UK housing supply - the problem & solutions

Dai Corner said:

The schools in the area I'm talking about are all in walking distance too. Assuming parents send their children to the local one, of course.

Click to expand...

If you work you are unlikely to have time to walk to school and back, then get in your car to work, let alone then dawdle about in public transport.

Meerkat said:

If you work you are unlikely to have time to walk to school and back, then get in your car to work, let alone then dawdle about in public transport.

Click to expand...

The kids walk to school, either alone if old enough or with neighbours and their children.

Dai Corner said:

The kids walk to school, either alone if old enough or with neighbours and their children.

Click to expand...

I don’t think that’s really the way modern society works

Meerkat said:

I don’t think that’s really the way modern society works

Click to expand...

And we're all the poorer for it.

Dai Corner said:

The kids walk to school, either alone if old enough or with neighbours and their children.

Click to expand...

Which may have been OK when there were schools close to where people lived. Our village primary is 2 miles away and also serves several other villages up to 5 miles away. We don't have any secondary schools less than 5 miles away. All these villages used to have their own primary schools and our village used to have a small secondary school. All these villages have suffered from there being no decent employment, so people never return "home" after university, so very few kids are being brought up in the villages thus schools aren't viable. Yet another consequence of the stupid concentration of decent jobs into a few big cities.

underbank said:

Which may have been OK when there were schools close to where people lived. Our village primary is 2 miles away and also serves several other villages up to 5 miles away. We don't have any secondary schools less than 5 miles away. All these villages used to have their own primary schools and our village used to have a small secondary school. All these villages have suffered from there being no decent employment, so people never return "home" after university, so very few kids are being brought up in the villages thus schools aren't viable. Yet another consequence of the stupid concentration of decent jobs into a few big cities.

Click to expand...

Presumably the children get free transport to school as they have to travel at least 2 miles (primary) or 3 miles (secondary). Where do their parents work?

The Ham said:

1966 population of 54.6 of which 6.7 million over 65.

2016 population of 65.7 of which 11.9 million over 65.

Population growth of 20% yet growth of over 65's 78%.

Of the 11.1 million growth in population about 47% (5.2 million) is down to more old people, given that population has been slowly growing (when looking at pre Eastern expansion of the EU) then it's fairly unlikely that the population growth is mainly (i.e. over 50%) down to immigration.

Of course if you have any figures to back up that claim I'd be interested in seeing them.

Data from here:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...opulationischangingandwhyitmatters/2018-08-13

Click to expand...

The birthrate of non-immigrants has been slightly declining for years, whilst the birthrate of immigrants generally is somewhat higher than indigenous people as they are generally of working and childbearing age. When do you cease to be considered an immigrant and at what point you become an indigenous person in statistics? - I don't know the answer on that to be fair. My broadbrush comment of 'the vast majority' is, I accept, an exaggeration, however, the higher than UK norm births from immigrants and the several million immigrants who have arrived on our shores in my lifetime still amounts to a significant increase in population who will all have to be housed at some time in the future even if some are babies now (note OAPS tend not to produce additional offspring!). A trip to Bradford would reveal that it is becoming quite common for bungalows to be flattened, dormers added all over the place or smaller properties replaced by houses with lots of rooms as immigrant families are often much larger. For years we didn't count immigrants and emigrants at border controls, so the number of illegal immigrants is a guess. Some doctors, local authorities appear to have more residents than official stats suggest and many students etc overstay their visas, some disappearing into the underground economy. Despite the hype, few appear ever to be deported, thus some of the official statistics may not be entirely accurate anyway.

Obviously, I do accept that the greater number of old people is part of the problem and need housing and care, but the type of accommodation they need (1 or 2 bedroom flatlets, ideally ground floor with perhaps a communal courtyard and usually preferred without kids kicking balls about and making a noise) is rarely available and most builders aren't interested. It should be remembered though that immigration is a bit off a ponzi scheme as, assuming they stay, they will get old in due course exacerbating the problem of increasing number of OAPS who all need care and more workers to look after them. Immigrants from my teenage years are now OAPS.

