The rise in property prices in the UK between 1970 and 2013 was unmatched in any other rich country. The housing policies pursued by successive UK governments in a rapidly globalising world have made millionaires of hundreds of thousands of families who still consider themselves to be middle-class, middle-income people, in defiance of the evidence of their assets.

For those not lucky enough to have secured a foothold on the property ladder before prices began their vertiginous ascent, the effect has been quite different. As is widely understood by the public as well as politicians, millions of people who might once have aspired to become homeowners now recognise that this is likely to take them much longer than it took people in previous generations, if it happens at all. Prices in the south-east but also in other parts of the country have, at many multiples of average incomes, moved beyond the reach of anyone who does not have a cash deposit of tens of thousands of pounds. The property ladder has been kicked away.

That something must be done to help these people has become a widely accepted view. Last year, in the aftermath of the Grenfell Tower fire, the government offered its backing to a private member’s bill from Labour’s Karen Buck, giving tenants the right to take landlords to court if their homes are unsafe. In another marked shift of policy and tone, ministers announced a plan to increase the length of a standard tenancy to three years. This is not a done deal: anxiety about the impact on housebuilders could see this sensible measure shelved. This would be a mistake, for political as well as principled reasons. Younger voters, who for obvious reasons are hugely over-represented in the non-property-owning 37% of the population, must not be ignored. New research published this week shows clearly that the private rental sector has developed twin tracks. We should all be concerned about the low-income households on the lower track, who have been forced to rent privately because of the shortage of council housing. These are the families who inhabit the increasing number of properties – damp, dirty, cold – that fail to meet the decent homes standard. The UK government has yet to conduct detailed research on the impact of poor-quality housing on education and health, but evidence from other countries shows, unsurprisingly, that poor accommodation hampers children’s progress.

Looking at the market as a whole, landlords point to gradual improvements. Some professionalisation has taken place since the sharp increase in small-scale landlordism after the crash of 2008, when low interest rates led people who might otherwise have invested in shares to invest in property instead. Nonetheless, it remains a remarkable fact that mainstream commercial property investors account for just 3% of residential stock. While better-off renters, including young professionals, are less vulnerable than low-income families to the abuses of rogue landlords, they are still affected by the chronic instability that short-term tenancies and sudden rent rises create. Our fragmented market damages the economy as a whole; but it is particularly damaging for young adults wishing to start families, or children forced to move midway through their schooling.

In a post-crash world, there are concerns about how to make homes affordable again. There is no quick fix to a housing crisis that has many aspects. But doing nothing is not an option. Renters too have the right not just to a roof over their heads but to a home.