Housing market performance – Labour v Conservative

Housing market performance – Labour v Conservative

10:51 AM, 28th November 2019, About 4 years ago 3

Text Size

House Price Growth Higher under Labour:

From 1974-2019, house price growth (taking inflation into account) from all four Labour prime ministers’ terms in office, added together (119%), significantly outstripped that of Conservative prime ministers (5%). Only one region of the UK/Northern Ireland saw higher house price growth under Conservative governments. This challenges two commonly held beliefs: that house prices rise higher in real terms under Conservative governments and that the Conservatives are responsible for pricing people out of the housing market!

The highest annual house price growth (under a single prime minister) since 1974 was recorded in 1988 under Margaret Thatcher’s government, at 29%. Meanwhile, Gordon Brown suffered the lowest annual house price growth of all prime ministers, at 15%. Tony Blair oversaw higher house price growth in his term in office than any other prime minister, 140% with inflation and 211% without inflation.

If you’re concerned more about the availability of housing, rather than values, then official data reveals that David Cameron built the fewest homes of any prime minister since 1923.

The Winners and Losers:

Unsurprisingly, different regions of the UK performed differently under Labour and Conservative governments. The following regions experienced the highest growth under Labour: the North West, London and Scotland. Meanwhile, these regions saw the lowest under Labour governments: Northern Ireland, the East Midlands and East Anglia.

During Conservative Governments, London was in the top three again, along with the Outer Met and South East. However, the following regions didn’t fare so well: the North, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Are Conservative or Labour PMs Better for the Housing Market?

The data seems to dispel the common belief that the Conservatives boost the property market with a focus on homeownership. That said, are house price increases always a good thing for the market?

View the analysis in full here: https://www.onlinemortgageadvisor.co.uk/blog/prime-ministers-house-prices/

Share This Article



12:50 PM, 29th November 2019, About 4 years ago

If you are "...concerned about the availability of housing rather than values..." then one of the factors you would have to consider would be the rate of population growth over the period that these prime ministers were in power and the extent to which net migration flows put pressure on housing and services.

If you were also concerned about the impact of uncontrolled migration on the environment in the UK and the destruction of green-field sites then you would also have to look at which prime ministers or governments utilised the most brownfield or green field sites.

And if you were keen on protecting the UK environment and understood that you can't cover it all in houses, roads *and* trees yet still feed your population without a massive economic deficit without controlling net migration you might then be prompted to think.

"There's an election on...which party has best got to grips with this?"

When you see your ballet paper I think your conclusion would be likely to be "none of the above".

Kathy Evans

18:37 PM, 29th November 2019, About 4 years ago

How much does it have to so with the colour of the government and how much with national and even global economic optimism?

Michael Barnes

20:14 PM, 30th November 2019, About 4 years ago

"Gordon Brown suffered the lowest annual house price growth of all prime ministers, at 15%"

That is not what the report says.
It says -15%

And I'm sure that is not the annual rate, but the rate over his term.

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership


Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now