Can anyone explain to me please:

Dont ask me. I no longer understand housing policy and housing in general in this country.

They will slowly eat into the green belt.

What is the answer? It is the Southeast that suffers most. I sometimes wonder what is the point in the North of England when no one really seems to want to live and work there!

The ever expaning "European" Union doesn't help either. I, personally, think we are better off staying in for trade reasons, and to keep Europe a united front, but it does mean we have to accept immigration from poorer countries. David Cameron has been doing his damnest to change the rules regarding this and for that reason alone I hope to see another Conservative government so he can continue his efforts. Be careful who you vote for.

Also, tbh, I agree with Princess Anne when she said the huge rise in people living on their own has got a lot to do with the need for more houses.

I understand that 91% of land is undeveloped so there's plenty of space for everyone, even in the crowded South East - we just need to build more houses.

I agree about the living alone part.

I think that many more would choose to live in the North of England, if there were good jobs there.

But on the other hand, I know someone who works in a place that needs many skilled immigrants. But to get them, the firm has to be in or near London to attract them.
If say, the firm moved to Bath or York, or anywhere else at all in the country, they do not get people agreeing to come.
So London it has to be, purely for the address.

91% undeveloped in the South East?

Are you including the New Forest there Riverwalk? Hyde Park? Windsor Great Park?

Or farmers' fields? Woodlands?

The various articles I've read jings make the point that there is much more land available than we think - I assume the statisticians take into account land that would never be built on like parks, and forests, etc.

So even taking out those places still leaves a lot of land for houses - even in sparsely-populated areas there is a shortage of affordable housing.

It's not just houses, though, is it. It's roads, schools, hospitals, services, all the infrastructure that goes with more housing.

If I have been to the south-east recently I am aghast at the amount of traffic we encounter and I am always thankful to escape to our backwater again (although there are proposals for hundreds of new homes to be built near us with no mention of schools, etc).

Ps some are on a brownfield site but most are on greenbelt land which has already been encroached.

I agree with riverwalk- plenty of room here in the East Midlands

soon why would a firm moving up North have to attract immigrant workers when people already in the North complain there are no jobs to be had?
Just wondered.

jing peel back the layers of the Conservative party and you will find that they are not so keen to limit immigration as you may like to think. I t suites them for a number of reasons to have a goodly number of migrants who will work for low wages. Their rhetoric will of course say what they think the voters want to hear, but look at their record.

With regard to land, brown field sites need much more exploiting and land banking needs tackling. Social housing is probably one of the main areas that will alleviate the problem as the line where housing is affordable is gradually creeping up the income scale.

jingl I hereby invite you to visit Newcastle so I can show you why you are completely wrong in your assumption that 'no-one wants to live and work in the North of England'
We just keep fairly quiet about it because we don't want to be inundated with you southerners we're not given to bragging.

It's the big businesses that need to move up North. But it won't happen. The fact that we are nearer to Europe probably makes a difference (business trips etc)

I have actually been to Newcastle. I truly loved it!

I was talking about two seperate points rosequartz. Which ought not to have been on the same post.
You are absolutely right.

I have posted muddled up thoughts elsewhere this morning as well.
I need to stay away from the keyboard this morning!

I agree with Teetime, that we have room in the East Mids but, in our village, we are getting loads of new houses but we don't get any more school places or medical facilities. They are sold as a benefit to the village but the new houses are on the periphery and there is new parking left in the village as its been built on!

jingl you would still be welcome
I agree that businesses and organisations need to consider the benefits of relocating outside London.

Here on the outskirts of Stockport we have a fair amount of building going on and in the pipeline and certainly we don't even have the roads to cope with it now. Mornings and evenings we can wait 10/20 mins to travel a few hundred yards to even get onto the main A6 into Manchester and the developments taking place will make it 100 times worse.The infrastructure needs to be in place first. This week I have e-mailed the two main candidates for our local seat in May and both agree with me and neither gave an answer.The air quality is said to be below the standard required and will get worse.

I agree with whitewave about land banking - there is plenty of land already in the ownership of building firms, supermarkets etc which is already earmarked for building and could be released without encroaching upon greenbelt land.
The issue needs to be looked at as a whole and no largescale building allowed without ensuring the infrastructure to go with it.

Very true about the lack of infrastructure

. Where I live the main route to the very large housing estate which was started 10 yrs ago and is still expanding to this day, is via a road so narrow that there isn't room to pass a cyclist. This is also one of the main through routes to other villages. They have just agreed to build the infants school which was part of the original plan. (nearest infants is currently over subscribe and is 2miles away) The nearest small shop is at best 1 mile or 2 1/2 from the other size of the estate.
If we weren't surrounded by marsh land I don't think we would have any green space left in this little part of South East.

janea Thank you.

I understand there are thousands of buildings standing empty because the owners can't or won't put them in habitable condition. At present, I think VAT is paid on repairs and restoration but not on new build. So if you are a professional developer, it's more profitable to build new on unused land or to let existing buildings fall down. The advantage of doing up existing buildings is that you probably already have a community with shops and transport and schools. Opposition to building in green fields isn't just about spoiling the view for people living there already.

Apparently builders prefer greefield sites as compared to brownfield sites, because brownfield sites are more expensive because the site has to be made safe.