I was dismayed to read your reports on Labour’s threadbare manifesto (Keir Starmer faces questions over cost of Labour manifesto, 13 June). The irony of Sir Keir Starmer standing on a podium with the legend “change” while offering so little substance could hardly be greater. Apparently, given the fiscal rules, any hope of real change must reside in Labour’s ability to stimulate economic growth and here the main lever proposed is reform of the planning system. This system, he tells us, acts as a “major brake on economic growth” and his manifesto promises to slash the red tape that is holding us back. This kind of tired old soundbite, based on anecdote rather than evidence, has been regurgitated at elections for the last 20 years. Several avidly pro-growth governments have already driven a coach and horses through planning guidance and legislation. It would be interesting to know exactly what regulations Starmer intends to ditch in his quest to unleash a tidal wave of housebuilding. Planning is about balancing, or ideally seeking synergy between economic, social and environmental concerns. To do this, careful and often complex consideration is required. So, unless Starmer wants planning by diktat, little will change. If Labour really wants to increase housebuilding, it should look at the suggestions made by the Lib Dems. These have a lot more to recommend them. Ian Collis Derby • It seems that the parties are all promising to overshoot carbon budgets by adopting policies of building houses to meet housing needs (What each party promises voters in its UK general election manifesto, 15 June). With just a low level of carbon literacy, they would know that the upfront carbon emitted in the building of 300,000 houses a year would exceed the carbon budget for the whole economy. Probably the only way of meeting housing needs within carbon budgets would be through concentrating on using the 1m empty homes and the 50% of unused space and fabric in existing housing stock. Daniel Scharf Abingdon, Oxfordshire