Share this post:

Labour’s spending review brought in a headline-grabbing £39 billion commitment to build more “affordable homes” over 10 years.

But – as with so much under Starmer and Reeves – the devil is in the definitions.

What, exactly, counts as affordable? And who benefits most from this investment?

Affordable for whom?

When politicians talk about “affordable housing,” it often means homes priced at 80 per cent of market rates.

In many parts of the UK, that’s still wildly out of reach for low- and middle-income families.

This isn’t a genuine solution to the housing crisis – it’s a fig leaf that leaves the structural causes of housing insecurity intact.

Labour’s plan continues the neoliberal model: subsidising private developers, offering incentives, and propping up an unaffordable market instead of confronting it.

There is no sign of a large-scale return to council housebuilding, even though that is what the country desperately needs.

We need council housing – and lots of it

Mass public investment in genuinely affordable, secure, publicly-owned homes is the only way out of this crisis.

It lowers the housing benefit bill, provides economic stability, fosters stronger communities, and actually helps control inflation by breaking speculative pricing cycles.

Council housing isn’t a handout; it’s an investment that delivers long-term returns: lower public spending on housing support, reduced homelessness, better health outcomes, and more social mobility.

Why the private sector won’t fix this

Decades of market-led policy have failed.

Private developers have an incentive to restrict supply to keep prices high.

They sit on land banks.

They build luxury flats while millions live in mouldy rentals.

Housing has become a financial asset, not a social good.

And schemes like Help to Buy? They inflate prices and line the pockets of developers, while locking first-time buyers into debt traps.

The land problem: it’s not just about homes

You can’t fix housing without fixing land use.

Publicly owned land has been sold off.

Developers hoard land and drip-feed supply.

We need to reclaim control of land to make sure it serves public need, not private greed.

A Land Value Tax – taxing the unearned rise in land value – could replace council tax and stamp duty, disincentivise land hoarding, and fund social housing directly.

It’s a policy whose time has come.

Through the economic lens

• Neoliberalism: Trust the market, subsidise developers, keep prices propped up. Labour’s current plan leans heavily this way.
• Keynesianism: Invest publicly to stimulate demand and meet unmet needs. Mass council housing fits perfectly into this model – and would have real fiscal multipliers.
• Vox Political‘s view: Treat housing as a public service, not a commodity. Combine the best of Keynesian public investment with a rejection of market orthodoxy.

A better way

A serious housing policy would:

• Commit to at least 150,000 new council homes per year.
• Introduce rent controls to protect tenants.
• Implement a Land Value Tax to disincentivise speculation.
• Reform planning laws to prioritise social need over market value.
• End public subsidies for private profit in housing.

If Labour is serious about tackling inequality and rebuilding the country, it must stop tinkering and start transforming.

Homes should be for living in – not hoarding, speculating, or exploiting.

It’s time for policies that reflect that.
Share this post: