Kickstarting the housing market will rely upon first time buyers entering the market again. The following will help them:

Getting rid of HIPs (so to allow more houses to be marketed without initial cost)
Get rid of stamp duty for houses priced below £150k
Offer tax relief for first time buyers

Tony Brown, Nottingham, England

Which government will it be that finally realises that we need to go back to building council housing so ordinary people can have a decent home?

My guess is the next time Labour get in they will have realised this.

Thatcher's right to buy was a social disaster.

Tony, Luton,

The market will clear at the first time buyers affordability level.
We are clearly not there yet.

By coincidence (not) the mortgage market will also become more open, but don't expect a return to the good/bad days of cheap and easy money.

george, london,

Paul in Dubai , you ask why the government would want to bail out the property market.
The answer is obvious , because they all have substantial property portfolios.
btw Tony from Islington would like to know if you would like to buy a pad in London for £4.5m , going cheap.

Douglas Maxwell, Richmond, Yorkshire

the idea that government should be using tax payers money to nationalise risk and prop up and incredibly inflated housing market is incredible, and one i'd only support if i was a homeowner desperate to sell or an estate agent, and

'just 1 per cent '

is hilarious: the market's crashing fast.

hugh, london,

Guaranteeing mortgages may not be the best route but saying that is government distorting the market is misleading, surely that is what governments are there for. Most business orientated legislation distorts the market as does tax. As I understand it the US has underwritten part of their market.

mike gee, bournemouth, uk

Why should pat of my huge tax burden be used to prop up the housing market when even know i could afford to buy my own house ?

Sure this is just some kind of slight of hand, double cross, transfer of wealth from the working to the property holding.

Gavin , London, GB

Anyone who thinks poorer people will benefit from the government standing back and allowing a fully blown housing crash is completely and utterly mad. The knock on effects for the wider economy would be catastropic and the poorest would be the hardest hit.

Richard Price, East Sussex,

What happened in 1970. Was their a decision made that everyone born prior was special and to be subsidised at every turn by anyone born thereafter? I am happy to pay my way but I am no longer prepared to subsidise the fortunate many who preceded me. I am not alone.

John P-T, Reigate,

Contrary to the spin, Crosby did not explicitly recommend government-backed lending - he rejected it out of hand and only said he would consider over 3 months the idea of the BoE creating a supported market for mortgage-backed securities: he clearly stated his opposition to other market intervention

MB, Edinburgh,

If your looking to buy a house and hear that prices are going to drop 11 -> 12% you're going to wait till they've dropped at least 10% so that they get the best bargains.
The governments job here is to prevent such problems as NR and sub-prime crises reoccuring, not artifically fixing the market!

Gordon Paterson, Wells, UK

The BIG point in the Crosby report is being missed here. Govt is incapable of "propping up the housing mkt" as the lenders have now become risk averse..What is feared is mkt collaps and recession.Do we want mass unemployment because of a failure of the housing market?Tax payer abuse?Nero fiddling?

alec newsham, ilkley, uk

Government must buy all those unwanted inner city flats and hand them to local councils, residents associations to use to house the poor and the repossessed evicted.

Sue Doughty, Twyford, Berks, UK

I bought my home only 6 years ago with only a 5% deposit. I owe less than 50% of it's value now so why all the talk of neg' equity. Don't sell and you will not have any. It would have been a good idea not to have borrowed that bit extra for the BMW and honeymoon in the tropics to start with though.

Derek, East Yorkshire uk,

The tax payer must not foot the bill, houses are for living in not for speculating.Whatever next? Maybe I should max out my credit cards and Mr Brown will save me as well, worth my vote!!!!!

George Fairweather, Milton Keynes,

In 1997 the average house (roughly £72k) was 3.8 times average earnings (roughly £19k). In 2008 the average house (roughly £180k) is 6.2 times average earnings (£29k). Unaffordable and unsustainable even with artificially low IR's. Do not interfere GB - this Middle Englander has enough debt already!

Nigel, Brighton, UK

Your article suggests that sellers of which there are many currently, should be allowed to go to the wall, why is this a good idea? Houses have always been bought and sold in a fluid market. Now that people can't sell they face repossession. Not their fault banks are parasitical scum.

david hambly, St Albans, Uk

If the government does this it will lose my vote forever.
Artificially using tax payers money to permanently price out people who couldn't afford to get on the bottom wrung of the ladder would be unforgivable in my book.

B THomas, oxford,

There is no scarcity of land. Population density in the UK is 246 people per square kilometre, whereas Holland squeezes in 395, Belgium 341 and Germany 232. House prices in the UK outstrip them all. The 'scarcity' argument doesn't wash.

