Women’s Safety in Rural Areas
Matthew Pennycook Excerpts(2 days, 16 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Dowd. I congratulate the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine) on securing this debate, and I thank the other hon. Members who have participated this afternoon for their contributions. On the subject of the hon. Lady’s letter, prior to this debate my office did look into what has happened. I think that, because it was addressed to both me and a Minister in the Home Office, it has been lost. However, I can assure her that she will receive a detailed response in fairly short order.
I will begin by reaffirming that tackling violence against women and girls is a top priority for the Labour Government, and our mission to halve it within a decade is already under way. As hon. Members have referenced, in December we published “Freedom from violence and abuse”, which is a transformative cross-Government strategy to accomplish that mission.
The strategy sets out the Government’s vision and the proposed concrete actions to prevent violence and abuse, pursue perpetrators and support victims. As the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), said, it recognises that we must take a whole-of-society approach to tackling violence against women and girls. It recognises that we must work across Government, public services and wider society to achieve meaningful and lasting change.
An example of the cross-Government work that is taking place to build a safer society for women and girls is the ongoing work of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on women’s safety in rural areas. Last year, it sought evidence from rural areas on support services and delivery methods that work best in rural contexts. DEFRA is working across Government to understand the findings of that evidence and to inform future work. That will address the disparities in the provision of support so that every victim, whether they are in a city or a rural village, can access the help that they need.
There are examples across other Government Departments. For example, the Home Office is working with the Department for Transport to ensure that considerations of violence against women and girls are embedded into planning and transport guidance so that public places are welcoming and secure for women. On the shadow Minister’s point, I am more than happy to ask DFT colleagues to provide an answer as to when we can expect a response to the consultation that he referenced.
Turning to matters for which I am responsible as the Minister for Housing and Planning, my Department is clear that women and girls must feel safe and be safe in all environments, including shared and open spaces such as streets, parks, transport hubs and public buildings. Planning and urban design are critical tools to that end for enhancing women’s safety. While the VAWG strategy should not be combined with the national planning policy framework, it is relevant to it and has informed the drafting of it. In chapter 12 of the framework, concerning well-designed places, the existing NPPF sets out that the planning system should
“create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users…and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.”
As hon. Members are aware, the Government recently consulted on a new NPPF. The proposals in it are intended to reinforce the message that developments should create places that are safe and inclusive, including for women and girls. I draw the attention of hon. Members to a number of specific policies in the draft framework that are relevant to design, transport and public safety. Our proposed policy on the key principles for well-designed places sets out that, in relation to public spaces, development proposals should:
“Include spaces that are safe, secure, inclusive, accessible for all ages and abilities and which facilitate and encourage social interaction, play and healthy lifestyles”.
Our proposed policy on street design, access and parking sets out that development proposals should:
“Make sure that the arrangement of streets and other routes help to create places that are safe, inclusive and attractive for all users”.
There is also a specific policy in the draft framework on maintaining public safety and security, which sets out:
“Development proposals should anticipate and address possible malicious threats and other hazards…in relation to…Occupiers and users, by identifying potential safety risks and proportionate mitigation opportunities which can be addressed through the design of the scheme. This applies especially in relation to…addressing crime, or the fear of crime”.
I have noted the calls from a range of individuals and organisations, including the hon. Members for Frome and East Somerset and for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos), to ensure that the framework more explicitly recognises the importance of a focus on the needs of women and girls and their safety when considering development proposals, whether that be in a rural or urban context; calls that the framework explicitly reference the VAWG strategy; and some of the other requests that have been made today. As hon. Members are aware, the consultation on a new NPPF closed on 10 March. My officials and I are considering all the feedback received, including in relation to this issue, and I will treat the arguments made today as an informal extension of that process. We will publish an updated NPPF in due course.
As hon. Members are hopefully aware, the NPPF is supported by a range of planning practice guidance. That is really important because the purpose of PPG is to support the implementation of national planning policy. The VAWG action plan contained within the strategy published in December included, as has been referenced, a specific commitment for the Government to update national design guidance to reflect a violence against women and girls perspective, ensuring that safety considerations inform how public spaces are designed.
In January 2026, we published updated design and placemaking PPG in draft. That consolidated document is intended to replace existing design guidance, including the national design guide and national model design code. Hon. Members will, I trust, welcome that the draft guidance that went out to consultation not only demonstrates the Government’s commitment to well-designed places but includes specific references to considering the safety of women and girls in the design of public spaces and streets. For example, paragraph 150 makes it clear that:
“Security features should be designed to support the safety of women and girls.”
The consultation on the draft guidance has now closed. Again, my officials and I are analysing the responses received and will publish the final version in due course. When the final PPG is published, policy DP3 in the draft NPPF proposes that the principles of that PPG should apply and inform applications in the absence of local policies, guides, codes or master plans. Those local tools can do the job if a local area has put the guides in place, or applied a specific master plan to a specific development, but in the absence of those we are proposing that the national PPG would apply through proposed policy DP3 in the draft NPPF.
I thank again the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset for giving the House a chance to debate these important matters. I assure her and other hon. Members that I will reflect on the points raised in the debate in advance of setting out the Government’s final position on the NPPF and design and placemaking PPG.
Large-scale New Communities
Matthew Pennycook Excerpts(3 days, 16 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
The New Towns Act 1946 was a response to the urgent need to alleviate housing shortages and urban overcrowding in a war-ravaged Britain. The acute and entrenched housing crisis that afflicts England today has far different causes, but the need for equally bold solutions is no less pressing.
As the final report of the New Towns Taskforce laid bare, a chronic shortage of housing is not only blighting countless lives but also hampering economic growth and productivity. The creation of a series of large-scale new communities provides a golden opportunity to make a significant contribution to meeting housing need across England, and to support economic growth by releasing the productive potential of our constrained towns and cities.
The original New Towns Committee established by the then Minister of Town and Country Planning, Lewis Silkin, rightly recognised that building well-planned new communities is a means of achieving national renewal as well as ensuring more families have access to decent, safe, secure and affordable homes. Inspired by the proud legacy of the past, we are now taking the first formal step to honouring our manifesto commitment to build a new generation of new towns.
Building on the diligent work of the New Towns Taskforce under the expert leadership of its chair, Sir Michael Lyons, and deputy chair, Dame Kate Barker, the Government are today launching a public consultation, which can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/new-towns-draft-programme/new-towns-draft-programme on their new towns programme and the environmental implications of it.
Through this consultation, we are seeking views on our proposals with a view to informing final decisions on how the new programme will operate; which locations will be taken forward; how the next generation of new towns will be planned and delivered; and how design, place-making and planning policy should be approached. The consultation also seeks views on the Government’s offer to locations and feedback on a strategic environmental assessment report that addresses local environmental constraints, the cumulative effects of new towns development, and practical methods of mitigation and monitoring.
The proposals set out in the consultation are the product of the Government’s assessment of whether each of the 12 locations recommended by the New Towns Taskforce, as well as an assessment of alternatives including sites submitted as part of the taskforce’s call for evidence in December 2024, other sites that MHCLG and Homes England were already aware of, and sites that were identified during the SEA process, were capable of meeting the programme’s objectives.
Each location was assessed against three objectives, namely scale, economic growth potential and deliverability. After reviewing over 100 potential sites, the Government determined that 13 locations appeared capable of supporting the programme to achieve its objectives. Of those 13, seven have been assessed as most capable of achieving those objectives and are therefore proposed for inclusion in the new towns programme.
The seven proposals are at different stages of maturity and require different types of intervention and support—including blends of public and private capital—to achieve their potential. The Government therefore intend to tailor their approach to each new town, with a view to making as much progress as possible as fast as possible.
Our seven proposed new town locations include three priority interventions:
A large-scale new settlement in Tempsford at the heart of the Oxford to Cambridge growth corridor and at the intersection of East West Rail and the east coast main line that could deliver over 40,000 homes.
An expanded landscape-led development of up to 21,000 new homes bringing together Crews Hill and Chase Park in Enfield that could help address London’s acute housing need.
Urban development to create a well-connected, high-density, city-centre neighbourhood in the heart of Leeds South Bank that could deliver circa 20,000 new homes and support an agglomeration of HMG investment and growth in the city.
As set out in our initial response to the New Towns Taskforce final report, these are particularly promising sites that could make significant contributions to unlocking economic growth and accelerating housing delivery. Subject to the SEA, each will receive significant Government focus and support to deliver.
