Unlocking the housing market log jam

As it becomes increasingly apparent that the changes announced earlier this year are having no impact what so ever on the housing market is it now time to consider more radical measures?

Given the increasing number of repossessions announced today and assuming the trend continues are we confident there will be enough capacity in the local authority sector to rehouse these individuals?

If you have answered yes then no to these questions perhaps there is some merit in developing these ideas?

Given that premise how about this for starters

Many house sales will no doubt be trapped in chains at the moment. Could the government therefore consider purchasing the highest property in the chain allowing every transaction under it to be completed?

Costs: unknown but if you start at the longest chains and work down.

Benefits :
Increase in stamp duty revenue from house sales lower down the chain
Increase in workloads in house move related industries, (estate agents, removals, land registry)
Increase in tax and reduction in redundancies in the sector
Availability of new social housing stock within the community as opposed to "social housing estates"
increase in mobility for people moving with the labour market


Obviously this is uncosted and unproven but unusual times such as these call for innovative and different solutions

If Gordon can multiply why can't Darling

An old colleague once told me the key to winning EU bids is not to show how much grant money you will spend in an area but how that money will multiply within the local economy.

While its seems that our PM has learnt this lesson the chancellor most definitely has not.

What do I mean by this curious statement well take their two big announcements. When the chancellor decided to give home buyers free loan to spend on new build he created a single transaction in short he allowed the payment to the builder. No knock on no multiple just one payment and one transaction.

In contrast GB resisted the siren calls of a rob peter to pay paul windfall tax which would just circulate money around the system and hit lower middle income earners with big price increases. Instead he offers up a means of saving money year on year and the opportunity for builders to take on new work to see them through the current slump in their trade creating new tax revenue two three or more steps away from his original investment.

So now think about the housing market if the Darling proposal was also open to old houses how many links in a chain could be completed with all associated agent and legal fees and at the high end of the chain additional tax for him to reinvest further.

So I say again if Gordon knows about multiplication perhaps he need to teach his (new?) Chancellor about the trick

Europe the way forward?

As we ponder the way forward in Europe perhaps the devolution position in the UK is a model to consider.

In Scotland the settled will suggested full law making from day one would fly while in Wales the settled will would have voted no out of hand so we have a partial solution and a roadmap to something better.

The EU problem is that, to continue the analogy, they have imposed the Scottish Model on Wales then wondered why its unpopular.

So what is the way forward?

Not as the analogy may suggest a two speed approach but a realisation that the peoples of Europe are what matter.

Stereotypically we are all to a greater or lesser extent xenophobes with a mistrust of authority.

When Marillion sung of "pleading answers from the nameless faceless watchers who stalk the carpeted halls of Whitehall" they capture that concern and when established politicians subconsciously associate humour in the use of Wop to characterise Italians it demonstrates how deeply ingrained this is in the national psyche.

To be faced with foreign president and overcentralised powers was therefore too much too soon.

Our leaders must go back to the treaty drawing board and look at what it contains. Grandiose schemes like Presidents must go on the back burner whereas processes that open up the commission and give powers from bureaucrat to parliamentarian and open up the processes to the public must come to the fore.

Europe must earn the trust of its peoples with a simple treaty designed for the population not those stalking the corridors in Brussels and Strasbourg.

In short we need a Welsh treaty not the Scottish one on offer

Why Boris and Dave are wrong about crime mapping

As a GIS professional it is nice to see our field of work at the front of national politics for once.

However the Tories are making a fundamental error in suggesting live data should be available to the public.

Crime hotspot analysis is first and foremost an intelligence tool. By modelling where crime is occurring at different times of day it is in theory possible to quantify risk and deploy your resources to respond to that risk.

So what will the Tories plans achieve put simply they will ensure the police are sharing their intelligence with the criminal fraternity.

Take burglary for example. Under Daves new world the IT savy local burglar can now check out where his competitors are working see the hotspot pattern and move to another part of town away from the focussed police presence designed to catch him. Then 2 months later when the insurance claims are settled he has a nice list of properties to revisit safe in the knowledge that the TV is brand spanking new.

In short if would be like the USA sharing their troop deployment with Russia in real time at the height of the cold war.

Far from forcing forces to spend time and effort on these shiny new web sites they should invest the same resources into improving the analysis infrastructure of forces to maximise access to this information at the beat level rather than leaving it trapped with a small group of highly professional analysts

Gwyneth Dunwoody

When you see on teletext the note veteran MP dies that first though is often I hope it isn't one of ours (followed a microsecond later by how sad for the family).

Todays news I have to say leaves me feeling that it is one of ours that Parliament has lost this week. At a time when too many politicians are little more than lobby fodder for the whips it is vital for our democracy that genuine thinking politicians with a free mind can still find their way to Westminster.

That is the type of person I feel we have lost today, while Labour now praise her memory and her effectiveness I hope they select a fit replacement in the same mould to contest the seat, if not I hope they get well and truly stuffed

Do Labour MPs need reading lessons?

Are some of our poor hard working labour MPs in need of a lesson on how to read legislation?

The reason I ask is they seem to have failed to understand the text of the budget measures they voted for last year with the 10p tax band....

..or did they?

I can just imagine the discussions 12 months ago

MP1: "Gordon I dont like this cut is sounds so unfair on the poor?"
GB: "keep quiet I'll be PM in a couple of months we get another 5 years in September and everyone will have forgotten the change by then"
MP1 "OK but..."

Need we say more?

Could Labour trigger a stock market crash next week?

Its an interesting question but quite a valid one to ask now that the terms of the Bill to compensate Northern Rock shareholders has been published.

The key problem is the terms that have been set in order to determine the valuation

In determining the amount of any compensation payable by the Treasury to any person in accordance with paragraphs 3 to 5, it must be assumed (in addition to the assumptions required to be made by section 5(4) of the Act (compensation etc. for securities transferred etc.)) that Northern Rock —
(a) is unable to continue as a going concern; and
(b) is in administration.

Obviously the company was not in administration at the time of nationalisation, and was, and still is, trading normally and as a going concern (as Government Ministers have repeatedly stated).

This means that in setting the criteria the Government is ignoring the facts and could be said to be acting in a way that is ethically and morally unjust in an attempt to contrive to fix the terms of compensation.

As a result of these terms any valuation process will not be objective and independent and as such liable to legal challenge. In essence the terms of reference in the Compensation Order will mean that the panel cannot value the Company in accordance with conventional standards and practices.

And that is the rub of the whole problem,if the Government are prepared to break standard accounting rules once what is to stop them again in the future.

Does this mean any use of the lender of last resort facility from the Bank of England could leave a bank and its shareholder vulnerable to nationalisation for a pittance?

.. and if it does given the state of the credit market at the moment is it wise to hold any substantial amount of assets in this sector?

Of course this need never happen all the Government has to do is remove these clauses from the bill. At a stroke they will ensure that any valuation is not prejudged by the very people who have most to gain from it.

In so doing and ensuring the valuation is on a normal commercial basis not only will they remove the main plank of any human rights based claim from shareholders but they will also go a long way to reassuring investors that it is still safe to invest their money in UK financial companies.

And of course with all those small northern investors it won't do them any political harm either