Nimbyism on the rise in blow to Rayner's building blitz
The number of people identifying as Nimbys is estimated to have grown by almost a third since the Government stepped up its anti-Nimby rhetoric in late 2024, according to the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) and Demos, a cross-party think tank.
Polling shows that 23pc of people now class themselves as Nimbys, up from the 17.5pc recorded in a survey by Labour Together in September last year.
The report warned that the rise in local resistance to developments risked hindering Ms Rayner's ambitions to build 1.5m homes by the end of this Parliament.
The Housing Secretary has repeatedly vowed not to tolerate Nimbyism, pledging to end their 'chokehold' on housebuilding.
Writing in The Telegraph in December, Ms Rayner, who is also the Deputy Prime Minister, said Nimbys would 'no longer have the upper hand'.
Under proposed reforms, builders will be allowed to sidestep council planning committees, while campaigners will be blocked from making repeated legal challenges against major infrastructure projects.
Sir Keir Starmer has echoed promises to stop developments being held up, saying in January that he would override the 'whims of Nimbys' against major building projects and back the builders, rather than the 'blockers'.
However, researchers from RTPI and Demos said: 'Far from driving support, the Government's current combative tone could be dangerously backfiring.
'This poses a risk to the Government's ambitious housebuilding target and potentially their electoral strategy too if they face increasing local opposition.'
They added that only 12pc of people felt they had a say over the outcome of planning decisions, pointing to risks that the Government's 'enthusiasm to drive forward building could fuel further mistrust'.
The report shows that 67pc of the British public identify as Mimbys – 'Maybe in my backyard' – representing those who are open to new developments in their areas under the right circumstances. Just 10pc identify as Yimbys, or 'Yes in my backyard'.
Victoria Hills, chief executive of the RTPI, said that trust could be rebuilt between local communities and the Government if they were involved in the planning process at an earlier stage.
Ms Hills said: 'Through effective community engagement, the majority of people would accept housing near them.
'If our members, and the authorities they work with, are given the time, space and expertise to engage early enough in the process, then we would find that housing across the country is delivered with the support of the local communities, not despite them.'
Polly Curtis, chief executive of Demos, said: 'Cutting the public out of the conversation like they are red tape will lead to more legal challenges and friction down the line.
'Instead, early and representative public participation will properly engage the Mimby majority, giving that silent majority a voice and helping to unlock housebuilding.
'This is a risk-reducing and time-saving strategy, and one that will help build trust in Government.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
23 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
In Canada's pledge to recognize Palestine, much depends on what comes after the words
It was nearly 80 years ago that a Canadian diplomat and future prime minister first laid out the boundaries of an independent and equal Palestinian state. Lester B. Pearson was chairman of the United Nations committee that drafted the former British territory's 1947 partition plan . Had it not been hindered by a war the following year that led to the creation of the state of Israel and kicked off a decades-long cycle of violence, the plan would have carved up the land into side-by-side Arab and Jewish territories. On Wednesday, Prime Minister Mark Carney took a significant step to revive the idea of a two-state solution to the conflict, one he said has been ' steadily and gravely eroded ' by the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel . In announcing that he would recognize a Palestinian state before the United Nations General Assembly in September, Carney said Canada was 'standing with all people who choose peace over violence or terrorism.' It is a step that Middle East observers see as a potentially powerful signal, one that comes in concert with an identical pledge from France and a warning that Britain will follow suit if Israel does not agree to a ceasefire in Gaza and commit to a peace deal . On top of snubbing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the recognition of Palestine risks isolating the United States, which could end up as the only permanent member of the United Nations Security Council resisting the movement. This is important because a potential United Nations member state must first have the backing of the UNSC before submitting to a vote of the General Assembly, where 147 out of 193 countries already support Palestinian statehood. The move by Canada, France and the United Kingdom could also split the wealthy and influential G7 member states and push their numbers into the majority at the G20. But this political recognition is far from a magic wand that will end the war and the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip. Much depends on what comes after the words. If recognition is not followed by action, the declaration will remain largely symbolic, said Yossi Mekelberg, a senior consulting fellow with Chatham House in London. Canada can intervene in the case against Israel in support of the principles of international law. Canada can intervene in the case against Israel in support of the principles of international law. But it could also prove to be hugely significant if it leads to a larger plan to end the war in Gaza , free the remaining Israeli hostages, deliver humanitarian aid and rebuild the devastated territory, reduce tensions in the West Bank and forge a long-term peace between Israelis and Palestinians. 