The remaining four locations also have great potential and will be provided with targeted support to ensure they can progress. Two mature schemes are exciting opportunities already in train where the Government will provide assistance to maximise development opportunities:
The creation of a riverside settlement in Thamesmead, Greenwich that could deliver up to 15,000 new homes, unlocking inaccessible land in the capital and improving connectivity via the planned docklands light railway extension.
Inner-city development and densification of the Manchester Victoria North urban quarter that could deliver at least 15,000 new homes, supporting agglomeration benefits and access to jobs in the growing city centre and other employment hubs across Greater Manchester.
Two scalable schemes are of considerable potential where the Government will provide support for initial phases while exploring opportunities to further scale up development:
A corridor of connected development in south Gloucestershire, across Brabazon and the West Innovation Arc, that could deliver up to 40,000 new homes in one of the highest productivity areas in the country.
A “renewed town” of circa 40,000 new homes in Milton Keynes, reinvigorating the city centre and delivering much needed housing growth to its north and east whilst reshaping the way people travel through a locally appropriate transport solution.
Collectively, schemes in these locations have the potential to provide hundreds of thousands of new homes in the decades ahead and to make a vital contribution to a stronger and more secure economic future for our country. We are determined to get spades in the ground on at least three new towns in this Parliament and will strive to accelerate work on all of the sites that are eventually selected for inclusion in the programme.
As the accompanying SEA report demonstrates, development at the scale we are proposing will need to be mitigated. Good planning, up-front investment, and high-quality design is the best way to achieve this. That is why we are so determined that the next generation of new towns will be built in a way that is consistent with our ambitious place-making principles. As we have always promised, we intend to create well-connected, well-designed, sustainable and attractive places where people want to live with all the infrastructure, amenities and services necessary to sustain thriving communities.
The fact that over 100 sites were submitted in response to the New Towns Taskforce’s call for evidence tells its own story about the significant opportunities that exist across the country when it comes to large-scale new communities. We were impressed by the strength of propositions across the board, including the six locations that we have identified as reasonable alternatives to the programme.
That is particularly true of Plymouth, which is a unique opportunity to bolster the UK’s defence and security and, if not ultimately taken forward as part of the programme, will require special consideration and its own bespoke financial support package to unlock its potential as a centre of excellence in naval technology, and to ensure that housing does not act as a barrier to further growth.
Our new towns programme forms an integral part of our plans to boost innovation, quality and competition in house building. Through land supply certainty, integrated planning, infrastructure co-ordination, the expansion of supply chains, and increased investment in skills and new construction methods, building the next generation of new towns will help transform the way that future large settlements in every part of the country are delivered.
Following the consultation and completion of the SEA and habitats regulations assessments, the Government intend to publish their final proposals later this year. This will confirm the final locations to be taken forward as part of the programme, alongside a full Government response to the recommendations of the New Towns Taskforce, and further detail on precisely how the next generation of new towns will be delivered.
The Government will continue to engage extensively with local leaders, mayors, investors and communities throughout this process to ensure new towns are planned and delivered to the highest standards of design, sustainability and long-term stewardship.
[HCWS1432]
Housebuilding and Infrastructure Delivery
Matthew Pennycook Excerpts(3 days, 16 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
Over the past 20 months, this Government have taken a series of bold and decisive steps to lay the grounds for high and sustainable rates of house building and improved infrastructure delivery in the years ahead. Today, I am announcing a series of further targeted measures to help stimulate housing supply and infrastructure provision.
To facilitate the more effective delivery of critical infrastructure, we are publishing an implementation plan, which can be found on gov.uk at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/streamlining-infrastructure-planning-implementation-plan
It sets out in detail the steps we will take over the coming months to bring into force the beneficial reforms to the nationally significant infrastructure projects system contained in our landmark Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025.
This implementation plan will give applicants, investors, practitioners, local planning authorities and other statutory bodies and affected communities the clarity they need to realise the full potential of our reforms. Its publication supplements the efforts already under way to test more efficient and streamlined approaches to determining development consent order applications, including smoother and faster planning inspectorate examinations where appropriate, and pilots for key projects like East West Rail to make use of new flexibilities.
To provide further support for house building, a new consultation direction will be made this month specifying that where a local planning authority intends to refuse planning permission for a housing scheme of 150 dwellings or more, they must consult the Secretary of State to enable Ministers to decide whether to use their existing powers to call in that planning application.
I am also confirming today that we will consult on further proposed changes to the consultation direction covering commercial development of 15,000 square metres or more and approvals within detailed emergency planning zones. The relevant consultation can be found on gov.uk at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/consulting-the-secretary-of-state-on-planning-decisions
The Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 introduced new powers for local fee setting, which will enable LPAs to set their own planning application fees through a local variation model. Under this approach, a national default fee will remain in place and apply to all LPAs, unless an LPA chooses to vary from the default fee for any or all application fee categories to reflect their own cost recovery needs.
We are today launching a consultation on the national default fee schedule designed to better reflect the costs LPAs incur. This is a vital step towards better resourcing LPAs and driving better outcomes including faster determination times, improved service standards and stronger performance across the planning system. The relevant consultation can be found on gov.uk at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/fees-for-planning-applications
We have also published regulations to fully implement the power for compulsory purchase orders to be conditionally confirmed. This will give councils greater confidence to use CPOs earlier to deliver public benefits, help progress stalled sites and provide certainty in respect of land assembly. The regulations can be found on gov.uk at:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2026/308/contents/made
I can also confirm today the allocation of £234 million of devolved land and infrastructure grant funding from our new national housing delivery fund for mayoral strategic authorities in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, the East Midlands, Greater Lincolnshire, Hull and East Yorkshire, Tees Valley, West of England and York and North Yorkshire. This will be delivered as a continuation of the existing brownfield housing fund to enable mayors to collectively enable the delivery of up to 8,000 new homes.
Finally, I am announcing today that we intend to award an £8.2 million contract to Google and Faculty to develop an artificial intelligence-powered planning tool designed to halve the time it takes for planners to process minor household applications, so that LPAs can provide a more efficient, high-quality planning service.
[HCWS1431]
Inclusive and Sustainable Growth: Greater Oxford
Matthew Pennycook Excerpts(1 week, 2 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
I am today setting out further steps that the Government are taking to expedite ambitious growth in Greater Oxford as part of our ongoing efforts to realise the full potential of the Oxford-Cambridge corridor.
The Oxford-Cambridge region is already a world-leading innovation corridor. Anchored by two of the world’s best universities, it is a hub for globally renowned science and technology firms, a breeding ground for internationally successful start-ups, and a magnet for talent and ambition. It has the potential to become one of the most innovative and economically dynamic areas in the world.
Maximising the full potential of the Oxford-Cambridge corridor requires us to identify and take advantage of the numerous growth opportunities that exist in the region. Oxford and its surrounding areas offer one such opportunity. Located at the western end of the corridor, Oxford already has one of the fastest-growing economies in the UK, driven by its world-leading technology, life sciences, and knowledge-intensive sectors from advanced manufacturing to artificial intelligence.
However, while the city and its environs are perfectly placed to deliver nationally significant growth to the benefit of existing and new communities and the country as a whole, numerous long-standing constraints risk undermining its full potential. These include inadequate transport connections, a lack of affordable housing, and energy and sewage capacity pressures.
In May 2025, I appointed Neale Coleman as chair of the Oxford Growth Commission and tasked him with identifying how best to unlock new development and accelerate growth across Oxford and its surrounding areas. The OGC’s interim report, published on 15 December 2025, recommended that a priority for the next 12 months should be consideration of the need for an appropriate delivery vehicle to support development in and around Oxford.
To take full advantage of Greater Oxford’s unique assets and ensure that we maximise its contribution to national economic growth, the Government are convinced that a bold place-based intervention is required to address the constraints it faces. I am therefore announcing today that we intend to consult on establishing a centrally-led development corporation to deliver nationally significant growth in Greater Oxford.
To ensure that such growth is inclusive and sustainable, and that its benefits will be felt by existing as well as new communities, we are committed to an ongoing partnership with local leaders, communities and residents. Their insights, knowledge and direct input will help shape the delivery vehicle’s ambition and focus. Should a decision be taken to establish a centrally-led development corporation, it is our intention that local democratically elected leaders would be invited to join the board. There will be opportunities to formally shape the Government’s proposals as part of the future consultation process.
