As opposition leader, Sir Keir Starmer long struggled to define what ‘Starmerism’ is, other than ‘not Corbynism’ and ‘not Toryism’. Last Autumn, he belatedly stumbled across a policy theme which he has since tried to make his own: ‘Yimbyism’, a positive ‘Yes In My Back Yard’ attitude to development: the antidote to Nimbyism.
Labour’s rhetoric on housing has been confrontational
In her first major speech on economic policy, Chancellor Rachel Reeves picked up this ‘Yimby’ theme in order to bolster her pro-growth credentials. Policy announcements include bringing back mandatory housebuilding targets, removing green belt protection from bits that are clearly not green (the ‘grey belt’), and overturning the ban on onshore wind.
We have, of course, been here before. We have heard similar Yimby rhetoric many times, even if the specific policies differ. In the years of the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition, housing minister Nick Boles tried to position himself as a Yimby firebrand, who was not afraid to pick a fight with the Nimby lobby. He got his fight alright. But he lost it badly, because most of his own party sided with the Nimbies.
In 2017, Sajid Javid, as housing secretary, also briefly tried to strike a Yimby chord, but got nowhere. Three years later, housing secretary Robert Jenrick tried again. Hoping he could capitalise on Boris Johnson’s 80-seat majority, he published a white paper outlining an ambitious overhaul of the planning system. It seemed to go well for a while – until his party lost a by-election (Chesham and Amersham) against the Liberal Democrats, who had run on a Nimby ticket. Conservative backbenchers panicked, and Jenrick’s plans were shelved again. It seems like an iron law of British politics that in the end, the Nimbies always win.
So why should this time be any different? Are we not bound to witness a reenactment of the same old story? Perhaps so. But there is also a chance that this time really is different.
Firstly, Labour have made Yimbyism an explicit policy theme during the election campaign. This means that unlike previous Yimby reformers, they can credibly claim to have a strong democratic mandate for those policies.
Secondly, Labour have a significantly younger electoral base than the Conservatives. For Labour, writing off the ‘Nimby Boomer vote’ in order to gets things built would still be an electoral gamble, but not an obviously crazy one.
Thirdly, it also helps that the Prime Minister, the Chancellor and the Housing Secretary are on the same page this time.
Fourthly, Labour’s rhetoric so far has been more confrontational, which suggests that they already know that they will make enemies. One mistake that previous Yimby reformers made was that they had the naïve idea that everyone can be won over to development, if only you build beautifully and in the right places. This is not true. Nimbyism is more of a lifestyle choice than a reaction against specific downsides of development, which means that there is no harmonious, conflict-free solution to it.
None of this is to say that economic incentives around development are irrelevant: quite the opposite. A lasting solution to Britain’s housing crisis must make sure that the economic benefits of development are shared locally, to win over as many residents as possible (while accepting that there will always be some Nimbys). In that regard, Labour still have to develop a long-term agenda: Reeves’s announcements cannot be more than a start.
But reforms of this type would take many years to develop their effect, and there is a major risk that any government will run out of steam and/or political goodwill halfway though. On housing and planning, Labour will have to see some results reasonably quickly, and build up further momentum on that basis.
If Labour get this right and finally get Britain building again, the political consequences could be immense. Over the past 14 years, the Tories have increasingly become ‘the Boomer party’: they have narrowed their electoral base, and put more and more eggs into one basket. It was already true in 2010 that support for the Conservatives tended to increase with age, but the gradient was not yet particularly steep. Today, it is only among Baby Boomers that the Tories still enjoy a lead over Labour – and this would still be true even if they won back every single Reform voter.
The Tories’ main problem is that they’re not making new Baby Boomers anymore. If young and middle-aged voters associate Labour with sorting out housing, it could lock the Tories out of power for a long time.
Comments