The UK Independence Party is known for its views on Europe, but does it have any policies on housing? Kate Youde finds out
The UK Independence Party won 147 seats in England in this month’s local elections - a gain of 139. While the views of Nigel Farage’s party on the European Union and immigration are well publicised, far less is known of its stance on housing. As UKIP’s influence on councils grows, we ask its housing spokesperson, Andrew Charalambous, an unelected private landlord, to outline its policies in five key areas.
On the hot topic of welfare reform, Mr Charalambous says UKIP would:
UKIP has ‘serious reservations’ regarding the national planning policy framework’s impact on the green belt, Mr Charalambous says. UKIP would establish a strategy for developing brownfield sites, including a ‘national brownfield decontamin-ation agency’ as a source of information for potential developers.
UKIP would also ensure councils have a duty to sell surplus land for development.
‘We would merge the planning and building control departments in local authorities,’ he adds, and ‘accelerate the planning process by introducing a system of “rapid generic approval” for non-contentious applications’.
Where planning decisions affect significant numbers of people, UKIP would establish binding referenda ‘enlivening and imbuing democracy into the planning process’.
‘Instead of the two options on either end of the scale of buying or short-term annual tenancies, we would establish a third choice of three to five-year mediumhold leases,’ Mr Charalambous says. ‘This would balance the long-term liquidity of the landlord’s asset with security of future rental. Some such tenancies could, in theory, even attract a market renewal premium. On the other hand, it would provide greater stability and security of tenure for tenants.’
On the subject of affordability, Mr Charalambous says UKIP would:
‘It is clear that the dominant pressure on housing in the UK has come from the unprecedented immigration of the last decade. Withdrawal from the European Union would be the only practical way to alleviate this effect on our housing demand,’ he adds.
On the subject of homelessness, Mr Charalambous says UKIP would:
‘It is good UKIP appears to recognise the damage that many of the current welfare reforms are doing. We would welcome proposals to scrap the bedroom tax, to allow housing benefit to be paid direct to landlords, and to introduce longer tenancies in the private rented sector. We would urge UKIP - like all political parties - to prioritise delivering a step-change in the building of new houses and to call a halt to the current cuts to benefits.’
Duncan Shrubsole, director of policy and external affairs, Crisis
‘We are not going to build 250,000 homes nationally if we do not address the issues of some urban growth into marginal greenfield territory, and new towns. A strategy focusing purely on brownfield sites just won’t cut it. UKIP’s ideas are a bit of a ragbag of different policies; some of which I would agree with, some which look like stuff that’s been thrown together and not thought through. It’s a curate’s egg.’
Rod Cahill, chief executive, Catalyst Housing Group
‘At first glance, these are a collection of reasonable proposals - except for those relating to migrants - many of which exist or have existed in previous regimes. The duty on councils to sell land for development would be welcomed but is already happening. Local democracy on planning issues is good in theory but often counter-productive when relating to social housing or supported housing schemes because of nimbyism.’
Tom Murtha, chair, Hact