A controversial issue here is no one in Government or medical profession ever bothers to ask if people WANT to live longer - sometimes being in considerable pain, bed-ridden and little life, friends all died off- I suspect many would like to have the opportunity to die peacefully at a time of their choosing - I would. Perhaps a separate thread on this topic might be an idea?

underbank said:

Which may have been OK when there were schools close to where people lived. Our village primary is 2 miles away and also serves several other villages up to 5 miles away. We don't have any secondary schools less than 5 miles away. All these villages used to have their own primary schools and our village used to have a small secondary school. All these villages have suffered from there being no decent employment, so people never return "home" after university, so very few kids are being brought up in the villages thus schools aren't viable. Yet another consequence of the stupid concentration of decent jobs into a few big cities.

Click to expand...

Infant school children are entitled to free school transport of they live more than two miles from their catchment school, junior and secondary children this increases to 3 miles. As such it sounds like most children in those schools should be getting taken to school by the local authority and therefore not needing to be taken by their parents.

Meerkat said:

If you work you are unlikely to have time to walk to school and back, then get in your car to work, let alone then dawdle about in public transport.

Click to expand...

I work and for 4 days of the week I take my children to school (the fifth day I don't so that I can do my hours to be able to pick them up on one day a week).

I do so by walking or cycling and I'm often at my desk comfortably before 9, but then I'm lucky to work in the same settlement as where I live and make an effort to only need to have one car in the household and limit the use of childcare.

Could I earn more working elsewhere? Maybe, but probably not enough to justify the extra expense (more childcare, transport costs, etc.).

Meerkat said:

If you work you are unlikely to have time to walk to school and back, then get in your car to work, let alone then dawdle about in public transport.

Click to expand...

Unless the kids are below year 6, they should be trusted to walk to school and back. If they are younger, walk them to your nearest neighbour, or take it in turns to walk the kids to the gates.

najaB said:

And we're all the poorer for it.

Click to expand...

Completely agree. Perhaps it's an argument for another thread, but people seem to live in their 'bubbles' and rarely leave them. 5-bed detached house 'bubble' at the end of a cul-de-sac 'bubble', before driving to school/work in a two ton metal bubble. Part of it is the way communities are laid out/constructed, part of it is that people have no trust, in their neighbours, for the general public. I'm a young person and will happily say the concept of helicopter parenting is terrible. Kids enjoy being trusted and independent, allowing them to independently socialise and make friendships is invaluable for building skills and increasing mental wellbeing.

underbank said:

Which may have been OK when there were schools close to where people lived. Our village primary is 2 miles away and also serves several other villages up to 5 miles away. We don't have any secondary schools less than 5 miles away. All these villages used to have their own primary schools and our village used to have a small secondary school. All these villages have suffered from there being no decent employment, so people never return "home" after university, so very few kids are being brought up in the villages thus schools aren't viable. Yet another consequence of the stupid concentration of decent jobs into a few big cities.

Click to expand...

Yeah, after growing up in a rural town, with some villages nearby being very isolated, I can understand some of these issues.

Unfortunately, jobs are increasingly moving away from labour/manufacturing to services, which are mostly in offices in the cities. Agglomeration effects are not to be underestimated either, having a better labour pool to choose from is useful, especially as industries move towards becoming increasingly specialist, with quite specific educational knowledge being required.

That said, there are definitely things causing rural areas to increasingly struggle, loss of essential services including lifeline public transportation links, along with healthcare, etc makes these areas harder to live in. Friends who had limited bus services and often relied on lifts to get around bailed very quickly. One who lived in a nearby village moved to London as soon as he left college. There is also limited housing choice, often quite expensive too. Not an ideal place to move when starting a family. There are some rural areas, especially in areas like Wales, that have become incredibly poverty stricken and devoid of opportunity. Some have lost industries such as mining/manufacturing.

