Homelessness: Funding

Tuesday 2nd December 2025 Westminster Hall

09:30

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the adequacy of funding to support homeless people.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. This debate brings together three members of the Backbench Business Committee, which agreed to schedule the debate in the first place.

The reality is that homelessness is rising. In its 2025 homelessness monitor for England, Crisis found that it is at record levels; in 2024, 300,000 individuals and families experienced the worst forms of homelessness, an increase of 22% on 2022. What is worse, Homeless Link estimates that 8,732 people were rough sleeping in England throughout June 2025, a 5% increase on the same time in 2024. Data gathered by the Combined Homelessness and Information Network shows that in London, 759 people were classed as living on the streets, 11% more than the same time last year.

London is suffering the most severe homelessness pressures in the country. London Councils reports that the capital accounts for more than half—56%—of all homeless households living in temporary accommodation in England. It also estimates that 200,000 Londoners are living in temporary accommodation arranged by their local borough. That is equivalent to one in 50 Londoners overall, and the figure includes over 97,000 children, meaning that on average at least one child in every London classroom is homeless.

As we approach Christmas, many of us will be doing our shopping, making arrangements to see family and loved ones, and probably turning the heat up a bit, but think of those sleeping rough at this time of year: cold, wet, hungry, on a park bench or in a shop doorway, in sub-zero temperatures overnight. Although there are no official statistics on how many people sleeping rough sadly die in their sleep, one only has to imagine the harsh and life-threatening conditions that people have to endure.

It is clear that local authorities are struggling to cope with the demands of homelessness. Crisis reports that 79% of local authorities struggle to meet their main rehousing duty either all the time or most of the time. That is backed up by research from Homeless Link, which shows that for many the picture has worsened in the last year, with services reducing capacity or closing down at the time they are needed most. The biggest short-term drivers of homelessness, outside the chronic undersupply of social rented housing, are the continued freeze on local housing allowance and homelessness from public institutions. Crisis found that the causes of homelessness with the biggest increases last year were people being asked to leave Home Office accommodation and people being discharged from hospitals or prisons, which saw increases of 37% and 22% respectively.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Member for bringing this subject forward for debate. Across the UK, a disproportionate number of homeless people are former military personnel. Does he agree that this Government need to get real about supporting those who serve this country in their hour of need? We cannot continue to abandon them.

[Bob Blackman]

Under the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017, local authorities have a duty to assist veterans who have put their lives on the line for this country. They should be given full support.

The wider context of homelessness is important in discussions of funding. It demonstrates that if we simply allocate the funding to prevent homelessness to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and local authorities, we ignore the major drivers of homelessness and will not see the reduction that we all want to see. I have raised this issue many times, and it has become increasingly clear that we need the Government to take action. They need to set out in the forthcoming homelessness strategy a clear direction for how they will tackle the drivers of homelessness, with an approach that prioritises prevention rather than cure, and securing access to stable housing with support as quickly as possible. They also need to make serious reform to funding models to ensure that they are adequate and can deliver outcomes on preventing and ending homelessness.

The cross-Government strategy must address the drivers of homelessness and be clear on the outcomes that we are trying to achieve. We await its publication, which will be a key opportunity to set a clear strategic direction from the heart of Government on the outcomes that we want to see, and to design funding to maximise the chances of achieving them.

Changes to homelessness funding are not isolated from wider Government policy. The numbers show that welfare decisions, Home Office policy changes, and the ongoing failure to end street discharge from hospitals and prisons are pushing more and more people into homelessness. The Government must consider any changes to homelessness funding alongside wider policy and the cross-Government strategy for homelessness and rough sleeping—in particular, how welfare policy decisions increase demand on local government services.

[Afzal Khan (Manchester Rusholme) (Lab)]

In my constituency, Caritas provides homeless support through its day centre and supported accommodation facility. It supported over 1,000 people last year, and demand for the service has risen by 19%. Does the hon. Member agree that long-term sustainable funding would help organisations such as Caritas provide their vital services and support those who most need it?

[Bob Blackman]

I thank the hon. Member for that intervention, which leads me on to the aspects of what local authorities have to do. They are the front door; they are dealing with this crisis 24/7, 365 days a year. The Government must provide them with more help with temporary accommodation costs. Last year alone, local authorities spent £2.8 billion on temporary accommodation, which often came from homelessness budgets. It is positive that TA funding is being moved into the revenue support grant, but the lack of Government subsidy for housing benefit and temporary accommodation costs means that the core issue remains unaddressed.

The welfare system and other public services must do more to prevent homelessness. The lack of social homes and the continued freeze of local housing allowance leaves people with nowhere to go. Fewer than three in every 100 homes for rent are affordable for someone who needs local housing allowance. Furthermore, according to the Crisis monitor, homelessness on discharge from public institutions—hospitals and prisons—has risen by 22%. I have raised that repeatedly in this place, but I have seen no action on it. If it does not change, councils will continue to face impossible levels of need with inadequate levels of funding.

[Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for securing this important debate. Liverpool is paying £25 million in the current financial year to house 1,700 people in temporary accommodation, 450 of whom are children. Does he agree that, although it is welcome that temporary accommodation funding is being moved into the revenue support grant, local authorities urgently need more support, given that they spend £2.8 billion on temporary accommodation, and we need to look at raising the local housing grant?

[Bob Blackman]

I am grateful to a Liverpool MP for calling me an hon. Friend; as I spent four years at the University of Liverpool, I have a shared interest in the great city of Liverpool. I agree that we have to do something about the local housing allowance, and I believe that that was a missed opportunity in the recent Budget.

Supported accommodation funding must be addressed. The removal of ringfencing has led to many supported housing services relying on exempt housing benefit to cover the cost of provision, spurring a proliferation of rogue providers. That must be addressed, and the Government must urgently bring forward the powers introduced by my Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023, which we are still waiting for despite deadlines having passed and the Government now technically being in breach of the law.

Fundamentally, the homelessness strategy must be backed by adequate funding models to enable an evidence-based approach to tackling homelessness. The Government have made welcome funding announcements regarding housing and homelessness—funding for rough sleeping and temporary accommodation hit £1 billion in 2025-26; 60% of the £39 billion of social and affordable housing funding has been committed to social homes; and they have committed to developing a £2.4 billion homelessness, rough sleeping and domestic abuse grant for 2026-27 to 2028-29—but the fact that homelessness continues to rise is clear evidence that we need to review the adequacy of funding and the overall approach to homelessness at a systems level, via the cross-Government strategy. That includes ensuring that the new homelessness, rough sleeping and domestic abuse grant enables local authorities to provide effective homelessness support in line with evidence-based best practice.

To do that, the MHCLG must ringfence the new grant, so that local authorities do not use it for purposes that do not meet the requirements in the guidance. It must also develop outcome-based scrutiny mechanisms, such as reductions in presentations to housing options through preventive work; higher assessment rates relative to presentations; the introduction of face-to-face assessments; and housing-led approaches to addressing homelessness, so that people’s ability to access a secure home, with support if needed, is prioritised over temporary solutions.

In their response to the fair funding review, the Government propose consolidating all homelessness and rough sleeping revenue grants, except for temporary accommodation grant funding, which is to be moved into the revenue support grant. That will be £2.4 billion over the next three years, matching the call from the sector and the all-party parliamentary group for ending homelessness, of which I am co-chairman, for consolidated multi-annual funding.

