The issue is one of the deficient supply of affordable housing: a problem concentrated in London and other high cost areas, but still present elsewhere. And, although new net supply increased to 217,000 in 2016-17, that figure is likely to prove a peak and still below projected demographic growth levels, leaving aside the impact of the supply backlog that has built up since the GFC. Recent supply totals comprise mainly homes built at prices way beyond the means of first time buyers with even less than upper quartile earnings in some areas, let alone average or below average earnings. The private housing market is broken, suffering from multiple housing and land market failures. That has significant and extensive deleterious macro-economic, as well as social, impacts, noted and highlighted by FT commentators, such as Martin Wolf and Chris Giles, to name just a couple. It needs to be replaced by a partnership model where 70,000-100000 dwellings are provided for either affordable rent or discounted home ownership terms accessible to those that cannot purchase. Deflating the cost of land directly should be an essential ingredient of such a partnership model, and would help to reduce its public expenditure cost. Insisting on at least 40% of all dwellings provided on new developments (beyond a minimum size) to be affordable as a mandatory, certain and transparent requirement would serve to reduce land costs; that change could be backed by changes in the compulsory purchase rules allowing public authorities to compulsorily purchase land at existing use values as a last resort in order to provide affordable demonstrably needed in their local areas.