In the 1920s, there were those who had personal butlers and those who were personal butlers; in the 1950s, there were those who called it a napkin and those who told them to sod off; and, in the 2010s, there are those who own second homes they can rent out and those who do not.

In recent years a new class has emerged: landlords. One in 30 adults in Britain is a landlord

In recent years a new class has emerged: landlords. One in 30 adults in Britain is a landlord, and rental income comes to roughly 3% of GDP. And, as the lucky few have grown richer, home ownership has been rapidly declining for the rest – particularly the young. In the past 10 years, the proportion of home owners aged 16 to 34 fell from about half to a third.

It is little surprise this new aristocracy has risen so far and so fast. Its members have a convenient way of keeping competition off the market: they can simply increase the rent.

There are other disadvantages for the renting underclass too. Like Wooster to the renter’s Jeeves, landlords tend not to be professionals. Most of them have only one property, and some seem not to manage it too well. About 30% of privately rented homes were recently classed as “non-decent” – which takes into account things such as the state of repair and whether or not they are heated.

But there are signs this shabby and damp-ridden empire is on the wane. In 2017, lending for buy-to-let went into modest retreat. In December only 5,300 sales were completed, down 17% on the same month the previous year. At the same time, the number of first-time buyers in 2017 topped more than 365,000 – its highest level in a decade. These new property owners are young, too – their average age is 30. What’s the reason behind this revolution?

First-time buyers hit 10-year high as buy-to-let property sales fade Read more

Credit where it is due: the turnaround is down to government policy. In 2016 the Tories put a raft of measures in place to make being a landlord a whole lot less attractive. They increased stamp duty – the tax paid by homeowners – by 3% for those buying a second home, got rid of a “wear and tear” allowance, and tightened the rules on how landlords write off interest costs against income tax. This has cut landlords’ profits enough to put some of them off. This is good news for those trying to get a foot on the housing ladder; when buy-to-letters compete with first-time buyers for property, they often win as they tend to be richer.

Meanwhile, and more importantly, a few more houses have finally been built. A change in policy that allows some buildings to be converted without planning permission has started to pay off, creating several thousand extra homes. There is a very long way to go, but a little progress has been made.

This is a welcome break in a pattern. So far Theresa May’s premiership can be characterised as a one long backtrack from her speech on the Downing Street steps, where she rousingly promised to right Britain’s wrongs and “fight against the burning injustice” of social inequality.

The prime minister wanted to roll out a system of new grammar schools; that plan has been quietly dropped. She promised to deliver tough medicine to corporate fat cats and put workers on company boards; her colleagues watered it down to the point of homeopathy. She wanted to freeze energy prices; her eventual election manifesto spoke of “an independent review” into the subject. In the space of 18 months, the platform on which she established her leadership has been almost completely worn away.

So it must come as a surprise to May that, after she promised to “make it her mission” to solve the housing crisis and “take personal charge” of the problem, she finds herself presiding over some progress in the matter.

But lest we get too excited, it is important to note the credit of course does not belong to May, but to George Osborne, who put the policies in place during the previous government. (May’s contribution to addressing the housing crisis, a promise in the budget last year to cut stamp duty, was widely criticised as being likely to push up housing prices.)

It is urgent that the Tories build on the progress made. There is already a sign the boom in first-time buyers may be waning, with the figures for December showing the number slipped compared with the same month last year. There is some way to go. Ill-thought-out policies such as “help to buy” continue to bolster the wealthy and should be scrapped. And the average first-time buyer is still far richer than most, with a salary of £41,000.

Young people may be rallying to Corbyn, but they are still Thatcher’s children, desperate to get on the housing ladder

There is a significant incentive for the government to do so. If there is one area where the Tories should be aiming to right social wrongs, it is in housing, because it helps them to win elections.

Mikhail Gorbachev once accused Margaret Thatcher of only being interested in society’s “haves”, and neglecting the “have-nots”. She replied that, instead, she wanted to create a whole country of “haves”. “Haves” meant homeowners, and home ownership has always been the way to turn young people into Tories.

Since 1993, the rate of home ownership among Brits aged 20-29 has declined from 50% to only 20%. Young people may be rallying to Jeremy Corbyn, but they are still Thatcher’s children, ambitious and desperate to get on the housing ladder.

More than half of Britain’s private renters voted Labour at the general election in June, beating the share of private renters who voted for Tony Blair in 1997. If the Tories can manage to create a generation of homeowners, they may yet win the next election.

• Martha Gill is a freelance political journalist and former lobby correspondent