Throughout that process, we should ask whether the Government are ensuring efficacy. To ensure that funding tackles homelessness, the Government must work with councils, strategic authorities and the sector to develop appropriate scrutiny and accountability mechanisms, requiring local authorities to demonstrate how the new grant funding has been used to achieve targets. In doing that, the Government must link funding to outcome-based targets, with clear lines of accountability and performance monitoring. Examples of outcome-based targets are reductions in presentations to housing options, through proactive preventive work; increases in face-to-face assessment; and the development of local housing-led approaches to addressing homelessness, which we know are the most effective ways of sustainably ending homelessness.

Although the Government did not propose including domestic abuse funding in the new consolidated grant, I am a firm believer that that might encourage local authorities to consider the intersections between homelessness and domestic abuse. In the 2023-24 financial year, domestic abuse accounted for 12,130, or 25%, of the households with children owed a relief duty.

Homelessness funding reached £1 billion for 2025-26, with two main funding pots and several smaller ones. Should that level of funding have continued over the 2026-27 and 2028-29 periods, councils would have received £3 billion. That does not match the provisional funding allocation for the next two to three years, so it is fair to ask whether that is a cut just when services need more support. Remember that the homelessness, rough sleeping and domestic abuse grant does not include funding for temporary accommodation. Of the £633 million allocated to the homelessness prevention grant this year, 51%—£322 million—will be allocated to temporary accommodation, so this could leave councils with just £310 million to spend on homelessness support.

At the heart of the matter are the pressures faced by temporary accommodation. Government data shows that in 2023-24, local authorities in England spent nearly £2.3 billion on temporary accommodation, including very expensive nightly paid accommodation and more specialist emergency housing such as hostels and refuges. Spending on nightly paid accommodation has increased from 6% to 30% of the total temporary accommodation bill in the past 10 years.

For the next three years, temporary accommodation funding will be separated from wider homelessness funding and included in councils’ revenue support grant. For that three-year period, councils will receive temporary accommodation funding worth £969 million, which is around £323 million a year. That was previously part of the homelessness prevention grant, for which councils had roughly the same amount of funding. I welcome the decision to separate the funding, but we should not allow local authorities to choose between paying for expensive and often unsatisfactory temporary accommodation and homelessness support.

There is concern that the impact of temporary accommodation funding reforms will be limited because of the shortfall in financial support, paid at 90% of 2011 local housing allowance rates. It is unlikely that the reforms proposed by the Government will mitigate that subsidy gap, particularly given that the proposed level of funding is similar to that in the current year.

Let me take us back to 2003, when English local authorities were allocated ringfenced Supporting People funding to commission housing support. In 2009, that ringfence was removed, enabling local authorities to decide how the funding was used in their areas. That has led to significant variation in how services are commissioned across local authorities, with some supported housing services directly funded and commissioned by local authorities and other, non-commissioned services receiving no direct grant funding from the Government. The impact is that many providers are ending up using the higher rates of exempt housing benefit to offset higher housing management costs and pay for support. Although housing benefit should not be used to pay for that support, many providers report having to do so.

Many of the problems that we have seen in the exempt sector are driven in part by reductions in funding for support and increased dependence on exempt housing benefit. Unscrupulous landlords have used the higher rates of exempt housing benefit to profit from the provision of supported accommodation, while providing poor and sometimes unsafe services. That was the core reason for my Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023, whose implementation we still await. When the Minister responds to the debate, she can give us the good news that we will implement that without any further delay.

A lot of good work has been done. People are more aware of the struggles of homelessness and the enormous amount of charitable work that continues to support, lobby and raise awareness for us all. The three-year grant is welcome, but homelessness continues to rise. It is clear that we need to review both the adequacy of funding and the overall approach, via the cross-Government strategy, so the next question for the Minister is when we will see that strategy actually being delivered.

Basic principles are still missing. Indexing local housing allowance to cover just the cheapest 30% of local homes is one of the most impactful measures that the Government could introduce. The cross-Government strategy must address the drivers of homelessness and be clear about the outcomes that we are trying to achieve. We cannot forget that local authorities are the front door—they are dealing with the crisis literally every single day, and 24 hours a day at that—and we are still waiting for the protections and regulations enshrined by my Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act to be enacted.

Let us not forget these points. Homelessness is rising. More than half of homelessness cases are in London. The cost of temporary accommodation is rising. Council budgets are shrinking. That is all while thousands are sleeping rough, on a sofa or on the street. The weather will be changing and temperatures will be dropping in the coming weeks. We stand here and call for change, and change must come.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Martin Vickers (in the Chair)]

Order. To accommodate all those who wish to speak, I ask Members to impose on themselves a four-minute limit.

09:48

[Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I thank the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) for initiating this debate. I ask Members to note my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests; I am a patron of my local homelessness charity, St Petrock’s.

As the largest urban centre for a very wide geography, Exeter has always had a pull factor for people whose housing situation deteriorates. We know that under 14 years of Tory government, homelessness increased substantially again after a period under the last Labour Government when it fell to historic lows due to political attention and drive. The factors driving homelessness are often complex, ranging from benefit changes and poverty to family breakdown, family violence or substance abuse. Researchers at the University of Exeter also look at the little-understood link between acquired brain injury and homelessness. Most people sleeping rough have experienced trauma, either as a child or—as with the veterans who find themselves homeless—in their working life, serving our nation.

According to CoLab Exeter, the city’s homelessness cases have the highest prevalence of complex support needs in the region. I am sad to say that Exeter has one of the highest rates of homeless deaths in the country. That is due in part to the pernicious impact of the highly addictive and dangerous drug Spice on our homeless population. I would like to see that scourge gripped by national authorities.

In this context, there are some bright spots, but there are also areas of significant concern. First, I am pleased that the Government have recently added a further £500,000 to Exeter city council’s budget for homelessness from the rough sleeping prevention and recovery grant, taking our budget this year to £1.8 million. That new money will partly support substance abuse services and children in temporary accommodation. I thank the Minister for that. However, our city, despite being the economic driver for the region and a fast-growing city, sits in a two-tier local government system, with Devon county council as the upper-tier authority with a far larger core budget. Supporting homeless people has historically been divided between the remits of Devon county council and Exeter city council, with housing a city council responsibility and the provision of care and support to an individual a county responsibility. That is where we have far more serious problems.

After proposing at a budget meeting in 2023 to cut its entire £1.4 million homelessness budget for this financial year, the majority of which is spent in Exeter, Devon significantly reduced that budget from £1.4 million to £1 million and then to just £500,000 next year, or to zero; it is not entirely clear to stakeholders. For this year, I am told that the grants have not been paid in full. One stakeholder was informed that they would get Q1 and Q2 payments and a smaller payment—about half of one quarter payment—for the remaining two quarters of the year. There has been little to no communication to service delivery partners, including our local YMCA, which delivers transitional housing for previously homeless people, about the funding decision since it was proposed about 18 months ago.

Providers are therefore working on the assumption that they will lose a majority of their funding from April next year. That means that vital emergency off-the-streets bed spaces and longer-term supported accommodation will be lost. The local support pathway out of homelessness will be significantly damaged, with no funding from other sources available to replace that lost funding.

One organisation, Bournemouth Churches Housing Association, has confirmed that its funding for this financial year has been reduced by 28%, after 10 years without inflationary increases. Its contract with Devon county council ends at the end of March 2026. There is a realistic possibility that Gabriel House, the main hostel provision for people transitioning out of rough sleeping, may close. Gabriel House accommodates 42 former rough sleepers and provides the main stepping stone from the street to more stable housing.

