The Labour Party's latest proposals for first-time buyers are being presented as a lifeline for young people struggling to enter the property market. In reality, it risks worsening the very problem it claims to address. What the Labour government has introduced and what it plans to do should it be re-elected favours developers and sellers far more than the young couples they are supposed to support.

Over the past 13 years, Malta's economic model - built in most part on population growth - has driven relentless demand for housing. The consequence has been predictable: a construction boom accompanied by sustained price inflation. For young people, especially those attempting to buy their first home, the result has been a steadily receding target. Wages have not kept pace with property prices, and the gap continues to widen.

Against this backdrop, the government's approach has been to subsidise demand. A few years ago, a €10,000 grant spread over a decade was introduced with the stated aim of easing the burden on buyers. The effect, however, was immediate and counterproductive. Sellers adjusted prices upwards, absorbing the benefit. What was framed as assistance became, in practice, an additional expense for buyers.

The latest proposals follow the same logic, only on a larger scale. Increased stamp duty exemptions, higher eligibility thresholds, refunds on transaction costs, and most notably the "My First Home" scheme - where the state covers up to 25% of a property's value interest-free - are all designed to make purchasing easier. On paper, the savings appear substantial. In practice, they risk being neutralised, or even reversed, by price increases.

Early indications suggest this is already happening. Reports of properties rising by €10,000 to €20,000 within days of the announcement are not surprising. Couples going for a second look at property they viewed two weeks ago found out that the price had gone up since their first visit.

In a market where supply remains constrained and demand is artificially boosted, prices will respond accordingly. Developers and property owners are not passive actors; they react rationally to incentives. When buyers have more financial backing, sellers simply adjust their expectations. Upwards, of course.

The Prime Minister argues that safeguards, such as price caps tied to eligibility, will prevent excessive inflation. He goes as far as saying that there is a chance prices will go down. Maybe he should speak to couples looking for a home before he makes such statements. Couples who are not blinded by partisan beliefs, that is.

What is most striking is the government's insistence that these schemes are "making a real difference". They are - but not in the way intended. For many young buyers, the experience is one of chasing a moving target, where each new measure designed to help them is quickly resulting in higher prices. We're not talking about villas with sea-views. We're talking about two-bedroomed apartments in peripheral localities that cost an arm and a leg, leaving potential buyers with heavy loans that will expire when they reach pensionable age.

The sense of frustration is compounded by the perception that policymakers are either unwilling or unable to recognise the consequences of their own actions.

If the objective is genuinely to make homeownership more accessible, the current approach requires rethinking. Otherwise, the cycle will continue: more assistance, higher prices, and diminishing returns for those it is meant to support. In its present form, the policy risks deepening the very inequality it claims to address, leaving first-time buyers no better off - and in many cases, worse.