Morning Call: pick of the papers

The ten must-read comment pieces from this morning's papers.

1. From rescue to recovery? It's not as simple as that, George (Independent)

Labour’s position in relation to spending is more astute than the Chancellor suggests, writes Steve Richards. 

2. Balls appeals to the few, Osborne the many (Guardian)

Labour's attack on the chancellor's spending plans is smart, but will only work with those who have made their minds up, says Martin Kettle. 

3. Julia Gillard: Sadly, this lady was for turning (Independent)

As with Thatcher, she had become an electoral liability to her party, writes Geoffrey Robertson.

4. Soon, we are likely to need a braver chancellor than this one (Daily Telegraph)

Osborne is good at the politics, but flunks the economics, writes Peter Oborne. For how long can this continue?

5. George Osborne master of the game of divisive politics (Guardian)

The Chancellor has tried to gloss over a dire financial situation by playing the game he knows best, writes Jonathan Freedland. 

6. Gordon Brown's plans to join the euro (Daily Telegraph)

The great saviour of the pound actually toyed with ditching it, says Sue Cameron.

7. On the spectrum of deceit, ministers have gone off the scale (Guardian)

Statistics have long been argued one way or the other, but this government twists them beyond reality to suit its ruthless agenda, writes Zoe Williams.

8. Shock horror: Britain less secretive than ever (Times)

Revelations about police subterfuge and the alleged CQC cover-up show how much more open we are as a society, says David Aaronovitch. 

9. Osborne sets a trap for Labour on welfare (Financial Times)

Sticking to the government’s benefits cap will torture the opposition, writes Janan Ganesh.

10. Can the state be trusted to do anything right? (Daily Telegraph)

Revelations of unacceptable snooping and the draconian treatment of whistleblowers are making a mockery of the government's quest for 'transparency', says Allison Pearson.

Getty
Show Hide image

I was wrong about Help to Buy - but I'm still glad it's gone

As a mortgage journalist in 2013, I was deeply sceptical of the guarantee scheme. 

If you just read the headlines about Help to Buy, you could be under the impression that Theresa May has just axed an important scheme for first-time buyers. If you're on the left, you might conclude that she is on a mission to make life worse for ordinary working people. If you just enjoy blue-on-blue action, it's a swipe at the Chancellor she sacked, George Osborne.

Except it's none of those things. Help to Buy mortgage guarantee scheme is a policy that actually worked pretty well - despite the concerns of financial journalists including me - and has served its purpose.

When Osborne first announced Help to Buy in 2013, it was controversial. Mortgage journalists, such as I was at the time, were still mopping up news from the financial crisis. We were still writing up reports about the toxic loan books that had brought the banks crashing down. The idea of the Government promising to bail out mortgage borrowers seemed the height of recklessness.

But the Government always intended Help to Buy mortgage guarantee to act as a stimulus, not a long-term solution. From the beginning, it had an end date - 31 December 2016. The idea was to encourage big banks to start lending again.

So far, the record of Help to Buy has been pretty good. A first-time buyer in 2013 with a 5 per cent deposit had 56 mortgage products to choose from - not much when you consider some of those products would have been ridiculously expensive or would come with many strings attached. By 2016, according to Moneyfacts, first-time buyers had 271 products to choose from, nearly a five-fold increase

Over the same period, financial regulators have introduced much tougher mortgage affordability rules. First-time buyers can be expected to be interrogated about their income, their little luxuries and how they would cope if interest rates rose (contrary to our expectations in 2013, the Bank of England base rate has actually fallen). 

A criticism that still rings true, however, is that the mortgage guarantee scheme only helps boost demand for properties, while doing nothing about the lack of housing supply. Unlike its sister scheme, the Help to Buy equity loan scheme, there is no incentive for property companies to build more homes. According to FullFact, there were just 112,000 homes being built in England and Wales in 2010. By 2015, that had increased, but only to a mere 149,000.

This lack of supply helps to prop up house prices - one of the factors making it so difficult to get on the housing ladder in the first place. In July, the average house price in England was £233,000. This means a first-time buyer with a 5 per cent deposit of £11,650 would still need to be earning nearly £50,000 to meet most mortgage affordability criteria. In other words, the Help to Buy mortgage guarantee is targeted squarely at the middle class.

The Government plans to maintain the Help to Buy equity loan scheme, which is restricted to new builds, and the Help to Buy ISA, which rewards savers at a time of low interest rates. As for Help to Buy mortgage guarantee, the scheme may be dead, but so long as high street banks are offering 95 per cent mortgages, its effects are still with us.