Finally, to strengthen our commitment to supercharge growth in the Oxford-Cambridge corridor, I am pleased to announce that the Government will double its initial £400 million investment, meaning that up to £800 million will now be available to help bring forward development in this critical economic area.
We will continue to update Parliament on the Government’s work in Greater Oxford and the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor.
[HCWS1412]
Oral Answers to Questions
Matthew Pennycook Excerpts(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
In the 13 months since we announced plans to supercharge growth in Oxford-Cambridge corridor, significant progress has been made, including through updated proposals on East West Rail, the establishment of an Oxford growth commission and tangible steps towards realising the full potential of Greater Cambridge.
Daniel Zeichner
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the work he has been doing on this issue, and I was pleased to see the announcement of the consultation on the development corporation a few weeks ago. What further steps can we expect to be taken along the corridor in the coming months?
Matthew Pennycook
I thank my hon. Friend not only for his question, but for his unwavering support for ambitious, high-quality sustainable growth in his city and the surrounding areas. We are determined to unleash nationally significant growth in Greater Cambridge, to the benefit of existing and new communities and the nation as a whole. Following the consultation on a Greater Cambridge urban development corporation, which ends on 1 April, we will publish the summary responses and a formal response setting out the Government’s next steps. As ever, I will strive to ensure that my hon. Friend and other hon. Members from Cambridgeshire are fully apprised of the Government’s thinking.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
Defence will be a key pillar of the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor. In my Huntingdon constituency, we are lucky to have RAF Wyton. It is in the middle of a very ambitious project, Project Fairfax, which will use surplus Ministry of Defence land. The MOD signed a memorandum of understanding with Huntingdonshire district council last year, and Homes England is a key part of that. Will the Minister meet me and the chief executive of Huntingdonshire district council to discuss how we can best supercharge these growth plans and make good progress on them?
Gordon McKee (Glasgow South) (Lab)
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
The definition of grey belt for the purposes of both plan making and decision making is set out in the glossary of the national planning policy framework. The Government also updated green-belt planning practice guidance in February last year, to assist local planning authorities with identifying and considering proposals for potential grey-belt land, and to provide for a consistent approach across England.
Bradley Thomas
Bromsgrove golf course is in open countryside. It is a beautiful, green open space and one of the most popular golf courses anywhere in the country, and it contains more than 20,000 trees. Does the Minister really think that it is suitable for development, particularly at scale? Will he rule out development on such golf courses? If not, will he meet me and members of the golf club to discuss their concerns?
Matthew Pennycook
I certainly will not rule in or rule out development on any particular site. The hon. Member knows why I cannot speak to particular planning applications, but he knows from our recent meeting on the subject that it is for local planning authorities to determine whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify the release of green belt, and it is for individual local planning authorities to undertake the necessary assessments to identify if land is grey belt, either through plan making or through specific applications that come forward.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
The Office for Budget Responsibility has concluded that this Government’s overhaul of the planning system will mean more house building in this country than at any time in the past 40 years. That is good news for residents in my constituency, who are desperate to get a home for themselves and their families. What more can this Government do to provide the uplift in social and affordable housing that residents in Harlow desperately need?
Matthew Pennycook
My hon. Friend is right; our changes to the national planning policy framework in December 2024 alone have been judged by the Office for Budget Responsibility to have led to the biggest increase in house building in the past 40 years. The Conservative party will not recognise that, as important as it is to preserve green belts, there are simply not enough sites on brownfield land across the country to deliver the volume of homes that we need. That is why we need a more strategic approach to green-belt land release and development.
David Simmonds (Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner) (Con)
The Minister has set out clearly for the House the key plank of development strategy under the previous Secretary of State: re-designating large parts of our green belt as grey belt. Housing delivery is collapsing, but a recent report identified that London already has capacity for 460,000 additional homes on brownfield sites. At the mayor’s rate of delivery, that is an 83-year supply of housing development plots. Rather than focusing on releasing green belt for development, why do the Government not instead focus on building those homes that already have planning permission, and could be built on brownfield sites tomorrow?
Matthew Pennycook
The Government are focusing on precisely that. That is why we have further strengthened national planning policy in respect of previously developed land—that is out to consultation at the moment, as the hon. Gentleman knows—and why our new homes accelerator is doing what is needed to unblock permission sites across the country. I refute the idea that house building is collapsing. We are dealing with the legacy of the previous Government’s decisions, including the abolition of mandatory housing targets, but starts are up, and applications are coming through the system.
Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
The Renters’ Rights Act 2025 received Royal Assent on 27 October last year. As per the road map we published in November, we intend to implement the new tenancy system it provides for on 1 May, at which point, among other things, section 21 no-fault evictions will be abolished, rental bidding wars will be prohibited, and the practice of landlords demanding large amounts of rent in advance from tenants will be banned.
Chris Bloore
The Minister knows that the Renters’ Rights Act will be transformative, especially for my constituents, but will he reassure me that the Government recognise the urgent need to improve safety and standards in the private rented sector, and will he act to drive down rates of non-decency?
Matthew Pennycook
I can provide my hon. Friend with the assurance that he seeks. Whether in the PRS or in the social rented sector, landlords should address non-decency wherever it exists. We are giving landlords until 2035 to implement our new decent homes standard, but we have made it clear that they should not wait until then to improve their properties. We are acting in other ways to ensure that private tenants have safe, warm and decent homes, including by introducing new minimum energy efficiency standards for the sector, strengthening local authority enforcement in respect of unremediated hazards, and applying Awaab’s law to the PRS through the relevant provisions in the Act.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
The private rental sector in Northern Ireland has a slightly different system, as the Minister knows, but the problems are the same across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. He is always incredibly helpful when it comes to assuring me and others in this House of the importance of Northern Ireland’s input into the process. Has he had the opportunity to speak to the relevant Minister in the Northern Ireland Assembly, to ensure that we in Northern Ireland have the same protections that he is proposing for here?
Matthew Pennycook
I can provide the hon. Member with that assurance. I met my counterpart in Northern Ireland some time ago, and this prompts me to check with my private office and ensure that another meeting is scheduled for the near future.
Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
There are 1.3 million people on local authority housing registers across the country. It is not in dispute that there is acute need across England as a whole. National policy makes clear that it is for local authorities, informed by local assessments of need, to set out requirements for the proportion and type of affordable housing that should be delivered through new development, including the minimum proportion of social rented housing required, and planned, to meet that need.
Imran Hussain
The Minister will know that Bradford is one of the youngest and fastest-growing cities, yet we are urgently and desperately in need of social and affordable housing. The reality is that homelessness is on the rise, and we have record numbers of people on waiting lists. Families simply cannot get decent houses. While I welcome the Government’s ambitious home building programme, will the Minister assure me that adequate measures are in the programme to address the need for social and affordable housing? While local government will have some say, we must give clear directions.
Matthew Pennycook
Given the acute need for affordable housing in Bradford, I understand entirely why my hon. Friend continues to press so vigorously for an uplift in the supply of affordable, and particularly social rented, housing in his constituency. I know that he will welcome the fact that, in the coming days, bidding will open for grant funding from our new £39 billion social and affordable homes programme, 60% of which is targeted at social rent. He will also note that the Government are currently consulting on a new national planning policy framework, including on proposals designed to further support the delivery of social and affordable housing, such as setting a national expectation of at least 10% social rent on all new developments.
Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
To honour our commitment to deliver the biggest increase in social and affordable house building in a generation, we have backed registered providers with the biggest social and affordable housing investment in recent memory. Although there is more to do, we have already taken steps to strengthen the existing developer contribution system to ensure that new developments provide necessary affordable homes and infrastructure.
Rachael Maskell
York Central will create 12,500 new jobs and 3,000 new homes in phase 1, which will be before the planning committee in May. Just 20% is allocated to affordable housing, but there must be an ambition for 40% because York has one of the worst housing affordability disparities in the country. We must reach that target, or our housing crisis will worsen. Will the Minister meet me to discuss York Central and set out what steps he will take with Homes England to ensure that we do not just achieve housing numbers, but meet local need?
