The housing debate has been given more column inches in the print media than any other topic in recent months. And so it should. Housing is an issue that affects not just present house buyers but also aspiring buyers in other words, all Malaysians.

Developers are by and large decent businessmen making an honest living. They are intent on delivering a good product on time. They honestly believe that the rogues amongst them can be weeded out by stringent rules and strict enforcement despite evidence to the contrary.

Underlying the Real Estate and Housing Developers Association's (Rehda) seeming intransigence regarding the 'sell build' system, is the fear that a change will affect the industry adversely. This fear is founded partly on their assumption that the banks will not support a 'build sell' (build first, sell later) arrangement. This fear is indeed without foundation.

Banks are in the business of making money by lending money and the house buyers (together with motor vehicle buyers) are the biggest borrowers of bank loans. There is no reason why banks will not come to the party, whatever the arrangement, if the projects are viable.

With a decision from the minister of housing and local government expected soon, the parties concerned (developers and house buyers) have heightened their campaigns for their respective positions on the status quo of 'sell build' or 'build sell'.

How then will the minister decide? Public perception is that Ong Ka Ting, the consummate politician that he is, will favour the developers. Cynics argue that the bulk of developers are Chinese and MCA, a Chinese-based party, will see to the interests of the community. Chinese developers are the major contributors to the MCA's coffers and as usual, money talks!

But those who think along this line forget that the Chinese also form the bulk of the house buyers. This is a large and important constituency no politician can ignore. If this is the case, one argument goes, should not the minister then opt for a solution which allows both systems to operate side by side? In other words, to give buyers a choice. Surely this would please both sides of the debate?

On the surface this would seem like the perfect solution but it is not. Under the status quo, developers can use buyers' money to fund their projects and not risk their own money. If there is a choice between 'sell build' and 'build sell', no doubt developers will opt for the former (which is the status quo). So in effect this will be a Hobson's choice buyers will not be any better off.

Despite public perception to the contrary, I believe the minister will make a principled decision and not one that is dictated by expediency. Money or votes regardless, Ong as the minister responsible for housing, has to first protect the house buyers. The minister knows that the present system does not work; and making more rules, in an already heavily bureaucratised situation, is not the answer.

What is needed now is the minister's skill and wisdom in ironing out an arrangement that will protect house buyers and yet be palatable to Rehda. The devil is in the details, as they say, but I am confident Ong has both the skill and wisdom to carry out this change - a change in how Malaysians buy their houses, which has been long overdue.

The prime minister has already opined that the present system is unsatisfactory and no doubt the minister for housing concurs that house buyers have to be adequately protected. Politics aside, Ong is a decent person and I am confident he will do the decent thing by the larger constituency. To paraphrase Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Ong Ka Ting is the minister for housing for all Malaysians and not just one sector.