Nearly 100 "surplus" NHS sites will be released to provide affordable housing, the government has announced.
The plans form part of chancellor Gordon Brown's plans to help 100,000 first time buyers on to the housing ladder in the next five years.
However, analysts have warned the new demand this creates could overheat the market unless more homes are built.
What do you think of the chancellor's plans? Will it increase the supply of cheaper housing or create more demand?
This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.
The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:
 | SUGGEST A DEBATE This topic was suggested by Jon, England:
 Will the government's release of extra land help ease the housing market for first time buyers? |
We desperately need to build a million or more new homes to break the overpriced market situation. Only then will supply and demand kick in to reduce the outrageous price of homes at present. Sadly because so many people think they have a home as an investment rather than a place to live, and expect it to go up and up in value, doing the right thing is political suicide.
Jen, Manchester, UK
If the Government was to limit the number of homes a person, or family could own, would that include 2 Jag 4 mansion Prescott and Tony Blair?
B Moore, Stockton on Tees, UK
These prices are still totally unrealistic and are pushed up by greed of the building companies. How long is this going to continue? There are plenty of houses but no-one can afford them unless you earn �50k plus.
Michael Jones, Wymondham Norfolk
Limit people to three homes? What's wrong with one?
Anon, UK
| We should look at how to make full use of existing buildings before deciding to build more new ones |
Whatever happened to the 'Living over the Shop' scheme set up sometime 2000/2001 to enable more people to live in town centres above shops and businesses? We should look at how to make full use of existing buildings before deciding to build more new ones.
Kate, Cambridge The suggestion that there isn't a land shortage in the North is misleading. Just ask any house-builder in these parts. In fact, we Brits are apparently content to put up with a society in which less than 5% of the population owns almost 70% of the land. As long as this is deemed acceptable, we'll get the housing market we deserve.
John Flanagan, Sunderland
In the last 4 years prices have trebled in some parts of the country. This is why people like me who earn around about the national average salary can't afford to buy a house anymore. The government should have acted to cool the housing market.
DC, Manchester
Providing it is policed properly it will work. Unless it becomes like the Stakeholder pension situation and only those who have the ability and are financially clued up will benefit.
Elizabeth, South East England
Buying property has been just out of reach for me for the last decade and if the government want to extend the gravy train and give me a chance to get on it then I'm all for it.
John Sheppard, London
I don't understand why so many people label others with 2nd and 3rd homes as being under the 'greed mentality'. My parents have a second home which they let out. This was afforded through years of being extremely careful with their money and not spending it on every piece of junk the retail market promotes. This home boosts their pension, and seeing as pensions have been devalued to such a degree I am thankful for this.
Mark, London
I think this is a great idea for young couples as it means we will be able to afford a mortgage as well as having some sort of life. The only thing that bothers me is the fact that lenders will be selecting people to qualify for these houses - what do you need to qualify, and what happens if you don't qualify? You're back to where you started - frustrated with no future to look forward to.
Lucie, Cardiff
| Why don't local councils and government do a bit of joined up thinking |
Why don't local councils and government do a bit of joined up thinking and make it standard to install solar panelling in all new housing? They should also work towards making all housing cheaper.
Jo, Brighton, UK Too complex - the French give tax relief on capital and interest for the first five years of a homebuyer's mortgage - much simpler to administrate. As usual, a badly thought out policy
Mike Perry, St. Helens, UK
There's only a housing shortage due to some people owning more than one property, like Tony Blair, he owns a house in Sedgefield, one in London, two flats in Bristol and has two state-provided addresses as well.
Robin Tudge, London
200,000 new homes in the south. Great idea Prescott. Great way to lessen the north/south divide. Great way to protect the green belt. How about new jobs in your beloved North and less concrete in your less beloved South?
Guy, London
It's all very well building new homes but what about the infrastructure? Our roads/schools/hospitals etc can barely cope with the population of Kent as it is. I'd like to hear more proposals for fixing these potential problems as well.