Exeter is already feeling the impact of the decision. At November’s annual rough sleeper count, our team saw a significant increase in the number of people they identified sleeping on the city streets. Another provider, Julian House, has had to close services, as funding to Exeter city council from the rough sleeper initiative and rough sleeper accommodation programme has been cut over previous years.

Labour introduced the Supporting People programme in 2003 as a ringfenced fund, which successfully reduced homelessness and rough sleeping, along with providing a net saving to the Exchequer due to the impacts on other budgets such as health, criminal justice and so on. However, ever since the ringfence was removed in 2009 and the budget absorbed into local authority core grants under the coalition Government, as the hon. Member for Harrow East mentioned, local authorities have been diverting funding to other uses, with the results that we see daily on the streets. I therefore ask the Minister to give serious consideration to reintroducing the ringfence on homelessness prevention funding from central Government to local authorities.

I have received helpful information from the Department, through the Parliamentary Private Secretaries, about the replacement of the rough sleeping initiative and the rough sleeping prevention and recovery grant. However, given that the funding for next year is wrapped up in the local government financial settlement, stakeholders and delivery partners are, at this point, assessing their ability to make it to the end of March without knowing what funding will be made available. That will have a destabilising impact on homelessness prevention services. RSI contracts end in March, so providers will potentially be winding down the projects and beginning redundancy processes in advance of those contracts ending.

I encourage the Minister to view homelessness prevention and elimination through a Total Place-style model in the upcoming homelessness strategy, which is essential if we are to tackle multiple disadvantage rather than continually managing crisis. Although Total Place was mentioned in the Budget, it was limited in its development to five mayoral authorities, which risks leaving places such as Exeter behind at a time when instability is accelerating. Exeter could be an ideal pilot for a Total Place model in a smaller city undergoing transition and, hopefully, devolution, allowing us to demonstrate how integrated preventive investment can work effectively outside larger metropolitan areas.

I pay tribute to the excellent organisations in Exeter that, despite pressures on capacity and funding, have provided vital support for our homeless population and have a wider beneficial impact in our city, including St Petrock’s, the YMCA, CoLab, Gabriel House and Julian House. These organisations do not just need an adequate sum of funding; they also need clarity on where that funding will come from.

Funding uncertainty is part of a long-standing challenge embedded by two-tier delivery of local services—one that I am hopeful will be addressed by local government reorganisation. That is why Exeter city council has applied for unitary status on expanded boundaries. I look forward to working on that with MHCLG.

[Martin Vickers (in the Chair)]

I am afraid that that was not a good example of a four-minute speech. Jim Shannon will show us how it should be done.

09:54

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Thank you very much, Mr Vickers, for the chance to speak; it is a pleasure to serve under your chairship. I thank the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) for leading today’s debate. He always leads on homelessness issues, whether in this Chamber or the other, and we thank him for all that he does.

Our housing provision differs across the United Kingdom: in the devolved nations it is different from the provision here in England. One issue I must highlight is the funding that we receive via the block grant, which is used to support the most central services in Northern Ireland. I believe that we need to improve the adequacy of that funding.

I echo the comments that my hon. Friend the Member for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) made about veterans. Last winter, I sat out for about an hour in the cold weather—it was enough for me—with a veteran who was trying to highlight the very important issue of homelessness for veterans. I look forward to the Minister telling us what will be done across the United Kingdom.

In the Assembly back home, the Communities Minister Gordon Lyons has announced an additional £2.5 million funding package for the Northern Ireland Housing Executive to boost homelessness prevention services. Homelessness across Northern Ireland is rife; the stats are shocking. There is not a day in my office back home in Newtownards, or indeed in the Ballynahinch office, when we do not have homelessness brought to us as a constituency issue—especially within Ards and North Down, which continues to be such a popular area to live in. The figures speak for themselves. In Ards and North Down, 1,233 households are presenting as homeless and 898 households have been accepted as full-duty applicants; in other words, they were in priority need.

We hear so often what “homeless” means, but full-duty applicants are the priority and in many cases they have not intentionally made themselves homeless. People buy houses over the years, rent them out and then want to release their capital and be better off. We cannot blame them for doing that, but it does put pressure on homelessness teams.

[Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)]

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the big problems in Northern Ireland and across the UK is the lack of affordable homes? Many families are finding that that is the difficulty with getting on the housing ladder, and there are social housing issues as well.

[Jim Shannon]

My hon. Friend is right. I have been presented with those cases in my office many times. People want to get a mortgage and cannot get one, because of the price of houses in Northern Ireland. In my constituency, they are the highest in all Northern Ireland; indeed, they are comparable to other parts of the United Kingdom.

I put on the record my thanks to my local housing team and particularly to the manager Eileen Thompson, to Irene May and to the many others who go the extra mile every day to help those in need. We do what we can with what we have, but because of the skyrocketing demand in my constituency and across the whole country, funding is not stretching far enough. Some 29,000 households in Northern Ireland have homeless status, and the policy approaches are not sufficient to meet the scale of demand. Although the Northern Ireland Executive receives money through the block grant, which is allocated accordingly, the figures show how much of an issue homelessness is, and there is more that we can do on home building.

My ask to the Minister—it is not her responsibility where the money goes, but maybe she can pass this on to the right person in the Cabinet—is a commitment to social housing delivery across the whole country and better integration with counterparts in the devolved nations, to ensure that we can support those who are in desperate need of safe and secure housing.

It is essential that Westminster provide stronger and more consistent support through fairer and more responsive Barnett consequentials. We have argued for many years that the Barnett consequentials do not reflect Northern Ireland’s needs. If they did, perhaps we could address the issue of temporary accommodation and homelessness, keep pace with demand and deliver long-term solutions. We must take the necessary steps to make the United Kingdom a safe and secure place to call home.

09:58

[Lee Pitcher (Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme) (Lab)]

It is great to speak under your chairship, Mr Vickers.

On Sunday, my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster Central (Sally Jameson), my wife and I took part in the Doncaster 10k with more than 3,000 other people. We chose to raise money for Doncaster Housing for Young People, of which we are patrons. I am pleased to say that we have raised more than £2,000 between us already. Doncaster Housing for Young People is a remarkable organisation that supports young adults who are vulnerable and at risk of homelessness. It not only provides decent accommodation, but supports them in gaining key life skills and by preparing them for the world of work. That means that, when young adults are ready to move into permanent accommodation, they have the physical and mental means to support themselves.

Why is that important to me? I come to this debate not just as a Member of Parliament but as someone who was homeless as a child. I know what it feels like when the word “home” means a room that is not really yours, and your whole life depends on decisions that are taken away from you. It somehow took until the 1970s to grasp what should have been obvious: for someone trying to recover from trauma, illness, addiction or financial catastrophe, a safe, stable home is not a luxury—it is the foundation on which everything else rests.

Today, the scale of the crisis is more stark than ever. Research in my own area of Doncaster and in the South Yorkshire area shows that 61% of people sleeping rough in December 2023 had slept rough before. Nationally, that figure is closer to 13%. That tells us something important: our system is managing crisis; it is not resolving it. We pour billions into temporary fixes, with families stuck in one room for months or years, schools disrupted, work made impossible, mental health deteriorating and people cut off from various networks that keep them safe and hopeful. We then act surprised when they fall back into homelessness and the cycle begins once again. A constituent of mine, a mum in Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme, is living in a room with a baby, and of a night time she has to go out to the service station to use its microwave to warm the baby’s milk. That is ridiculous. How is that possible in this day and age?

