Home buying dreams

I see the CBI has jumped on the band wagon and is demanding more support for first-time buyers this morning with a mortgage indemnity device.  This is hot on the heels of Rightmove reporting that 45% of first-time buyers state they now feel "more likely to buy" since the government's FirstBuy scheme was announced in the March budget and launched in September (it allows first-time buyers to purchase a new-build property using just a 5% deposit, with a further 20% deposit loaned to them interest-free) although they were quick to point out that there is still room for improvement as "over a third of FTBs have still not heard of the scheme".

Well hats off to the CBI (and to FirstBuy come to that) for trying everything they can think of to get the economy going.  You've got to do something.  But I do wonder whether they are aiming for the right target.  Is owning a (probably poky) home the holy grail then?
Only last week, Paul Smee, the new director general of the Council of Mortgage Lenders, went into the national press (headline "House-buying dreams dashed") saying that many will spend far longer renting than they imagined and that there are millions who will never own a home.  And presumably it is in his interests, and that of his members, to talk UP the mortgage market.  And his comments were echoed by deputy governor of the Bank of England, (the excellently named) Charlie Bean, who predicted the number of homeowners will drop because lenders will stop handing out "imprudently generous" mortgages that require little or no deposit. (I don't know who these people who are handing out "imprudently generous" mortgages as I don't know anyone who can get a mortgage right now; although someone did describe Northern Rock to me as a "heroin junkie" the other day, perhaps they are the imprudent ones.)  
The average age for first time buyers has hit 39 and the logical concomitant of this is that millions of young people and families may never be able to buy their own home.  And moreover that it may not even be desirable for them to try.  Which is where the UKR mantra "don't get a mortgage, get a life" comes into play. 
My eldest (still relentlessly a kidult, despite the fact that she'll be 21) leaves university in June (where does all the time go?). And, naturally, we are giving some though as to what's next.  And to where she'll be living.  She'll probably come home for a bit (and the place will get knee deep in magazines, clothes, cosmetics, shoes, handbags, all over again; oh joy unconfined) but I think she'll want to find a place of her own fairly quickly.  With her student loan to pay back, there is simply no question of her taking out a mortgage.  You know, we are the average property owing middle class nuclear family and it is never even discussed as an option. 
I was with a hugely enlightened local authority yesterday (no I won't tell you who, nosey, oh alright then, it was Enfield) at senior level, discussing unlocking a scheme with them.  They were very receptive to the UKR model of build-to-let. They said that they wanted economically active people in their borough who would spend money locally, and employ cleaners and other local services, they cared not whether they owned or rented, they want stability and long termism, to reinforce and support their communities.  Diversifying the housing stock is the sane response to the potential toxicity of yet more youngsters being lured into mortgages that they cannot afford.  I don't want the kidult (my beautiful, glossy, bright, stunning, healthy girl) to have a millstone around her neck.  I want her to have love and laughter.  And be happy.  And I don't guess I'm THAT strange as a mother.