Honestly, having a good bus or rail link seems like the best option for many rural areas. Having access to the jobs/prospects of a nearby city, or giving local businesses access to a larger labour pool by perhaps encouraging some reverse commuters out seems to bring significant benefits to these areas. The government has floated the idea of reversing some beeching cuts, so perhaps we could see more rural routes in the coming years.

matacaster said:

The birthrate of non-immigrants has been slightly declining for years, whilst the birthrate of immigrants generally is somewhat higher than indigenous people as they are generally of working and childbearing age. When do you cease to be considered an immigrant and at what point you become an indigenous person in statistics? - I don't know the answer on that to be fair. My broadbrush comment of 'the vast majority' is, I accept, an exaggeration, however, the higher than UK norm births from immigrants and the several million immigrants who have arrived on our shores in my lifetime still amounts to a significant increase in population who will all have to be housed at some time in the future even if some are babies now (note OAPS tend not to produce additional offspring!). A trip to Bradford would reveal that it is becoming quite common for bungalows to be flattened, dormers added all over the place or smaller properties replaced by houses with lots of rooms as immigrant families are often much larger. For years we didn't count immigrants and emigrants at border controls, so the number of illegal immigrants is a guess. Some doctors, local authorities appear to have more residents than official stats suggest and many students etc overstay their visas, some disappearing into the underground economy. Despite the hype, few appear ever to be deported, thus some of the official statistics may not be entirely accurate anyway.

Click to expand...

In regards to Migration, this seems to be an interesting read! They seem to be a fairly reliable, unbiased source, so I feel quite confident reading their findings.

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac....-impact-of-migration-on-uk-population-growth/

Migration has in fact exceeded natural population growth for the past two decades. That said, with 'natural change' only, the UK population is predicted to decline by 2044.

Interestingly, the populations of Scotland and Wales would be expected to decline without any migration between 2018-2043. Wales loses net 2.1% of its population to the rest of the UK in this time period, England and Northern Ireland -0.3%. Presumably due to low birth rates, Scotland is expected to have a natural population change of -8.1%. However, with around 4.5% expected to come from both the rest of the UK and another 4.5% internationally, Scotland's population is expected to rise.

Just found one about housing:
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac....nd-housing-in-the-uk-experiences-and-impacts/

The article mentions there is some evidence migration has contributed to higher house pricing, although it is estimated to be fairly low... (around 1%)

Interestingly though it mentions:

The Migration Advisory Committee study found that the impact of migration on house prices was larger in local authorities with more restrictive planning practices, i.e. those that have higher refusal rates for major developments.

Click to expand...

I think this is what me and a few others have been saying, is that migration is undeniably a factor, however poor housing policy will exacerbate the issue, regardless of migration or not.

Obviously, I do accept that the greater number of old people is part of the problem and need housing and care, but the type of accommodation they need (1 or 2 bedroom flatlets, ideally ground floor with perhaps a communal courtyard and usually preferred without kids kicking balls about and making a noise) is rarely available and most builders aren't interested. It should be remembered though that immigration is a bit off a ponzi scheme as, assuming they stay, they will get old in due course exacerbating the problem of increasing number of OAPS who all need care and more workers to look after them. Immigrants from my teenage years are now OAPS.

A controversial issue here is no one in Government or medical profession ever bothers to ask if people WANT to live longer - sometimes being in considerable pain, bed-ridden and little life, friends all died off- I suspect many would like to have the opportunity to die peacefully at a time of their choosing - I would. Perhaps a separate thread on this topic might be an idea?

Click to expand...

Many immigrants who come over to work return to their home countries to retire. Often they come to earn more relative to their home countries, so they can give themselves and their families a better quality of life over there. In that sense, we often get the better end of the deal. Perhaps it's worth encouraging this type of labour in the new system.

Right to die is an important issue, but definitely not a solution to the housing crisis...

I think most people would be quite happy to live as long as they are relatively healthy, perhaps just skipping the latter days of a terminal illness. As healthcare gets better though, I'd expect this to at the very least even itself out.

The Ham said:

I work and for 4 days of the week I take my children to school (the fifth day I don't so that I can do my hours to be able to pick them up on one day a week).

I do so by walking or cycling and I'm often at my desk comfortably before 9, but then I'm lucky to work in the same settlement as where I live and make an effort to only need to have one car in the household and limit the use of childcare.

Could I earn more working elsewhere? Maybe, but probably not enough to justify the extra expense (more childcare, transport costs, etc.).

Click to expand...

That seems nice, I bet the exercise does everyone some good too!

