The one gleaming light of honesty in the last 11 years of shabby self-serving deceit was Estelle Morris’s resignation as Secretary of State for Education and Skills in 2002. Here was a decent person whose conscience would not allow her to continue in office once she realised that she did not have the range of skills needed to do such a serious and difficult job to a high standard.

The skills needed to head a government department are possessed by very few. It is necessary to have the intellectual skills required to understand: (i) the current law and how it applies in practice, (ii) the effect any change in the law will have, (iii) how policy initiatives will affect areas outside your department’s remit, (iv) the limits to what policy initiatives can achieve and many other matters. Then there are the personal skills of organisation and leadership without which you cannot be effective as the head of anything.

Trouble comes when people are in politics for themselves and not for what they can achieve. Usually they are blind to their own shortcomings with the inevitable result that bad policy and bad law will be formed. Those who are not blind to their own shortcomings are even more dangerous because deceit and bluster take the place of honest incompetence.

Sadly, the Housing Minister is not the only one in the senior ranks of government at present who does not appear to have the requisite range of skills to carry out the serious responsibilities of cabinet government to a proper standard.

What hope is there of the deficiencies being corrected by new appointments? Where are the Douglas Hurds, Ken Clarkes, Tom Kings, Michael Howards, John Majors, William Hagues and (if I might say so) John Redwoods of the Labour backbenches? Many outstanding people emerged between 1979 and 1997 because Conservative Party candidates were not selected by reference to how docile they would be to the whips. By contrast the Labour party machine has packed their benches with grinning lobby fodder of desperately poor quality ever since 1997 and now we all have to pay the price.

Statistically, one other planet in our galaxy has life on it. You just have to keep searching amongst the billions of stars to find it.

Statistically among the billions of ideas proposed by Flint, one will be a good one.
Its just a question of listening and waiting. And waiting, and waiting…

No, what’s even sadder is that these muppets genuinely believe they are doing the right thing, but don’t have any ability to learn from past mistakes and look at possible consequences.

e.g. VED which I am pretty certain will result in older, more polluting, vehicles being kept on the road longer because they have trashed the used car market.

It’s a deeply cynical strategy but then what do you expect from a party one of who’s apparatchiks wanted to use 9/11 to bury bad news.

This shortage has, in turn, turned houses into an investment instead of somewhere to live & it is this part of the price which is subject to the violent price bubbles we see.

Nonetheless if houses cost what they could, or even a bit closer to it, they would sell. Currently we see it as being accepted that young people without financial backers cannot hope to get on the housing ladder. It is not necessary that this be so.

Your # 1 proves my point. The government is not ordering that flats be built, it has no such power unless it pays for them. It is ordering that restriction of all other building be even harsher, which is not the same thing.

(If it were really desireable that no more land be used for housing the way to do that would be to introduce Land Value Tax as an element of council tax. This would provide a free market incentive to minimise the land used for housing, on the other hand it would hurt those keenest on preventing building in the countryside since they are the ones who already own such property.)

Sure, we could do all the things that you suggest, but these land price bubbles happen time and time again (under governments of any party), which, to my mind, is a good argument for replacing all wealth/property related taxes* with Land Value Tax to keep land prices low and stable.

* The list includes Council Tax less Council Tax Benefit, Business Rates, SDLT, Inheritance Tax, Capital Gains Tax, TV licence fee, Insurance Premium Tax, s106 agreements, ‘roof taxes’ and also includes subsidies to land and property ownership like agricultural subsidies, Housing Benefit, VAT zero rating for new homes etc etc.

Happily enough, once you net all this off, the total receipts are roughly equal to total spending by local government (ignoring Education – which ought to be replaced by vouchers anyway).