Rant: Home Builders Federation's Stewart Baseley

The Housing Green Paper did something important. It recognised the vital link between the need for more new homes and land supply. It's a simple equation - more homes means more land, in this case with implementable planning permissions. Unfortunately, not everyone is happy with this state of affairs. The usual suspects, including nimbys, have been claiming that, while they "accept the need for more homes", increasing land supply won't do anything to help.

The arguments deployed unfortunately miss the point. If more homes need to be built, and sufficient new land is not released, then you will forgive me for wondering just where these new homes are going to go. Basic economics dictates that in order to meet demand, supply must be increased. For the dyed-in-the-wool nimby, however, this is hard to swallow.

What of density you may ask? Well it has its part to play, but it cannot solve our problem on housing supply. Since 1997, the density card has been played to its fullest extent. As a tool of increasing housing output in the short term it has worked. But it cannot take us to the government's goal of 240,000 new homes-a-year by 2016. With an identified need for more family homes with private garden space, we will not be able to deliver for enough people without more land to build on.

The bare facts of land supply make alarming reading. Between 1997 and 2003, the annual supply of land for development actually fell by 7%. In the context of the Green Paper's commitment to three million extra homes by 2020 there is a vital need to reverse this trend. We commend the government for setting its sights high. We commend the incentives in the Housing Planning Delivery Grant, and the public sector land being released.

However, this will not in itself be enough. The planning system must show itself capable of delivering land, so that home builders can get on with their job of building homes.

Stewart Baseley

Executive chairman

Home Builders Federation