This is a copy of a letter first published in Property Week, 04 March 2016

It was fantastic to see you focusing on housing in your coverage of the recent LandAid Mayoral Debate (‘Battle for Mayor of London heats up’, 24 February) - and rightly so when one stops to consider the challenges facing our Capital. However, it is also frustrating that all of the candidates again refused to look beyond the status quo in terms of the options available for delivering both an uptake in housing numbers, and indeed a choice of means of housing.

Sweating public assets, as Sadiq Khan suggests, or Zac Goldsmith's focus on regenerating housing estates, are both worthy policies, but they will not go far enough to build the level and breadth of homes that Londoners need.  Moreover, they are already being relied upon by boroughs to meet their housing targets.

Inevitably, not all families will want to live in apartment blocks. Sadiq Khan was right to point out that families often want a house with a garden – the very accommodation that both main candidates are fortunate to call home.  But they are masquerading the public to suggest that these homes will be provided through a sole reliance on brownfield land within the tightly constrained urban fabric of London.  If this debate were to be about planning and not politics, the laudable objective of delivering an urban renaissance on brownfield land would be complemented by a careful assessment of the settlement limits of the Capital.  This does not mean concreting over our countryside; however, it does mean adopting a managed, sustainable release of land. A poll taken by Property Week last year (‘Open up the Green Belt to housebuilding, 4 September) demonstrates that 74% of the industry are in agreement on this point, which may not make for great political capital, but it does reflect the stark reality of the situation.

Property Week’s recent opinion poll on the merits of releasing Green Belt land for housing (04 September 2015) was - not surprisingly - thought provoking.

The industry has been calling for a revised position on the Green Belt for years. The poll serves as a useful reminder of a growing disparity between realistic solutions to the housing crisis and Government policy.

74 per cent of Property Week’s respondents suggested restrictions should be relaxed to some degree. I would suggest this doesn’t go far enough. The factors restricting development delivery in this country are as much about perception as they are policy. Any relaxation of rules should be accompanied with an honest message about why certain areas of land are suitable for development – because the social, economic and moral arguments for housing our population far outweigh the often limited environmental value of many of these sites. Likewise, this has to be about a long-term approach. We need to recognise that any relaxation will be a short-term realignment before looking ahead to how we can plan more productively in the future.

Extract from Property Week, 26 June 2015
Ian Anderson, Executive Director at Iceni Projects: 

Editor: Your recent column points to a well-established concern in the industry – the failure to grasp the planning ‘nettle’ by political parties too focused on ‘aspirational’ yet ineffective demand-side policies, like the much maligned Right-To-Buy rehash. Unfortunately for this government time is running out and, unless the supply crisis is addressed immediately, this issue will define General Election 2020. Politics can no longer afford to skirt around the problem.

Yet we must be careful not to mistake planning reform with dumbing down the system. The last government went to great pains to overhaul a bloated regulatory framework. Think what you will about the NPPF, which is not perfect, but planning needs some degree of consistency and the framework offers that. Instead, let’s build on its basic principles and financially incentivise Councils to put development plans in place. As we’ve seen, waving a stick doesn’t work if you’ve already experienced the chopping block, and it’s time we ensured Local Authorities – all of which have been cut to ribbons – feel the benefit of proper planning.