A flagship Tory scheme to help first-time buyers has been described as a “flop” after just 35 homes were delivered.

Sophia Sleigh www.huffingtonpost.co.uk 

The First Homes programme promised to help thousands of key workers onto the property ladder by offering homes at a discount of at least 30% compared to the market price.

A trial was launched in Bolsover, Derbyshire, in June 2021, with a ministerial visit by then housing secretary Robert Jenrick.

It all formed part of Boris Johnson’s “levelling up” agenda and aimed to help first-time buyers stay in their local area.

The scheme featured in the Conservative Party’s winning 2019 election manifesto and was part of Johnson’s ambition to build one million new affordable homes during this parliament.

The government promised that further sites would launch across the country in “coming weeks”, adding: “A further 1,500 will enter the market from the autumn, with at least 10,000 homes a year being delivered in the years ahead and more if there is demand.”

However, figures unearthed by Labour MP Mike Amesbury show the government has delivered just 35 home since the scheme launched.

How Many First Homes Have Been Completed?

In the financial year 2021-22 at total of 35 First Homes were completed in England, according to government figures.

12 were completed in Bolsover, 10 in Cannock Chase, 10 in County Durham and three in South Cambridgeshire.

The former shadow housing minister branded it a “flop” and accused the government of “all spin and no substance”.

He told HuffPost UK: “Millions of people across the country are desperate to get on the housing ladder yet for many, market prices are simply unaffordable.

“Here was a glimmer of hope, with promises made and expectations raised. But yet again we find a government that is all spin and no substance.

“How many were completed in 2021-22? Just 35. And not a single one in my constituency or the wider North West region where I’m based.

“This is a scandalous state of affairs. It’s government by press release, government by soundbite. When you examine the evidence, there’s just no delivery.”

The then housing secretary Jenrick said at the launch: “Thanks to First Homes, we will offer more homes to local people and families, providing a route for first-time buyers to stay in their local areas rather than being forced out due to rising prices.”

Government sources stressed that they were still in the first stage of the scheme which runs until September and after then will ramp up the scheme to 10,000 a year.

A Department for Levelling Up spokesperson said: “First Homes gives first-time buyers discounts of up to 30% – making homeownership a reality for many.

“These figures only cover the very early stages of the pilot scheme and we have always been clear it will take time to ramp up and have never suggested delivery will be at 10,000 at this stage.

“We continue to support people onto the property ladder through a range of schemes including Right to Buy, Shared Ownership and through the mortgage guarantee scheme.”

Owl not holding their breath on this one either.

Remember: in the heyday of the “Build, build, build”, developer friendly business forum oriented Tory administration, EDDC lost track of S106 monies.  Vote the wrong way in May and that’s where we will return.

Under the proposals, the amount developers will have to pay will be calculated once a project is complete, instead of at the stage when planning permission is given. This is designed to make sure that councils benefit from increases in land value, which can be significant for large developments that take years to complete.

www.theconstructionindex.co.uk 

The infrastructure levy, which will replace section 106 contributions for most developments, will prevent developers from negotiating down the amount they contribute to the community when they bring forward new projects, the government says.

Councils will also be given powers to set rates themselves.

Secretary of state for levelling up, housing and communities Michael Gove said: “Central to our levelling up mission is ensuring local communities can take back control. The infrastructure levy will do just that – giving local leaders the tools to bring forward more affordable housing and the transport links, schools and GP surgeries their communities need.”

He added: “It will also speed up delivery and put an end to lengthy negotiations with developers seeking to shirk their responsibility to provide for local people.”

A small number of councils will implement the levy initially, testing how it operates in practice, before being rolled out more widely, to make sure the new approach works.

The consultation runs until 9^th June 2023 and can be found here.

Solicitor Gary Sector, a partner in Addleshaw Goddard’s planning & infrastructure consenting team, said: “This announcement is no surprise really. For years the government has been talking about shaking up the levy on developers. It makes sense that Michael Gove was going to be the one to finally do it.

“Since the controversial community infrastructure levy (CIL) was brought in 13 years ago to sit alongside 106 planning obligations, there have been a number of false dawns on further major structural reform in this area.

“Undoubtedly this is a complex system to navigate. The consultation suggests the government is serious about securing a simpler calculation of contributions paid on the completion of a development, replacing current s106 and CIL calculations which are front-loaded to when planning permission is granted.

“Whether the planning system really needs another big-bang moment it debateable at a time when the government is so focused on growth. Changes to the planning system are often unpredictable and there’s nothing to say that this change won’t slow things down in the short-term.

“The consultation raises a number of pressing  questions, not least around how charges secured at the time of completion of developments secure the timely delivery of infrastructure requirements.  The government can expect a lot of lively debate from developers and local authorities during the 12-week consultation period.

“Make no mistake, change here is not going to be instant. The government makes clear any significant reforms will be implemented slowly, with a 10 year ‘test and learn’ period.  So in the short term this is perhaps more about creating the illusion of significant reform, whilst on a practical level doing very little in a few local authority areas – at least initially.”