Jack, London,

It may be a temptation, but even fool GB can't swallow this one. Anyone who thinks that banks writing mortgages against assets that are likely to fall in value and that the government i.e. taxpayers should guarantee up the losses needs certifying.

j barrows, newcastle,

Tom Lamkin Manchester
Spot on. I am a courier and thats all i see all day
is land. and I am thinking we are short of land?

David, Bristol,

The parlous state of the housing market has nothing to do with Govt (or Kirsty et al). It was GREED, pure & simple, greedy sellers profiteering, greedy buyers hoping to profiteer in the future and worst of all greedy bankers lending ridiculous sums. Let market forces sort them out, not us taxpayers

Ewan, Harrow,

Helping first time buyers, with the banks requiring up to 25% deposits?The banks are having a laugh! Only folk who don't need a mortgage have that kind of dosh lying around. The billions that Broon is giving to failing banks would be better spent building council houses - stuff the private sector.

Frank Lynch, Livingston, Scotland

many FTBs have plenty of cash but don't want to buy at hyperinflated prices. Can you blame them? Over the years of being priced out they have saved hefty deposits but why buy now when in a years time it'll be 10% cheaper??? That's the danger in creating a bubble - once popped there's no reflation

j dickinson, middlesborough,

Why reinflate a bubble that's bursting? The government should not interfere with something that needs to happen. It will take a while for first time buyers to save an appropriate deposit. Good. Then they'll have smaller mortgages, and hopefully more breathing room when rates rise. End panic buying!

Carol, Derbyshire,

I see now that oil is down 20% in just the last couple of weeks. No doubt the government is already drawing up plans for a bail out to help hard pressed oil speculators and ensure that high street petrol prices stay at unaffordable levels. No? So why do the same with property????

Paul, Dubai, UAE

Whilst being in the position personally of likely losing money from the value of my home I none the less could not condone any plan which would allow banks to duck the consequences of their frankly irresponsible policies to mortgage lending. The people of UK should not foot the bill.

Bob, Reading,

Having lived in Germany for over 30 years I am appalled at the state of the economy in the UK. The economy is based on financial services, housing and little else. Manufacturing industry has all but disappeared. Where will value be created to support the rise in house prices in the next few years?

Malcolm Mitchell, Ilkley, UK

Bailing out the financial institutions with tax payer's money is a little like sending a bank robber to a minimum security jail. The boom years are OVER. Get used to it. When the pendulum swings, it goes both ways. This is a natural economic cycle and the LAST thing anyone should do is interfere.

James, London,

We are in our current situation precisely BECAUSE the government & BOE interfered with the markets after 9.11 when the dot.com bubble had burst & the markets were slowing down. The house price boom of the last 5 years is a direct result of that interference & not sustainable. We need rebalancing!

James, London,

There are house owners and non owners. As a group, the non owners are poor, thus they cannot pay the tax for this scheme. This only leaves the owners to pay it. They wont cash in the house until retirement but will have to pay higher tax now. This will depress the economy even further.

grog, London, uk

House prices are falling. Why are you trying to say that they are not? There are so many houses on the market at the moment so that only those priced reasonably or those highly desirable, are selling. With so much choice, why would any buyer not demand value for money?

nan, Reading, UK

Ok, how about the government gives FTBs 10% of the average house price instead. No need to underwrite anything and as banks require a hefty deposit, this should get them lending again. If course you’ll need to do it for every generation after as well…

Stuart, Glasgow,

andrew bright , in what way are countries like the USA ahead of us in home ownership please ?

colin grayson, paris,

Alice I think you underestimate the impact of banks not lending. I suggest a great many 1st time buyers would buy if they could get funds its not all lets wait and see. If you can buy cheaper and afford it and it represents good value then buy it. trying to guess the bottom of market is a bad call.

Mark Connelly, Surbiton, England

How ridiculous! And still no-one suggests putting house prices back in to the Inflation index. If the index was adjusted to show real inflation over the past 5 years, it would be obvious house prices need to come down, not be falsely supported by a country going in to deeper debt

martin, bridgwater,

Wasn't Labour supposed to be the party of the poor? Abolishion of the 10p tax band, bailing out banks (why should my taxes have bailed out Northern Rock?) and helping to prevent 1st time buyers getting onto the property ladder - looks as though they've swapped with Old Tories! Gotta get em out!

David Burke, Manchester, UK

The very notion that using taxpayers money to prop up what was a false housing boom that has truly gone to 'broke', in order to create another false sense of security in the economy is pure lunacy. Using taxpayers money to fund would be criminal.

But then lunacy on the left is nothing new is it?

