There is no question that the UK faces a housing crisis. Rent and house prices have soared in recent years, pushing many into financial hardship and placing home ownership out of reach for younger generations.
Acutely aware of this, the Labour Party has set out a clear target: delivering an additional 1.5 million homes across the country by the end of this Parliament. However, progress – at least in the short-term – has been constrained by viability challenges. Developers continue to contend with high build and labour costs, rising borrowing rates and growing uncertainty around returns on investment.
While a series of major policy announcements in 2025 marked a step in the right direction – including the passing of the Planning and Infrastructure Act, the publication of Homes England’s national strategy, the launch of the Social and Affordable Homes Programme, and plans for seven new towns – the Government’s attention has now turned to delivering houses at scale, and at pace.
Backed by billions in financial capacity, the National Housing Bank could be one of the Government’s most important delivery tools in mobilising long-term capital, crowding in private investment across the housing sector and acting as the keystone between public and private finance to make development viable again.
A publicly owned subsidiary of Homes England, the Bank was officially launched at the end of March and has already made a strong start. Early activity includes a £100 million partnership with Aviva to deliver an initial 300 homes on brownfield sites across Liverpool and Manchester, as well as a landmark £860 million joint venture with Capital&Centric and Swiss Life Asset Managers to acquire and develop an industrial site in Manchester.
At a time of significant pressure on public sector finances, such projects will be welcomed. But the National Housing Bank will only succeed if it is rooted in the communities it seeks to serve, which makes close coordination with Homes England, local authorities and Mayoral Combined Authorities essential. Housing need is not uniform – pressures in London boroughs differ significantly from those in rural towns or post-industrial cities. A blanket financial model risks delivering homes without real purpose.
By working hand-in-hand with local partners, the Bank can direct capital into specific regional priorities, whether that is unlocking brownfield regeneration, broadening supply of social and affordable housing, or progressing part-complete developments which have since been abandoned. Local authorities bring detailed knowledge of their communities and an understanding of which sites offer the greatest potential, making their early involvement critical.
Harnessing this expertise will allow the Bank to not just fund housebuilding and regeneration projects, but to support genuine place-based solutions that reflect local market needs in both the immediate and long-term and support broader economic and social objectives. A lack of alignment between central government, public bodies and regional leadership has defined the housing system in recent years – the National Housing Bank must pave the way in breaking this cycle.
Its ability to leverage private and public sector capital will be an invaluable tool in accelerating delivery, but it is not a silver bullet. Its impact will depend on the Bank’s ability to combine these significant funding pots with local insight. If it is able to reduce genuine viability blockages whilst remaining selective on the type of development it supports, the Bank could be the most important tool in delivering Labour’s housebuilding ambitions and, in time, help to turn the tide on the UK’s deepening housing crisis.
Ongoing political turmoil risks distracting the Government from its core delivery goals, but those operating in the housing sector must be optimistic that Homes England and the Bank will make the difference.
