Great places to live

In 1945, Labour pledged to “proceed with a housing programme [at] the maximum practical speed until every family in this island has a good standard of accommodation”. After six years of war, many towns and cities needed to be rebuilt on a vast scale. A full half of the two million homes destroyed were in London, but many other cities suffered too. In Hull, 90 per cent of homes were damaged, and nearly half of the city was left homeless by the war’s end. Britain also needed to demolish slums, alleviate overcrowding and modernise the unsuitable housing that had been largely unaffected by the blitz.

The scale of the challenge facing the new Labour government was substantial, especially considering the resource and workforce challenges. But Labour’s manifesto committed to more than just building units of housing. They wanted to build the homes people wanted – and deliver good “town planning”. “Pleasant surroundings, attractive lay-out [s], efficient utility services [and] … transport facilities” were all considered integral to a mass housebuilding programme and to meeting housing need.

While postwar housing is often lacking compared to modern standards, it was progress compared to the ‘back to backs’ that previously dominated many working-class communities. They were larger and less overcrowded, had indoor plumbing and hot water, and were built with greater access to green spaces and vital amenities. The first new towns, created in the 1940s, offered spacious, affordable and good-quality housing on former agricultural land.

Every Labour government since has been ambitious about building good quality homes and improving existing ones, situated in communities that people want to live in. In the 1960s, Labour designated some of the largest new towns, including Milton Keynes, and provided grants to improve housing quality. In the 1970s, Anthony Crosland encouraged mixed housing estates where social renters lived alongside homeowners and supported diversity in properties available to buy or rent. This mission continued in the 2000s, when the new Labour government invested in housing quality, which improved over a million social homes, while the housing market renewal programme sought to regenerate neighbourhoods and places.

The circumstances facing the current government are different to those of the past. But it should be inspired by its predecessors. Every previous Labour government had a clear, unifying vision for housing that went beyond just building a set number of units. This government needs to articulate a vision that is broader than the individual policy choices. They need to show how they will build good quality homes that are fit for the future, in communities that people want to live in and with the green space and amenities they need.

As the party that swept away slums, built new towns, and renewed housing estates, Labour should be committed to building great places to live. This is relevant for every part of the country. It means major developments, including new towns and housing estates, but it also means building a few homes in a village to make sure it can retain the critical mass needed to keep local services. Above all, Labour must recognise how the quality of these homes, and the communities they are situated in, matter.

There is also a moral imperative to this vision, rooted in Labour values. We need to build good quality homes quickly to cut the cost of housing, alleviate overcrowding, replace dangerous accommodation, and improve access to vital amenities such as green spaces.

Ultimately, the target of 1.5m new homes is not just about this parliament. It is about improving people’s lives for decades to come. What is built between now and the next election could trans-form the health, wellbeing, life chances and living standards of the nation. Every child could grow up in decent and stable housing conditions, and older people could live independently in their own accessible home. More young adults could finally move out of their childhood bedroom, start their own family, or move across the country to access their dream job. This is what a vision of great places to live can offer.

Such a vision will reject the idea that the only thing that matters is the number of units built, regardless of quality or size. There is no route to tackling the housing crisis without building homes that people actually want to live in and in communities that are thriving. That requires smarter regulation – not a regulatory bonfire that allows anything to be built, anywhere, to any standard.

Focusing on great places to live isn’t just sensible policy. It is also good politics. At the next election, the electorate will need to hear a convincing story about housing, rooted in their values. Itis all too tempting to assume that public support for more homes being built will persist, or that delivering on housing targets will help the government win the next election. However, building new homes is very disruptive for existing communities – and there is likely to be political pressure, especially when Reform and the Conservatives will be opportunistically opposed. Labour will have to go onto the doorstep and articulate exactly why this disruption is worth it. Talking only about units and targets will not cut it for voters – even if 1.5m new homes are built in this parliament. Without being clear and persuasive about why building more homes matters, beyond simply putting spades in the ground, there is a risk that the government’s messaging will not land with the public. And if voters are not convinced that the past five years were worth it, they are unlikely to put their trust in a successive Labour government.

There is clear evidence that the idea of building great places to live is popular with the public. When Opinium asked what could increase support for new housing in their local area, the most popular argument was “build high-quality, attractive homes that fit local character,” backed by 49 per cent. The Home Builders Federation and Rightmove found a strong sense of community, access to local parks and public spaces, and the general environment mattered to homebuyers. As one respondent put it: “having shared spaces and local amenities makes a big difference – it’s where relationships are built, and the area starts to feel like home”. Tapping into this clear public demand can bring significant political benefits for a party that wants to secure support for transformational change.

For the remainder of this parliament, the government needs to set out its vision on housing policy clearly and persuasively. It must tell a story about how it will build great places to live which draws on our party’s history, sensible policy making and public demand. If Labour gets this right, it can change lives – and may even persuade people to trust it with a second term.