Matthew Pennycook
We need to build many more homes of all tenures, but it is absolutely right to stress the importance of delivering a significant uplift in the number of social and affordable homes. I am aware that discussions are ongoing about increasing the proportion of affordable housing within the York Central scheme. I encourage the developer to work with Homes England and relevant registered providers to maximise the potential for social and affordable housing in its first phase. I am more than happy to ensure that my hon. Friend gets an appointment at one of my forthcoming Tea Room surgeries.
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
As the House will know, local plans are the method by which we can identify affordable homes and make sure that they are built in the right place at the right time. Since I was elected back in December 2019, I have consistently asked the Liberal Democrat Three Rivers district council to get on with the local plan. However, as the Housing Minister will know, the latest version of that plan did not have sufficient evidence. He has therefore rightly called it in. Does he agree that the Lib Dems need to get on with delivering the local plan and that they should not continue to fail my residents in South West Hertfordshire?
Matthew Pennycook
The hon. Gentleman will understand that I cannot discuss any specific local plan. However, in general terms I would say that any party that controls any local planning authority across the country must take active and firm steps to get up-to-date local plans in place. They are the best way for local communities to shape development. Without them, communities are open to speculative development that does not have resident input. That is why we are pushing for universal coverage across the country.
Sarah Green (Chesham and Amersham) (LD)
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
As I have said, local development plans should address needs and opportunities in relation not only to housing numbers but to infrastructure, and identify what infrastructure is required and how it can be funded and brought forward. Through changes to national planning policy, and financial support for essential infrastructure through land and infrastructure funding programmes, the Government are supporting infrastructure provision, but we recognise that there is more to do to ensure that the right infrastructure is built at the right time.
Sarah Green
I am keen to hear what work the Department has under way to ensure that necessary infrastructure is in place. The cumulative effect of lots of smaller developments on the sewerage system and GP provision is the same as the effect of one large development. That is a live issue in Buckinghamshire, where we do not yet have a local plan. Will the Minister meet me to hear about the struggles that communities face in getting the relevant agencies to engage?
Matthew Pennycook
This is not the whole answer, but having up-to-date local plans and infrastructure funding statements in place can make a huge difference in ensuring that the right infrastructure comes forward at the appropriate time. I am more than happy to meet the hon. Lady to discuss what more we can do not only to get her local authority to put a plan in place as quickly as possible, but to bring development and infrastructure forward in the right way on individual developments in her constituency.
Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)
Until local roads are adopted, communities miss out on so much—from having their roads gritted to getting a post box, as I have found out. How can we speed up Central Bedfordshire council and others?
Matthew Pennycook
It is probably easier if my hon. Friend writes to me on those particular concerns in her area, and I will set out the Government’s full position. I am happy to discuss the matter that she raises in further detail.
Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
I can give my hon. Friend the assurances he seeks, and I encourage him and his constituents to engage with proposals in the consultation on a revised national planning policy framework that seek further to strengthen support for brownfield development and ensure that appropriate infrastructure provision comes forward alongside that development.
Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)
Andrew George
The Minister is shaking his head, but it simply is not possible through the pre-development process. Although I have met the Secretary of State to discuss how we can move forward shovel-ready projects that are held back at the moment, will Ministers meet Members of Parliament who are concerned about the thousands of homes that could be delivered and start on site right now, so that we can get Britain building and meet the desperate need for affordable homes?
Matthew Pennycook
I do not accept the hon. Gentleman’s characterisation of development that can come forward and be funded through our new social and affordable homes programme. We are ensuring that that programme has the necessary flexibility to fund provision across the country, whether it is community-led housing or rural housing. Our new homes accelerator is doing precisely what the hon. Gentleman says, by going in and unblocking problems site by site to get stalled development going.
Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)
Matthew Pennycook
I have met Northern Housing Consortium on a number of occasions. My hon. Friend will know that funding from the social and affordable homes programme can be used to support the regeneration of existing social housing estates. If he wants to write to me with further details about some of the recommendations he has suggested, I would be more than happy to respond.
Stuart Anderson (South Shropshire) (Con)
Matthew Pennycook
We need to understand this issue better, because answers were not forthcoming in the consultation carried out under the previous Government regarding the rationale for the commission. I assure the hon. Gentleman that in the very near future we will go out to consult and to find more evidence, so that we can take the action that is so desperately needed in this area.
Michael Wheeler (Worsley and Eccles) (Lab)
In my constituency of Worsley and Eccles, residents of Peel Green and the surrounding area, including the enthusiastic pupils of Salford City academy, are looking to get their hands on the Pride in Place money. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that they are at the forefront, they take the lead, and they decide?
Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)
Matthew Pennycook
From that question, it is difficult to understand precisely what the hon. Gentleman is getting at. If he writes to me, I will happily respond.
Sam Rushworth (Bishop Auckland) (Lab)
I know that the people who elect us to this place believe that it is important for politicians to uphold standards, whether at a national or local level. There is growing concern about the public behaviour of the leader and deputy leader of the Reform-led council in Durham, but they have changed the regime for standards, so that a committee of only three, with two Reform members, looks at those issues. Will the Minister consider an independent commissioner for standards for local government to ensure that we can hold our representatives to account?
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
Last year, 88,000 new homes were meant to be started in London, but instead, 5,891 were started. That shortfall has a direct impact on rents in my Spelthorne constituency. Will the Secretary of State say why he is allowing Sadiq Khan to run circles around him?
Matthew Pennycook
The Government have recognised openly that there is a perfect storm when it comes to house building in London. That is precisely why we are consulting on an emergency package. As the hon. Gentleman will know, the consultation closed just weeks ago and he does not have long to wait before we come forward with next steps.
Dan Carden (Liverpool Walton) (Lab)
Private market rents are most extortionate in working-class communities such as mine, where people can still buy a terraced house for around £70,000. So far, the Government have kept regulation linked to market rents, but we could do something different. We could do something that the Tories and Reform cannot do and that previous Labour Governments did do: as with Harold Wilson’s fair rents, we could have rent controls in deprived areas with poor housing stock. Will Ministers at least consider a pilot? Why not do it in Liverpool?
Matthew Pennycook
I am sorry to disappoint my hon. Friend, but the Government have been very clear that we do not support rent controls. The provisions of our Renters’ Rights Act 2025 will ensure that landlords can increase rent only once a year and that tenants are empowered to challenge unreasonable rent increases.
Alex Brewer (North East Hampshire) (LD)
What measures is the Minister taking to protect communities from inappropriate, speculative development when effective and expensive local plans that were working have been rendered effectively useless by new housing targets?
Matthew Pennycook
If a local planning authority has an up-to-date local plan in place, it will be up to date and in place until it needs to be replaced. At that point, we expect the targets that flow from the new standard method to be adhered to.
Valerie Vaz (Walsall and Bloxwich) (Lab)
Will the Minister meet me to discuss the decisions of Walsall council, including the closure of the Walsall Leather Museum against the wishes of local people?
Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)
We need to improve the infrastructure surrounding new developments and existing developments while ensuring that highways in local government, which felt the full impact of austerity, have the resources to deliver. What conversations has the Minister had about expanding capacity in local government to ensure that highways have the appropriate resources to deliver the infrastructure that we need?
Matthew Pennycook
We have provided significant support for local planning authorities to help them with capacity and capability pressures. My hon. Friend will know that through the provisions in the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025, we are allowing local authorities to set their own fees at a local level to ensure that their costs can be covered.
Aphra Brandreth (Chester South and Eddisbury) (Con)
There are a number of new build housing developments in my constituency where developers have sold the properties and moved on without completing work on vital infrastructure such as roads and sewers. What consideration has the Minister given to allowing councils to refuse future planning permission to developers with a record of leaving developments incomplete?
Matthew Pennycook
As part of the proposals we set out in a build out working paper last year, we are looking at some of the powers in the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 that allow local planning authorities to refuse planning permissions to developers who consistently do not build out. On the issue of highways, I will happily respond to the hon. Lady if she writes to me with some more detail.
Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) (Lab)
Does the Minister agree that Birmingham’s exit from section 114 status is an important moment for the city? Does she further agree that it is time to start scaling back the central Government intervention?
Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)
The Minister has talked about the protections afforded by local plans, but in areas such as Surrey Heath and Guildford, which have experienced a near-doubling of housing targets, those protections have been stripped away according to the tilted balance approach. What protections will the Minister put in place as at least a temporary measure to protect our communities from speculative development?