Geoff F., Liverpool,

Good article. However, first time buyers are not waiting in the wings for prices to drop because 100% mortgages have disappeared and many cannot afford a deposit. But any measures the Government take to 'kick start' the housing market (which would be lunacy) will fail. The country is mired in debt!

sophie smith, london, uk

'...a government-manipulated boom'
Exactly so. The last boom was founded on a combo of cheap credit, irresponsible lending and 'optimistic' borrowing. To reintoduce the latter two elements by another means will create much the same outcome.

m collins, Leeds,

Gordon had no problem while the market was rising 20%+ per year since 2000 so why should he have a problem now, its a heathly correction to the market place, LEAVE THE MARKET ALONE.... If you overborrowed, took out a Liar Loan, Tough love is coming your way

mark, london,

The cynical way in which banks etc' offer to lend money is the biggest reason for the current predicament. Celebrities advertising loans, daily junk mail doing the same and if you look for the lotto results on ITV teletext there is always an advert underneath aimed at the desperate non- winners.

Derek, East Yorkshire uk,

>
How much acreage is squatted upon by worthless aristocrats
>
Very little I suspect. If it had been viable building land it would have been realised. You may wish to contemplate building company instead though. A new development for several 000 homes is just starting a mile from me.

Andrew Fanner, Cowplain, UK

We have been told for years that 'you cannot buck the market' and now it is the tax-payer who is being called upon to bail out banks. This is cloud cuckoo land: nationalise the risk and debt and still allow the city gents to pocket their multi-million pound bonuses. It is unjust, immoral.

A J McCabe, Doncaster, UK

The Treasury could have leaned on financial institutions to limit the borrowing to earnings "multiples". That would have limited purchasing power and slowed the rise of house prices but they chose to turn a blind eye. Why should tax-payers money be used to bail out banks?

Chris King, Fleet, Hampshire

What mortgage famine ? Anyone with a 10% deposit can have a mortage for more than 4 times their salary without difficulty.

The idea of using tax payers' money to prop up the values of those who own houses to make them even less affordable for ordinary folk who don't?

Barmy.

Michael; Reid, Northampton, UK

Scarcity of land was a comparative. Population of USA is roughly 4 and a bit times that of UK. Territory available is roughly 38 times larger... I think it was a fair point to make!
Government owns a lot of land. Some could be used for new housing. How much has been over the last decade?

Chris King, Fleet,

Abolishing Stamp Duty Land Tax would be a better idea. This is a mischievous tax on mobility. The abolition could easily be afforded by means of a cut in worthless consultancy projects.

Frank Upton, Solihull,

Yup, the scarcity of land is a myth, less than 10% of land in the UK is actually built on, it's probably an even smaller amount for housing.

The problem is something like over 90% of the population are packed into the cities into increasingly shrinking homes...

Tom Lampkin, Manchester, UK

House prices need to fall to a more realistic level so that people trying to get on the housing ladder don't need such huge loans. If the Govt uses taxpayers money to artifically jack up the housing market all they will do is ensure that 1st time buyers will continue to over-reach themselves.

Donna Walker, Effingham, England

This will not revive the housing market unless lenders revert back to the risky lending criteria of the last few years. Unless the government is totally stupid (a not unreasonable proposition) it should impose minimum lending criteria to prevent current problems from recurring. So what's the point?

Marek, London,

In years to come, the idea of propping up the unfair and unsustainable prices of the housing bubble with taxpayer's money, will seem as silly and misguided as the idea of doing the same with the South Sea Bubble, or the Tulip Bubble.

Timm, Oxford,

I agree with everything apart from the "scarcity of land" issue". How much acreage is squatted upon by worthless aristocrats whose title to "their" land is dubious at best?

Bruce Robertson, Brighton, UK

Sounds like a sensible idea - we cannot afford the current stalemate in the housing market to continue as it favours no-one ( particulary first time buyers who cannot get even afoot on the property ladder at present ) and aren`t Governments ideally positioned to offer such guarantees

Graham Smith, Oslo, Norway

Such an idea merits consideration, but its potential impact both philosophically and economically is enormous.

A decision on its adoption or rejection should be made objectively (as you sensibly imply) and not by fiscal incompetents out of political expedience.

David Williams, Eastnor, England

This isn't a bad idea, as long as you perform credit checks and verify income. The bottom line is countries like the US are so far ahead of us in terms of home ownership, that we ought to be ashamed, so together with abolishing that outrageous tax we pay to get a mortgage, this could work.

Andrew Bright, Anchorage, USA

"Just" 1% in May-June! 1% is warp speed for highly illiquid assets like houses. Prices fell 13% in the WHOLE of the 90s crash. Otherwise I agree . A desperate measure which MUST NOT be allowed to happen. Reflating the bubble by buying unsaleable mortgage assets with taxpayers money? No no no no no!

Jon Cooper, herts, uk,