A new set of dentures for Ofwat? Owl not holding their breath.

The UK water regulator is to use new powers to block companies from shareholder payouts if they fail to hit performance and environmental targets.

Mark Sweney www.theguardian.com 

Ofwat, which in December heavily criticised some of the country’s biggest suppliers over the size of dividend payments relative to their financial performance, said the new rules would also mean water companies would “maintain a higher level of overall financial health”.

“When deciding on dividend payments to investors, water companies need to take stock of their performance for customers, the environment, and the company’s overall financial health,” said David Black, the Ofwat chief executive.

“Too often, this has not been the case. That is why we’re implementing changes that will allow us to better hold companies to account and take enforcement action when they get it wrong.”

The report was published after the Guardian revealed that the nine main water and sewerage companies had paid out £65.9bn in dividends in the last three decades. They have also taken on debts of £54bn since privatisation.

Ofwat, which is taking a tough stance with water companies after criticism that for years the firms have not been properly regulated, said its new rules would improve the attractiveness of investment in the sector as well as “protect customers and the health of our waterways”.

In December, Ofwat released a report that found poor performance was “the norm” at many water companies, in particular naming Northumbrian Water, Southern Water, South West Water, Thames Water, Welsh Water and Yorkshire Water.

The regulator is modifying water company licences to ensure they have a strong credit rating, with the power to stop them paying dividends if their financial health is at risk.

In addition, licences will be changed to require companies to also take into account “service delivery for customers and the environment” when deciding whether to pay dividends.

“We hope the introduction of these new powers will focus minds around company board tables on the importance of responsible decision making and openness with customers and other stakeholders. And if that isn’t the case, we will act.”

Last month, the government accepted a Liberal Democrat amendment to the UK infrastructure bank bill that would mean taxpayer money would be able to fund water companies only if they produce a costed and timed plan for ending sewage spills into waterways.

Commenting on Ofwat’s new powers, the water minister, Rebecca Pow, said: “It is wrong for water companies to be responsible for environmental damage and poor performance but not face the penalties.

“It has been happening too often and it needs to stop. These new powers, made possible through our Environment Act, will enable Ofwat to clamp down on excessive cash payouts and make sure companies put customers first.”

A bureaucratic “Beauty Contest” of glossy brochures, costly in time, effort and cash for participants – Owl  

A senior Devon councillor has criticised the government’s levelling-up bidding process, calling it “absolutely the wrong way to go about it.”

Ollie Heptinstall, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

Liberal Democrat Julian Brazil, opposition leader at Devon County Council who also sits on South Hams District Council, was speaking after a number of Devon bids to the fund’s second round were rejected at the start of the year.

These included a bid by Teignbridge District Council for government cash to create a new cycle route between Newton Abbot and Torquay, a new relief road for Cullompton in Mid Devon, and an East Devon bid for the Axe Valley.

A number of applications were successful though, with a total of £45 million going towards an extension to Dinan Way in Exmouth and town centre transport improvements, a new railway station at Okehampton and a Clean Maritime Innovation Centre in Appledore.

The levelling-up fund awarded £1.7 billion to projects in October 2021 and another £2.1 billion in January. So far, more than £300 million of this has been handed out to projects in the south west.

However, speaking to Devoncast from Radio Exe, Cllr Brazil said of the process: “I do find the way that the government hands out this money, with all the strings attached, is absolutely the wrong way to go about it.

“If you want to give levelling-up money to communities, give it to local authorities and let them decide how they want to spend it. But I think this [process] of making areas compete against each other is timely, costly and I don’t think, in the end, will necessarily produce the best results.”

He also criticised the “over-centralised” spread of power in the country: “Westminster has the money and it will decide, and I just think that’s disappointing. I’d much prefer to see that funding devolved down to the regions or to Devon itself and [let] Devon County decide.

“Much closer to the people. Much more democratically accountable.”

Labour’s shadow secretary of state for levelling-up, housing and communities, Lisa Nandy, has also criticised the bidding process and the “Hunger Games-style beauty contest for levelling-up funds.”

But Councillor Philip Skinner, leader of the Conservative group on East Devon District Council, defended the process, telling Devoncast: “We’ve been securing money in this way for a long time now, and in actual fact it’s really a good public process. It’s not hidden from view from anybody.”

He hailed the £15.7 million of cash given to Exmouth from the fund and said: “It is very unfortunate when other authorities – Teignbridge and the like – put bids in and you don’t win, but you don’t always get things on the first round.”

Cllr Skinner added: “Local authorities really need to work up schemes to get them put forward to government, so if you can imagine it’s almost like putting a business plan forward to a bank. And this is almost the same sort of process.

“So, what the government is saying is ‘we’re not just going to dole out money to you for you to prop up what may be things that are not actually going to deliver for the money that’s come from central government,’ and it’s making local authorities really focus and concentrate. And I think it’s a good thing.”

There is expected to be a third round of the fund within the next year, in which unsuccessful councils are likely to be able to bid again.