Matthew Pennycook
Local plans that are up to date provide protection from speculative development. Local authorities have to ensure that they are meeting housing delivery targets; that is an essential part of the system. Again, I will happily respond if the hon. Gentleman writes to me with further detail.
Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)
This Government have announced that they are awarding over £18 million to Redcar and Cleveland borough council to help it tackle the broken children’s social care market. While that is very welcome, it is a shame that it is necessary, so will Ministers meet my council leader to discuss what further support can be put in place to make sure this is not needed in future?
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)
Sovereign Harbour in Eastbourne is unique, in that it is the only harbour in the country where freeholders and leaseholders have to pay through their rent charge for not only the maintenance of the area, but sea defences, which elsewhere are paid for by the Government. Will the Secretary of State commit to meet me to review the fairness of that arrangement and help stem the tide of 16% increases in that rent charge, as has happened this year?
Matthew Pennycook
Not just because I have accepted a large number of meetings, I think a far better way for the hon. Gentleman to submit his views would be through the appropriate consultation on freehold estates, where he can bring that case and the issues it raises to life for us.
Sub-regional Strategic Planning
Matthew Pennycook Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
The Government were clear in their manifesto that housing need in England cannot be met without planning for growth on a larger than local scale. That is why we committed to introducing effective new mechanisms for cross-boundary strategic planning.
In the English devolution White Paper, “Power and partnership: Foundations for growth”, published in December 2024, we reaffirmed our intention to reintroduce mandatory strategic planning through the production of sub-regional spatial development strategies (SDSs) across England.
The Planning and Infrastructure Act, which received Royal Assent in December 2025, contains provisions that place a duty on combined authorities, combined county authorities, upper-tier county councils and unitary authorities to prepare an SDS for their area. The Bill also enables the Government to establish “strategic planning boards" to prepare SDSs on behalf of specified groupings of these authorities. These provisions will be brought into force this summer.
The rollout of SDSs will reintroduce a strategic tier to the planning system in England. SDSs are intended to be high-level spatial frameworks for housing growth and infrastructure investment. They will ensure that sub-regional areas can effectively plan to meet their housing needs; co-ordinate the provision of strategic infrastructure; grow their economies; and improve the environment and climate resilience. They will set the context for local plans which will have to be in “general conformity” with the SDS once it has been adopted.
We remain committed to ensuring universal coverage of up-to-date local plans as quickly as possible. The production of SDSs should not be used as a reason to delay the preparation of local plans.
Mayoral strategic authorities will prepare the SDS for their area. In areas without mayoral strategic authorities, the responsibility for producing SDSs will sit with non-mayoral foundation strategic authorities. Where these do not exist, responsibility will sit with upper tier county councils and unitary authorities who will, in most cases, be required to work together to produce SDSs.
We set out in the English devolution White Paper that we will generally expect these authorities to work together to produce SDSs over “sensible geographies” as defined within it. The Planning and Infrastructure Act sets out a formal mechanism to enable such groups of authorities to work together, namely a strategic planning board. These will operate in a similar way to joint planning committees that have been established to co-ordinate the preparation of joint local plans in some parts of England.
Today, we are launching a consultation on the geography for SDSs. The consultation identifies a number of groupings where we understand that there is a degree of broad agreement about the principle of working together, and in these areas we propose an SDS geography. In other areas where such agreement is tenuous or lacking entirely, we are inviting proposals to help inform final decisions.
Where areas are able to quickly confirm their support for a particular grouping, my officials will look to work with those authorities to agree the terms for a strategic planning board. These will then be subject to statutory consultation. To support SDS production, the Government have identified a funding package. We expect to make some initial payments in March and to confirm the full package in the summer.
Separately, Minister Fahnbulleh has also made a statement to the House, announcing the next step forward in the Government’s English devolution agenda: an invitation from the Secretary of State for all areas in England without an existing devolution agreement to come forward with their neighbours with an expression of interest for a new foundation strategic authority (FSA). In the vast majority of cases, we would expect the geographies for SDSs to align with foundation strategic authorities.
[HCWS1337]
Supported Exempt Accommodation: Birmingham
Matthew Pennycook Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
It is a pleasure, as always, to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I congratulate the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) on securing this important debate, and thank him for his clear and comprehensive account of the challenges of poorly managed, and in particular non-commissioned, exempt accommodation in his constituency.
I also thank other hon. Members who have participated in the debate, including my hon. Friends the Members for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali) and for Birmingham Edgbaston (Preet Kaur Gill). My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Edgbaston, along with my right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood) and my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Selly Oak (Al Carns), have championed this issue for, in some cases, many years. I remember the debates about it in the previous Parliament.
Members will have noticed that I am not the Minister responsible for supported housing. The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness, my hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Alison McGovern), is currently in the main Chamber updating the House on changes to local government finance. I will obviously do my best to respond to the various points raised by the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr and others, but I know that the Minister for Local Government and Homelessness will be happy to follow up with any Member in relation to specific issues of concern. I have no doubt that she will be more than happy to meet the hon. Gentleman and, indeed, his constituents, should that be appropriate, to discuss matters in more detail.
In general terms, let me reassure Members of two things. First, the Government take incredibly seriously the need to ensure that all individuals who benefit from supported housing live in safe and decent accommodation and get the support that they need to get back on their feet and improve their lives. As we have heard, in many cases these are very vulnerable individuals who need support if they are to get their lives back on track.
Secondly, we remain firmly committed to addressing exploitation and profiteering at the hands of rogue exempt accommodation operators. Understandably, that has been the focus of the debate. As the Liberal Democrat spokesperson—the hon. Member for Woking (Mr Forster) —and others noted, there are lots of high-quality providers out there. There is also, as the shadow Minister—the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Lewis Cocking)—rightly argued, huge unmet need in this area. That is why, as Members will know, at the spending review the Government announced £39 billion for a new 10-year social and affordable homes programme. We want to see new supply of supported housing in England come through that new programme in greater numbers. Although we did not set any numerical targets or ringfence budgets for that programme, it has been designed with the flexibility necessary to ensure that those types of accommodation that require higher grant rates can come through the new programme in the appropriate numbers.
We are also providing wider support for the supported housing sector. We announced £159 million, through the local government finance settlement for 2026 to 2029, for support services in supported housing. We are working with targeted local areas and officials are confirming allocations with those areas in the coming days and weeks.
I recognise not only that Birmingham has significantly more supported exempt accommodation than anywhere else in the country—the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr rightly said approximately 31,000 individuals are housed in around 11,000 units—but that it faces acute challenges in respect of unsafe and poor-quality supported housing. I think it was mentioned earlier, but the Local Government and Homelessness Minister recently met the leader of Birmingham council and Members representing a number of Birmingham constituencies to discuss the ongoing problems that Birmingham faces.
It is worth my saying a few general remarks about supported housing. It helps those who need extra support to live as independently as possible in the community, and that support can take many forms. Some individuals may need supported housing for a short time while they recover from a period of crisis; for others, supported housing is a home for life, helping them to live independently outside of institutional settings. The Government fully appreciate that there have been real issues in parts of the supported housing market. Over recent years, far too many residents have been placed in inappropriate accommodation or dangerous situations, with little to no support.
As we have heard today, the impact of unsafe, poor-quality supported housing on residents, their families and communities should not be understated. Increased antisocial behaviour resulting from poorly managed housing and knock-on impacts for wider services such as the NHS and the police are frequently brought to the Department’s attention. Communities in a number of areas across the country have been blighted by these problems, but we know, as I have said, that the issue is most prevalent in Birmingham. Let me be very clear: that state of affairs is intolerable. It cannot be allowed to continue, which is why the Government are taking action.
Action has been taken prior to and alongside the legislation that the previous Government supported and that we have been taking forward. The supported housing improvement programme has been in place in Birmingham since 2022, and before that the supported housing oversight pilots resulted in real improvements—I think the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr made that case in his speech. The multidisciplinary teams that have been established in the local authority, across housing enforcement, adult social care and housing benefit teams, have strengthened understanding and allowed targeted action to take place.
Although the programme will end in March, the lessons learned and the actions taken by Birmingham city council should now be firmly embedded. We are ending that funding as we work towards the implementation of the Act and, thereafter, local authorities will charge fees for the administration and enforcement of licensing in particular going forward. We have not cut off all funding with a view to having no replacement; there is work alongside our intentions to roll out the legislation.
