Teekall and his family, longtime residents of Peckham, south London, now find themselves victim to the government’s reckless housing policies that put demolition over community stability. Despite steady employment and a deep-rooted connection to their neighbourhood, they face the painful prospect of being priced out due to the widespread push for rapid development—regardless of local needs. The proposed Berkeley Homes project to develop 877 new residences on the Aylesham Centre site exemplifies the government’s obsession with quantity over quality, driven by a relentless aim to hit their headline target of 1.5 million new homes. Yet, for families like Teekall’s, such developments are increasingly inaccessible, highlighting a stark disconnect between government rhetoric and real community needs.
The controversy centers on Berkeley's decision to drastically reduce affordable housing from an initial 35% (around 270 units) to just 12% (77 units), a move criticized by residents and local leaders alike. Southwark Council and community groups have condemned this attempt to dilute social housing provisions, with Councillor Helen Dennis lamenting the “shocking” decrease amid a rising demand—over 4,000 households await social housing in Peckham alone. Despite the council’s outright rejection of Berkeley's plans in 2025, the developers bypassed local authority controls by appealing directly to the Planning Inspectorate—an authority newly empowered by government reforms that fast-track housing schemes and weaken community input. This process, culminating in a public inquiry in late October 2025, underscores the government’s confidence in its approach of overriding local opposition to boost housing numbers at all costs.
These reforms are part of a broader government strategy that aims to fast-track housing projects by reducing affordable housing obligations from 35% to 20% and empowering the London Mayor to bypass local scrutiny on schemes over 50 homes. Critics warn that these measures are a recipe for disaster—further marginalizing communities already suffering the brunt of a housing crisis. While ministers insist these reforms are necessary to combat stalled housing supply caused by rising interest rates, Brexit-related costs, and declining foreign investment, they ignore the glaring fact that this approach prioritizes developer profits over public interest. Over recent years, housebuilders like Berkeley Homes have recorded profits exceeding £500 million annually, returning vast dividends to shareholders—profits sustained despite the government’s narrative about addressing affordability. Meanwhile, the government’s strategies gradually erode the social fabric of communities, forcing working families into poverty or displacement, and reducing London to a playground for the wealthy.
In Peckham, this dynamic is painfully evident. Campaign groups like Aylesham Community Action reveal that of the planned affordable housing, only 50 units will be available for social rent—despite overburdened waiting lists. The remaining 800 market-rate homes will be priced far out of reach for most local residents, with fewer than one in ten families able to buy or rent at an affordable level. This paradox exposes the government’s false promise of “growth” while actively undermining the very communities it claims to want to support. Teekall and his neighbours are rightly concerned about social displacement, their fears reflecting a wider anger at a system that values profit over people and community cohesion.
Despite the government’s claims of long-term investment—such as the £39 billion Social and Affordable Homes Programme for 2026–2036, and a pledge of £2 billion for 18,000 affordable homes by 2029—nothing masks the shortsightedness of current policies. These initiatives often fall short on the ground, delivering little for the families that need them most and losing sight of social and economic sustainability. The ongoing dispute in Peckham epitomizes a larger pattern: a government more focused on hitting ambitious housing targets than on creating genuinely affordable, inclusive communities.
The debate surrounding Aylesham Centre underscores the fundamental fissure at the heart of UK housing policy—one driven by a desire for rapid economic growth but at the expense of social stability. As the public inquiry unfolds, it will reveal not just local resistance but the deep systemic failures of a housing system that favours developer profits and political expediency over real community needs. For those like Teekall, the message is clear: until the government abandons its obsession with numbers and starts prioritizing people and communities, the housing crisis will only deepen, leaving millions behind in a city that should be their home, not a distant dream.
Source: Noah Wire Services