Housing, Planning, Devolution, and Urban Econ
@CentreforCities
. Stuff on Ukraine + Eastern Europe and Japan + East Asia too. YIMBY. Views own etc. 🥑🇺🇦
If we want to fix English local government, then we need to sort out both the finances and the geography of councils.
Our new briefing shows how to get it done by the end of the Parliament, and it all depends on a new map for English local government that looks like this:
Devolution solution: How fixing English local government will improve economic growth📈
Fiscal devolution would see councils rescued from financial distress and give strong incentives to grow the local economy.
Read our latest briefing from
@AntBreach
👇
Regardless of your politics, it's important to understand Labour's Yimbyism isn't just Reeves + Starmer. There is also a rising core of young Labour members (incl. MPs) who want more construction to solve the housing crisis they face + to get the economic growth they haven't had.
There are 112 cities in the G7 bigger than Nottingham - but of the bottom 20 for productivity, 7 are British.
We can catch up with the rest of the G7, and become richer than Germany, but only if we fix this problem.
NEW REPORT | Climbing the summit: UK vs G7 cities ⛰️
This latest report explores the gap between British cities and their peers in the G7.
The UK an outlier in the G7 because its ‘second cities’ lag well behind their peers.
Read the full report 👇
Just insane that planning applications can be scuppered after a consent by these vandals. How many hundreds of thousands of pounds of value and hours of private and public sector time have been destroyed to save a glorified bus stop?
🚨UPDATE: We're delighted that 71 Whitney Drive in Stevenage has just been designated Grade II following C20's listing application, saving the house from a consented demolition.
Designed in 1966 by Derrick Shorten as his family home, Shorten was also project architect on the
Finland's success in housing policy is because they build more than we do. If we had their housing availability, we'd have 8 million (30%) more houses in the UK.
People sometimes call their strategy 'Housing First' - it would be more accurate to call it 'Build Housing First'.
Its a funny thing but it turns out that if the state pays for giving people the minimum requirements needed to live decent lives, like homes, it saves the state money in the long run.
I don't understand why people treat 1.5m new homes (or 370k a year) as some sort of "maximum" theoretical supply in England.
Compared to other European countries we're missing 4.3m homes. England should be building around 442k-654k a year if we want big impacts on affordability.
Good solid evidence-based piece in
@TheEconomist
on what we can expect to happen to house prices and rents at different rates of supply. One to ✂️ out and keep
On the contrary - Labour made planning reform and building on the green belt central to their election offer, and have won the biggest majority in their 124 year history.
The bigger political risk is failing to fulfil their mandate to solve our national housing problem.
I really do not understand why Government and the rail/bus industry have completely ignored the explosion in antisocial behaviour on public transport since Covid. How hard is it to put up some posters warning of spectacular fines and then enforce them a little?
British policy's push for heat pumps + hatred of A/C (the same tech!) is bizarre. Chapter O building regs mandate tiny porthole windows for Londoners to control overheating but don't allow A/C, meaning people buy inefficient mobile units and stick the nozzle out their window.
In a bid to annoy pretty much everyone, I've written that the problem with the govt's heat pumps plan isn't that it is too disruptive/expensive, but that it isn't disruptive/expensive enough 🫣
Sounds odd but... have a read. Free if you click fast enough
This would be a serious mistake from Labour. Even leaving aside the obvious fact the national + local economy needs lots more houses in Cambridge - a new Gov that wants more "strategic planning" starting by scrapping one of the few strategic plans we do have would be bananas.
Labour could drop Cambridge as focus for growth, says strategic planning expert - Planning Resource.
Today’s Planning Summit hears Labour could instead choose to promote the Midlands, the north of England and the wider South East.
Sounds interesting - seems like Starmer could be calling for a 'Builder's Remedy' approach, where councils have to agree local plans or they lose their planning powers entirely. This is used in California and we've called for it before as an interim planning reform.
NEW: Keir Starmer ‘will unveil plans to build 1.5 million houses over five years by forcing councils to approve new homes, including on the green belt, warning that those who refuse will have development imposed upon them as part of a “zero tolerance” approach to nimbyism.’
This is the most important part of John's excellent thread. Austria and Finland don't have cheaper housing than the UK because they have more social housing than us - it's because they have/build more social AND private housing than the UK does:
Cities like Vienna and Helsinki demonstrate this.