Steve Pattenden, Hempstead, Kent
A former NHS site was sold for redevelopment by Byrant homes. The NHS made a tidy profit but the locals now suffer as they have to travel much further to hospitals in Basildon or Romford. Not a good plan!
M Jackson, Orsett
Would it not be simpler to pay people decent wages if they are teachers/ nurses etc rather than offer them this alternative to social housing? Why on earth would any graduate contemplate such jobs if they are going to have to pay extra taxes for their education and then live their lives paying the government money for their basic homes? The only winners out of this are the shareholders in building companies.
Jack, Essex
The government has announced that nearly 80,000 new homes will be built in Hertfordshire in the next 15 years. Where are they all going to go? This is the same government that promises to protect the green belt.
Paul Collier, London, UK
Housing is far too important just to leave it to market forces alone. The future is for public authority housing.
Eddie Espie, Cookstown N. Ireland
I have recently looked into buying a shared ownership house. Even with a 25% share, the costs are still far too expensive. The so-called nominal rents are too expensive and don't take into consideration service charges etc. It looks unlikely that I will ever be able to buy my own property.
Laura, Gloucester, England The only people to gain out of this are the house builders. Building materials have not increased that much in the last 10 years. So the only meaning of affordable housing is the builder makes less profit.
M. Jackson, Orsett
I'm a bit loathe to pay for this through taxation as I have had to do 3 jobs in the past to stop my house being repossessed. Subsidising others for something I couldn't qualify for doesn't seem right.
Simon, Manchester, UK
Given the government has also started tearing down thousands of homes in the Midlands would it not be easier to tidy up the ones they are tearing down - nice, solid brick houses - and move more jobs out of the South East? Seems obvious to me.
John, Essex
Second homes should be taxed as if rented out. If you buy a house to rent out you pay tax on the proceeds of the rent. If you buy a house and only use it a couple of times a year, you should be taxed as if you received rent. The tax should rise for each additional property. Years ago if you purchased a house as a buy-to-let, the interest rates used to be much higher than normal rates. Cheep buy-to-lets and second and third holiday homes have created the shortage; if we all had one home there would be more than enough to go round.
Martin, Southampton
Frank, I too work for a housing association, but disagree. The burden is not worsened by second home owners, but by bogus tenants. Many of the tenants here would be ineligible if the selection process was more rigorous. I also see property empty for months at a time. And as for the second home owners, when a local sells his house does he/she take the lower offer from a local or the higher offer from an incomer?
Peter, Dyfed
We are told our birth-rate is going down so why do we need more houses? I would suggest more homes are needed for the thousands of asylum-seekers who have entered our country in recent years.
Michael Ayres, Kent, England
Please lower house prices. My partner and I are on a low income, and as we have had to go through the local housing association, we have been placed right out of our original asking area. People say we are selfish for wanting to move, but if we could afford to buy a house of our own, we could live where we wanted to, instead of being put in the nearest available place which happens to be miles away from our families. I fully support the scheme.
Anon, Oxford, UK
This is going to make matters worse. Why can't government pay for older housing to be renovated and also put a block on buying second homes? That would slash the problems in housing by at least a half. Instead what do we get? More houses for people on middle incomes, whilst the lower income brackets will still not be able to afford a house. Here we get luxury apartments as a solution to the housing problem, and low-income families still haven't got a permanent home. This government hasn't got a clue.
Jennifer Hynes, Plymouth, UK Is this not another way of providing council houses?
Justin Mallinson, Preston, UK
If the government was going to help it should have done so when it was first realised a problem was emerging. If at that point they had made it tougher and less profitable to be a buy-to-let landlord then this mess could have been averted. We live on a new estate of 2 and 3 bed houses, starter homes and at least three quarters of these are owned and rented out by landlords. It's not that there aren't enough small houses for the first time buyers like us, it's that new small houses are snapped up by landlords within hours of being put on display and if the government could slow this down, things would get easier.