The Ham said:

Infant school children are entitled to free school transport of they live more than two miles from their catchment school, junior and secondary children this increases to 3 miles. As such it sounds like most children in those schools should be getting taken to school by the local authority and therefore not needing to be taken by their parents.

Click to expand...

LA provide free bus passes - brilliant! Except there are no direct buses. The bus route through the village was run down and eventually scrapped in the noughties because the council stopped subsidising it. To travel by bus, you have to go a few stops in the opposite direction to get onto a different route which takes you back to the other end of the village and then walk back (about half a mile) to the centre where the primary school is. Similar for the secondary school - you need to get a bus to town B's bus station, then change to a bus that takes you to town A's bus station and then a mile walk from the bus station across town to the school - secondary school kids using the bus have to leave home at around 7.20 to get the 7.30 bus and still often arrive late at school due to late buses/congestion etc. That's why people drive their kids to school. People in cities with good public transport just don't grasp what it's like outside the big towns and cities. It's not as if our village is a sleepy hillside hamlet - it's the largest village in our county with approx 6,000 inhabitants - you'd think we deserve a bus route that goes through the village wouldn't you?

underbank said:

LA provide free bus passes - brilliant! Except there are no direct buses. The bus route through the village was run down and eventually scrapped in the noughties because the council stopped subsidising it. To travel by bus, you have to go a few stops in the opposite direction to get onto a different route which takes you back to the other end of the village and then walk back (about half a mile) to the centre where the primary school is. Similar for the secondary school - you need to get a bus to town B's bus station, then change to a bus that takes you to town A's bus station and then a mile walk from the bus station across town to the school - secondary school kids using the bus have to leave home at around 7.20 to get the 7.30 bus and still often arrive late at school due to late buses/congestion etc. That's why people drive their kids to school. People in cities with good public transport just don't grasp what it's like outside the big towns and cities. It's not as if our village is a sleepy hillside hamlet - it's the largest village in our county with approx 6,000 inhabitants - you'd think we deserve a bus route that goes through the village wouldn't you?

Click to expand...

If there's no suitable public bus the LA must provide dedicated school transport (this may include taxis). By suitable there are time limits and the routes shouldn't be unreasonable.

If you are more than a 2 or 3 miles walk from the local school you should apply to the LA to see what provision they will provide.

underbank said:

LA provide free bus passes - brilliant! Except there are no direct buses. The bus route through the village was run down and eventually scrapped in the noughties because the council stopped subsidising it. To travel by bus, you have to go a few stops in the opposite direction to get onto a different route which takes you back to the other end of the village and then walk back (about half a mile) to the centre where the primary school is. Similar for the secondary school - you need to get a bus to town B's bus station, then change to a bus that takes you to town A's bus station and then a mile walk from the bus station across town to the school - secondary school kids using the bus have to leave home at around 7.20 to get the 7.30 bus and still often arrive late at school due to late buses/congestion etc. That's why people drive their kids to school. People in cities with good public transport just don't grasp what it's like outside the big towns and cities. It's not as if our village is a sleepy hillside hamlet - it's the largest village in our county with approx 6,000 inhabitants - you'd think we deserve a bus route that goes through the village wouldn't you?

Click to expand...

Tbh, many cities have poor public transport too for their size. Manchester has frequent bus routes and decent coverage, but the prices are eye watering, even on Stagecoach.

I also understand the pain of rural living too, as that used to be me. Fortunately I was never out of walking distance to school and we had a railway link to the town.

It's hard to express how much the train benefitted the younger people, letting us access shops, entertainment and education outside the town. I went to college, which would have been so much harder without the train. Rail brings a lot of social mobility, especially to younger people in rural areas. Perhaps re-opening some of the lines cut in the beeching era will help reverse the flow of younger people into larger towns and cities, as they will be able to commute to more jobs/opportunities from home.

The Ham said:

If there's no suitable public bus the LA must provide dedicated school transport (this may include taxis). By suitable there are time limits and the routes shouldn't be unreasonable.

If you are more than a 2 or 3 miles walk from the local school you should apply to the LA to see what provision they will provide.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I remember my school had quite a few dedicated bus routes, with some students arriving by taxi. The vast majority didn't need lifts from parents because of this, even those who lived a few miles away.