Yesterday was probably a good day to bury bad news. It was also very probably an opportune moment to promote a bad policy in the hope that it would slip under the radar of those with critical voices.
Yesterday was probably a good day to bury bad news. It was also very probably an opportune moment to promote a bad policy in the hope that it would slip under the radar of potential critical voices.
Perhaps it should not have been a surprise, then, that chancellor George Osborne chose yesterday to reveal more details of his Help to Buy scheme, which will essentially underwrite £130 billion of mortgage lending with state money.
The scheme was first announced in April, and yesterday Osborne promised stricter testing of those who can afford mortgages and a ban on second home purchases through the scheme.
That more flesh was put on the bones of the Help to Buy scheme at a time when much of the media was distracted, however, has not stopped the criticism pouring in, with the chief economist at the Institute of Directors (IoD) calling the scheme “dangerous”:
“The housing market needs help to supply, not help to buy and the extension of this scheme is very dangerous,” said Graeme Leach, chief economist at the IoD.
“Government guarantees will not increase the supply of homes, but they will drive up prices at a time when it seems likely that house prices are already over-valued.
“When the scheme is withdrawn any rise in prices that has taken place will be undermined, with potentially disastrous results.
“There is a real risk that the housing market will become dependent on the underwriting by government, making it very difficult politically to shut the scheme down. This should be of great concern.
“The world must have gone mad for us to now be discussing endless taxpayer guarantees for mortgages.
”Instead of trying to pump-up prices, the government should focus on relaxing planning laws and reducing Local Authority charges on developers to make it easier to build more homes.”
This follows hot on the back of criticism of the scheme when it was proposed by the treasury earlier this year, with former United States secretary of the treasury Larry Summers saying the scheme went “against basic things taught in economics textbooks”.
And in June Albert Edwards of French bank Societe Generale called the policy “truly moronic”
“I believe it truly is a moronic policy that stands head and shoulders above most of the stupid economic policies I have seen implemented during my 30 years in this business,” he said.
Presumably, having refused to stimulate the economy with significant investment, Osborne is hoping for an economic recovery on the back of another housing boom.
As everyone apart from Osborne seems to realise, however, the last house price boom didn’t end particularly well.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
12 Responses to “‘The world’s gone mad’ – Institute of Directors on Osborne’s Help to Buy scheme”
OldLb
It’s a bonkers policy. Driving up property prices and the state underwriting the risk is just mad.
IOD is correct.
1. Deal with the demand. ie. Curtail low skilled migration. The easy solution which has huge other benefits, such as cutting the welfare bill.
2. Stop accruing pensions debts. ie. Divert NI into savings accounts. Not only will people be better off but the growth generate is huge.
TristanPriceWilliams
So we bail the banks out because we need them to survive to keep the wheels of the economy turning. They then refuse to lend the money we have given them. We accept this and set up a fund to do their job (or the slightly riskier side of it) and they keep the money so their books look good and they can pay big bucks.
Sounds like the Tories and Alistair Darling.
VacantPossession
Sounds suspiciously like Fanny Mae… Politicians manipulating markets using our money and ultimately failing.
Guess who ends up with the bill. (unless you are on welfare).
madasafish
So how will we replace the NI money? Cut spending? Or raise taxes?
OldLb
Cut spending. There’s a solution for you.
Now, the pensions debts come to 6,500 bn according to the ONS. It’s rising at 734 bn a year. Taxation raises 600 bn. Spending currently is 722 bn. The gap is 122 bn + 734 bn or 856 billion this year alone. [All government figures]
So you need to find an extra 856 bn of taxes on top of 600 bn currently being taxed, just to stand still.
So what’s your plan for paying the pensions?