Vik, UK
Having fought my way onto the housing ladder and become trapped on the bottom rung and unable to move up because of spiralling housing costs and ridiculous stamp duty boundaries, dear old Gordon is going to use my tax money to help the first time buyers. Well excuse me for not being impressed. Where was my help? Who did I get to sponge off? These new 'home owners will be competing for my next house from a substantially enhanced position. Perhaps if this government would take stronger action to limit profiteering in the housing market and help those who genuinely want a home, I could start to believe in the Labour ideal.
Adam Smith, Reading, UK
This will only help a small sector of society. What is needed is a lot more state-owned property available to be rented by all, not just single mothers.
M Nash, UK
What a dreadful prospect. Imagine struggling to pay a large mortgage (relative to income) for many years. Then, just as things start to get easier financially - maybe after a promotion, there's another half of the house to buy. In addition, this second mortgage may have to be for a shorter period (and take you right up to retirement). Let's hope nobody falls for this government con-trick.
D Williams, Hemel Hempstead All this will achieve is destroying what is left of England's green and pleasant land. Let's face it; nurses have never been able to afford their own house, that's why there were nurses' homes on NHS land until the government sold them all off. If we are serious about meeting the housing needs of the country without destroying it in the process we should look to the continent where high density housing is high quality and sought after without the stigma associated with the appalling cheap, poor tower blocks that we built here in the 60's.
Jim, Swindon, UK
It is a start, but the Government needs to reform the planning system to release more land while also ensuring that the infrastructure (roads, sewage, schools etc.) is improved to cope - otherwise local opposition will stifle new housing provision.
Andrew, York, UK
Affordable housing in the South East is a joke. It is market forces that will set the value of the house. But the South is not paved with gold as John Prescott would have you believe. Many parts of the South East do have black spots were jobs are hard to find.
Bumble, Dartford, Kent
| the problem will resolve itself just like it did in the last housing crash 15 years ago |
London at the moment is full of empty flats that investors have bought and now can't let. There isn't a shortage of houses, there are plenty to rent. There has just been a speculative housing bubble where some people sought to buy many houses because they believed it was a way to easy riches. Now that house price falls are gathering pace, the problem will resolve itself just like it did in the last housing crash 15 years ago.
Mart, London, UK I applaud the government for making surplus land available for developing affordable housing, but would like to be sure that the sites are in the right place to meet need, will have a suitable level of social rented housing, will develop into sustainable communities, and that the properties will be sold leasehold to keep them affordable in the long term by taking the cost of land out of the purchase price.
Abigail, Coventry
It's entirely possible for the birth-rate to fall and the housing demand to rise at the same time. For example, it's possible for 6 people to demand 3 homes (a childfree couple in the first, a couple with 1 child in the second, and a single adult in the third). Likewise, it's possible for 20 people to demand one home (a man who believes in keeping his wife, 3 sons, 3 daughter-in-laws, 2 unmarried daughters, and 8 grandchildren all under one roof). The former scenario is more likely in a culture with a low birth rate. The latter more likely in a culture with a high birth-rate.
Hsifeng, NYC, USA
Plenty of houses could be built in my area of Islington, I know because I see the undeveloped sites everywhere. I also know the local planning office refuses as a matter of course just about every development proposed. I know this because in their incompetence they mail me most of those refusals. I've never had anything to do with development in my life.
Dan, London
The reason prices are going so crazy is because banks and building societies are allowed to lend people so much against their income. The buyers suffer a lifetime of debt while the builders and banks get ever richer.
Chris Ransom, Colchester, UK
More houses, fewer hospitals? Blairconomics at its silliest.
Ian, Brit in USA
| I love all these Stalinist types wanting to restrict the numbers of homes owned by individuals |
I love all these Stalinist types wanting to restrict the numbers of homes owned by individuals! They should emigrate to somewhere congenial like Cuba and earn $30 a month. After years of an official policy of 'regional development' this Government has finally scrapped the idea and accepted that the nation's wealth is primarily generated in its bottom right hand corner. Awkward details like there being less water available per head than in Syria seem to have slipped them by and their very own cumbersome planning procedures hamper rather than assist more home building. Prescott should not be allowed to develop by ministerial dictat, democracy demands that the planning procedure should be made more locally accountable and better streamlined for everybody.
