The government’s target is to deliver 1.5m new homes by 2029. Public servants on the frontline of delivery have spoken out – and it’s not good news for the housing minister. Jonathan Parker, development director at national procurement specialist Pagabo, dissects the nationwide survey report titled Building 1.5m Homes – Is It Achievable?
Even with significant policy reform, less than one-third of the housing sector believes the national target for new homes is achievable. When asked if they are satisfied with their organisation’s progress in relation to the delivery of affordable homes compared with the local target since the Labour party entered government, only a fraction over one-third of respondents said yes.
Our report didn’t stop there; we wanted to understand why such pessimism exists.
A plethora of problems
According to respondents representing a broad cross-section of job functions across local government and housing associations, the most critical factor holding back housing delivery is the lack of sufficient, flexible and long-term funding, with 60% of respondents describing the availability of funding for housing projects in their area as being highly inadequate or insufficient.
Meanwhile, a trio of interconnected issues surrounding land cost, site availability and developer profit expectations present widespread barriers to delivering more homes – with planning restrictions, community opposition and infrastructure constraints also cited as obstacles to overcome.
Digging deeper into the issue of site availability, a pragmatic stance has been adopted by housing professionals despite an ideological preference for building on brownfield sites. Faced with the high costs of remediation, 54% of those surveyed prioritise a balanced mix of both brownfield and greenbelt sites, while only 3% leant towards prioritising green belt land.
Respondents also drew attention to the nation’s existing housing stock, identifying a critical and growing tension beyond the headlines dominated by new homes. Results showed that for housing associations, refurbishment is a core strategic priority – particularly with the introduction of new legislation like Awaab’s Law in 2025. By contrast, local government bodies viewed refurbishment as secondary to the primary goal of planning and enabling new development.
Despite this difference, across the sector there is a strong view that new housing must be supported by corresponding investment in social infrastructure – with an overwhelming 79% of all respondents viewing collaboration with other public sector bodies as either essential or important.
New housing delivery and existing housing refurbishment cannot be considered in isolation. Success is defined not by numbers alone but by the creation of thriving places, underpinned by access to healthcare, education, transport and social infrastructure.
Thinking ahead
Since Building 1.5m Homes – Is It Achievable? was published, the Home Builders Federation (HBF) has released new data revealing that the total value of developer contributions held unspent by local authorities in England and Wales has increased to £9bn.
In theory, this funding should help make sure development is sustainable and transformative, but too many of these contributions come from housebuilders that can only deliver new homes and not new schools and GP practices, for example. Housebuilders would rather give funding to local authorities but currently these funds are not being allocated to the infrastructure surrounding the same housing schemes as they should be.
Local authorities have pointed towards pre-allocated funding structures and limitations in staffing as the main reasons behind the increasing amount of unspent developer contributions. However, these are added complications and not root causes.
At the heart of the problem is an over-reliance on isolated, piecemeal improvements, which create an overwhelming number of moving parts. If more new homes were built by developers that have agreed a comprehensive and rigid masterplan with the local authority, Section 106 and CIL funds would not be necessary because the associated infrastructure has already been given equal attention and consideration.
The remedy is the creation of more joint ventures between local authorities and developers that not only deliver new homes but also placemaking through the provision of schools, medical facilities, commercial hubs and retail outlets as part of the same scheme – ensuring services are available to the larger population in the area.
Developer-led procurement of wide-ranging development schemes is a proven remedy for many of today’s problems, capable of increasing speed, improving value for money and enhancing outcomes – while also acting as a force behind positive community impact.
The alternative – open-market developer procurement – is more time-consuming, more expensive, and riskier for local authorities.
It is clear that the structure of traditional contracts involving land sales followed by housebuilder delivery is misaligned with public objectives. This reinforces the need for a more collaborative and forward-thinking delivery model in which the public sector and developers share responsibility from the outset to accelerate delivery and maximise public value but also ensures that communities are taken on that journey as well to truly be involved in shaping their own futures.
The post Local authority-developer JVs can change housing delivery fortunes appeared first on Planning, Building & Construction Today.