Let me turn to that legislation, which has rightly been the focus of much of the debate. I remember it going through the House when I was the shadow Minister. We should commend the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) on his private Member’s Bill, which the previous Government supported, and on all his work on the wider homelessness agenda. That legislation was a response to long-standing concerns about the quality of non-exempt supported accommodation, its oversight and the value-for-money questions we have heard about today.
Despite there being many excellent supported housing providers, regulation in this area is absolutely needed. The Government are working to introduce the necessary measures to improve quality and oversight as soon as possible. I am happy to tell Members that we intend to implement the Act in stages over the coming months, and I will provide some more detail on the different elements of the Act that we intend to take forward, and the timescales. It should be said that local authorities can and should still use their existing enforcement powers to take action against poor-quality accommodation as we do so.
I am pleased to say that, this week, we have allocated £39 million in new burdens funding to local authorities, including Birmingham, to start work on their local supported housing strategies. Those strategies ask local authorities to assess their current supply of supported housing, and to estimate their unmet need and future demand. They must then set out how they will meet them. The first strategies are due to be completed by 31 March 2027, and statutory guidance to support this work was published earlier this week.
The Liberal Democrat spokesman challenged me on the advisory panel. I can assure him that it has not been forgotten about. We are moving forward with its establishment. The chair will be officially appointed imminently and the panel will be officially convened. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the panel will then advise the Government on the implementation of the Act as a whole and consider what further support the supported housing sector needs going forward. We are taking that part of the Act forward.
As has been mentioned a number of times, the Government have also consulted on our proposals for supporting housing licensing and new support standards. We did that last year, and I know that a response has been anticipated for some time. It will be published as soon as possible. I well understand the urgency that Members from across the House have expressed. We will publish the new national supported housing standards along with guidance, so that residents, providers and local authorities know the standard of support we expect.
We will consult on licensing regulations later this year, giving stakeholders an opportunity to comment on the regulations before they are debated in Parliament. This is really important, and it goes to the point about high-quality providers that several Members made. We need to ensure that we introduce the licensing scheme in a way that is both proportionate and effective, so that the expense of bearing down on the rogue providers and operators does not penalise high-quality providers. Local authorities will receive new burdens funding to establish their licensing schemes, and we will monitor the licensing schemes to ensure that they are having the intended effect.
The Government are committed to implementing the measures in the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act and to giving local authorities the powers they need to tackle the problems evident in supported housing in Birmingham and across England. The progress that has already been made is worth noting, and we want that to continue. We want councils like Birmingham to make use of their existing powers. I think my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Edgbaston mentioned some of the progress made under SHIP in Birmingham. SHIP and the previous programme received a total of £6.5 million in funding, and that has rightly generated huge amounts of benefit: £8.8 million of housing benefit spend was prevented; the number of cases where support was deemed to be inadequate has dropped from 33%; and we are seeing the proportion of inspected properties that meet the decent homes standard rising from 44%. Progress has been made, but the regulatory framework that the Act introduces does need to be brought forward.
Matthew Pennycook
We issued guidance earlier this week in respect of some of the provisions that are in the Act, but I will ensure that the Minister for Local Government and Homelessness has heard my hon. Friend’s call for more support and guidance in that area, alongside the implementation of other elements of the Act.
The Government and my hon. Friend the Minister are committed to working with all Members, local authorities and supported housing providers to make sure the measures have the intended effect. Aside from the note of party political debate injected into our discussions by the shadow Minister in regard to the wider housing supply, I think there is cross-party consensus about what needs to happen on this particular issue, and the need for the regulatory framework to be introduced so that we can get supported housing that is good quality, appropriate for the needs of the individuals and helps them to live as independently as possible.
Greater Cambridge Development Corporation: Consultation
Matthew Pennycook Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
I am today setting out the next steps the Government are taking to unleash ambitious and high-quality sustainable growth in Greater Cambridge as part of our plans to supercharge growth in the Oxford-Cambridge corridor.
The economic growth of Cambridge over recent years has been a phenomenal success and the city and its environs are now home to the most intensive science and technological cluster in the world. We know that Greater Cambridge has the potential to make an even greater contribution to the UK economy and the Government are determined to make this happen.
While local partners share the Government ambition, there remain significant barriers to further growth. If we are to realise the full potential of Greater Cambridge, to the benefit of its existing communities and the country as a whole, we must tackle a range of challenges including infrastructure deficiencies, commercial accessibility and housing affordability.
These constraints are not new, and local leaders and institutions have worked hard to address them over many years. However, due to their nature, scale and complexity, overcoming these challenges in a way that enables the delivery of nationally significant growth in Greater Cambridge requires a delivery vehicle with the necessary powers, authority and access to finance.
I am therefore launching a consultation today on proposals to establish a centrally led urban development corporation for Greater Cambridge. This Greater Cambridge development corporation would align national capabilities with local expertise and insight to drive further growth across the area at the scale and pace required.
A centrally led approach would provide the stability, capability and capacity needed to co-ordinate complex infrastructure delivery across multiple local authorities, landowners, delivery partners and agencies, and to secure the significant public and private investment required to unlock growth at the desired scale.
Building upon the exceptional quality of place seen across much of Greater Cambridge, the objective of the development corporation would be to deliver exemplary development in the form of high-quality, well-designed, attractive, and sustainable homes and neighbourhoods.
The proposal to establish a centrally led urban development corporation for Greater Cambridge is intended to support the emerging Greater Cambridge local plan. In its initial phase, the proposed development corporation would build on the work of the Cambridge Growth Company, and work in close partnership with local authorities to increase both the pace and quantum of development at sites identified in that draft local plan. in the medium to long term, the development corporation would prepare a long-term spatial plan for Greater Cambridge, with a focus on providing major new strategic sites for growth.
The consultation invites general feedback on the Government proposal to establish a centrally led urban development corporation in Greater Cambridge. It also seeks views on a number of specific issues, including:
The proposed objectives and activities of the development corporation.
A proposed operational boundary for the development corporation that is aligned with the current combined administrative areas of Cambridge city council and South Cambridgeshire district council.
The proposed spectrum of powers that the development corporation could be granted, including plan making powers and development management powers for use in relation to sites of strategic importance.
The proposed approach to embedding local democratic representation in the governance of the development corporation.
I encourage all those with an interest in the future of Greater Cambridge to respond to the consultation and share their insights and knowledge. Your representations will help guide us as we work toward delivering high-quality sustainable growth in Greater Cambridge to the benefit of new and existing communities alike. The full consultation is available on gov.uk.
[HCWS1305]
Planning: Section 106 System
Matthew Pennycook Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
The Government have a manifesto commitment to deliver the biggest increase in social and affordable house building in a generation, and to strengthen planning obligations to ensure new developments provide more affordable homes.
Section 106 agreements are, and will remain, an essential mechanism for delivering social and affordable housing. They account not only for a significant proportion of affordable home completions, but also a significant share of total new home delivery. Without them, the development pipeline as a whole is at risk of contracting sharply.
However, in recent years, the negotiation of section 106 agreements has become synonymous with inefficiency and delay. To ensure the developer contributions system secures the supply and affordability outcomes we seek in the years ahead, we need to reduce its complexity and minimise negotiation friction.
In the short term, we also need to act to deal with the detrimental consequences of a declining market for section 106 affordable homes. A complex range of factors has led to the sharp drop-off in demand for section 106 units over recent years, with the result that thousands of constructed or consented section 106 units are currently uncontracted. This state of affairs is delaying the build-out of development sites across England, and disrupting both affordable and wider housing supply.
To this end, today the Government are announcing a comprehensive policy package that will lay the foundations for a simpler, more transparent and more resilient section 106 system, and deal with the legacy problem of existing unsold and uncontracted section 106 units.
Immediate action to unlock unsold and uncontracted section 106 homes
Estimates vary, but it is not in dispute that thousands of unsold and uncontracted section 106 affordable homes have built up over recent years. They have done so as a result of the complex interplay between a range of factors. These include:
Registered providers of social housing facing mounting pressures from severely constrained financial capacity, higher costs of finance, rising building costs and commitments to remediate existing stock to meet building safety and decarbonisation requirements, all of which have led to a scaling back of section 106 acquisitions.
Concerns among RPs that some section 106 homes do not meet the quality and other standards required. Examples include section 106 homes not meeting described space standards or not being in conformity with the, now updated, decent homes standard and minimum energy efficiency standard, as well as anticipated higher new standards (e.g. changes to building regulations, future homes standard).