Alan, Wivelsfield I'm in my late 20's and am desperate to buy a house of my own. In this day and age, a home is going to be my pension - but at the moment I can't afford either.
Kiera, Didcot, Oxfordshire
I think this smacks of Nigel Lawson's failed attempt to end double tax relief - but not yet - in 1988. That poured petrol on the flames of a housing boom and led to massive problems. This is no better and unless the government spends its money on the infrastructure and supports housebuilders to treble supply, rather than indulging as ever in PR stunts, then house prices will continue to rocket beyond ordinary people.
John Moss, London, UK
Why not build houses to rent at low-rates (as with the armed forces)? I disagree, however, with public money being used to help buy a property that will no doubt be sold for profit - not to the taxpayer - in the end.
Neil Small, Scotland
Why is this scheme just aimed at first time buyers? I am a home owner - I own a flat. I am divorced and I have two children, but on one salary there is no way I can afford to move to a house as property prices in Dorset have gone through the roof. We need better solutions than this.
Fiona, Dorset
When is the government going to realise that house prices will always rise until it reduces demand and increases supply by changing its policies on regional development and on university admissions? By giving businesses real incentives to move into the regions, the job opportunities can pull demand for housing away from SE England. Also, if the government abandoned its obsession with 50% of the population entering university, more people might see the value and opportunity in learning a proper trade. The country needs builders, electricians and plumbers much more than it needs media studies graduates.
Michael, Glasgow, Scotland
Everybody is assuming that buying your own home is the only ambition any of us should have. When is someone going to address the lack of rentable housing for those of us who genuinely can't afford a mortgage?
Elaine, Letchworth Garden City, UK When will the government wake up to what is affordable? As a single person, unable to reach �100,000 for a mortgage, I cannot afford even a studio flat. What is wrong with renting, one person asked? Well, increasingly your property is your pension and the means to pay for a nursing home in later life. I have no children to support me (even supposing that they should) so my preference is to drop dead at 65 at present.
Jessica Hall, Reading
So a first-time buyer buys a house through the governments proposed plan of shared ownership. As general house prices rise they are still going to be priced out of the market on the next move, as they only own half the equity accrued. Nice try Labour, but back to the drawing board. The only real way to get houses to the right people is to outlaw buy-to-let - a major contributing factor to the recent price increases.
Jason Holland, Essex
There is plenty of housing to go round as there is. The problem lies with people seeing this housing as a means to make money. We have no council houses, so private landlords are doing very nicely indeed. Surely having somewhere to live is a basic human right, not a luxury.
Simon Jones, Wrexham, Wales
All these plans will do is encourage more people to migrate to the South and to sustain the current price boom for a bit longer. This only delays the inevitable crash. If no-one can afford to buy, the market will drop to a sensible level.
Andrew James, Maidstone UK
Why build a couple of hundred thousand houses in the South when there are 850,000 empty houses in the Midlands and North that could be made available for much less cost and environmental damage?
Chris Turner, Thatcham, Berkshire
These starter homes will be a great idea. But the government must put a restriction on them that they can only be sold at the inflation rate of the RPI. Owners can only stay in them for 10 to 12 years before moving up the property ladder. To set the house price rise at RPI for these homes will always keep them affordable. Occupancy time limits means the houses will become available on a regular basis. Other homes should alter in price to be affordable to persons leaving these starter homes and moving up the property ladder.
Nigel Green, Wirral
I agree with those who blame the buy-to-let "investors" for pushing first time buyers out of the market, but what do you expect when Brown raids pension funds by taxing the dividends they earn? People see property as the only serious way of saving for a pension.