Both are full of affordable housing, with homelessness low and falling.
But contrary to some narratives, this is not just because of social housing. The stock and new supply of market-rate homes is also far higher than London.
Super exciting stuff here. New Zealand is essentially abolishing their green belts and their minimum space standards - both of which currently cause very serious problems for the total amount and location of new housing in England, and by extension affordability:
How the suburbs were built before the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act - developers would buy land, lay out the infrastructure, and either sell finished houses or plots (!) for households/small builders to work on themselves.
If this thread was true, then England should be swamped by self-builders busy beavering away on new homes.
We're not, because it's not true, because the planning system restricts all development, and in such an unpredictable way developers are forced to landbank to manage risk.
Neglected fact: getting more housebuilding is about more than planning reform.
Here’s an important graph for understanding that:
Developers have consistently under-delivered on their planning permissions for years.
🧵 on why and why it matters
@mattyglesias
The case is currently going to appeal and has been extremely well covered in the UK. I'd recommend having a look through some of the UK reporting to better understand the full range of evidence that was presented in court. e.g. +
New Towns as urban extensions for London and other expensive cities could work. But as special places where the normal rules of planning don't apply, they are also kind of an admission that the planning system in the rest of the country that ain't a New Town is highly restrictive
Under the Tories, house building has plummeted.
As part of Labour’s first step towards our economic mission, we will build good quality, affordable homes across the country.
The planning system is not the right framework for improving human rights in supply chains - planning is about land is used.
Objecting to new infrastructure on the unethical origins of some parts comes across rather like throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks.
This morning Ed Miliband is boasting of making a decision on Mallard Pass, and two other major solar plants, at speed:
“They were put on my desk on Monday, and I’ve made a decision in three days.”
This is an example of ideology absolutism over considered governance.
We in
A sensible start to planning reform. Trying to make the existing system work a bit better makes lots of sense.
But if planning reform was this easy, we'd have already done it. We will need deeper reforms over the next few years to create a normal planning system that works well
Rachel Reeves to announce planning overhaul as Labour seeks to build 1.5m homes this Parliament
* Restoration of mandatory local housebuilding targets
* Relaxation of planning restrictions on 'ugly' parts of the green belt
* Enhanced presumption in favour of sustainable
Housing was worse in the Victorian era for the same reason food, clothing, + transport all were. We were much poorer 150 years ago.
Housing has not improved nearly as much as those other things since 1947 tho, as our abnormal planning system has reduced housebuilding ever since
Ah yes, the Victorian era when famously people were housed well and in no way did deregulation lead to terrible slums that needed state intervention to address
If we zoom out and compare to other European countries, it becomes more obvious that Britain's 'homes per population is at its highest level ever' is both A) much lower than other rich European countries + B) stuck at basically the same level for the past 30 years.
Housing item on R4,
@amolrajan
compared 700k immigration (for 1 yr) to ~230k new housing - but average household size for migrants is around 3. Not an ideal comparison
Also lots of 'housing supply not keeping up' but homes per population is at its at its highest level *ever*...
People on here will be like "planning reform to build more houses? That pales in comparison to my plan, taxing homeowners so much that boomers are forced into houseshares on their pension", and then not increase tax on homeowners at all
I've written a new piece for the
@IIPP_UCL
blog: Meeting housing needs within planetary boundaries requires opening the black box of housing "demand"
1/8
The "best" bit about the rejection from the Islington planners is the comment that increased council tax/business rates revenues are 'not a public benefit' - in a period of utterly dire straits for the finances of local government and local services!!
Islington rules against a mansard on a small property even though it offered retrofit to reduce emissions by 90%! Council even sent a 25 page statement of case to the Inspectorate. That resource is better used to consult residents and update policy. Anti-housing and anti-climate.
Bristol is a real success story. It's become much more affluent since 2000 and is helping lead the national economy.
But Bristol has a terrible housing crisis. Our new briefing shows that is because the planning system blocks new homes in Bristol, particularly the green belt.
Ship shape? How the planning system is holding back Bristol’s economy 🏠
The planning system needs to reform to ensure big cities like Bristol can fulfil their economic potential.
Read our new briefing by
@Oscar_Jay_Selby
👇
These people who oppose planning reform never manage to explain why the planning system we have now is actually good.
