Help to Buy: George, David and Ed were all missing for their basic lesson in economics
The cleverness of the politics lies in the invisibility of those who will lose out
.jpg)
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.“He needs a basic lesson in economics”, said David Cameron at Prime Minister's Questions, when asked by Ed Miliband about Labour's proposal for an energy price freeze.
So true. But, sadly, so does the Prime Minister. This was exposed by Graham Jones, Labour MP for Hyndburn, who won my Backbench Question of the Day by asking why it was all right to intervene in the mortgage market but not in the energy market.
Cameron responded feebly that the mortgage market isn't working, which is doubtful, implying that the energy market is, which is true.
What it also undeniable is that the Government's Help to Buy scheme, to underwrite mortgages up to £600,000 to allow people to buy with five per cent deposits, is the economics of the perpetual-motion tombola.
It is clever politics, because the beneficiaries will be grateful to the Government for allowing them to buy a house that the could not afford otherwise. But it will do next to nothing to increase the supply of housing, and so for every beneficiary there will be a loser somewhere, who might have bought a house had the scheme not existed, but who will now be beaten to it by a Help-to-Buyer.
The cleverness of the politics lies in the invisibility of these losers, who may not themselves know that they have lost out.
There are only two ways in which the scheme can "work":
1. If prices rise or mortgage availability improves to such an extent that housebuilders build more houses than they would otherwise have done. That would of course put house prices generally out of the reach of even more people.
2. If houses that are now rented are sold to mortgage-backed owner-occupiers. Again, that would happen only if house prices rise or rents fall, and there is no reason why the second should happen.
The Prime Minister and the Chancellor need a basic lesson in economics, and should not be allowed to get away with the politics.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments