While perusing the news in a most cantankerous frame of mind, I was suitably annoyed to come across this mindbendingly stupid idea from our Minister of Housing:

The government is offering councils financial incentives to allow more moorings for houseboats on waterways.

Housing Minister Grant Shapps says new moorings could be eligible for the New Homes Bonus, which sees the government match council tax from new-build homes.

He says houseboats could allow people to live in areas that otherwise might be out of their financial reach.

“Landlords, councils and communities all have a clear incentive to get more mooring sites in their areas,” he said.

This had me reaching for my Prozac for so many reasons.

Firstly, I am quite certain that moorings are subject to planning permission, much like anything else involving a potential residence. So there are bound to be pretty much as many moorings available already as current planning regulations will allow. So now he is suggesting that councils either relax their planning regulations, which will lead to a firestorm of NIMBYism protest, or that people try to get planning permission for places where there aren’t facilities or access roads or things like that. Which is pointless, because you need roads to get to shops or schools or whatever, waste disposal and so on and so forth. Unless, of course, Mr Shapps is suggesting that boaters can use the waterways as their personal toilet and dumpling ground?

Secondly, why in the name of all that is holy does the government have a New Homes Bonus, which means that taxpayers are refunding the council tax of new home buyers? Why not just have Councils not levy the council tax in the first place? Why is the long-suffering taxpayer helping people to buy newly-built homes? What possible reason could there be to justify this?

If the the government paid bankers a New Branch Bonus for building new branches of their banks, there would be an national outcry.

Thirdly, there is a reason why more people don’t live in houseboats already. They are relatively cramped, sanitary facilities are primitive and they are not as nice to live in as houses. Some people, it is true, really enjoy the lifestyle, but for most people it is a totally impractical option. If you’ve ever been on a boating holiday, it may well be that you’ve idly considered buying a boat for high days and holidays, as I have, but the thought of going to live on a boat did not even cross my mind for a second.

This “idea” is Blairite in its complete lack of viability and commonsense. I suppose we should just be grateful that there isn’t the money to promote it to a nation that neither wants nor needs it.

The true answer to Britain’s housing shortage is discussed here.

Stephen Spencer-Black September 8, 2011 at 16:17

A great if somewhat uneducated response, for a start house boats do NOT
require planning permission although they do have to comply with the relevant
building regs required for their use plus some other regs required by the MCA
if commercial use is planned.

I live on a house boat, actually a 50foot yacht, it is cozy and comfortable
and is as well fitted as any flat or house I have ever occupied. I recognise
this is a matter of perception and for those who are blind to it I shall not
bother trying to convince them.

For all the others I recommend living afloat.

For more on the subject see my blog here
http://www.spencer-black.co.uk/2011/09/08/changes-to-houseboat-policy/

Stephen

Cascadian August 29, 2011 at 19:26

Thaddeus, I believe you have relied too much on the BBC’s “interpretation”
of Shapp’s announcement, that is always a dangerous proposition.

A quick search reveals the original announcement: http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/corporate/1974164
and
surprise, surprise the idea is not quite as half-baked as the BBC would have
you believe. Although, as usual for this government (despite expensive PR )
the message gets lost in a mire of political correctness while omitting some
essential information.

The main issue would seem to revolve around the definition of houseboat,
while traditionally this has meant some pensioned-off hulk, narrow enough to
traverse a canal it can be something very different-think “Sleepless in
Seattle” type of structure. Google- Seattle houseboat images, for
examples.

Given that a major part of the cost of new housing is the land, there are
indeed major savings to be had. Arguments about hull maintenance are
superfluous for this type of construction as the “hull” is a styrofoam filled
concrete tub that will last generations with little-or-no maintenance. Due to
weight constraints house construction is generally wood frame, which is common
in North America. An energy efficient, flame resistant and pleasant home is
easily built at lower cost than typical UK brick houses. Savings of 25% should
be easily achieved for comparable sized land-based homes.

The announcement clearly states that new powers devolved to local
authorities could be used to authorize floating communities that would assist
in removing “unlawful towpath” residencies. I would oppose locations that
encroach on narrow river and canal waterways, they could not be serviced
economically. Clustering float homes, would allow provision of sewer, water,
gas and electricity at comparable costs to new subdivisions.

This could be a very successful initiative especially in major cities where
old docks and disused industrial sites exist. Existing infrastructure-roads,
buses, parking, would then be utilized and a new tax base generated at minimal
cost.

For once I applaud this dysfunctional government for proposing a very
sensible solution to overpriced housing. Though why they feel it necessary to
propose an incentive of taxpayers money is baffling, but not surprising.

Buildingstoat
August 29, 2011 at 18:40

Yes, I’m afraid you may be right.

Delphius August
29, 2011 at 17:24

Its a way of bringing the throng of boaters with “cruising licences” (that
have to be continuously moving and therefore don’t pay mooring fees and
importantly for this article council tax ) into the “residential licence” fold
(who then have to pay mooring fees and more importantly pay council tax to
their local authority).

