THE debate about where much-needed new housing is going to be built is one of the most pressing of all. There's a shortage, and kick-starting house building would do the economy a power of good.
This debate is also a controversial one because, sooner or later, some empty land is going to have to disappear underneath bricks and mortar. But what kind of empty land – and where?
Anna Soubry, the MP for Broxtowe, has sought to bring some clarity to this messy debate by sending a letter to a department run by her own government pointing out the mixed message they give about protecting the countryside on the one hand and allowing new housing on the other.
The response? Not a mixed message but a proper own-goal, with one of her ministerial colleagues, Nick Boles, suggesting that while greenbelt would be built on only in exceptional circumstances, "low quality, environmentally uninteresting fields" might have to make way for the developer's digger.
In short, Mr Boles has left the debate in the same mess that Ms Soubry complained about, while inflaming local passions by suggesting that some green fields might be pretty boring anyway. Who is he to judge?
For the sake of residents in Broxtowe, Rushcliffe and the rest of the country, somebody in Mr Boles' department needs to get a grip and give an important question a meaningful answer.