such a change and reduced oversight of government, we will have to wait and see. I could go on for days, literally days, on why devolution is a bad idea, but when our Assembly member's efforts are spent conjuring mad ideas such as our new sprinkler law I return to my opening comments, someone is already fighting this battle for me!
If you would like to comment on this post, please click 'comments' below.
Thursday, 3 February 2011
Thou Shalt Watch this Video
If you would like to comment on this post, please click 'comments' below.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)