NEW COUNCIL ROLES Council housing is back - but not as we know it
 | Francis is a Partner in the London based National Strategic Land team, with over 15 years of experience providing advice on strategic property assets. Francis' advice focuses on masterplanning, delivery and viability analysis to maximise the opportunity and value for private, corporate and public sector landowners. His UK wide experience is particularly focused on new settlements and brownfield land assets with infrastructure constraints, including sites without an established occupier demand profile. Francis has a strong understanding of policy issues including public sector infrastructure funding and the wider economic case for development projects. |
Francis echoes some of the challenges Jackie Sadek covered both in her panel contribution at ACES’ National Conference, and in her individual article in this issue. He argues that a modern council housebuilding programme cannot recreate the post-war model: it will depend on partnerships, mixed tenure and a rebuilding of local development capacity. |
Post-war achievements and skills
The post-war council housing programme is an irresistible comparison for anyone promising a new era of public housebuilding. The scale was extraordinary: in England, local authorities completed about 1.47m homes during the 1950s, an average of roughly 147,000 a year. By comparison, local authorities delivered just 10,480 affordable homes in 2024-25.
Much as many would welcome similar numbers today, the reality is that a modern council housing programme today would start from a very different institutional base.
Post-war councils were major developers with large in-house teams, but today many councils’ lack of in-house skills is one of many barriers to housebuilding. Those skills would take considerable time to rebuild because many councils have not been directly involved in major development for decades.
The MHCLG’s Local Authority Planning Capacity and Capability Survey 2025 reveals that 93% of local planning authorities report skills gaps, and 23% identify a gap in regeneration and property development, site delivery and capital delivery. The government has responded with a Capacity to Build programme, but the programme is just months old and achieving success will inevitably take time.
Who will really build and councils’ roles?
In reality we cannot expect a return to councils acting as self-contained municipal housebuilders any time soon. Councils may lead a public housebuilding programme, as commissioners, master developers, investors and long-term stewards. Contractors may build the homes; Registered Providers may oversee development and management, and joint ventures with developers will be crucial to providing capital and capacity. So, is it really a council housebuilding programme?
The outcome will be very different too. The post-war programme produced many large mono-tenure estates. I find it hard to imagine politicians or nearby local residents accepting mono-tenure housing at that scale today. Policy has quite rightly moved in favour of mixed-tenure neighbourhoods, whether tenure is pepper-potted within a scheme or delivered through separate parcels. Not only does that meet social objectives, but market sale, shared ownership and other tenures can provide cross-subsidy for infrastructure and social rent. Government has recognised this, announcing on 25 August a more pragmatic 60% social rent target for homes delivered through the nearly £10bn in allocations to Registered Providers.
Finance will also be assembled rather than supplied through one route. The £39bn Social and Affordable Homes Programme provides a substantial foundation, but a scaled programme will combine grant, Housing Revenue Account borrowing, land value, low-cost finance, Registered Provider capacity, and private capital.
Furthermore, today regulations have brought about higher standards in building safety, energy performance, accessibility, biodiversity net gain, public realm and whole-life maintenance – all of which affect design and cost. Because councils may own the homes for generations, the cheapest building to construct is not necessarily the cheapest asset to hold.
Another factor is relevant to overall success: in 2024-25, according to the Social housing sales and demolitions 2024-25: Net supply of social housing for rent, England recorded an estimated net loss of 3,834 homes for social rent, despite new supply. Right to Buy reduces stock significantly: the government’s Right to Buy sales and replacements, England: April 2025 to March 2026 shows that 14,187 homes were sold under Right to Buy during this period.
If the ambition is to rebuild council housing, I would judge the programme by net additions to the stock, as well as starts and completions.
The post-war lesson is therefore not that councils should recreate the institutions or estates of 70 years ago. It is that public housing at scale needs a delivery system designed for the task at hand. Today, that means rebuilding council capability while using the expertise, finance and capacity that already exist across Registered Providers and the private sector.
Comments