I'm really glad the member has asked this question, because it is stuck in an archaic system of thinking that housing is a ladder in this country. It is archaic, because housing does not help people move. This is not what people want, and it is not sustainable. This way of thinking is a violation of human rights, as well, or leads to the violation of the human right to housing.
This ladder way of thinking doesn't take into account that not everyone is going to aim to spend 30% of their income on housing. Some people have other needs. Maybe they're trying to pay off their education. Housing needs to be a choice. Whether it's home ownership or rental, that needs to happen.
I also want to throw this at all the members present today. When there is something you want that's for sale, you're going to grab it. You're not thinking, “Well, I'm going to leave it behind even though this is what I really want, because someone else, who can't afford to pay more, will need it.” We don't consume that way, so that is not how the market of housing should be treated either, but we're making those assumptions, and that is the big flaw in the modelling.