Itâs thinking like this that curses the government and by extension everything it runs and why some of us see the benefits of the private sector. A business can do almost anything (sensible) in 2 years, for some reason we give a government decades.
Give the money, permission and access to land to the private sector day 1 and youâll have 50,000 houses built in 2 years. Leave it in the hands of the government and theyâll still be having inter-departmental meetings (hard hats are mandatory along with high vis) 3 years later.
The private sector already do most of the house building. They are notorious for land banking and failing to build the infrastructure that is meant to go with the housing.
Iâd suggest that making owning undeveloped land unprofitable would be a better strategy.
That conflation seems unfair. Corbyn was (rightly or wrongly) naturally opposed due to his anti-capitalist principles. Farage is racist, xenophobic and focussed only on his own self-interest
The actual building is a piece of piss and youâre 100% correct. Its all private sector. Even public sector contract a private firm to do the actual construction. Planning permission however is where complications occur.
A side issue on this is that private investors will also maximise housing that maximises their return. That usually isnt what a particular area needs.
Good point on people speaking two languages. Well done the interviewer above.
Farageâs brand of âotherâ is all too rife over here, and millions of people have been whipped up into a frenzy over the southern border with Mexico.
Itâs horrible. People just want to get on with their lives and make a contribution in all the normal ways that help build a society. Stop demonizing them!
One of the biggest challenges of public-private partnerships for these sort of projects where there is a government objective to fulfil is the protections to the process that need to be applied to ensure the contracts are doled out on merit. Without this the process very quickly devolves into one of self-dealing and patronage. It necessarily slows down the process in a way that may be worse for the specific project, but is required for the big picture.
It is undeniable that in a lot of places the process has become too cumbersome, but the alternative is politically connected people getting government money to run projects that make them richer without being held accountable for delivering the outcomes the public agency was looking for.