2nd opinion: Let's be more creative

OK, I own up: I watch Location, Location, Location, Property Ladder and Escape to the Country. I am, of course, far from the only viewer: this country is obsessed with homeownership.

In the past 30 years it has become the means by which we can get rich quick without much effort – provided scarcity and increasing demand pushes up the price. We feel secure, we have our alternative pension fund or increased equity upon which we can borrow. So what's wrong with that? Well, those of us who work in housing know that scarcity has a price, paid in human suffering.

First, living on the edge of homeownership can be a nightmare. On many of our estates, you can tell the homes that have been bought under the right to buy because they are poorly maintained. The owners either do not have the money to maintain them or have sublet them, and as private landlords do not want to spend the money. Second, living on the edge means you can fall off. With declared homelessness rates at an all-time high since Labour came into power, along with debt levels, it appears that a fair number of people have fallen.

That's why I am so worried by the government's obsession with low-cost homeownership and, in particular, the need to provide for a small part of society – certain public sector workers including police officers, planning officers and probation staff, but not refuse collectors, housing officers or firefighters.

I'm not against providing affordable homes for key workers; I very much understand the economic necessity of ensuring that people with low to moderate incomes can live relatively close to where they work. But I am against narrow definitions that are difficult to justify and create problems by restricting marketing and selling to a small pool of eligible applicants. The swing of the pendulum in the direction of key workers is considerable: of the £290m allocated for development in the South-east during 2004/5, £120m – more than 40% – will go to such schemes.

At a recent housing conference held by the Government Office for the South-east for local strategic partnerships, the audience was asked to choose the single most important housing issue facing the region. Two-thirds thought the problem was affordability, one-third thought it was supply and there were no votes for key workers. But is anyone prepared to tell the deputy prime minister?

Low-cost homeownership has its place but it is not the most flexible answer when trying to tackle a wide range of need. Society is changing; many young people start their working lives with large debts from university. If they want to be independent, they have to rent and some may well have to do so for many years.

Perhaps we should be more creative when tackling scarcity and affordability? What about providing affordable, secure, well managed and maintained rented homes for the majority of people in the first instance, but with the opportunity to pay more rent if their incomes rise, thus entitling them to an equity stake in the property? It would be a bit like paying back a student loan when you reach a particular income threshold, but with an incentive to pay more because you then get a slice of the feel-good factor attached to homeownership.

Let us try not only to increase supply but also to produce products that are flexible, catering for the needs of future generations as well as those of the current population.