Negotiations on section 106 agreements can create delays in the planning process and increase costs for local authorities and developers, which can disproportionately impact small and medium-sized enterprise developers. A lack of capacity and capability at the local authority level in terms of legal resource, in comparison to larger developers, often means that local authorities are at a disadvantage when negotiating contributions at the planning application stage.
RPs deciding to prioritise other routes to development, mainly land-led grant funded development, where they can have greater influence over specification and design and avoid management challenges stemming from their more limited control as an intermediate leaseholder of small numbers of homes in blocks managed by an external managing agent or freeholder (e.g. service charges for tenants can pose barriers to managing these homes as social housing); and
RPs and developers being unable to agree on section 106 unit pricing.
The Government have already taken a number of steps to support demand for section 106 units, not least spending review measures designed to rebuild the capacity of RPs. As a result, we are seeing tentative signs of an improvement in appetite for acquiring section 106 homes. However, despite this positive shift in sentiment post spending review, we know that there are still housing schemes where developers remain unable to secure an RP buyer for the affordable homes set out in the original section 106 agreement, and where local planning authorities and developers have not discussed or reached agreement on variations to planning obligations, with the result that many of these sites are stalling.
For this reason, as of today, we expect all LPAs to take advantage of existing planning flexibilities to renegotiate section 106 agreements, and to allow the tenure of homes to be varied in order to secure a buyer where affordable homes secured in section 106 agreements remain uncontracted or unsold. This can be effected by a deed of variation—making amendments/revisions to existing section 106 agreements—either by agreement of the parties to the section 106 or by formal application under section 106A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
To ensure we target sites that are genuinely stalled, the following section sets out the conditions that LPAs should ensure are met, and the approach to negotiation they should take, where it is necessary to agree a deed of variation with developers holding uncontracted section 106 units that have not found any suitable RP buyer.
This measure is intended to support LPAs in exercising their ability to renegotiate planning obligations. It will be strictly time-limited, in order to target those section 106 homes already built or very close to completion but unable to find an RP buyer. This policy is also laid out in the section 106 road map published on gov.uk.
Conditions for accessing this time-limited process
LPAs are expected to consider renegotiating section 106 agreements when the following conditions are met:
Developers should have exhausted all reasonable endeavours to find an RP buyer based on the affordable housing marketing, and any other relevant requirements set out in the original section 106 agreement.
Developers should have uploaded any uncontracted section 106 homes onto the Homes England clearing service by 1 June 2026 to give a final opportunity for RPs to bid to purchase these homes. Any homes not uploaded onto the clearing service by this point will be outside of this process.
Homes should be live on the clearing service for a period of six weeks from the date of the unit being uploaded.
The section 106 homes should be due for completion on or before 1 December 2027, to be eligible for this time-limited approach; completion defined as when a home is ready for occupation or when a completion certificate is issued. Expected completion dates should be registered on the clearing service to guide LPAs on whether all above conditions are met.
LPAs should seek to avoid tenure renegotiations for uncontracted section 106 homes that have received reasonable offers from willing and suitable RP buyers, as is current practice, to avoid the loss of social and affordable housing to private sale.
As is currently expected, developers should inform LPAs of any, and all, bids they receive from RPs seeking to buy uncontracted section 106 units. LPAs are actively encouraged to request that these details are provided.
Assessing the reasonableness of bids is ultimately a matter for individual LPAs but, where available, they are encouraged to consider the following evidential sources: site level viability evidence; published commuted sums policies; grant rates; surveyor data; and recent section 106 purchases in the locality.
Given the clearing service will have provided an opportunity for RPs to identify and bid for unsold and uncontracted section 106 homes, LPAs are encouraged for this temporary period to take a pragmatic, time-limited, and light-touch approach to assessing bids, and any further information requests, for example evidence of marketing efforts or details of contact with prospective buyers in the locality. In instances where there is a dispute between the LPA and developer over whether bids received are reasonable, they may also wish to seek a third-party view to support a resolution, as per an existing alternative dispute resolution procedure.
Guidance for LPAs on proceeding with a deed of variation
LPAs should confirm their decision on proceeding to renegotiate the section 106 agreement as quickly as possible—with a guideline of no more than twelve weeks from the end of the six week period on the clearing service, and consider the following in negotiating to alter the tenure of eligible homes:
LPAs are encouraged to take the following approach:
(i) seek alternative affordable housing or discounted market tenures in the first instance where possible;
(ii) if there is no buyer for such tenures, proceed through to private market rent or sale—with an equivalent form of affordable housing provided on an alternative site within the LPA s area or, where this is not feasible, a financial payment made in lieu of onsite affordable housing.
LPAs should include stipulations that make clear that if homes are not completed on time and by the deadline of 1 December 2027, schemes will revert to the tenure mix set out in the original section 106 agreement. Renegotiated section 106 agreements should provide for this without the need for a further deed of variation to be made.
When considering phased development, LPAs and developers should agree a tailored approach with regard to the circumstances of the specific phases i.e. if the first phase will be completed by 1 December 2027, then a deed of variation should be considered in line with the policy set out in this statement. However, where phases contain units that are not expected to complete by this point, the terms set out in the original section 106 should continue to be expected to apply.
In line with planning practice guidance on viability, site-specific viability assessment should not be used on schemes subject to the golden rules for the purpose of reducing developer contributions, including affordable housing. The Government are currently consulting on a revised national planning policy framework, https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/national-planning-policy-framework-proposed-reforms-and-other-changes-to-the-planning-system which seeks views on the limited instances in which site-specific viability assessment may be justified.
Laying the foundations for a more effective section 106 system
While this immediate action is necessary to overcome current challenges facing the section 106 market in order to reduce disruption to house building and sustain supply, we are clear that this is a time limited, emergency intervention. The Government’s primary focus remains on long-term reform to reset the section 106 market and support effective section 106 delivery of social and affordable homes, and thereby honour our manifesto commitments.
We intend to work closely with LPAs, RPs and developers to deliver a series of measures that will provide for a simpler, more transparent and more resilient section 106 system, including:
Supporting LPAs to negotiate section 106 agreements. We want to simplify and strengthen the process for agreeing developer contributions through section 106 agreements at the application stage of new developments. It is our intention to publish a template section 106 agreement to speed up the process of drafting and concluding new section 106 agreements.
Setting clear sector expectations to guide section 106 delivery. We want to provide greater clarity and certainty to facilitate the more effective delivery of section 106 homes. Through new guidance we will seek to foster early engagement and collaboration between developers and RPs; provide greater clarity on the standards section 106 homes must meet and the role that should be afforded to RPs in ensuring section 106 homes meet the standards required of social and affordable housing; and encourage standardisation across the market in respect of how pricing is negotiated so as to provide more certainty for RPs and developers on what they can expect to pay and accept for section 106 units.
Expanding financial capacity to revive the market for section 106 homes. Low-interest loans will be made available to private registered providers of social housing. They will be administered by the national housing bank outside London and the Greater London Authority in London. Up to 10% of the £2.5 billion low-interest loan scheme for private registered providers will be available to support the delivery of social and affordable homes via section 106. Further detail on low-interest loans is set out in our decade of renewal update. We will also build on the recently extended affordable homes guarantee scheme 2020, and confirmation of its use for section 106s. We will continue to explore how Government can crowd in additional private investment to enable the purchase of unsold section 106 units. This is with the aim of bringing them into use while retaining them as regulated affordable housing, for example through an affordable housing acquisition vehicle supported by debt guarantees which is able to buy section 106 homes.
We will set out further detail in due course with the intention of this full reset being in force in spring 2026. The Government’s full policy statement has also been published today.
[HCWS1286]
Social and Affordable Housing Renewal
Matthew Pennycook Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
On 2 July 2025 we published a five-step plan to kickstart a decade of social and affordable housing renewal and set out this plan to the House in a written ministerial statement—HCWS771.
Today I am providing a progress update on the implementation of the plan, as well as confirming next steps in respect of grant funding, regulation, rebuilding sector capacity, and the reinvigoration of council house building, so that registered providers have the clarity and certainty they need ahead of bidding opening for our new social and affordable homes programme—SAHP—next month.
The biggest boost to grant funding in a generation
In July we confirmed headline parameters for our new 10-year £39 billion SAHP. Prospectuses for London and the rest of England were published by the Greater London Authority and Homes England respectively in November 2025. Bidding for the programme will open next month.
