John Veit-Wilson is right (Letters, 2 June); destitution is being used by the Conservative government as a policy tool to destroy the defining principle of all welfare states, that they offer a minimum real level of living to all inhabitants. Such a minimum income must be able to pay for truly affordable housing, the provision of which was neglected in the Cambridge TV debate. The need for food banks will continue to grow, and the health of the poorest diminish, until the chaotic UK housing market is brought under control. Rents must stop taking the money needed for food, fuel, water and other necessities. Several parties’ manifestos gave land value tax a nod. The advantages are that land cannot be placed tax-free in an overseas bank, taxing land forces into use the 600,000 plots of unused land owned by the big builders, it is progressive, it relieves the incomes of hardworking people and companies by enabling the abolition of inefficient taxes such as council tax, business rates and stamp duty.

Two other laws are needed: no international speculator should be allowed to buy British land, which must be reserved for British citizens; and landowners should be required to sell any property they have left unused for six months.

Rev Paul Nicolson

Taxpayers Against Poverty

• Thanks to Oliver Wainwright for his quick comparisons between the main parties’ housing policies, the most progressive of which is clearly the Liberal Democrats’ (Who should you bet your house on?, G2, 1 June). What bugs me is that the inequity of the application of VAT at the full rate on most maintenance work to the existing estate (which is the main problem as far as both public health and CO 2 emissions are concerned) when newbuild housing is zero-rated, is not mentioned in any debate.

With a 20% incentive to demolish and rebuild, even in the unlikely event of a Labour victory, we would still see pressure for a continuation of this process on inner-London councils with large public landholdings, such as Lambeth, Southwark, with all the waste of embodied energy and disruption of communities that this implies, but which suits the volume housebuilders just fine.

Kate Macintosh

Winchester

• Land nationalisation has a long history, relevant today when private profit from land has overwhelmed public interest. Who owns, occupies and uses land is the root problem in many countries. Israel/Palestine is the most obvious case. With nationalisation back on its agenda, Labour should revisit a 1973 proposal to convert all land from freehold to 99-year leasehold. Land ownership is the greatest source of power, undeserved gains, and the skewing of wealth to a small minority. It is a power that determines democratic elections.

Tommy Gee

Wingfield, Suffolk

• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters