Commentary
Aim and you might hit. Targets crucial to solving housing crisis
Secretary of State Angela Rayner acknowledged recently that there was only a “slim chance” of the Government overseeing the completion of 1.5 million homes within the current parliamentary term, writes Sam Stafford.
“It’s a slim chance, but I’m definitely not giving it up”, she said. “I think it’s really important that we keep a target,” adding that “it was always a stretch target.”
This is quite right. We will only build 300,000 homes a year when we plan to build more than 300,000 homes a year.
Targets
At the point the Regional Spatial Strategies were abolished, by the Coalition Government in 2010, the total of their combined housing targets was 209,967. In 2022 Lichfields totted up the targets in every adopted local plan and used emerging figures where there were gaps. That combined figure was 233,010. How many homes have we been building? About that many.
The current Standard Method (which adds up to around 370,000) may not be to everybody’s taste, trading as it does sophistication for certainty, but it has a logic to it. Regardless though of how such a method is constructed (and to revisit the current one would add yet more uncertainty and delay), anybody who thinks that 300,000 homes a year can be achieved without the requirements in every Spatial Development Strategy (SDS) adding up to 400,000 or thereabouts, and every local plan under every SDS doing it’s share, is fundamentally unserious about building 300,000 homes a year.
Actors
Angela Rayner also said that Andy Burnham’s main focus was now on building council houses, suggesting that was taking priority over efforts to increase the overall target. That is less encouraging because we will only get closer to 300,000 when every player on the pitch plays a full role.
We obviously need more diversity of housebuilder. We need small builders who can then become medium-sized builders who can then become big builders, but the SME sector is in crisis and data soon to be published by the LPDF will hopefully provoke some actual action from the Government in this regard.
Builders will only buy land and build homes though when they can sell them, which makes the pegging of affordable homes delivered by way of Section 106 Agreement to open market delivery quite bizarre when you think about it. Even when Section 106 stock is available there may not be a Registered Provider wanting it at that point in time, perhaps because managing their existing stock is more of an immediate priority.
How can the delivery of social housing be made a clear and consistent priority for both RPs and local authorities?
Land
Upon what do small, medium-sized and large builders, RPs and local authorities build their open market and social housing? To embolden one without more land available would cannibalise the activities of the other.
We need a lot more land available to build on. We need Mayors and local leaders to piece together and bring forward major projects that private enterprise would not do. We need small and medium-sized promoters bringing land forward for small and medium-sized builders and we need every local authority to have an up-to-date local plan and a brownfield register showing exactly which small and medium-sized sites it wants to see built on.
Planning
How could I not mention planning. More words than I have here are needed. Let us just continue down the clear, rules-based path.
So. Forget 1.5 million homes. Let us aim to build 300,000 homes in one year as soon as possible and then let us do consistently thereafter.
Sam Stafford has been managing director of the Land, Planning and Development Federation since May 2025. Prior to that he spent three years as planning director of the Home Builders Federation, and eight years as a regional strategic land director at Barratt Developments.
This is the latest part in a housing policy series published in partnership between Place Media Group and CivicScape.
READ MORE | Jeremy Hinds: Sixty housing interventions. Why is England still unaffordable?
