Metro mayors could be the key to unlocking new housing
Originally published in the Local Government Chronicle – 14/05/2024
Whatever you call it, ‘levelling up’ depends on solving the housing crisis – a feat that can’t happen without subregional planning, argues Localis head of research, Joe Fyans.
Last Thursday’s local elections spelled the beginning of the end of the current political cycle and, it seems extremely likely, of 14 years of Conservative, or Conservative-led, government. As we look back over that time period – defined at its outset by the long tail of the Great Recession and shaped in the past eight years by all the upheavals and crises that will surely come to characterise the late 2010s in the historical record – we might ask, what has been consistent throughout this period? What will endure? The elections last week speak to this question, as one area of policy that has stayed remarkably resilient to dramatic changes in government emphasis and personnel is the slow decentralisation of Whitehall functions to mayoral combined authorities (MCAs).
The steadfast development of the MCA model, beginning before 2010 in Greater Manchester but defined and shaped by the coalition and Conservative governments in the run up to the 2017 election of the first crop of mayors, is a clear through-line which can be observed when considering government’s approach to local regeneration in the past 14 years. This is something we have been reflecting on at Localis as part of our research project ‘Design for Life – the smart regeneration journey to 2030’ which was published this week.
The report looks at how regeneration can be carried out in a sustainable and socially responsible manner in the coming years, and naturally focuses on one of the most pressing issues of our time: the generational housing crisis. Examining the issue, we reached the same conclusion as many other experts and commentators, which is that strategic spatial planning is crucial to effective delivery. As the number of, and public awareness of, combined authority mayors continues to grow, it is time to seriously consider how this model can help address the chronic under-supply of new homes, which remains a major driver of the housing crisis.
Throughout the research we consistently found ourselves confronted by the issue of master-planning and the constraints local authorities find themselves placed under when attempting the task – from the political short-termism that has long blighted attempts to deliver more housing to the massive capacity loss in planning departments brought on by austerity. How can regeneration schemes deliver homes of the right kind, the right tenure and the right affordability whilst also maintaining viability and attracting external investment? There is no single answer to that question, but there is a pathway to beginning to address the problem that runs through the combined authorities and the strategic spatial plans which MCAs produce.
The current mayoral powers, while significant, are lacking a vital element: statutory heft to coalesce local plans around shared targets. Were the spatial strategies upgraded from guidance to legal frameworks for housing provision, subregional housing targets could support regeneration by taking a strategic view to the mix of economy, infrastructure and social across subregional geographies. As it stands, the lack of firm powers to provide new housing is a barrier to achieving real subregional governance, and also places limits on what the MCAs can do to attract and sustain investment into local areas. Long-term certainty over the provision of housing and infrastructure will be crucial to securing private finance. Attracting investment into subregions has been a crucial part of the mayoral modus operandi from the inception of the model.
While the carrot of investment may be enticing, the CAs have no stick as forebidding as the prospect of anti-development movements gathering to mobilise popular opposition. While local opposition to new housebuilding is not the only underlying cause of the housing crisis, it is a major one, and the current system of planning is heavily weighted towards existing residents at the expense of future generations – a point Anna Clarke, director of policy at The Housing Forum, argued convincingly in our recent essay collection. The much larger electorates of the MCAs change and mitigate that risk calculation, and might allow for a more long-term view of the social and economic needs of the subregion, as well as creating opportunities to pool depleted capacity across planning authorities. Without this long-term and holistic view, regeneration schemes can all too often end up piecemeal and incomplete, with social benefits undercut.
The importance of regeneration to alleviating inequalities within and between regions was acknowledged by the Levelling Up White Paper, and will no doubt be re-affirmed in Labour’s plans to ‘power up’ Britain. The MCAs, first formally established a few years before Levelling Up arrived as a slogan and destined to long outlive the agenda, represent an imperfect but highly practical vessel through which to steer such change, and are likely to be factored into government plans. They have evolved gradually since their formal beginning a decade ago, and if they are to continue to act as the loci of decentralisation then further statutory steps must be taken to accompany the major financial developments being made with the Trailblazer settlements. The time is approaching for our increasingly high profile metro mayors to confidently plant both feet with conviction into the housing and planning arena.
Joe Fyans, head of research, Localis