'It actually should have been done long before as a way to overcome the asymmetry in negotiation between a state (Israel) and a non-state actor (the Palestinian Authority),' Mekelberg said in an interview. Carney, who spoke with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas following his declaration, said he expects the governing body, which administers the West Bank, to commit to governance reforms, to holding elections in 2026 and to demilitarizing the Palestinian state. 'It puts the onus on the Palestinians to behave as a state and not as a liberation movement,' Mekelberg said. The Israeli government has strongly objected to the move, saying that recognition is a reward for terrorism and supports a movement that wants to destroy Israel, not live beside it in peace. On Thursday, U.S. President Donald Trump wrote on social media that Canada's decision ' will make it very hard for us to make a trade deal with them .' Trump posted on Truth Social the move 'will make it very hard for us to make a trade deal' with Canada. Trump's deadline for a trade deal is Friday. Trump posted on Truth Social the move 'will make it very hard for us to make a trade deal' with Canada. Trump's deadline for a trade deal is Friday. The U.S. State Department also announced Thursday that it had decided to prevent Palestinian political leaders from obtaining travel visas on grounds they had, among other things, attempted to 'internationalize' the conflict with Israel through legal proceedings at the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice.' But the decision by Canada, France and Britain — three countries with historically close ties to Israel — to back the Palestinian cause will also make it hard for average Israelis to ignore the existence of a shifting tide in global public opinion. This, even if a Pew Research survey published last month found that only about one in five Israelis believed it was possible for separate Israeli and Palestinian states to peacefully coexist, while half said it was not possible. The prospects for a peaceful future have little to do with the determination about whether a territory constitutes a state. The generally accepted definition was agreed to nearly a century ago at a gathering of mostly central and South American countries in Uruguay. They signed a treaty, the 1933 Montevideo Convention , resolving that a state existed as a legal entity wherever four basic criteria were met: a permanent population; a defined territory; a government; and the capacity to enter into relations with other states. Canada's own difficult history with the Quebec independence movement and the geopolitical chaos prompted by the fall of communism in the 1990s is a reminder that what is written on paper rarely translates neatly into what occurs in real life. It took nearly a decade after the guns had fallen silent for Canada to recognize Kosovo as a state separate from neighbouring Serbia, although the Balkan nation still does not have a seat at the UN. In the case of Palestine and Israel, Canada and dozens of other frustrated countries have determined that recognition can serve as a potential precursor to peace, not simply as a reward for having achieved an end to the fighting. Mekelberg said that rather than viewing international recognition of Palestine as an attack on Israel, it should be seen as a 'pro-Israeli move' to end the wars, to ensure Israel's security and to fulfil the potential of both the Arab and Jewish populations. 'It's not a punishment,' he said. 'It's a step toward once and for all, finishing a conflict that is not only 77 years old, it's more than 100 years old.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
24 minutes ago
Putin signs a bill punishing online searches for information deemed 'extremist'
MOSCOW -- Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday signed a bill that punishes online searches for information officially branded 'extremist,' the latest in a series of moves by authorities to tighten control of the internet. The legislation, which has been approved by both houses of parliament earlier this month, makes what it describes as 'deliberately searching for and accessing extremist materials' online punishable by a fine of up to the equivalent of $60. In Russia, the official definition of extremist activity is extremely broad and includes opposition groups like the Anti-Corruption Foundation, created by the late opposition leader Alexei Navalny, and the 'international LGBTQ+ movement.' It's not clear how authorities will track down violators. Officials and lawmakers said ordinary internet users won't be affected and that only those who methodically seek outlawed content will be targeted. They did not explain how authorities would differentiate between them. Russians widely use VPN services for access to banned content, but authorities have sought to tighten restrictions and close the loopholes. The state communications watchdog has increasingly used technology to analyze traffic and block specific VPN protocols. Russian authorities have ramped up their multipronged crackdown on dissent after sending troops into Ukraine in February 2022.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Mass shooting on Park Avenue shows how dangerous a Mayor Mamdani would be for NYC
