Labour under fire as Angela Rayner admits ‘slim chance’ of delivering 1.5m homes pledge

Here we go with Labour whining about what Harold MacMillan called “Events, dear boy, events” when seeking an excuse.

As far as I’m concerned the Tories are a busted flush and will never get my support again but what the hell is Angela smoking? Built cost and every other type of inflation were rampant after the onset of the Ukrainian conflict which started over two years before Labour took office and of course Labour gave no credit for the difficulties ANY government would have had over that other thing that happened on the Tories watch… Covid (which occurred when the economy was still on life support, as was the rest of the EU throughout the two thousand and teen years with central bank rates near zero (or negative in the case of the European Central Bank).

Expect a lot more of this as Labour are almost half way through their term.

Labour expected the public to swallow this hogwash about building 1.5 million homes and now they are trying to backtrack, just as the Conservatives have done previously.

1.5m homes was never a realistic target, just like most politicians’ promises made whilst seeking election, which are seldom fulfilled, or accountability sought.

The problems predate and include Covid & Ukraine – such as an absence of apprenticeships, tradies leaving the UK after Brexit, and many more.

The short termism of successive governments and ill conceived policies without any depth or research (did Labour consult the building industry before announcing the 1.5m newbuilds? Doubtful) and the failure to control population growth are leading us down a spiral of housing decline. At a time when the PRS is so important to sustain housing in this country, politicians are doing their best to decimate the sector. You couldn’t make it up.

Reply to the comment left by Keith Wellburn at 15/09/2026 – 11:49
Quite so…politicians have short memories. The conservative government put far more money into social support during the Covid outbreak than the Scandinavian countries, but labour and John MacDonald urged them to go ‘further and faster’ i.e. to spend more:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51983086

Now they think that they aren’t responsible for the debt pile…when they wanted to spend more. As he headed out of the door, Kier Starmer decided to blame B****t for the economy being sluggish. But one part of the EU economy that has been growing fast is Spain; Spain’s growth has been driven by investment from China (not a part of the EU) and immigration from spanish-speaking migrants from South America (not part of the EU). So this was B******t….an excuse for failed economic policies when labour came to power promising to grow the economy and pursued policies that would achieve exactly the opposite. Politicians need scapegoats for that kind of failure…something or somebody else to blame.

Labour never were going to build 1.5 million new homes and ‘building more council houses’ never was a solution either. There needs to be both a thriving private rental sector and ALSO a thriving social housing sector. Labour still thinks it’s 1947.

Angie got it wrong I
It was not one and a half million new home being built .
It was one and a half million private rented homes being lost due to Renters Rights.
And another one and a half million homes being lost because they will not be able to comply with EPC grade C.

No government since WWII has ever been able to build to the quota they set themselves. Pure carrot to get votes.

Reply to the comment left by Judith Wordsworth at 19/09/2026 – 13:22
And even IF they were to give billions to councils to build more houses, what evidence is there today that councils are good at building houses? How do you even know that they are going to spend the money on building houses, rather than only working a 4-day week?

https://www.scambs.gov.uk/four-day-working-week

And even if the council manages to build the houses, what happens to the ‘council’ houses if the council goes bankrupt? The truth is that the country needs both a thriving social-housing (not for profit) sector and also a thriving private rental sector. You don’t get that by punishing small landlords for being landlords….the truth is that small landlords are doing something socially useful. Labour don’t recognise that because they still think it’s 1947.

Angie got something wrong. Now there’s a surprise! It’s a shame that some people actually believe the garbage that politicians spout. I’m sure there’s good stuff spouted on occasions, but do they not realise that a constant supply of junk is what grabs headlines, not the good bits?

Less garbage may mean more voter satisfaction. Or maybe the public really are that gullible? Short memory syndrome seems rather common these days.

Reply to the comment left by Landlord Phil at 01/10/2026 – 18:27
Angie got a lot of things wrong, so did Kier Starmer and so did Rachel Reeves. There were unprecedented levels of public debt when labour came to power and it was obvious when labour came to power that the only way to fix the problem is and was to grow the economy. Borrowing costs just hit 6%:

https://www.express.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/2253650/uk-borrowing-costs-hit-30-year-high

It was always OBVIOUS that labour didn’t have the money to build enough council houses to fix the housing supply problem, even if the evidence had been there that councils are any good at building houses or turning over housing stock efficiently in 2024-2026. Labour can’t afford to punish small businesses because small businesses have always been the engine of the UK economy; labour also can’t afford to punish investors for investing in growing the UK economy, or for investing in the UK housing market. Any COMPETENT economist would be able to see that. The money markets can see it.