Spectator's Notebook
THE cost of building land was one of the large and ill-defined influences which helped to nudge the electorate in the direction of the Labour party las1 year. Anyone who tried to estimate public opinion during the last phase of the Tory government constantly came across a sense of grievance on this issue. Many Tories, I know, feel that their party missed the bus by leaving it to Labour to attack land profits and promise remedial measures.
Now that Labour's plan for h 40 per cent levy on the development value of land is pub- lished I dare say this regret will be intensified. Mr. John Boyd-Carpenter, speaking for the Tories last .March, carried his party's commit- ment on the subject a good deal further than the vague hint which was all that last October's manifesto contained:
We do think [he said] it would be reasonable to impose a charge related to the increased value realised from development of land fol- lowing planning permission... . It is our inten- tion when we return to office to include provi- sion for such a charge among our measures.
But it is one thing to make such a promise out of office and another to produce it in a White Paper as a government proposal. The episode looks like a classic example of bolting the stable door after the political horse has galloped off.
It may be remarked, of course, that neither a 40, nor a 45, nor a 50 per cent levy will actually bring the price of building land down: on the contrary, it seems very likely to drive it up; but that is not the sort of point out of which party- political capital is so easily made.
Previous page
