So David Cameron and the Tories are set to give richer council house tenants £75,000 discounts to help them buy the houses they rent, are they (Thatcher's right to buy revived, 3 April)?
Can anyone tell me how this will help ameliorate the dire housing situation plaguing this country? Only people in secure, reasonably well-paid jobs will be able to take up this latest offer, and who can claim that status under this disastrous government, which is taking away job security as fast as it can, while aiming to lower wages for public employees in many parts of the country?
It may be "one of Thatcher's most significant achievements", but the result of that stupid policy is that we are now shelling out £20bn a year in housing benefit, largely to private landlords, just to keep people in their homes.
A sensible policy would be to build more houses that people can afford, and start now. It would create jobs, workers paying taxes, and give us affordable housing. That £75,000 would be a good part of the cost of building a new house. Why use it to take one away?
David R Reed
London
• Whilst I fully endorse the idea of helping those social tenants who wish to become independent house owners, giving away social housing stock with a huge public subsidy is not the way to do it.
Giving tenants a £75,000 discount simply transfers others' taxes or investments, used to pay for the housing to be built, into private pockets, especially when such subsidised purchases eventually become eligible for resale.
More importantly, it reduces the stock of available social housing at a time when there is a growing shortage of it for those in need.
In the light of this government's record it is hard not to see this announcement as:
a) designed to distract attention from criticism of all their current mismanagement activities;
b) a cynical populist ploy;
c) a hope to turn Labour voters into Tory ones.
Michael Miller
Sheffield
• I suppose I am an old cynic, but if David Cameron has a plan to breathe new life into Mrs T's "most significant achievement", I cannot help assuming that, like his mentor, he is aware of the beneficial effect of this largesse at a low point in his prime ministerial career on two million voters who might realise the wisdom of voting for their benefactor.
Besides, the £75,000 discount will make lending on mortgages in a falling market a very attractive proposition for Cameron's friends in the City. But at a time when affordable homes (as opposed to the unaffordable ones – how could there be such a dwelling in a market economy?) are hard to come by, will local authorities welcome a further contraction of their stock?
There are apparently 14% more homeless families in England now than there were last year. Perhaps Mr Cameron should concentrate on bringing the approximately 1m empty homes back into use by removing VAT from repairs and maintenance before he thinks how to boost his electoral chances.
Henry Pryor
Hay-on-Wye, Herefordshire
• Your profile of garden city enthusiast John Lewis (A model community, 4 April) is right to question whether David Cameron appreciates the ethos behind the idea. For, while the legacy of Edwardian garden city pioneers like Ebenezer Howard includes the planning profession and a seldom achieved vision of community control, it also spawned a whole century of destructive urban sprawl.
This is why England, with Europe's highest population density, builds homes at its lowest density. The movement generated few garden cities but inspired the massive low-density, car-dependent suburbs that too often are still our default development type. Yet this destroys our countryside and its inhabitants are fatally dependent on their cars.
America pursued these ideals of sprawl and car-dependency on an even grander scale but is starting to learn the lessons. Its Smart Growth movement is promoting compact, walkable, cyclable urban communities with good public transport and protection of greenfield land – principles we urgently need to adopt here.
If Cameron really does want to solve housing shortages and protect the countryside, this is the path to follow, not the sprawl of the garden city movement.
Jon Reeds
Convenor, Smart Growth UK