They hate Yimbyism for reasons unrelated to the housing crisis - if you are paying high rents/stuck in a houseshare/unable to move out, they are not your friend.
"Rejecting YIMBYism doesnt mean rejecting housebuilding. What we want to see is houses as homes, not new opportunities for upward wealth redistribution"
@g_f_red
@_isaacrose
& me on property developer activism, false binary of NIMBY vs YIMBY, Labour's plans & what we need next
Housing First has worked well in Finland. But it would make more sense to call it 'Build Housing First', as it works because the Finns have and build much more than the UK does.
In 1955, Finland had 14% fewer homes per person than the UK. Now it has 23% more than the UK:
Lots to agree with in here. Three thoughts from me.
1) The central fact about the UK's economic geography is the non-London big cities underperform. Focusing on London as expensive misses some of the biggest problems the UK has with agglomeration, urban outcomes, and planning.
Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated.
A new essay by
@bswud
,
@SCP_Hughes
& me.
Why the UK's ban on investment in housing, infrastructure and energy is not just a problem. It is *the* problem.
And how fixing it is the defining task of our generation.
The planning system restricts all development. It is designed to do so, and functions perfectly. If we want to see more housing, more development, whether private or public, then we need planning reform.
Finally! Such a testament to how bad our planning system is that our own public bodies are held up for YEARS from using their land effectively, because the former MP from the neighbouring constituency wanted her voters to be able to park there
Spoke to the Guardian a second time this week, and some people are noticing! Labour need to do planning reform for the sake of the economy - it's not just about fairness, but economic growth that feels tangible, with more money in everyone's pockets.
Oh dear quoting Ant Breach about housing. Someone who works for an organisation that thinks we have a shortfall of 4.3 million dwellings! [We don't}. Housing policy has been captured by free market 'think-tanks'!
@Victoria_Spratt
Well sure, more supply of new homes doesn't necessarily mean we get more subsidised 'affordable homes'. But more supply does make all housing more affordable.
A quick thread from me on the Government's latest planning reforms.
In short, I think they come close to the max you can get out of the current system without picking major fights (which is good and sensible), but they also show how deeper change is still needed.
Really so proud to live in a country where despite our political divides there is such a deep and shared consensus across the entire country about our support for Ukraine. Одна, Єдина, Соборна Україна.
Today, we honour those who gave their lives so we could live in freedom.
Too many are still paying the ultimate price today.
I told President
@ZelenskyyUa
that if there is a change of government, there will be no change in Britain’s support for Ukraine.
What's interesting about Labour Yimbys wanting planning reform to get more/cheaper housing and more growth is Tory Yimbys want the same thing. They disagree a lot on how exactly to do it, but this is generational, not ideological.
@Samfr
@Noahpinion
Whenever Noah writes about a topic that has anything to do with the UK or the rest of Europe, all this tub-thumping American nationalism comes out. I genuinely have no idea why, he's never explained or reflected upon it.
Contrary to what you might think, cities are good for the environment. By sharing land and infrastructure, they make low-carbon transport and living options viable, and reduce the pressure human civilization puts on the natural world:
☀ NEW REPORT | Accelerating net zero delivery: What can UK cities learn from around the world?🌍
Our latest report looks at the role cities will play in meeting the government's net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 target🌱
Read the full report👇
Puzzling to read a defence of these unelected policymakers that admits they are doing a terrible job.
It remains mysterious to me why Natural England's functions could not be exercised by democratically accountable civil servants in either local authorities or the Department.
Sunak’s government has almost destroyed
@NaturalEngland
– just for doing its job.
If Labour wins the election, it must give our green watchdog back its budgets and independence.
My new piece for the Guardian:
cc
@SteveReedMP
@ChrisGPackham
We'll learn more later, but to me this sounds like trying to get the current system working as well as possible.
If a site is allocated in a plan it will almost certainly get a consent, and part of the push here seems to be getting plans agreed everywhere ASAP.
Duncan is right. Much better to just demolish buildings at the end of their life and redevelop the site with nice new buildings, than to spend tens of billions of taxpayers' money pumping mouldy foam into people's walls.
"[Consultation mechanisms] are, of course, unrepresentative, but [...] more important, they cannot do anything. They can only harass and complain. They carry no responsibility, so they are under no obligation to be practical or constructive."
Regardless of if you call yourself a "YIMBY" you should recognize this sort of NIMBYism as
1) not a product of genuine democratic deliberation but a process highly selective of the worst busybodies
2) incompatible with a world where the state aggressively builds out public goods
The most important bit from
@emmacduncan
here is there's often zero evidence these regs actually work, let alone are worth the cost. The second staircase rules will save no lives; nutrient neutrality won't clean our rivers; "10% more biodiversity" is open to obvious abuse etc.
The basic problem is that under the current planning system these councils will need to be forced to produce an entirely new local plan for these Nimby local plans to be replaced. This could take years - eg St Albans is still using their local plan from 1994.
New! Manchester's housing market is driving those who can't afford to pay skyrocketing rents out. But the sharp edge doesn't look much like a skyscraper - I wrote about our suburban housing crisis for
@ManchesterMill
(£) (1/4)
That these are two completely different maps should raise questions about the framework that underpins them.
Neither aligns with local economies and so can't be expected to really improve local outcomes. Pursuing either map risks being a huge distraction for everyone involved.
These arguments are so strange. All the good things in the built environment are thanks to the planning system; but all the bad things are the fault of somebody else?
We need systemic change in planning; but we shouldn't change the planning system from its TCPA 1947 origins?
Rather than less planning, Britain actually needs much more – not more of the same, but more ambitious, more imaginative and more proactive planning, setting out positive visions crafted in collaboration with community participation all across the country.
Oh my god the DRIVER of this tube just came into the carriage and told off someone for playing music without headphones this is the best day of my life
What's interesting about the Finnish case is it upsets a lot of the big myths of British housing policy. Nearly all their housebuilding is private sector rather than public - their private sector alone happily outbuilds our private and public sectors combined.
Nice review of the evidence on rent controls that's relevant to the UK debate this week. Beware anybody who tells you that rent control has no costs or that "new generation" rent controls will work differently this time.
The Government's economic strategy depends on whether their planning reforms can match their Yimby rhetoric. Only a big shift from discretionary planning to flexible zoning will be enough to play the load-bearing role the logic of the Gov's arguments now requires:
‘The YIMBY moment has come’: pro-building Labour yimbys are set to have the biggest rally of conference.
This parliament of millennials has a number of key YIMBY activists.
And the politics are v convenient as well...
My read here -
Some of Barker's proposals are defensible, but we've tried most of them before and they didn't work. If the Government is serious about planning reform driving growth through a big boost to housebuilding, they need big reforms to match (i.e. a shift from discretion to zoning).
The Tories have left housing supply in free fall and turning things around is going to be immensely challenging.
I'd like to thank
@Barker4Kate
for sharing her Commission's initial recommendations about how we can address England's housing crisis.
Enjoyed chatting to the FT this week! Planning reform is essential for both housing and the economy - a new Labour Government thinking seriously about two terms will have to think seriously about deep reforms to the guts of the planning system.
When you see Russians talk about 'Nazis', they mean anyone who speaks Ukrainian, because they believe that all East Slavs are really 'Russians' and that all 'Russians' must be obedient slaves of the Kremlin.
Russian KA-52 pilot and milblogger Aleksei Voevoda admits that a woman – a gas station operator – was kidnapped and tortured by Russian troops in a basement in Zaporizhzhia Oblast because of him simply for saying, "Good evening. Tap your card" in Ukrainian. A few thoughts: 🧵
@SamCousins93
@RosieP4
digging up swathes of the countryside and seabed to bury cables out of sight and out of mind for Nimbys is bad for the environment
Cities are good for the environment and the planet! The average city-dweller emits LESS carbon than those who live in small towns and the countryside in place-sensitive sectors, because urbanites drive less, use public transport more, and live and work in efficient buildings.
Important paper here from the US for British Yimbys. In short, talking about "build more private housing" is not that popular and US voters are doubtful will work.
But planning reform - removing discretionary planning to get rules-based zoning - is popular!
