Reeves’ growth plans choose chaos over strategy

In her Mais economics lecture on 17 March 2026 at the Bayes Business School in the City of London, Chancellor Reeves stated her readiness to apply compulsory purchase powers across swathes of SE England, in order to force growth in the so-called Oxford to Cambridge Growth Corridor. Campaign group Stop the Arc Group (STARC) says the move is proof of an absence of clear thinking and coherent government strategy.

STARC Chair Charles Pither said 'The previous Ox-Cam Arc Strategy was cancelled in 2021. There is still no replacement. Instead, we have a flimsy investment prospectus that reads like estate agent blurb, and ministerial statements that highlight individual towns but nothing linking them other than housebuilders’ profits margins.'

STARC says the absence of strategy has allowed a raft of contradictory policies to emerge across government.

The Chancellor's statement pre-empts formation of the Greater Cambridge Development Corporation, public consultation for which closes on 1 April 2026. The Department of Science and Technology is promoting the revival of the Oxford Cambridge Arc dream, but the Department for Housing, Communities and Local Government is conversely pushing local councils into three, probably four separate mayoralties across the Arc. Labour-led Milton Keynes and Luton are refusing to work with Reform in Northamptonshire. Elsewhere, the Department for Transport is claiming that land around new stations could be sold off to help fund the East West Rail project. But the Department for Housing Communities and Local government wants to remove ‘hope value’ from land, so the areas would have to be compulsory purchased, prior to being resold at a profit.

STARC's Nick Burton said, 'A strategy vacuum such as this is being filled by think tanks and speculators. Labour Together is promoting a single gigantic Development Corporation with sweeping powers all the way from Oxford to Cambridge. Another group is promoting the 'Forest City' in Suffolk using leasehold properties in ways that the government is currently seeking to outlaw. And a proposal has emerged for The Fast Growth Cities group – advocating an unlikely combination of Cambridge, Milton Keynes, Norwich, Oxford, Peterborough and Swindon. Nowhere in this free-for-all is there a single proposal to listen to the public who live in the places targeted for development.'

Supporters of growth across the Ox-Cam corridor claim to be building on success. But numerous independent reports identify other locations growing substantially faster and more successfully. York, Edinburgh, Cardiff, Leeds, and much of England's South West region consistently outperform cities in the Ox-Cam corridor, in terms of skills, employment and affordability.

'The Chancellor acknowledges the need to stimulate growth in other parts of the country. But plans for the Ox-Cam corridor remain a red-hot priority, led and driven by developers, seeking to create a gold-rush opportunity in a region where their margins are at a maximum,' said Pither. 'Just building houses does not lead to growth in the tech sector, so much vaunted by this Government. Cheap electricity, low business rates, favourable employment law, easier access to finance, might, but these are noticeably absent from their approach.'

'Reeves says compulsory purchase powers are needed because landowners block developers. In fact, housebuilders claim their progress is stalled less by land availability, more by lengthy planning processes. And it's well-understood that housebuilders own more land than they are willing to develop at any one time. There are currently over one million houses in the UK with planning permission, but which haven't been built because developers are reluctant to place supply ahead of demand.,' said Pither, 'First the government said the planning process was stalling housebuilding, so that it seeks ways to squeeze democracy out of decision-making. Then it claimed bats and newts were blocking development, so it swept away environmental protections. Now it wants simply to enable land-grabbing. But none of these increasingly desperate measures will ever persuade developers to build more houses, sooner. Because there's no money in that.'