Britain will be building 200,000 homes a year by the end of the next parliament, according to Ed Miliband in his recent conference speech. This will be "more than at any time in a generation," he added.
Housing experts have already picked apart this noble ambition. There were 205,050 homes built in Britain just five years ago. Perhaps he meant England, not Britain? The last time more than 200,000 homes were built in England was in 1988-89 when 202,930 were constructed. In either case, his target still falls far short of the 250,000 homes that most experts believe need to be built each year in England alone.
But the more worrying question that no political party has yet addressed is who will build these homes?
It's clear the big housebuilders cannot do it. At a recent meeting with George Osborne they whined that their production could only be ramped up by between 5% and 10% a year. "We are an inelastic industry. Where are we meant to find that sort of growth?," asked one chief executive.
A quick look at the government's housebuilding figures shows the scale of the problem. In England, private house builders produced 84,320 homes in 2012-13. Housing associations and councils built another 23,640 – mostly provided by the big housebuilders. This amounts to just 43% of the 250,000 homes needed every year.
If housebuilders can only increase their output by 5% a year for the next six years they will be turning out 112,997 private sector homes by 2020. With a 10% boost in supply, they will produce 149,378 a year. That still leaves it 50,000 short of Miliband's target of 200,000 (assuming he meant England, of course) and 100,000 short of the 250,000 homes we need. Under current public funding arrangements it is a gap that housing associations and local authorities simply cannot fill.
So what is the answer? The first step is an admission that the present housebuilding industry is not fit for the job at hand. They are slow to respond to any change in demand (the response to Help to Buy has been sluggish at best) but quick to stop building as soon as the market shows any sign of trouble. Their primary concern is their shareholders and their profit margins, not mass house building. They cannot solve our housing crisis on their own.
Both parties have pledged to identify new towns and garden cities and this must be the answer. A public sector led housing recovery could unlock major greenfield sites and build new homes at little or no cost to the public purse by creating uplifts in land values on land that has been compulsorily purchased.
The sooner our politicians recognise this deficit in supply and make some bold decisions about the next generation of new towns and garden cities the better.
Colin Wiles is an independent housing consultant
• Want your say? Email housingnetwork@theguardian.com
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. Join the housing network for more news, analysis and comment direct to you.
