The 2023 party political conference season in the UK has almost ended, with housing and infrastructure never far from the debate. From the Green Party’s ambitious plans for renters’ rights to the Conservative Party’s controversial decision regarding HS2, each party has now set out its vision for the future of housing and major infrastructure in Britain.

The Green Party’s proposals stand out with a commitment to empower renters, allowing them to demand insulation improvements in their home, backed by a substantial £145 billion investment plan. They also pledged to build 100,000 council homes annually, all meeting the Passivhaus or equivalent standards to tackle the ongoing housing crisis and promote sustainability.

The SNP is making a bold move by advancing the ban on gas boilers in new homes a year ahead of England’s planned deadline. This commitment reflects their dedication to combatting climate change and promoting cleaner energy solutions.

The Liberal Democrats’ stance on housing targets remains divisive within the party. While they promise to build 150,000 social homes and commission ten new garden cities, they are also advocating for increased local involvement in planning processes and a revision of the Land Compensation Act.

In a controversial move, the Conservative Party decided to scrap the northern leg of HS2, drawing mixed reactions within their own party as well as beyond. They have pledged to redevelop Euston Station with a 10,000-home project. The Conservatives said they will address the nutrient neutrality issue and tackle potential council misuse of the “15-minute cities” concept.

The Labour Party’s housing agenda is marked by a commitment to build 1.5 million homes over five years. They also plan to bolster planning departments with 300 new officers and re-introduce housing targets, emphasising the continued use of a standard methodology. They plan to make it easier for councils to use right-to-buy funds for new home construction, driving forward delivery.

What was arguably most interesting is what was not said: nobody was talking about ‘use it or lose it’ and nobody suggested a fair and equitable society lies solely in the regeneration of city centres. Does this mark a genuine turning point back to long-term, planned growth?