We're going to run out of houses in London

Falling well short of projections.

New household growth projections released by DCLG this week show that over 525,000 new households that will be created in London between 2011 and 2021.

The supply pipeline suggests that delivery of new units will fall well short of this, with an estimated 277,000 new units expected to be delivered over the next decade.

According to Knight Frank’s head of UK residential research, Gráinne Gilmore: “The overall trend for development in London shows that demand for housing in the capital will continue to outstrip supply by quite some margin. There is widespread recognition of the housing shortage in the capital, with the Mayor pushing hard to encourage higher levels of development."

This news could further boost prices in the capital which are already at record highs. Since the end of 2007, which is considered to be the peak of the market in most developed countries, London property prices have risen by 7 per cent (Source: Land Registry).

London prime prices have risen by even more - they are up over 20 per cent since end of 2007 (Source: Knight Frank, £1m+ homes only). London prime property has performed particularly well recently with growth of 12.2 per cent in 2011 and 8.7 per cent in 2012. In the first 5 months of 2013, prime prices rose by another 3.2 per cent according the Knight Frank figures.

This has been fuelled mainly by foreigners buying in. According to Knight Frank, local buyers made up only half of London sales in 2012. Russian buyers made up a high 6.6 per cent, USA buyers 4.8 per cent, Indian buyers 4.4 per cent, French buyers 3.3 per cent, Italian buyers 2.6 per cent and South African buyers made up 2.2 per cent. Super-prime statistics published by Knight Frank are even more extreme with local buyers making up less than a third of London buyers in 2012. Super-prime refers to properties valued at more than £10m each.

Despite this strong growth, it should be noted that London prime prices are still at a similar level to the end of 2007 if measured in US dollar terms.

This is of course still significantly healthier than general UK house prices which are down over 34 per cent since the end of 2007 (if measured in US dollar terms).

Photograph: Getty Images

Andrew Amoils is a writer for WealthInsight

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

Autumn Statement 2015: George Osborne abandons his target

How will George Osborne close the deficit after his U-Turns? Answer: he won't, of course. 

“Good governments U-Turn, and U-Turn frequently.” That’s Andrew Adonis’ maxim, and George Osborne borrowed heavily from him today, delivering two big U-Turns, on tax credits and on police funding. There will be no cuts to tax credits or to the police.

The Office for Budget Responsibility estimates that, in total, the government gave away £6.2 billion next year, more than half of which is the reverse to tax credits.

Osborne claims that he will still deliver his planned £12bn reduction in welfare. But, as I’ve written before, without cutting tax credits, it’s difficult to see how you can get £12bn out of the welfare bill. Here’s the OBR’s chart of welfare spending:

The government has already promised to protect child benefit and pension spending – in fact, it actually increased pensioner spending today. So all that’s left is tax credits. If the government is not going to cut them, where’s the £12bn come from?

A bit of clever accounting today got Osborne out of his hole. The Universal Credit, once it comes in in full, will replace tax credits anyway, allowing him to describe his U-Turn as a delay, not a full retreat. But the reality – as the Treasury has admitted privately for some time – is that the Universal Credit will never be wholly implemented. The pilot schemes – one of which, in Hammersmith, I have visited myself – are little more than Potemkin set-ups. Iain Duncan Smith’s Universal Credit will never be rolled out in full. The savings from switching from tax credits to Universal Credit will never materialise.

The £12bn is smaller, too, than it was this time last week. Instead of cutting £12bn from the welfare budget by 2017-8, the government will instead cut £12bn by the end of the parliament – a much smaller task.

That’s not to say that the cuts to departmental spending and welfare will be painless – far from it. Employment Support Allowance – what used to be called incapacity benefit and severe disablement benefit – will be cut down to the level of Jobseekers’ Allowance, while the government will erect further hurdles to claimants. Cuts to departmental spending will mean a further reduction in the numbers of public sector workers.  But it will be some way short of the reductions in welfare spending required to hit Osborne’s deficit reduction timetable.

So, where’s the money coming from? The answer is nowhere. What we'll instead get is five more years of the same: increasing household debt, austerity largely concentrated on the poorest, and yet more borrowing. As the last five years proved, the Conservatives don’t need to close the deficit to be re-elected. In fact, it may be that having the need to “finish the job” as a stick to beat Labour with actually helped the Tories in May. They have neither an economic imperative nor a political one to close the deficit. 

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.