🥳New papers! A cornucopia! (well, 3).🎆
#1
: "What State Housing Policies Do Voters Want? Evidence from a Platform-Choice Experiment" (w/
@ClaytonNall
&
@stan_okl
)
written for a
@JPIPE_journal
symposium on political economy of housing
🧵/21
We need big increases to public sector take home pay if we want to public services to improve. Bringing forward compensation from pensions to salaries is a sensible way to do this, not least because it gives the Government breathing space on its fiscal rules
Exclusive: The country's largest trust plans to offer staff an alternative pension - meaning it can boost starting salaries to up to £45k
But unions have slammed the 'alarming' and 'dangerous' move - saying they could strike
The only way to solve the housing crisis is by fixing housing policy. Immigration does make this more challenging, but our planning system should be supplying adequate new homes whatever our level of population growth is - it doesn't because it is designed to be restrictive.
Good long read in
@Telegraph
on the origins of the housing crisis, feat me,
@AntBreach
& Paul Cheshire. Short version: no, Nigel, it's not just about immigration.
Cool paper here on how French quality regulations are counterproductive and worsen the quantity of housing produced.
London has similar problems from England's minimum space standards - bunching at 37m², 50m², 70m², and 85m² also shows harm to quantity and quality of housing.
French law mandates that a licensed architect establishes the plans for any new home, but only above a size threshold. Using exhaustive data on building permits, I evidence that construction costs jump at the discontinuity, and that quality standards distort quantity choices.
At the very least if the state is going to violate private property rights in this manner, it should be the Secretary of State for Housing and Local Government doing it, and nobody else. That an unelected quango (
@HistoricEngland
) is responsible for this behaviour is appalling.
I really don't understand these proposals for case-by-case deletions of public infra/industrial land to build housing in London. We need planning reforms that are scalable - tightening bottlenecks in the land market just transfers costs from households to firms/the public sector.
In 2015, it was estimated that if Wandsworth Prison was sold off for development, it would create space for almost 1,000 homes worth a combined £386m.
Why do we dedicate valuable land in the capital to dilapidated Victorian prisons?
Interesting from Jenrick here on planning reform. If Jenrick still supports a move from a discretionary system towards a zoning system, it would mean he supports bigger planning reforms than what the Government is currently proposing.
Labour don’t have a credible plan for growth, and their hostility to wealth creators is already scaring off investors.
Here’s how we can unlock Britain’s potential👇
Morning everyone. Today we've released our new Planning Reform FAQ - it's a short and simple guide to solving the housing crisis and making planning reform work. A quick thread with some questions below:
💥🏘️ OUT TODAY: A very short guide to planning reform from Senior Analyst & our housing expert
@AntBreach
.
🧵 Explore 5⃣ answers to some of the most frequently asked questions on
#planningreform
in the thread below.
Just to be clear, the Yimby argument for planning reform isn't "Let's go back to Victorian times" but "Let's be like the average rich country in the year 2024".
All Yimbys are asking for is for England to have a normal planning system.
@Victoria_Spratt
The article and the literature are both clear that more supply = more affordability.
Other things affect rents and esp. prices, but as the article says, the real problem is how supply in England (esp. the South) does not respond enough to prices, because of the planning system.
Farage is wrong - Putin is extremely clear that Ukraine provoked Russia's genocidal war by existing and being a democracy.
That's why he's not bothered about Finland and Sweden joining NATO, and instead obsessed with Soviet local government boundary changes in the 1920s.
BRIEFING | Mission accepted: How the new Government can revive growth 📈
The new Government are facing large economic challenges.
Here are our 7️⃣ suggestions for what it should do to make an immediate difference 👇
Agree with lots of this. The key thing for a Labour government to consider is that bigger reforms will cause bigger squabbles earlier in the political cycle, but as a result, they will deliver bigger benefits later in the cycle too.
Labour will soon enter office with an unprecedented mandate to fix the planning system.
Are their plans enough to deliver 1.5 million new homes?
Here's my take on what Labour's housing plans get right and what they're missing.
New Towns can help solve the housing crisis - but they give you pace rather than scale. Our new analysis shows the New Towns did build quickly (especially Milton Keynes!) but that they were only 3.3% of all the new homes built in the forty years after the New Towns Act 1946.
Are new towns the answer to the UK’s housebuilding crisis?
The Government has announced that it is planning a new generation of new towns. But what will their contribution be?
Read our latest blog from
@maurice_a_lange
👇
Great thread and report with very useful conclusions. The planning system + centralization + overengineering are all part of the same family of problems in that the British state deliberately makes it as hard and expensive as possible to build anything.
