IN THE past four decades average house prices in Britain have more than quadrupled in real terms, a bigger increase than in any other G7 country. Costly housing constrains economic growth and poisons politics. A big cause of this sorry state of affairs is inadequate housebuilding, especially in London and the south-east. Governments of all stripes have pledged to get Britain building. But the last time the country put up more than 250,000 houses a year, which is what most economists reckon is the bare minimum to constrain house-price growth, was in 1979.

Yet there are some surprising signs of progress at last. As the economy has recovered from the financial crisis in 2008-09, the number of planning permissions granted to builders has returned to pre-crisis levels (see chart). Indeed, it has gone further: last year more planning permissions were granted than in any year since comparable records began in 2006. If they translate into actual housebuilding at the same rate as now, then Britain may soon meet the 250,000-a-year target.

Housing experts appear optimistic that the trend will continue. The Tories are increasingly aware that Britain’s housing mess is costing them votes; over half of private renters voted for the Labour Party at the general election last year. Sajid Javid, who was promoted to home secretary last month, made wonkish reforms in his previous two years as secretary of state for housing. What at first looked like modest tweaks could add up to create a further boost to supply. The first relates to the thorny issue of planning policy. Rules implemented by David Cameron’s governments in 2010-16 made it easy for local authorities to limit housebuilding on their patch. Determining how much local housing was needed was the responsibility of councils themselves. Local bigwigs had every incentive to lowball the figures to avoid the wrath of NIMBYs, says Neal Hudson of Residential Analysts, a consultancy. Recently Theresa May’s government has tweaked this approach. Central government is getting greater power to determine where houses are built. In November Mr Javid identified 15 councils that had failed to adopt a “local plan” for housebuilding (lately the 15 have been building 20% slower than the average council). In March three of them were in effect taken into special measures. York council may soon vote in favour of a local plan, which would be the city’s first in over 60 years. Across the country last year, 80% of minor residential planning applications were dealt with within eight weeks, the most since records began in 2004. The government is exploring other ways to gee up housebuilding. In November the budget detailed plans to raise a cap on local authorities’ borrowing. The change will allow them to invest more in social housing. The department is also helping housing associations (non-profit providers who generally let homes at below-market rates). It appears to be scrapping two other Cameron-era policies: annual cuts of 1% in the rents that housing associations may charge, and a plan to give housing-association tenants the right to buy their home. The move will strengthen housing associations’ finances, allowing them to build more houses.

There is plenty more that James Brokenshire, Mr Javid’s successor, could do. Boldest would be to allow more building on the “green belt” land that encircles cities (and often isn’t very green). Giving councils an incentive to grant development, by allowing them to keep more of the council tax that is generated, would also help. But for the first time in years, he will at least be building on firmer foundations.