Tony Morris, Kidderminster
| Safeguards and rules would have to be set up |
The last NHS employed social worker I knew who bought a cheap house on the local shared finance initiative housing pilot in Reading quit his job one year later and locumed. He then sold the house18 months later at a profit and kept the profit. Thereafter, he worked privately. Safeguards and rules would have to be set up.
Emma, Berkshire Seems to me that the government is in a 'no win' situation with some of your readers. Be damned for not addressing the supply side issues of the housing market then be damned for trying to do something about it! I think it's an excellent idea and a good use of redundant NHS land that has become available because so many old, expensive-to-maintain hospitals have been replaced with new, cutting edge facilities.
RW, Oxfordshire, UK
The chancellor's plans on paying for half the home are mad. All it will achieve is a doubling of house prices. The only way to tackle the problem is to tax second homes and buy to let properties heavily.
Phil, UK
It's fine building all these houses. But where is all this land coming from? It's a very small island, and the land mass is NOT increasing. Stop people coming into the UK, that might help reduce the amount of houses required.
Nick, Bournemouth
As a person who has to rent, I nonetheless wish the government would stop interfering. Let market forces do the job. The government is artificially propping up house prices by such schemes. You didn't see the government offering cheap shares in the recent dotcom boom so why offer cheap house in this housing boom?
Greg Sellers, Abingdon, UK I see the need to build more homes but why must they all be detached with less that a foot between them? If we need more houses people will have to learn to like terraces and apartments. For a start you'll get a lot more houses built that way, and protect the green belt
E. Grainger, Exeter
Lots of people are whining about multiple home ownership but for some people this is equivalent to a pension policy or even their main source of income. You live in a society where in general money is all that matters so if you don't like it, tough.
N. Akram, London UK
More government spin! Park Prewett in Basingstoke has been marked for development for an age. Construction started several years ago. Hardly a new site!
Roger, Basingstoke, UK
Isn't it ironic that in this age of hospital bed shortages the government is proposing to build houses on old hospital sites. Perhaps the government should consider re-opening some of these hospitals and focus on bringing the housing market down to a sensible level.
Peter Benn, Preston
As with all the other announcements from Prescott there is no mention of schools, hospitals, roads and in Kent we are already short of water. We should be trying to encourage people to move north.
Mr Wickham, Kent
Until they relax the house building rules on derelict land, it is unlikely these gimmicks will work. I want to build 5 houses and can't because there is no land. These houses would be ideal for first time buyers but the local authorities reject any planning permission. Maybe I should build them anyway, it's worked for the travellers.
Stephen, Bognor, UK
I work for a housing association which is charged with the task of helping provide accommodation for people in housing need. Traditionally this has been for people on low incomes but with a home now costing ten times the average salary we are faced with the vast majority of young people now being unable to contemplate owning their own home. Housing associations will be unable to pick up this added burden and yet there are a large number of second homes in this beautiful rural area. It's time the government bit the bullet and introduced curbs on the dog in the manger ownership of second homes.
Frank, Coleford, Forest of Dean, Gloucestershire The thing I, and most others, take issue with is Prescott's determination to demolish perfectly good properties and replace them with modern tat. The vast majority of people I know envy the fact that I live in a property with character. Most people that I know who are moving or buying, are looking for Victorian, including terraced and semis.
Steve Georgii, Grayshott, Hants
It amazes me that the government have come up with this idea. Half the problem has been caused by the lack of affordable houses or accommodation available to key sector workers. Rather than looking to sell these NHS buildings off to people, wouldn't the government be better renting those properties to health service staff to allow them to be able to afford to live in these expensive areas, rather than just carry out this publicity stunt, which only looks to perpetuate the situation rather than tackle the root cause.
Scott, West Sussex
Why, for goodness sake are we so obsessed with home ownership? What was actually wrong with the council house concept? It kept rents low, and freed up houses for re-use when a tenant was finished with it.
