Which is also true of political parties in the first place.
They've (re-)inflated a housing bubble, allowed most of our capital city to (continue to) be sold to Russian mobsters, and engendered the creation of a great number of zero-hours jobs. They've cut government services and failed to make savings from it. So no, not really. But no British government has done a good job since the War.
We have property in London and when I visit the capital and stay there two things that most local people talk about are
Property prices in London are very expensive and only foreigners can afford them
There are many Arabs and Russians who are now effectively buying up London
My argument to this would be
The market determines the price of a particular property based on numerous factors like location. Is it the governments fault that a flat is that expensive in Chelsea?
Its a global world, can you really prevent wealthy people from other countries from investing in areas like property? How would you reasonably prevent this?
Yes. It is the fault of numerous post-war governments deciding to cancel government house-building plans, while maintaining the stringent planning regulations put in place by the Attlee government, which were supposed to be offset by... government house-building. The government is very much to blame for the housing bubble. International capital was attracted to the property market in London because (a) prices were already relatively high, and (b) London is a city for **** .
As for it being a global world, yes, you can reasonably prevent the kind of tax-dodging going on with, oh, One Hyde Park, by ending the non-dom rule, introducing taxes of the variety mentioned by Monte, you could introduce regulations requiring property bought to be either lived in or rented out... the point of legislation is precisely to 'redress grievances'.
May be those are different people.