There is no silver bullet for the housing shortage, only a series of ordinary slugs

Unsurprisingly, their bullets inevitably involve new buildings, preferably designed by themselves.

The failure to build enough homes, especially those procured directly or indirectly by public authorities, has led to growing problems over the past 30 years.

This has been the result of attitudes across the political party spectrum, distrustful of the merits of more “council estates”, reliant on increasingly indebted housing associations to become providers of last resort, and anxious to find scapegoats for shortages and (inevitably) rising prices.

Those scapegoats have included private housebuilders (how dare they not build enough); mortgage lenders (irresponsible for lending too much and too little, when the market is scarcely rational); the planning system (which is the same as when Harold Macmillan was delivering 300,000 homes a year); land shortages, especially in London (one of the really big lies which clouds the debate); and building regulations/standards (with some justification).

What the politicians never want to confront is their own persistent failure to provide for the less well-off, even though we did so when we were a poorer country; the ever-increasing burdens placed on housebuilders, which act as a deterrent to supply; and the failure until recently to engage the financial community in the provision of homes of every tenure type.

It is extraordinary how housing provision is taxed, via community infrastructure levies, Crossrail levies, S106 agreements (even though they are supposed not to happen), “affordable housing” or contributions to off-site provision (ie social apartheid).

If any of this was applied to, say, the bakery sector, there would soon be a bread shortage.

These taxes are justified by the huge profit that housebuilders are supposed to make on every home sold but, where true, this is a result of rising prices brought about by the shortage, for which politicians are fundamentally responsible.

How can the political class make amends?

First, it can stop blaming everyone else for what has gone wrong and plan a broad-brush strategy for housing recovery.

Second, it can revisit - this time with attitude - as-of-right conversion of offices to residential. Too many politicians and planners had a Pavlovian reaction to this sensible idea. They should relax and welcome the approach as one of many strands of a supply policy. And frankly, boroughs such as Croydon should stop squeaking about office jobs. All the people who now want to move there are perfectly capable of sorting out their own jobs without help from the council.

Third, as-of-right should be extended as a principle for encouraging modest height increases everywhere, based on road widths. This would be far preferable and less disruptive than basement development, which is what happens if you have a height obsession. Architects could be asked to draw up appropriate guidance.

Fourth, the idea of self-build, or custom-build (a better name), should be encouraged, in particular by public authorities identifying sites that can be serviced easily then split up for sale at modest prices for people who want to do their own thing.

Fifth, the same principle should apply to sites for disposal to small builders, who would compete for low-cost land on the quality of their proposals in terms of design, mix and flexibility.

Sixth, municipal mortgages should be reintroduced, funded from central government, so local authorities can help young people into the housing market where the default rate on ordinary mortgage lending is low. If someone does default, the council suddenly has a property to rent out or sell.

Seventh, in London we should combine the various public bodies controlled by the mayor to create the Housing Delivery Authority. Like the Olympic Delivery Authority, this would control land, have planning and compulsory purchase powers and would procure homes on its own authority. It would have strict delivery targets and there would be substantial bonuses for the people who made them happen.

A John Armitt or David Higgins figure should run it - someone with major construction project experience.

To be fair to mayor Boris Johnson, he gets some of this and is right to regard housing as a form of infrastructure. But he still needs to make a big political move rather than tinkering - a comprehensive approach would tackle supply at the large and small scales.

Rather than Keep Calm and Carry On, we need to Stop Moaning and Get On With It.

Paul Finch is programme director of the World Architecture Festival