Housing First offers a way to break that cycle. In simple terms, it turns the old model on its head: instead of asking people to prove that they are housing ready before they get a permanent home, Housing First starts with the home and wraps support around it. It means a settled, self-contained tenancy as a first step—not the last—and intensive, flexible, person-centred support to help people keep that home. It does not make help conditional on being abstinent or already in treatment, but gives people the support they need to tackle those issues head-on. It offers that support for as long as it is needed, not just the length of a short-term programme. We are not talking about a theory; the three Housing First pilots in Greater Manchester, Liverpool city region and the west midlands have already supported over a thousand people with some of the most complex needs into independent tenancies. Around 84% of those tenancies were sustained after three years, which is remarkable given the level of trauma, poor health and repeated homelessness that people had experienced.

What do we need to do now? First, I urge Ministers to commit to a national Housing First strategy, making it the default offer for people who are repeatedly homeless or have more complex needs, and not a small pilot on the margins. That strategy should include clear targets for the number of Housing First tenancies. Secondly, we need long-term ringfenced funding. Programmes such as the rough sleeping initiative and the single homelessness accommodation programme are vital, but local areas need multi-year certainty so that they can recruit and retain specialist staff and build proper services, not live hand to mouth.

Thirdly, we should link Housing First to the Labour Government’s mission on house building. We have committed to 1.5 million new homes and the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation. A share of those generally affordable homes should be reserved for Housing First. Finally, I hope Ministers will prioritise areas with high levels of repeat homelessness, including Doncaster and South Yorkshire, as early beneficiaries of any expansion.

I know that many volunteers out there this Christmas will be helping the most vulnerable and the homeless, and I thank them from the bottom of my heart for doing that, but if I could ask Santa for one Christmas wish this year, it would be that those volunteers could be redirected into something else, and that homelessness be ended for good.

10:03

[Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) for securing this debate.

We have Shelter’s vicious cycle:

“No home? No address. No address? No bank account. No bank account? No job. No job? No home.”

Rural homelessness is a unique challenge. In a way, it is unlike homelessness in urban centres; it is less visible, which makes it harder to tackle. I suppose people always imagine quaint villages and rolling hills, so the association with homelessness does not necessarily fit, which perhaps makes it easier to overlook. There are many people in my constituency who sofa surf, staying temporarily with family and friends, and therefore are not classified as statutorily homeless. There is a hidden homelessness crisis. If hon. Members came to visit the Hope Centre in Minehead with me, they would see the excellent volunteers from the Baptist church support the many people who are sofa surfing in Minehead and west Somerset.

In 2024-25, 30% of people in mid Devon became homeless because friends or family were either no longer able or willing to provide accommodation. That figure is about the same in Somerset. Homelessness in rural areas has increased every year since 2018, with the most recent statistics indicating there are around 28,000 homeless people in rural parts of the country. They are most highly represented in the south-west. At the end of 2023, homelessness in the countryside had jumped by 40%—nearly half. An English Rural report found that rural areas receive 65% less funding for homelessness per capita compared with urban areas.

We need more social housing. I had a look at what the CPRE said about rural homelessness following the Government’s publishing of the housing figures in June. In the south-west, almost 65,000 people are on waiting lists for social housing. Figures from 2023 showed that just 8% of homes in rural areas were affordable, whereas that figure is 17% in urban areas. Without building the homes, people will continue to face destitution and homelessness. The Liberal Democrat manifesto last year included a commitment to build 150,000 social houses. I am proud to say that in Minehead, Somerset council has built social housing for the first time in a generation. The Liberal Democrat Mid Devon council is making good headway. Given the comments from the hon. Member for Exeter (Steve Race), I will make sure that he gets an update from Liberal Democrat-controlled Devon county council.

I always tell people there is no point in talking about affordable housing if someone earns only £20,000 a year. What we need is social housing, not affordable housing, and we need it in Tiverton and Minehead first and foremost.

10:06

[Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I thank the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) for securing the debate.

The latest annual rough sleeping snapshot has recorded thousands of people sleeping rough—just 2% below the highest level ever recorded. I am afraid to say that it is not getting better quickly enough. Monthly data still showed a 5% rise in rough sleeping between last June and this June. Temporary accommodation has already reached record highs in the recent period. At the very moment when demand for housing is soaring, there is still not enough support for the people who need it most. Nearly half of the homelessness services that we have across the country are now reported to be at risk of closure, and the number of bed spaces available has fallen by 43% over the last 17 years.

As with so much that has gone wrong in this country over the last couple of decades, the root cause of all this is the underfunding and public sector cuts that we saw under the previous Government, led by a short-termist, narrow focus that wilfully ignored the tried and tested ways for economies to get out of the growth doom loop that we have been in. What we need to do is stop storing up more problems in years to come and start addressing things like the homelessness emergency head-on. That means ensuring that services are properly funded to provide safe, year-round bed spaces. It means making sure that new regulations on supported accommodation do not unintentionally punish good providers. It means reversing Tory Government decisions that actively drive homelessness, most notably the freeze to the local housing allowance and the benefit cap—things that make it almost impossible for many households to access the stable housing that they need.

In addition, we need cross-departmental working. Ending homelessness cannot be the responsibility of just one single Department. Decisions in health, justice and welfare, immigration—Departments across the board—all shape who becomes homeless and who does not. This is not the sort of thing that might get the pulses racing, but we need to ensure shared accountability and a shared delivery agenda across Government, not just here in Westminster and Whitehall but through the devolved layers of government, especially at the new strategic authority level.

We all come into politics for good reasons. The moral case for action is clear, as is the financial case. In that vein, I want to highlight the importance, from an efficiency perspective, of Housing First. The Housing First model has consistently demonstrated its effectiveness, here and internationally. It is based on a simple principle: first and foremost providing people with a stable home, then wrapping support around them. It prioritises dignity, choice and long-term stability, and by dealing with the root causes of social issues, it helps the state save money.

The Government’s own evaluation of the three national Housing First pilots confirms what frontline service providers have long known: the model delivers good value for money, achieves remarkable tenancy sustainment rates, reduces rough sleeping, and leads to improvements across health, wellbeing and wider metrics. Crucially, it works for people with the most complex needs—those who have been systematically failed by traditional models of accommodation. Housing First can help us break the cycle of homelessness, crisis care and retraumatisation, which leads to more homelessness. When properly funded and scaled, it can prevent rough sleeping, reduce demand on the NHS and the criminal justice system, and help people to rebuild their lives for good.

If we are serious about combating homelessness, in particular rough sleeping, we should protect and expand Housing First. That requires long-term, ringfenced funding, and a national commitment to scaling provision and to ensuring that it is embedded in the wider homelessness strategy for Government.

I thank the Chair and colleagues for their attention, and I look forward to hearing the Minister’s comments.

10:11

[Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I thank the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) for securing this debate, which is important for the country and, indeed, for Birmingham.

In Birmingham, more than 25,000 families are currently on the housing register, and shockingly, around 10,000 children live in temporary accommodation. In some cases, families are split, with a father and some children living in temporary accommodation in one part of the city, while the mother lives with other children in another part. That causes me great anxiety not only because of the impact on mental health, but because of the direct impact on families and children. Children may not be able to go to local schools because they have no fixed abode.