Why can Dijon, France plan, approve, and build a 12 mile tramway in 4 years, while it takes 13 years to build a 1 mile tram extension in Birmingham?
Our new report, written with
@createstreets
, explores how Britain can make building new tramways cheaper and faster. 🧵
@marwood_lennox
@clapifyoulikeme
The posts of these American true crime addicts are doing wonders for my trust in the English criminal justice system. The Secret Barrister could never
Housing was so affordable in the 1930s because we were building absolutely loads of them. "New houses have probably never been so cheap or widely available", and as the late Prof. Nick Crafts showed, this housebuilding boom drove a third of our recovery from the Great Depression.
Conway is right that there are practical challenges from moving from wet to air - would be a lot easier if we were prepared to demolish poor quality houses and build nice new homes with modern technology from scratch.
The key to reform of these taxes isn't building the most efficient system possible, but a system that works for local authorities in every part of England. The problem with LVT isn't just that voters in high-value areas will hate it, but LAs in low-value areas will hate it too.
All are calling for land value taxation. Replacing council tax, business rates and stamp duty - all very broken taxes - with an annual charge on the unimproved value of land.
@John_Stepek
We don't have a shortage of land, as in actual dirt. We have a shortage of development land, on which we can lawfully build new buildings, because the planning system explicitly bans it across large parts of the country, and even when allowed makes it as difficult as possible.
The planning reform debate continues to underrate both A) Labour's voters in green belt seats have different views to Tory/Lib Dem/Green voters and B) that planning reform and housing are big priorities for younger Labour activists
This same period saw the collapse of not just council but also private housebuilding from their postwar, post-1947 planning system highs.
Planning tightens over this period (green belt, 1972 Local Gov Act, end of slum clearances etc), reducing supply a second time after 1947.
Just here to say that the last five year period when we built more than 1.5m homes was 1974 to 1978. Which is the last time we had a mass council house building programme of any description, not when planning laws were invented
It is already apparent, but in retrospect the single most extraordinary thing about Russia's war on Ukraine will be the commitment by tens of millions of Russians that ending the war is somebody else's problem
❗️Vladimir Kara-Murza emphasized that Western sanctions should be targeted at
#Putin
, not at Russian citizens and the entire country.
"This is extremely unfair and counterproductive because it gives Putin's propaganda material that 'we are in the ring of enemies, in a besieged
The TCPA 1947 was a mistake of historic proportions. While other European countries kept their zoning systems, our switch from zoning to discretion in 1947 permanently crushed housebuilding. We need a flexible zoning system to save planning and increase housebuilding.
3) Reforming local finance is the hardest, but it offers by far the greatest benefits.
Councils currently can't really get more tax revenue from growing their local economy as funding is so centralised. Councils get all the pain of growth without any upside, making them Nimby.
And because it's 2024, sandwiches going viral on Chinese TikTok mean that restaurants and cafes in China are now offering 'dry lunches' to their customers:
My final two takes on election day - 1) housing has risen up the political agenda because both renters and mortgaged homeowners have been clobbered over the past five years - these voters live in different places in and near cities but together add up to a LOT of seats.
📌 Will homeowners swing the 2024
#GeneralElection
?
As we head to the polls today how much impact will homeowners have with housing higher up the political agenda than it has been in a generation 🏠
Read our latest blog by
@AntBreach
👇
@mattyglesias
e.g. Ukraine's nuclear power plants have been extremely important from independence but especially since the war as a source of domestic energy which the invaders cannot interrupt without an on- the-ground occupation
Great to chat to the Guardian this weekend on why Labour will need to do big planning reforms if they win - it's not a coincidence that by international standards we have an unusually dysfunctional planning system + an unusually terrible housing crisis
In an alternate universe where Thatcher doesn't try to introduce the poll tax, Britain's debates on local government funding in the 2020s look like this instead of the mess we currently have:
Auckland has the lowest rates rise of any metro council in New Zealand – 6.8%, half the national average.
That didn’t happen by accident - I've been clear we need to stop wasting money!
Great to speak to the Economist this week on Labour and planning reform. Labour are correct to make it the centre of their economic strategy - but if they want systemic change then they are going to have to change the system
At the heart of Labour’s strategy is a puzzle. Fixing public services depends on faster growth which depends on planning reform. But its policies on planning are rather timid. They combine the sensible, the vague and the misguided
@TheEconomist
: