Show Hide image

Morning Call: pick of the papers

The ten must-read comment pieces from this morning's papers. 

1. Queen's speeches are usually weird. But this one was weirder than usual (Guardian)

 Scotland's vote and the coalition's near end lent today an added air of make-believe, says Martin Kettle. The big stories are all outside parliament.

2. This coalition can be compared with our greatest governments (Daily Telegraph)

Like Thatcher and Attlee before them, David Cameron and Nick Clegg have changed Britain, writes Peter Oborne. 

3. Tiananmen split the workers of the world (Financial Times)

The opening of China through reform and investment has driven a wedge into the proletariat, writes John Gapper.

4. Slog, snog and snug: the Tories’ triple whammy (Times)

The Conservative manifesto will talk tough on public finances, woo Ukip voters and seek to reassure the low-paid, writes Tim Montgomerie.

5. Has Theresa May the mettle to follow the Iron Lady? (Daily Telegraph)

A row with Michael Gove over Muslim hardliners won’t tarnish the Home Secretary’s lustrous rise, says Sue Cameron. 

6. Critics should heed good IMF advice (Financial Times)

With the general election in the offing, the fund can help the parties produce sensible manifestos, says Chris Giles.

7. Recall Bill: This is not democracy, it's an incitement to malice and short-termism (Independent)

We already have a recall power in the British constitution, says John Rentoul. It is called a general election.

8. Newark shows how the sting could be taken out of Ukip (Guardian)

Deregulation and insecurity feed the anti-immigration backlash, writes Seumas Milne. A break with failed policies can draw the poison.

9. Putin on D-Day beaches violates the very values our heroes died for (Daily Mail)

The west should have uninvited Putin weeks ago, following his illegal annexation of Crimea, says Simon Heffer.

10. It isn’t just foreign countries that imperil women (Times)

A woman is menaced by her ex-partner, but the CPS is coldly indifferent to her plight, writes Jenni Russell. 

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

How can Britain become a nation of homeowners?

David Cameron must unlock the spirit of his postwar predecessors to get the housing market back on track. 

In the 1955 election, Anthony Eden described turning Britain into a “property-owning democracy” as his – and by extension, the Conservative Party’s – overarching mission.

60 years later, what’s changed? Then, as now, an Old Etonian sits in Downing Street. Then, as now, Labour are badly riven between left and right, with their last stay in government widely believed – by their activists at least – to have been a disappointment. Then as now, few commentators seriously believe the Tories will be out of power any time soon.

But as for a property-owning democracy? That’s going less well.

When Eden won in 1955, around a third of people owned their own homes. By the time the Conservative government gave way to Harold Wilson in 1964, 42 per cent of households were owner-occupiers.

That kicked off a long period – from the mid-50s right until the fall of the Berlin Wall – in which home ownership increased, before staying roughly flat at 70 per cent of the population from 1991 to 2001.

But over the course of the next decade, for the first time in over a hundred years, the proportion of owner-occupiers went to into reverse. Just 64 percent of households were owner-occupier in 2011. No-one seriously believes that number will have gone anywhere other than down by the time of the next census in 2021. Most troublingly, in London – which, for the most part, gives us a fairly accurate idea of what the demographics of Britain as a whole will be in 30 years’ time – more than half of households are now renters.

What’s gone wrong?

In short, property prices have shot out of reach of increasing numbers of people. The British housing market increasingly gets a failing grade at “Social Contract 101”: could someone, without a backstop of parental or family capital, entering the workforce today, working full-time, seriously hope to retire in 50 years in their own home with their mortgage paid off?

It’s useful to compare and contrast the policy levers of those two Old Etonians, Eden and Cameron. Cameron, so far, has favoured demand-side solutions: Help to Buy and the new Help to Buy ISA.

To take the second, newer of those two policy innovations first: the Help to Buy ISA. Does it work?

Well, if you are a pre-existing saver – you can’t use the Help to Buy ISA for another tax year. And you have to stop putting money into any existing ISAs. So anyone putting a little aside at the moment – not going to feel the benefit of a Help to Buy ISA.

And anyone solely reliant on a Help to Buy ISA – the most you can benefit from, if you are single, it is an extra three grand from the government. This is not going to shift any houses any time soon.

What it is is a bung for the only working-age demographic to have done well out of the Coalition: dual-earner couples with no children earning above average income.

What about Help to Buy itself? At the margins, Help to Buy is helping some people achieve completions – while driving up the big disincentive to home ownership in the shape of prices – and creating sub-prime style risks for the taxpayer in future.

Eden, in contrast, preferred supply-side policies: his government, like every peacetime government from Baldwin until Thatcher’s it was a housebuilding government.

Why are house prices so high? Because there aren’t enough of them. The sector is over-regulated, underprovided, there isn’t enough housing either for social lets or for buyers. And until today’s Conservatives rediscover the spirit of Eden, that is unlikely to change.

I was at a Conservative party fringe (I was on the far left, both in terms of seating and politics).This is what I said, minus the ums, the ahs, and the moment my screensaver kicked in.

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