Another growing problem in Birmingham—and certainly in Birmingham Perry Barr—is rough sleeping. On some of the high streets in my constituency—Soho Road, Villa Road in Lozells, Aston Lane—and at the One Stop Shopping centre, desperate individuals are out in the cold, looking for some small change for a hot drink in weather that will only get worse. Some of them have difficult and complex needs, some are drug addicts and some have had problems with alcohol. There are also people who have been in the military. I am not going to mention his name, but I know of a young man, who I think is in his mid-30s, living in temporary accommodation but without the support that he needs. He is frequently out on the streets until the early hours of the morning. That, in itself, can cause a degree of antisocial behaviour because, with increased crime and people on the street late at night, there are always ramifications in a local neighbourhood.

I totally agree with the hon. Member for Harrow East about ringfenced funding. That is so important in Birmingham, which has been run by Labour for the past decade. It is not just because Government funding has been reduced but because there has been a high degree of funding mismanagement by Birmingham’s Labour-run council. Ringfenced funding for housing will ensure that people get the support they deserve.

It is not just about the funding that central Government provides to councils under the Barnett formula but about the recent Pride in Place funding the Government have announced. Edgbaston, Erdington, Hall Green, Hodge Hill, Ladywood, Northfield, Selly Oak and Yardley—eight constituencies in Birmingham, all with Labour MPs. But which constituency did not get any funding? Birmingham Perry Barr. We only have to Google or ChatGPT search the deprivation indices to see that Birmingham Perry Barr has among the highest. Will the Minister speak to her colleagues about why Birmingham Perry Barr has been excluded?

10:15

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I thank the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) for securing the debate—Mr Vickers, you and I know he got a real grilling from the Backbench Business Committee when he proposed the debate. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Wavertree (Paula Barker), the chair of the APPG, for her work in this important area.

I declare an interest: before coming to this place, I was a project outreach worker for a brilliant homelessness charity in my Harlow constituency called Streets2Homes. I pay particular tribute to its chief executive officer, Kerrie Eastman, to her manager, Lisa Twomey, and to my former colleagues Jamie and Alice for all their work to support people in Harlow who are rough sleeping or sofa surfing—as we often discuss, sofa surfers are the hidden homeless.

My role was very varied, but one thing I had to do was go out into the community—sometimes into a wooded area, and sometimes into industrial estates—to find people who were rough sleeping, to encourage them to register with our charity and to support them into secure accommodation. I echo the comments made by Members across the House about the importance of the Housing First approach to tackling rough sleeping.

I also welcome the Government’s commitment to an additional £1 billion of funding to tackle rough sleeping. However, we also need to recognise that there are a multitude of reasons for people becoming homeless. Sometimes, it is addiction to drugs, alcohol or gambling, and sometimes it is mental health issues. My hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) correctly identified the root causes coming down to trauma. How we support people who have faced trauma is really important.

Before I worked for that homelessness charity, as people know, I was a teacher. I do not want to get into the politics of why I left teaching, because this has not been that sort of debate. However, what I will say is that, within my first two weeks of working for a home- lessness charity, a man came in who had recently become homeless. He was a former teacher who had had a mental breakdown, turned to alcohol and found himself homeless. It was a seminal moment for me, because I thought that it is only by the grace of God that our positions were not reversed. There is a saying that we are only ever two payslips away from homelessness—with the cost of living crisis and the increased costs of the private rented sector, it may now be fewer than two payslips. It really struck me that we could all potentially be affected by this issue.

Harlow council is in the 40% most deprived lower-tier authorities, and at any one time there could be more than 250 people in temporary accommodation. When I was a district councillor in Harlow, one of the last questions I asked was about the cost of temporary accommodation. Harlow is quite a small district council, but it still cost roughly £2 million a year to house people in temporary accommodation. Clearly, if we can get this right, there is a saving to be made.

My wife is currently a teacher, and she speaks about having to visit families in temporary accommodation. We recognise how difficult it is for young people growing up in such accommodation, as my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme mentioned. It hugely affects their schooling.

I echo the comments made by the hon. Member for Harrow East—there is Harrow-Harlow agreement in Westminster Hall today—on the issues affecting people leaving prison. We have had a number of people come into Streets2Homes who had been released from prison with nowhere to go. Clearly, if we want people not to reoffend, that is a huge issue.

I am running out of time, so I will quickly say that I support the Housing First approach, but I am concerned about what supported accommodation is and what it is not. I am concerned about people claiming to provide supported accommodation and not actually providing it. Under the last Labour Government, we brought down the number of rough sleepers. Let us make sure this Labour Government do the same.

10:20

[Rachel Blake (Cities of London and Westminster) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Vickers. I thank the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) for securing this debate, and for his continued advocacy on this topic. He has been a reliable voice in this space for quite some time.

I am grateful for the opportunity to highlight the latest statistics, but today I will also make the case that tackling homelessness is the right thing to do not only for individuals and communities but for public spending and our economy. We have done so much already, but there is a lot more to do, so I will share with colleagues some details about the cost of temporary accommodation, particularly in London, and then propose some possible solutions and make some requests of the Minister.

Currently, 56% of homeless households living in temporary accommodation are in London. In fact, one in 50 Londoners live in temporary accommodation, which is nearly 200,000 people, including 97,000 children. London boroughs collectively spend £5 million a day on temporary accommodation, with the rate of temporary accommodation in Westminster reaching 3%. In 2023-24, Westminster city council spent £95 million on temporary accommodation, and in the same year spending on temporary accommodation in the City of London increased by 52%.

It is positive that there are plans to spend capital money on temporary accommodation, which is part of the solution, but we are now in a situation where the average household in London spends £202 every year, or 11% of their council tax bill, on temporary accommodation. The net current expenditure on homelessness in London has risen by 42% since last year, compared with a 16% increase across the rest of England. And of the 4,254 households in temporary accommodation in Westminster, 768 are in bed and breakfasts, which are an appalling place to grow up, and only 244 are in local authority or housing association stock.

The most expensive type of temporary accommodation is in the private rented sector and paid for nightly. It is the most common type in many London boroughs, including Westminster, where it is used for 1,684 of the 4,254 households in temporary accommodation. Local housing allowance has been frozen, and analysis by the Local Government Association shows that local authorities are due to spend an additional £400 million a year from their own funds on temporary accommodation. At present, 30 in every 1,000 households in the City of Westminster and seven in every 1,000 households in the City of London live in temporary accommodation.

This Government have done a lot. We have committed £39 billion to increase the supply of genuinely affordable housing, and my own local authorities have received significantly more money to tackle some of the worst forms of rough sleeping. I am grateful for all the work the Minister is doing, and for how open-minded and open-spirited she is about tackling this problem. All of us in this Chamber have come forward to solve some of these problems.

Will the Minister bring local government and housing associations together for an emergency meeting, to have a frank conversation about the ludicrous situation of local authorities driving up the cost of temporary accommodation because they are competing with each other to procure it? Will she update the House on the Office for Value for Money report on the cost of temporary accommodation? And will she consider using funding models that have been used in the past that help people to transition from leased temporary accommodation into permanent social housing?

These families live and have children growing up in London communities, and we simply cannot continue putting them out to other local authorities that I know have struggles with identifying temporary accommodation. I also know how seriously this Government take this issue, and I firmly believe that we will be able to end the scourge of rough sleeping and tackle the temporary accommodation crisis if we have the will and the spirit to get it done.

10:24

[Jim McMahon (Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I congratulate hon. Members on their speeches so far.