New Yorkers' collective sense of safety was bruised and rattled this week — a chilling wake-up call. On Monday, a deranged gunman waltzed into a Park Avenue skyscraper toting an M4 rifle. There he killed four innocents, including 36-year-old NYPD Officer Didarul Islam. The flood of frantic 9-1-1 calls reporting an active shooter drew an immediate and robust police response, led by officers in its specially trained Strategic Response Group, who arrived on the scene within six minutes. Both Officer Islam's sacrifice and the selfless professionalism of the hundreds of officers who bravely rushed to the scene brought home a crucial reality: The NYPD is an institution the city simply cannot live without. None of this is good for the victor of the Democratic mayoral primary, Zohran 'Nature Is Healing' Mamdani, who has a long and troubling history of statements deriding, taunting and calling to defund and dismantle the NYPD — whose officers are often the ones holding the very thin line between good and evil, order and chaos. Perhaps sensing a vibe shift, the mayoral hopeful called a press conference Wednesday to do some damage control. His performance struck me as contrived, insincere and deeply misguided. The policy proposal at the center of Mamdani's prepared statement — stronger national gun controls and a nationwide assault weapons ban — was especially frustrating. After all, how effective will additional gun controls be in a city with fewer police, and fewer opportunities to enforce those laws? During his campaign, Mamdani declared his intention to get the NYPD out of traffic enforcement. Yet more than 40% of the NYPD's gun arrests begin as traffic stops, as former NYPD executive John Hall explained in a 2021 Manhattan Institute report. And what would a Mayor Mamdani propose be done with gun-toting lawbreakers who are caught in a city without the jail space to house them? Seems like something he should think about, given his full-throated support for the plan to close the Rikers Island jail complex and replace it with a system whose maximum capacity is approximately half of the current jail population. Mamdani on Wednesday repeatedly turned up his nose at opportunities to retract any of his many troubling anti-NYPD statements. Rather than exhibiting sincere contrition for his anti-cop extremism, Mamdani chose deflection and indignation when reporters asked whether would explicitly disavow his prior calls to defund and dismantle the NYPD, or his smearing of its officers as racist. In fact, Mamdani merely restated the idea undergirding many of the 2020 calls to defund the police: That other actors — like violence interrupters, social workers and, as Mamdani has proposed, community safety agents — are better suited to take over NYPD functions like traffic enforcement, mental health crisis response and even domestic violence calls. He continued to defend his calls to dismantle the SRG unit, despite its admirable response Monday. Worse yet, he actually thought it appropriate to reiterate criticisms of the unit for its handling of unruly protests, accusing officers of First Amendment suppression and excessive force. Even in the wake of tragedy, Mamdani couldn't fully conceal his inner NYPD critic. If Wednesday's event was meant to make Mamdani's candidacy more palatable to those who had reservations about his history of anti-police stances, it missed the mark. From beginning to end he was, in every way, the wrong man for the moment. Cop-haters like Mamdani fail to acknowledge a fact the rest of us recognize: Our police are our protectors. The work they do — whether it's arresting armed gang members, taking fire from mass shooters or enforcing the subway fare — shields us from the crime and disorder that once defined this city. The calls coming from those Park Avenue offices on Monday were not asking for mediators, or social workers, or unarmed safety agents. They were pleading for armed police officers. This attack reminds us that the public rarely has control over whether or when evil will darken our doorsteps. But we do have some control over who will be there to meet it when it does. For that, those of us who live or work in the Big Apple will always owe the police our thanks and support. But from Mamdani, they are owed an apology. Rafael A. Mangual is the Nick Ohnell fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, a contributing editor of City Journal, and author of the book 'Criminal (In)Justice.' All views expressed are those of the author and not the Manhattan Institute.
