Thought Piece | A Planning Permission is Not a Home

Someone still has to buy the land.  Someone has to fund the development.  Someone has to build the homes.  And, most importantly, someone has to buy them.

The land market remains challenging.  

There is undoubtedly demand for good sites, in the strong locations, but secondary and tertiary markets have felt the impact of wider economic uncertainty. 

Housebuilders are still buying land, but the market is much more selective now than it was during the stronger years of the cycle. Many of the major PLC housebuilders have reduced land-buying targets and are exercising greater discipline over acquisitions.

That is entirely rational.

Housebuilders cannot simply buy land because planning policy says more homes are needed. They need confidence that the finished product can be sold at a price that makes the development viable.

The new home sales market is challenging.  Incentives are commonplace and bulk deals with registered providers and private rented sector operators continue to play an important role in supporting delivery. However, these mechanisms cannot fully compensate for a subdued private sales market.

At the same time, the industry continues to face increasing costs. The Building Safety Levy, the Future Homes Standard and rising planning obligations all add pressure to development viability.  Planning gain costs are ever increasing, particularly in respect of education and highways.

The industry can increase the supply of consented land, but if the economics of building and selling homes do not work, delivery will inevitably slow.

The beginning of 2026 offered some grounds for optimism.  January and February felt more encouraging, with a sense that we might finally be emerging from the uncertainty that has characterised the housing market since the disastrous reaction to the September 2022 mini-budget.

Then geopolitical uncertainty intervened.  While the war in Ukraine continues, the conflict involving Iran has added another layer of unpredictability to an already fragile economic backdrop. 

The key question for the housing industry is whether enough confidence returns to the market before the Spring 2027 selling season gets under way.

While the Government’s supply-side measures are both welcome and necessary, the industry now needs support to unlock demand for new housing. 

There is no shortage of people who want to own a home. The problem is that too many simply cannot afford to buy one. Higher mortgage rates have reduced borrowing power and saving for a deposit remains a major hurdle for many first-time buyers.

That is why supply is only part of the answer. We also need measures that help people buy the homes being built, alongside a range of tenure options including Shared Ownership, Rent to Buy and other products that can help people take their first step onto the housing ladder.

For all the criticism directed at Help to Buy, it achieved one thing very effectively: it stimulated demand for new-build homes.

It was far from perfect. Critics highlighted a number of shortcomings, including concerns around value for money and whether all of the support reached those who needed it most. Those criticisms have undoubtedly shaped perceptions of the scheme and contributed to its mixed legacy, but they should not overshadow its impact on housing delivery.

However, Help to Buy did support hundreds of thousands of new home sales through its various iterations. It demonstrated that Government intervention on the demand side can have a meaningful influence on the housing market.  It supported jobs in the industry and has returned well over £1 billion to date to the Exchequer, with the final total likely to exceed £2 billion. 

Reassess the price caps, focus support on first-time buyers and rebrand it if necessary, but there is a strong argument that the market now needs a Help to Buy 2.0.

As a land promoter, I should probably be delighted.
  
We have more sites progressing through the planning system than at any point in our history. The planning policy environment is materially more supportive than it was just a few years ago. There is a genuine political focus on housing delivery and the opportunities created by planning reform are significant.

But that is where the frustration lies.

We can promote the land. We can secure the planning permissions. We can create the supply.  

What we cannot do is create the demand.

The planning system has finally started to move at a faster pace, resources permitting.  Now the rest of the housing market needs to catch up. 

Because if the Government genuinely wants to deliver 1.5 million new homes, the challenge is no longer simply finding somewhere to build them.  

It is ensuring there is a market with the confidence, demand and investment needed to deliver them.