The homelessness crisis is a national scandal, and it has a human cost that we all see in our constituencies. In Oldham, there are 517 households, including 633 children, in temporary accommodation. Over half of those are in nightly procured accommodation, and a quarter are in bed-and-breakfast accommodation. Even though we call it temporary accommodation, many young people are there for such a significant part of their childhood that it becomes their home, and these are not homes that any of us present would choose to live in. Over 10% of those households in Oldham are in temporary accommodation for between two and five years, and 32% are in temporary accommodation for between one and two years. For a child growing up in primary school, those are the formative years of their childhood and they make a significant difference to their development and education.

When procuring temporary accommodation, local authorities are often looking further afield. There are many out-of-borough placements, but even within a borough, with local transport not always as it should be, it can be very difficult for parents to get their children to school. It can be difficult for working parents to rely on family members to support childcare before or after school. In practice, it means that many young people are missing out on a good education and their wider support networks during that period.

A lot has been said about the impact of local authority budgets. All of us appreciate the work that the Minister is doing to reconcile not just the financial cost to local government but the human cost to families, particularly children. But let us be honest: this is a gold rush for private landlords, who are absolutely rinsing the taxpayer dry for substandard accommodation. The average cost of nightly accommodation in Oldham is between £25 and £35 a night, and those are single rooms. The accommodation that I visited with the Shared Health Foundation in Oldham had three mattresses with a cooker, a sink and an extractor unit that was supposed to take out the cooking smells from that room, but went nowhere.

I met a woman who had fled domestic violence, and she was contemplating going back to her abuser because she was fearful of what staying in that temporary accommodation meant for her children. I visited the room next door and spoke to her 14-year-old son, who wanted to be an engineer when he left school. He could not get any sleep because he was put on a mattress in the corner of that attic room, and there were holes in the skirting board where, every single night, the mice were chomping through the woodwork and keeping him awake. He showed me the holes in the wall that he was using old socks to fill because he did not want the mice to come through into the room. Mice and rats were running through the whole building. A six-room HMO used for temporary accommodation in a town such as Oldham brings the landlord £65,000 a year in income.

We are also seeing family homes being taken off the housing market, because these private landlords will snap up terraced houses and convert every single room into a letting room for temporary accommodation, charging £25 to £35 a night. As an example, one person—an Oldham councillor who drives around the town in a Rolls-Royce, for God’s sake—had a facility from which eight children and 16 adults had to be removed because of health and safety violations. These were attic rooms again, filled with mattresses and shared facilities, and he was on a £7,000-a-month contract for just that one property.

We have to deal with the human costs, but the system has to be put in order. The Minister is one of the good people in government who absolutely believe that, but she has a job to do with her Home Office colleagues. That is not the Minister, I should say, but there is certainly a culture within the Home Office. Unfortunately, I would say they have a disregard for the impact of their policies on local communities, whether that be the move away from extended support for people moving out of temporary accommodation or even the artificial market that they are driving with the procurement of dispersal accommodation for asylum seekers. If we do not have a whole-of-Government approach to dealing with the housing crisis, we will just not solve it.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Martin Vickers (in the Chair)]

We have three remaining speakers and 10 minutes, so you have about three minutes each.

10:29

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to contribute with you in the Chair, Mr Vickers. I congratulate the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) on securing this debate. He has focused homeless prevention, but we need also to think seriously about homeless recovery and permanence as we move forward.

It is right that Housing First provides that blueprint for us. I thank Professor Nicholas Pleace at the University of York for all his work on that, and for showing the value to people as well as the economy of putting housing first. We need to be able to support the transition into Housing First, particularly changing accommodation. We are trying to retrofit our hostels to ensure that there are single-based units to accommodate people in that path to permanence. I also draw the Minister’s attention to some of the work the Salvation Army has done. We have a NAPpad, which is a temporary unit where people experiencing chronic street homelessness can see a transition step into accommodation, by having a very simplified unit which gives them the feeling of independence but comes before taking that big step into Housing First.

I agree with colleagues that we need to look at the local housing allowance again. It is far too limited. It is almost at 50% in York, which goes nowhere near the costs. The local authority then has to pick up the tab for the differentials that people experience. That is unsustainable, not least as we have the lowest funded unitary authority in the country yet far from the most affluent. I also have my eye on the Department for Work and Pensions budget. We spent £31.8 billion on housing support, so I urge the Government to look again at rent controls, because we are seeing a spike in the escalation of housing costs in the private rented sector, which is often where people find themselves. That is unsustainable. People are falling out of housing but cannot get back in. Looking at rent controls is important, alongside social build, which we know is really needed as well.

Supporting People has been mentioned. That was introduced by the last Labour Government and was absolutely a game changer in recognising the holistic needs. We have heard about the financial and health risks people have, but also the levels of trauma. We do not have a real focus on trauma capacity to support people. Supporting People did keep people in their homes, provide support, build resilience and gave people independence and confidence so they could manage their own affairs and be able to sustain their living. I trust we can look again at how we can ringfence that money and ensure we address those complex needs. As York introduces its focus round a multidisciplinary, multi-agency, independent team to provide that support, we need to ensure we do not only move people out from the streets into temporary accommodation, but also break the cycle of homelessness into the future.

10:32

[Naushabah Khan (Gillingham and Rainham) (Lab)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. Before coming to this place, I worked on the frontline of homelessness policy at the charity St Mungo’s and also in the housing industry for over 15 years, as well as being cabinet member for housing at Medway council. Those experiences taught me how quickly people can fall into crisis when systems fail, and how powerful the right interventions can be when they are properly funded and sustained. It also highlighted how complex the homelessness landscape is, and how important it is that we have an integrated Housing First approach, driven by evidence.

Under the Tories, we saw rough sleeping more than double between 2010 and its peak, while local authorities faced a significant real terms reduction in core spending power—the very budgets that funded homelessness prevention. As a result, the system has become crisis-led, reactive and structurally incapable of meeting demand. Most strikingly, the Everyone In scheme demonstrated what is possible when homelessness is treated with the urgency it deserves, with over 37,000 people brought in off the streets overnight. It also highlighted the clear truth that rough sleeping is not an unsolvable issue, but a resource one.

When we talk about homelessness, we are not only talking about those who are rough sleeping. We are also talking about those who are sofa surfing, hidden homelessness, and thousands of families who are placed in temporary accommodation, often miles from their schools, support networks and places of work. For example, many London councils are placing people in my constituency, driving up prices locally but also putting a real pressure on an already overstretched local authority.

The scale of this crisis has got to the point where temporary accommodation has become a parallel housing system in its own right. Unfortunately it is no longer a safety net. Instead it is a symptom of a system under acute strain, and represents one of the clearest arguments for long-term, sustainable funding for homelessness prevention.

The Government’s commitment to significantly expand the supply of genuinely affordable and social homes will help to ease the relentless pressure on temporary accommodation, as more families can access stable, long-term housing, rather than being trapped in the cycle of emergency placements. However, we must be honest about these structural issues and we cannot shy away from addressing them at their root. I therefore urge the Minister, whose work I really respect in this area, to look closely at the local housing allowance and ensure it is set at a level that reflects real rental markets. It will be one of the most effective levers we have to preventing homelessness at scale, and it must be a part of any credible long-term strategy.

Finally, our approach to ending homelessness has been discussed for many years. The solutions that can work are ready and available. Now is the time for action.

10:35

[Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers and I thank the chair of the Backbench Business Committee, the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) for bringing this debate.