Rebuilding the sector’s capacity to borrow and invest in new and existing homes
We remain committed to providing a stable rent policy for social and affordable housing that supports investment in new and existing homes, with the right protections for existing and future rent payers and for public spending.
The 10-year settlement of CPI + 1% announced at the spending review gives the sector the long-term certainty it needs. We also confirmed at the spending review that we would implement a convergence mechanism as part of the new long-term settlement, not least because we believe that doing so is right in principle to address the disparity between actual social rents and formula rents.
Following consultation, I am today confirming that registered providers will be able to increase weekly rents for social rent homes that are below formula by up to an additional £1 on weekly rents each year over and above CPI + 1% from 1 April 2027, and by up to an additional £2 on weekly rents each year over and above CPI + 1% from 1 April 2028, until formula rent is reached.
Convergence will only result in a tenant paying more where their rent is below formula rent—i.e. below the maximum that could be charged if their social rent home was re-let to a new tenant. We believe that this approach strikes a fair balance between the need for increased investment in new and existing homes, the interests of existing and potential social housing tenants, and the consequences for public spending and our fiscal rules.
To help providers build more social and affordable homes, we announced at the spending review that we would make available £2.5 billion of low-interest loans over four years—2026-2030. The loans will be made available to private registered providers of social housing and will be administered by the National Housing Bank (Homes England), and by the Greater London Authority in London.
Today I am announcing that 60% of the £2.5 billion—i.e. £1.5 billion—will be allocated to London, in the light of the acute challenges facing providers in the capital. The loans will be available at an interest rate of 0.1% and will have a duration of 25 years. They will be used to deliver the same social and affordable tenures and strategic priorities as funding under the SAHP.
They will be made available via a competitive bidding process, following confirmation of initial grant allocations made through the SAHP. We expect providers to submit ambitious grant bids for the SAHP when it opens next month, with the loans intended to secure additional homes over and above those delivered with SAHP grant funding alone. There will also be an opportunity to bid to use low-interest loans to acquire section 106 homes. Up to 10% of the £2.5 billion will be available to support the delivery of social and affordable homes via this route. We will confirm further details in the near future.
I am today also publishing a road map detailing how the Government intend to deal with the legacy problem of existing unsold and uncontracted section 106 units and how we will prevent the problem recurring by laying the foundations for a simple, more transparent and more resilient section 106 system. I will publish a separate written ministerial statement setting out further details about this policy package.
Establishing an effective and stable regulatory regime
Building new social and affordable homes must go hand in hand with ensuring that our 4 million existing social homes are safe, decent and warm for tenants. To support registered providers to invest in existing homes, we are implementing a modernised regulatory framework that puts tenant safety and experience at its heart but is proportionate for providers.
I am today confirming details of the new, modernised decent homes standard. This new DHS will apply to social and private rental tenures from 2035, allowing landlords time to plan carefully to implement the changes. It has been designed to reflect modern expectations of rented homes and improve health outcomes for tenants. It prioritises safety, decency and warmth, and it will act as a common standard for both private and social rented housing.
Following consultation, the new DHS will focus on condition as the primary factor when determining compliance of building components such as windows and roofs, rather than age. It will go further in ensuring that rented homes are provided with good-quality facilities such as kitchens and bathrooms, and it will introduce safety measures such as mandatory child-resistant window restrictors—this will help to prevent tragic falls and will give parents greater peace of mind. It will also establish a more proactive and preventive approach to addressing damp and mould.
Having carefully considered feedback to the consultation, we will not introduce enhanced home security regulations, a mandatory floor coverings requirement, or an obligation for landlords to meet repair standards within the public realm. We recognise that some landlords are already providing floor coverings, but many residents struggle to provide their own basic furnishings. As such, we intend to work with landlords and tenants to rapidly identify cost-effective ways in which landlords can better support tenants in need.
The new, modernised DHS necessarily balances the cost implications of improving the quality of existing rented homes with the need to increase social and affordable housing supply, given the importance of the latter to moving people, including many vulnerable children, out of unsuitable temporary accommodation. Guidance will be published in due course to support early action and compliance. A full Government consultation response and policy statement has been published today, setting out details of the new standard.
We have also published today the final standard to provide direction to the social rented sector on a new minimum energy efficiency standard and will publish a full Government response to this consultation shortly.
Following consultation, we have decided that all new and existing social rented properties must have an energy performance certificate C, using reformed EPCs, in a choice of fabric performance, smart readiness or heating system metric, by 1 April 2030. The compliance date to meet a second metric has been extended, so that all new and existing social rented properties must meet the equivalent of EPC C in a second metric by 1 April 2039. This recognises the unique role that social landlords play in both improving the energy efficiency and decency of homes and in increasing the supply of social and affordable housing, ensuring that social landlords have the confidence to invest now towards meeting our shared objectives to reduce fuel poverty, decarbonise the sector and increase supply.
This new standard will encourage building improvements that make homes warmer and energy bills cheaper, and that lead to lower emissions. We will publish further guidance to support social landlords with the implementation of the new standard in due course.
We have received extensive feedback from registered providers over many months, making it clear that confirmation of the future homes standard is key to unlocking ambitious development plans across the sector. The FHS will include high levels of fabric efficiency, low-carbon heating and solar by default. We will publish the consultation response, full specification, alongside laying a statutory instrument in the first quarter of 2026. This will set out the policy detail and transitional arrangements.
On 27 October 2025 we brought into force phase 1 of Awaab’s law, specifying fixed timescales to address damp and mould hazards and requiring all emergency hazards to be addressed within 24 hours. We are now undertaking our “test and learn” approach before extending the requirements to other housing health and safety rating system hazards. Last year we also introduced regulations requiring social landlords to carry out checks on electrical installations, and any appliances they have provided, at least every five years. This already applies to new lets and will be phased in for existing tenancies over the course of this year.
Reinvigorating council house building
Over recent years, councils have once again begun to build new affordable homes. Annual completions by councils have increased year on year for the past five years, and in 2024-25 they completed 10,480 homes—the highest number since the current reporting period began in 1991-92. We want to support councils to build upon the progress already made. We will continue to work with the sector to ensure that councils have the confidence, capacity and capability to deliver affordable homes at scale once again.
To provide councils with greater certainty and to support ambitious supply plans, I am announcing today that we will extend the “preferential” borrowing rate for council house building from the Public Works Loan Board rate for a further year until the end of March 2027. It will continue to be set at gilts + 40 basis points, and will be available for house building through the housing revenue account.
Additionally, I can confirm that the threshold for when a council must open an HRA will be increased from 200 to 1,000 homes from today. This will ensure that councils always have enough homes to make opening and operating an HRA financially sustainable. It will also provide councils without an HRA with greater flexibility to increase delivery, including through SAHP and the acquisition of resettlement homes through the local authority housing fund.
Finally, in July we launched the council house building skills and capacity programme. In its first year, CHSCP has engaged with 81 councils through the council house building support service to expand their delivery capability. As part of the expanded pathways to planning programme, CHSCP will recruit and train up to 50 graduates for placement with councils in 2026-27 to become qualified surveyors or construction project managers.
In November, CHSCP’s council house building support fund allocated £5.5 million to 29 councils to aid the development of SAHP bids. Today I am confirming that, due to strong demand, we are allocating a further £3.5 million to 15 additional councils. In total, this should enable these 44 councils to deliver up to 9,850 new homes and accelerate the delivery of a further 1,700 homes across the course of SAHP.
A renewed partnership with the sector
A decade of social and affordable housing renewal will only be delivered by Government working in close partnership with the sector. That is why in the coming weeks we will work with the National Housing Federation, the Local Government Association and other sector bodies to agree a compact. Once agreed, that compact will be overseen by a taskforce comprised of representatives from a range of sector organisations and interests. More detail about the terms of reference and membership of this group will be set out in the coming weeks.
At the heart of the compact will be ambitious social and affordable house building commitments, evidencing how the grant funding support and regulatory certainty and stability that this Government have provided has translated into ambitious delivery plans and bids into the SAHP from housing associations, councils and other registered providers. It will also be premised on strengthened joint governance and accountability mechanisms, including agreed supply, decency and other metrics that will be tracked and monitored, with oversight provided by regular reporting back to the Secretary of State.
[HCWS1283]