In essence its basically attempting to create more tax revenue for local
authorities from a group that previously escaped paying that tax.

The same is now true for those with Swiss Bank accounts. Government both
local and national are clawing as much money as they can from previously
untouched revenue streams.

nonomad August 29, 2011 at 14:49

Grant Shapps-plank=exactly.

Buildingstoat
August 28, 2011 at 19:41

I don’t want to say anything good about Shapps because I think he’s a twerp
but is this really such a bad idea? There are many people living on boats,
some of them quite luxurious ones but few have residential moorings, they are
very hard to come by. Some yards/marinas just look the other way but the usual
workaround is to move to a different bit of canal/river from time to time.
Another example of how banning things doesn’t actually stop them.

Shapps has an impossible problem to solve, how to make housing both cheaper
and at the same time keep house prices high. Everyone, including Shapps,those
both for more housing and against, knows that the planning system is
dysfunctional and needs major work but that Dave just doesn’t have the balls
for it. What Shapps seems to be trying to do is to make small changes round
the edges of the planning system with this suggestion and an apparent interest
in self-build. Clearly there is no mass solution here but if it allows people
who want to to live on the water, why not?

Demetrius August
28, 2011 at 18:31

Flies, rats with Weill’s disease, sundry other vermin, many local nutcases
throwing used beer cans in, oh yes, and the rising damp.

Rich August 29, 2011 at 11:36

Demetrius, all of your comments apply to buildings and the people who
live in them. Have a wander round some of the more choice high-rise blocks
in any of our towns and cities.

But, I have never heard of rising damp on a boat. Unless of course it
sinks. Boats do sink but then houses get flooded.

I live on a boat, the sanitary arrangements are not primitive and it is
not cold, frequently in the winter it is too warm. We, my wife and I, love
it as do many thousands of liveaboards.

Rich August 28, 2011 at 16:59

The problem with the above diatribe is that it was written by someone who
knows nothing about the subject as any live-aboard would tell you.

Joe Public August 28, 2011 at 12:39

I think it’s a great idea.

MPs without a house within commuting-distance of Westminster, should have
to live on a houseboat moored adjacent to Parliament. That’d reduce the costs
of governing us.

Daedalus X.
Parrot August 28, 2011 at 12:58

Good idea Joe, but perhaps the MPs’ houseboats should be moored in one of
those crime ridden waterways such as in the Kings Cross area.

Ed P August 28, 2011 at 13:38

Great idea! A nice big boat on the Thames with 650 bunks – it could be
called the Marchioness…

Gallovidian August 28, 2011 at 12:14

Erm, isn’t the true solution to Britain’s housing shortage in some way
related to immigration? 239000 last year alone, net.

Or have I said a bad thing?

SisterEvaLongoria
August 28, 2011 at 12:03

I have to say I have always quite fancied it, but then I have only spent
the odd night on a houseboat. Pity that practicality is against it. It
attracts my Bohemian side,..

Engineer August 28, 2011 at 10:31

Don’t worry.

It’s probably just one of those ministerial ideas that appear from time to
time, only to sink without trace….

Radders August 28,
2011 at 09:50

There are many reasons why folk live on boats; a very few actually love it.
Most others have been forced to; escaping debt, court judgements, living on
tiny pensions (yes, there are many over-65s on boats) or just hiding from
abusive partners or State prodnoses. Waste generally goes into a boatyard
skip, sewage straight into tidal water. They don’t have addresses so mail is
generally held by the boatyard. Their heat comes from gas cylinders or coke
stoves, but in bad winters this does nothing to dissipate the bone-numbing
chill.

Forget Damian Hirst’s houseboat moored at Chelsea Pier, think more of an
old wooden sloop of 30′ bought for £3k that will never see an extended passage
again, moored on mudflats and out of the way drying creeks with a leaking deck
and wet rot in the keel.

In my waterborne exploring I’ve come across little knots of these
boat-gypsies everywhere from Shoreham to Butley via Deptford Creek and I have
to say I tend to like them; they’re friendly, co-operative, anarchic,
independent and if you want to break your passage for a week, it’s always safe
to leave your boat with them. And frankly, I don’t think this bloke Shapps
even knows they exist – he’s thinking of Chelsea Pier, I think – for which I’m
sure they’ll be profoundly grateful.

JuliaM August 28,
2011 at 09:31

“.. why in the name of all that is holy does the government have a New
Homes Bonus, which means that taxpayers are refunding the council tax of new
home buyers? Why not just have Councils not levy the council tax in the first
place? “

Because having a Bonus to administer requires government jobs to
administer, check, validate and train for.

Simples!

ivan August 28, 2011 at 11:11

Not only that but it helps to prop up the strange obsession of ‘house =
wealth’ that appears to be rampant in the UK.

Techno August 28, 2011 at 08:10

Completely agree. It is a desperate and silly suggestion by the Housing
Minister.

There is no mention that every few years a houseboat has to be lifted out
of the water and have its hull inspected, with all the disruption and
inconvenience that entails.

Barking mad.