Winter is coming and the temperatures are dropping. I remember a particularly bitter winter 28 years ago, in 1997, when a new Labour Government, with Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott, opened up Admiralty House to 60 young people to serve as a winter shelter. That was as powerful symbol of the change that came from that Government. I remember a certain Conservative MP, Crispin Blunt, was not happy with this scheme. He said that it would reduce a historic building to a flagship for undesirables. That is the difference between a Labour Government and a Conservative Government, I have to say. In subsequent years, homelessness was indeed slashed by that Labour Government, but sadly, during the last 14 years under the Conservatives, it has risen again. This year, thankfully, this Government are investing £1 billion in pursuit of ending homelessness and rough sleeping. I am pleased that this winter we have topped that up with a further £84 million cash boost.

I will talk a bit about what can work. In Rochdale, we are seeing the tangible results of what happens when there is sustained investment and a relentless focus on combining early intervention schemes with investment in temporary accommodation options that actually get people back on their feet and build better, more sustainable pathways out of homelessness. Rochdale council has seen a 79% reduction in B&B placements compared with November 2024. That is the difference that a Labour council can make when it is working with the Labour Government. I pay particular tribute to Hannah Courtney-Adamson and her team at Rochdale council for all their work in this area, but of course, there are also lots of people on the ground who make such a difference to charities such as the Army of Kindness in Rochdale, Petrus, Sanctuary Trust and Angie’s Angels, who do fabulous work with people who have fallen on hard times through no fault of their own.

The provision of affordable housing is not keeping pace with demand. In Rochdale, over 7,000 households are on the housing register and we have almost 1,500 live homelessness cases. That is precisely why we need to build more homes for rent. The £39 billion we are investing in affordable and social homes is ultimately the only way out of this crisis. In the meantime, the private renting sector is often the only option, but rising rent prices and cruel section 21 evictions are cited by Rochdale council as the main cause of homelessness, and make the private rented sector impossible for many. That is why I am so proud that this Government has abolished section 21 evictions.

Finally, I will say something about the need to tackle homelessness among veterans. It should be a source of national shame that those who served our nation cannot find a home, or they find a safety net filled with holes when they end up on the streets. We are proud of our support networks for veterans in Rochdale, and I am pleased that the council is renovating Denehurst House, a Victorian manor house, and turning it into five new apartments for veterans. I pay tribute to Get Together After Serving for every bit of work they do in this area. Finally, the people of Rochdale really care about fellow Rochdalians who fall on hard times and have no roof over their head. As a Government, we will be judged by how quickly we tackle this crisis—not just in winter, but all year round.

10:39

[Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers, and to take part in this debate about the adequacy of funding to support homeless people. At the outset, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman), for securing this debate. I know how important this topic is to him, and his forensic opening speech this morning emphatically underlined that. I am confident I speak for all sides of the House when I say how appreciated his tireless efforts have been to address the tragedy of homelessness. I also thank all hon. Members who have contributed to this debate.

Just over a month ago, I had the pleasure of coming to this place and hearing 17 speeches from a range of hon. Members on the issue of homelessness. Some of them are here again today and some are not. I said at the time that homelessness is a “social tragedy” wherever it occurs and for whatever reason. That we are back here again shows both the importance of this issue to my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East and its significance to hon. Members across the House.

Unfortunately, since the last debate, things have got worse rather than better. The future cost of living looks worse—certainly in the wake of last week’s rather gloomy Budget. The future of house building and the Government’s manifesto promise to build 1.5 million homes appear to be in dire straits, and the state of local government finances again appears bleak and unlikely to improve. On top of all of that, the long-awaited homelessness strategy, first pledged in the Government’s manifesto a year and a half ago, continues to be late and remains unpublished.

The strategy was first promised to us in 2024, with the publication repeatedly said to be forthcoming. We were then repeatedly told by the Minister’s predecessor that it was due for publication following the conclusion of the spending review—which was six months ago. In a parliamentary question answered just last week we continued to be told that it will be published “later this year”. It is 2 December today and the year is running out. It may be advent, the season of waiting, but there are many who consider this to be an unacceptable and damaging delay, particularly the charities and homeless people waiting for the Government to take serious action. It would be a very welcome early Christmas present if the Minister were to announce its publication this morning.

In saying that, I acknowledge that the Government have not been totally idle. They have introduced some additional funding: a £69.9 million uplift to the rough sleeping prevention and recovery grant, an additional £10.9 million for supporting children experiencing homelessness, and £3 million for the rough sleeping drug and alcohol treatment programme. The funding is welcome, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East said in his opening speech and others have mentioned, funding must come with strategy and purpose and that is something we are yet to see.

As I said in this Chamber in October:

“prevention must be at the heart of any national strategy for tackling homelessness”.—[Official Report, 21 October 2025; Vol. 773, c. 312WH.]

That was a central focus in the last Government’s approach which produced £2.4 billion of funding to tackle rough sleeping and homelessness including the rough sleeping initiative and £547 million over the period from April 2022 to March 2025 before schemes such as the RSI were rolled up into one by the current Government. The rough sleeping initiative provided locally led tailored support and services for rough sleepers, providing direction and strategy at the most local levels.

The Minister’s Department has so far failed to provide itself and its fellow Departments with a national strategy. Simply spending money will not do the job, and funding without purpose or direction can actually damage efforts to achieve the critical goal of ending homelessness.

Much of the responsibility and funding for tackling homelessness lies with local government. Bills for homelessness accommodation have soared to £3.8 billion across 2024-2025—a 25% increase in a single year. There are now a record number of people in temporary accommodation, including 169,050 children in England—a 12% increase in a year. The result of that is that councils are now warning that homelessness poses one of the biggest threats to their financial viability.

Homelessness is a statutory demand-led and highly acute pressure on local government. The Government’s answer so far has not been to provide more support, but to take money away from many councils as part of their so-called fair funding formula. In introducing what my right hon. Friend the Member for Braintree (Sir James Cleverly) has called their “unfair funding” model for local authorities the Government are funnelling money away from councils predominantly in the south to send to councils predominantly in the north. It is hard to see that as anything other than a partisan cash grab and a punitive targeting of many well-run councils, especially penalising those who have historically kept council taxes low and controlled spending better.

Some of the most affected areas, including the south- east, are witnessing a large rise in homelessness and simultaneously a potentially catastrophic drop in funding thanks to the fair funding policy. How does that reconcile with the need to go further to tackle this soaring issue? The answer is that it does not. It certainly does not help that councils are being punished and losing money for the crime of being comparatively well run when they are still trying to play their role in providing temporary accommodation to those 126,040 households.

[Chris Vince]

Will the shadow Minister give way on that point?

[Gareth Bacon]

I will not. I apologise to the hon. Gentleman, because I know he cares passionately about this issue, but we are running out of time. I need to leave time for the Minister to respond and for my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East to conclude.

The figure of 126,040 households is a 15.7% increase on 2023. The Government need to rethink this policy for the sake of local government and those who have a statutory requirement to help. It is not just local authorities that are under additional pressure. Homeless Link found that thanks to the Chancellor’s national insurance hike, the 2024 autumn Budget removed between £50 million and £60 million of vital funding from smaller organisations that provide homelessness services. It is sad that the Government’s announcements on homelessness funding, as welcome as they are, to some extent merely fill the gaps that the Treasury created.

