UK housing crisis myths demolished

As the UK government proclaims “Build, baby, build!” and scapegoats environmentalists and regulations for housing shortages, Danica Priest exposes the narrative that building more houses on Green Belt land would solve the crisis as lacking foundation. 

Words: Danica Priest

There’s a common type of post on social media from the property lobby that always follows the same formula: they show a photo of derelict wasteland and say: ‘THIS is the real Green Belt, it’s not green at all!’. They want everyone to know those images of rolling hills and idealistic countryside views are not ‘real’, and blame Green Belt protections for the housing crisis. ‘If only the nimbys would allow us to develop on this Green Belt to build a car park, you could afford a home… how dare they!’ But, of course, this isn’t accurate.

The truth is 93.1% of the Green Belt is greenfield land. And, more importantly, the Green Belt is not why housing isn’t affordable.

 

Some facts about Green Belt and housing

86% of all applications get approved.
The rhetoric that environmentalists and other are ‘always blocking things’ as an MP recently claimed, is untrue.

The UK has over a million more homes than people.

Brownfield sites have available capacity for 1.2 million homes.

The UK has more homes per person than we did in the ‘70s.
In 1971 there was almost one dwelling for every 3 people in the country. Today there is one per every 2.25 people, meaning we have more homes per capita now than we did 50 years ago (ONS). The issue is not the number of houses in Britain

Land banking developers have over 1.4 million homes unbuilt despite granted permissions.

 

1. Green Belt is green

• Green Belt, despite narratives to the contrary, is, in fact, green. Understanding its purpose will help us debunk some common myths.
• 95% of London's statutorily protected nature sites are located within the Green Belt. 17% of total Ancient Woodland Area is within the Green Belt.
• 9.1% (147,187 hectares) of Green Belt land is also designated as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). 
• 13.6% of Green Belt land is woodlands. 
• 68,686 hectares of Green Belt land encompasses Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). 
• There are 8,490 hectares of National Nature Reserve in the Green Belt
• 30% of all new Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) have been created in the Green Belt.
• Green Belts are home to 34% of Community Forest land.
• 16.2% of all Green Belt land is Grade 1, Grade 2 or the ‘best and most versatile’ agricultural land.
• 53% of the total Green Belt agricultural land is part of the Nature-Friendly Farming scheme.
• Green Belts provide green space for over 30 million people.
• Green Belts are home to 19% of all traffic-free cycle routes. 

 

2. Green Belt is important

The Green Belt was created to prevent urban sprawl. Its main purpose in planning is to force developers to create density and reuse previously developed land rather than making more profit by building over greenfield sites. Green Belt restrictions are needed to encourage brownfield development. Countries without a Green Belt – for example, the United States – have not ended up with magically affordable housing, but with endless car-dependent suburbs interspersed with soulless shopping centres. 

3. Green Belt protects nature better than environmental legislation 

While Green Belt isn’t an environmental designation, it does have an environmental benefit because of the lack of environmental protections within our current planning system. There are countless examples where nature sites have only been saved because they had Green Belt designation. I’ve seen applications, for example, where a developer wanted to build on land that was within the Green Belt but also an important wildlife corridor. The council rejected it for both of those reasons. The government’s planning inspector said the site was Green Belt, so the council was right to refuse it on those grounds, but not right to refuse on wildlife grounds because that could have been mitigated. If this site had not been Green Belt, the environmental protections would not have protected it from development and an essential wildlife site would’ve been lost. Removing the Green Belt would have an environmental consequence which can’t be ignored. 

4. You can build on Green Belt

Politicians on the side of for-profit developers often present Green Belt as an immovable border beyond which cities cannot expand even if they have reached maximum capacity. The reality is that the Green Belt is being built on as you read this. There are already systems in place for land to be taken out of the Green Belt. Green Belt applications are approved all the time. Since 2014 we have lost over 25,000 hectares of Green Belt. 

5. Green Belt housing is not affordable 

New housing developments in the Green Belt are consistently less affordable than those on brownfield sites. On average only 5% of the housing built in the Green Belt has been social housing, which is less than the minimum affordable housing requirement of most local authorities. This proves that brownfield regeneration is a more effective strategy for delivering genuinely affordable homes.

6. The Planning Bill is not the answer

Labour's new planning bill is a disaster for the Green Belt, nature and affordable housing. It claims to fix the housing crisis but it’s a transparent giveaway to developers, gutting environmental protections and allowing them to pay a fee to destroy habitats for profit. It’s not too late to stop the destructive parts of this bill from going ahead. Professional ecologists and environmental groups have proposed amendments that would help save our protected species and important green spaces. Write to your MP today and tell them to support these amendments or they can kiss your vote goodbye. Once these sites are gone, they’re gone forever. 

7. If removing the Green Belt won’t solve the housing crisis what will?

The housing crisis is a complex, systemic issue that is the result of decades of deregulation, austerity and wealth inequality. There isn't a simple fix, no matter what politicians tell you, but there are some things that would actually help speed up planning decisions and lower house prices:

Fund councils so they can hire enough staff to properly manage the volume of planning applications faster and retain those staff with competitive salaries.

Tackle land banking. There are over 1.4 million houses with planning permission left unbuilt by developers. 

Stop punishing councils when private developers refuse to build. Our current system takes power away from councils and gives it to developers if they don’t build the houses they promised too in the local plan. 

End buy to let mortgages or at the very least tax them harder. 

Implement rent controls.

Tackle second homes and Airbnbs.

Fund councils so they build more council housing, buy supply and manage their current housing stock properly so tenants have safe, quality housing. 

Make designated nature sites and irreplaceable habitats off limits to development so developers won’t waste their time with vague planning rules.

Involve communities in shaping their local plans.

 

This housing crisis will only be solved when the government abandons trickle-down economics and commits to a genuine bottom-up approach to housing which prioritises those most in need. 

Danica Priest is a Bristol-based environmental and housing campaigner. A fierce advocate for nature, she provides education on planning policy and challenges misinformation to help people protect their local environment. 
Follow her on TikTok: @danicapriest