Francesca Lacey, Didcot, Oxfordshire
The Ministry of Defence owns many thousands of acres of land in Surrey, close to motorways, airports, and main rail links to London, and ripe for development. It is actually used for training troops, which seems absurd given the dearth of new housing in the south of England. So in principal, I am in favour of the Chancellor's scheme. If the land was sold on the open market it could also raise billions of pounds for the public purse.
James, UK
There are too few homes for first-time buyers because of the 'buy to let' market, i.e. greed mentality.
Carol, Edinburgh, Scotland
Good news, but will the government spend the money upgrading the road and rail networks so that they serve these new communities?
Tim, Bath
Limit the number of houses that any one person can own to three. Any more than that is pure greed. Those who own 5, 10, 20, even 100 houses, are depriving ordinary working people of the opportunity to own their own home.
Neil Maggs, Bristol, UK
As a first time buyer currently looking for a home, it isn't so much the lack of properties as the cost of them! I keep hearing it is a buyer's market, but I'm not seeing it. Existing house prices need to come down.
Sarah, Leeds
I earn less than �20,000 a year yet these new plans are targeted at "couples". I still have no chance to get my own home so I feel that the plans are rubbish.
Daniel Sullivan, Bexleyheath, Kent
| Demand is caused by too many people wanting too few homes |
How can building 100,000 new homes "overheat" the market by creating demand? Demand is caused by too many people wanting too few homes. The Chancellor intends to build homes not people and so will surely reduce demand? This merely shows that property "experts" are paid far too much money for their bizarre opinions.
Peter, Nottingham Just another gimmick. The real and obvious solution is to try and attract people away from the overheated and overcrowded South East to the North where there isn't a land shortage. Would I be cynical in suggesting that the reluctance to do this is connected to the electoral advantage Labour gets from people moving south?
Alex Swanson, Milton Keynes, UK
Fine, but will anything be in place to stop people from selling their homes at great profit within months of moving in?
Sarah, London, UK
I presume they have looked at this very carefully because most of the land on which hospitals are built does not belong to the NHS or the government. It was deeded to the NHS only as long as there is a hospital on the site. If the land is to be used for anything else, it defers back to the original owners, the church.
Keith, Sunderland, UK
All of the plans to subsidise house purchases for first time buyers will simply make the problem worse. The only thing that will improve matters is the property price crash that is long overdue.
Pat, Bristol
This is a major disaster area, the plans have not been thought through at all. The requirement is for hundreds of thousands of new homes, at affordable prices at around �75,000 to �100,000 in every city, town and village throughout the country, to give every one the chance to buy their own house - this is the priority. If it deflates the housing market so be it, as housing is going to be a major political policy issue through to the next general election.
Jim Evans, Brighton, UK
I'd like to know if any of this new housing stock will be made available to Londoners. If so, then sign me up! I can barely afford to pay rent in the capital, let alone try to save up the money required to pay a deposit on a house in the existing market.
David Ross, London, UK
They will only be "affordable" for the first time they are sold on the market. After that, greed will set in and the people who bought them "cheap" will make a tidy profit.
Phill Smith, Durham, UK
I understand the need for affordable housing for nurses, police etc in London and this plan should be applauded to meet this specific issue. However, as to Prescott's plan of building of hundreds of thousands of new homes in England, especially the South East - WHY? I thought the birth rate was falling in UK and Europe.
James, Bucks, UK
There is a supply problem in this country which has resulted in inflated house prices. This will do nothing to solve the cause of the problem. The government needs to increase the tax on second homes and buy to let schemes. It needs to release the massive land bank that the government agencies have and reduce the red tape that exists within the local planning authorities. With greater supply we will see house prices returning to a sensible level.
Ian Davies, London, England
I believe that the government should restrict the number of houses people are able to own. Those who are able to afford 2 or more houses should be taxed at a higher rate, therefore forcing them to dispose of second, third homes allowing such houses to become available in the housing market.
Simon Golding, Swansea
Anything that helps first time buyers is welcomed. Gordon Brown's scheme also improves or removes the "eyesores" that some redundant hospital sites have become!
Colin, Stockport
One-Minute World News 
News services
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version 
