The home ownership honeymoon may be over in the world’s leading democracies, but there is no reason why, locally at least, if a few brave steps are taken now, we cannot both continue to sustain a healthy housing market from which profits are generated, as well as a fairer society where more have access to affordable homes, where all sections of society enjoy a decent home, where many different housing tenures coexist peacefully, from outright ownership to commercial renting, from shared ownership to subsidised rents, from equity sharing to supported housing models (such as those offered by the Richmond, Agenzija Sapport and, most importantly, for the homeless in a crisis situation those hostels offered by YMCA). Everyone must have a stake in society, and the first building block of that stake in society is a decent home.

It will in the first instance require some more substantial investment in housing.

Housing is a very important area of need, but in recent years there has been less direct investment partly because the market was delivering well. This is now clearly not the case and many households, both single person and all forms of family, cannot afford either rental or home ownership, at least not in the models that are prevalent. Also very importantly, a substantial number of households cannot afford to pay for their housing at all, be they people on a pension which has no fat to allow for paying for housing, be they people on low wages, where again there is no slack available to pay for their home, be they one of the many thousands who live off relief or simply young couples starting out.

Very importantly too we need financial packages to pay for the very many people who want to live independently although they have support needs, people with disabilities, people who cannot manage on their own, people we all know and, generally, who are supported by their families to an absolutely amazing degree.

The backdrop to this if we genuinely want to succeed anyway, must be no politics and no posturing.

It is very obvious that with an election round the corner different parties will focus on certain lobbies that can influence substantial votes. The Church did some lobbying too lately when it spoke of the difficulties faced by first time buyers. But we need to be rational and honest and openly admit that our worst housing difficulties are not only about those faced by first time buyers. Consequently, we have a moral duty to highlight the other needs of people who are very, very much poorer than our average early 20 something year olds, but who seem to have no political voice, no one shouting for them, nobody lobbying for them, not even the Church, which is also a shareholder in a house lending operation (a very responsible operation I hasten to add), and is so part of the process by which money is made on lending. Nothing wrong with that, but it does need to be clearer when it criticises whether it is being consistent or even helpful at all to those who are in fact supposedly its most important constituents, the poor and dispossessed, and not just first time buyers, many of whom are far better off than we were when those of us who are already home owners all started on the housing ladder many moons ago.

Therefore, to allow our housing honeymoon to mature into a lasting marriage, we need to tackle the problems that are larger than political posturing, and much needed investment without which much government investment will not be as cost effective and sustainable as it should be. We must take two brave decisions if we really want to alter the housing market.

First we must use the planning system to deliver a wider range of homes with a wider range of prices attached to them. Right now we just have a surplus of over priced and in many cases poorly designed lumps of concrete with a few holes in them, pricey caves masquerading as homes.

Secondly, all new homes, whether newly built or refurbished, must aim for zero carbon emissions. In the UK homes produce a staggering third of all carbon emissions, the figure here must be similar and we cannot go on ignoring this problem. This summer, with its series of heat waves, should have woken us all up to the fact that an overheating planet is already on our doorstep.

Planning gain has been successfully used in the UK to produce thousands of affordable homes than would otherwise have been generated. Land is simply too precious and in too short supply to let total market forces prevail any longer.

Developers of certain sites (not Tower Road type sites obviously) must be incentivised to produce a range of homes at a range of prices, or homes where their profit margin varies. Those with the most subsidy can then be distributed by the government according to strict means tested criteria. Permits need to be given in exchange for a contribution to our distorted housing market. If we don’t do this, we risk a society of too many have nots and a few haves.

We are already getting there and though we must not go down the road of taking over empty homes from people as was done in the past, we can, with a little courage, transparency and sense of fair play, use the planning system to create better access to more affordable housing options.

The government on its own cannot supply enough housing of the type, range and price needed and while it does need to invest more, particularly for the most vulnerable, it should use the planning system to create a saner and ultimately a fairer market particularly for first time buyers. Simply hoping that prices will now just come down a bit because of over supply is not enough to correct our market inequalities. We have to institutionalise some fairness in the housing sector and this is the government’s role, as the private sector will not come to the planning gain table unless it has to.

It is the same with building energy saving homes. Why is it not yet mandatory for all new buildings? Most government built homes are now being built to better environmental standards but the government builds a tiny percentage of the supply, on average around 150 homes per year, Why don’t the private developers also have to build to standards which at the very least ensure we don’t waste so much water (by reusing households waste water), by harnessing our surplus of solar power, by insulating our roofs and windows so our homes are cooler in summer and warmer in winter. It can be done but it must be mandatory. We are already almost too late but we do need to start being very serious about this hothouse planet of ours, especially here when we already know how unbearable hot days are. Who wants more of them?

Hopefully, after this election is over, we will all together start to look at our housing challenges rationally and not politically, in the long term and not in quick short-term election mode. We will start to plan properly to produce a fairer housing market where more benefit than banks and contractors, where more can access decent housing, housing which also respects the limit of this heating up planet far more than we are doing now.

[email protected]