It is also important that the Government work to make housing more affordable, including with proper funding for social and affordable homes. Unfortunately, the Government are not making the progress that they promised. On funding for affordable housing, despite the Chancellor’s boast when announcing the package at the previous spending review, the Institute for Fiscal Studies noted:

“Upon closer inspection the promise of £39bn over 10 years is less generous than on first appearance…The small print suggests spending of about £3bn a year over the next three years, which is not a million miles away from what is currently spent on the AHP”—

affordable homes programme—

“This is why enormous-sounding numbers should always merit further scrutiny”.

The Government are also failing on making social and affordable homes available. Figures show that, with the lowest number of additional homes for nearly a decade, the Government are on track to fall well short of the target of 1.5 million additional homes in this Parliament, possibly not even reaching 1 million. That is considerably worse than the 2.5 million new homes delivered by the previous Government, including 1 million in the previous Parliament, of which 750,000 were affordable homes. That was despite having to grapple with the pandemic for the better part of two years.

In conclusion, it is clear that Ministers must work more quickly and effectively to provide local authorities and charities with the strategy and direction they need. It is vital to move at a greater pace to ease the temporary accommodation crisis, get more social and affordable homes built in the most affected areas, and finally publish the homelessness strategy first promised in July 2024 but repeatedly delayed to the detriment of those relying on it to work. I look forward to the Minister’s comments.

10:47

[The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Vickers. I congratulate the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) on his continued work on homelessness. He is respected across the House, as the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), said, and we are all grateful for his work.

I thank the 14 hon. Members who have contributed to the debate. I again agree with the shadow Minister that that number, along with the 17 hon. Members who spoke in the last such debate, sends a message to people outside this place that tackling homelessness is a priority for Members on both sides of the House of Commons. I will encourage all officials in the Department to read this debate to understand where MPs are coming from and the priority that this subject represents for them. The Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 of the hon. Member for Harrow East is a priority for me, and I want to work with him to implement it. I hear what he said about its delay and take that as an instruction to work harder to get it done.

More broadly, I thank hon. Members for their thoughtful contributions. As has been said, although homelessness is a problem of not having enough houses, it is not just a housing problem; it is a profound injustice that devastates lives. Everyone has a right to a roof over their head. Homelessness is a visible reminder that our society falls short in the duties that we owe to one another—something that the Labour Government are determined to change.

Some hon. Members mentioned the homelessness strategy, about which I can only say, “Watch this space.” I am determined to get on and publish it before Christmas, and I am really keen to work cross-party with hon. Members to make it work. We had an excellent parliamentary engagement session last week, which was less formal than this debate, and I think it works really well to have a combination of informal opportunities and debates such as this for hon. Members to talk through what they want to see in the strategy.

As we move towards the delivery phase of the homelessness strategy, it will be right for us to continue holding those parliamentary engagement sessions on a range of issues to make sure that hon. Members can feed into them. Last week, we talked through the preventive nature of the strategy from the point of view of housing and affordability, and how we can enable the support that the most vulnerable people need. A couple of hon. Members also made important points about people with complex needs.

You will forgive me, Mr Vickers, if I briefly mention the Budget. I have no doubt that, as with any Budget, not every hon. Member got all their heart’s desires, but ending the two-child limit was one of mine. I have met many kids in temporary accommodation, or otherwise living in poverty, who will benefit. I think of those children every day when I walk into the Department, and what we can collectively do to give them their futures back.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Rachel Blake) said, we announced in the Budget that the Chief Secretary to the Treasury will lead a review, involving me and other Ministers, of value for money in homelessness services. It will include looking at ways to improve the supply of good value for money and good quality temporary accommodation and supported housing, such as through greater co-ordination in planning and procurement in different parts of the state.

A couple of hon. Members, including my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon)—who I commend for his work as my predecessor as Minister for Local Government, setting in train a really important set of reforms that will help in this area—mentioned the absolutely dire state of temporary accommodation, both for the kids in it and for the taxpayer, and the fact that we are not getting value for money at the moment. I encourage all Members to engage with that value for money review; we want to see some of the worst cases so that we can provide an evidence base.

[Ayoub Khan]

The Minister is making some powerful points in recognition of the challenges that we face. On the Budget, it will always be difficult to balance the books and maintain the status quo. Does she accept that the mammoth task of addressing homelessness can be achieved only with the substantial amount of investment that can come through wealth taxes—with wealthy people paying more for the vulnerable in society?

[Alison McGovern]

I think the record will show that the Government have taken action to bring in more tax from people who owe it—from those at the top of society—and that, because we have done so, we have been able to get rid of the two-child limit and commit £39 billion to build more social and affordable housing. That investment will make a difference in tackling the social injustice of homelessness.

As a few hon. Members mentioned, we are taking action now, even before we have published the strategy. This year, we have invested more than £1 billion— the largest annual investment to date—to enable local authorities to invest in prevention, provide tailored support and reduce the reliance on costly short-term solutions.

Several hon. Members also mentioned the tension that exists between ringfencing funding and allowing local authorities the flexibility to lead solutions that work for their place. Following the work of my predecessor, I am very glad that we have been able to provide local authorities with a three-year funding settlement and reconnect council funding with deprivation. The twin effects of those policies will help in that area.

We as Members of Parliament have to recognise, however, that there is a tension between curtailing local authorities’ freedom through things like ringfencing, which might target resources in the right place, and enabling them to tailor support to their local area. We will square that circle through the local government outcomes framework that we will publish shortly with the full settlement. We will show how we will have visibility and transparency over outcomes so that we can understand exactly where the problems are and take steps to tackle them. I look forward to engaging with all hon. Members on that framework.

We know that our investment in councils on homelessness is making a difference. The latest annual figures show early signs of progress, with 11% fewer households in bed-and-breakfast accommodation. That is a small bit of progress, but I agree with all hon. Members who have expressed real concern about where we are at the moment; we still have a long way to go.

Far too many people are experiencing homelessness and we have to provide the homes that they need, as I have said. Alongside increasing supply, as I mentioned, we need to reform the private rented sector. Section 21 no-fault evictions are a leading cause of homelessness, forcing thousands of families into crisis every year, but we have abolished them through the Renters’ Rights Act 2025. The best way to prevent homelessness is to stop it before it starts, and that is what the Renters’ Rights Act will do. We have also strengthened protections for the social housing stock by reforming the right to buy.

Many hon. Members mentioned supported housing, which is crucial. I say to the hon. Member for Harrow East that I am working very hard on the implementation of his Act. It is vital that we drive out rogue landlords. As I mentioned, I will welcome the engagement of hon. Members on our value for money review, because we know that we desperately need more resources in this area and some of the resources that are there at the moment are not being spent in the way that we as Members of Parliament would wish. We have a collective duty to resolve that situation in the strategy’s implementation phase.

I will conclude and allow the hon. Member for Harrow East to say a few words. In the end, we want to see lasting change, whether through social homes being built or our goal to improve disposable incomes so that people are less likely to be unable to fulfil their tenancy. Those are the steps that we can take to end homelessness for good and make sure, for anybody experiencing homelessness, that it is a brief period and never repeated. We need the cross-party collaboration that we have demonstrated again here today, and a whole-system approach. On hospital discharge, on prisons, on victims of domestic abuse and on veterans, I have engaged with Ministers in those areas and I will continue to do so. We have an interministerial group meeting coming up before we publish the strategy, and I can report that all those other Departments are engaging enthusiastically on the strategy.

We need to prevent homelessness. That will mean less cost for the state and, crucially, much better outcomes for families and individuals who desperately need better support. I thank all hon. Members who have contributed today. It has been inspiring, again, to understand how important this issue is. Most of all, I thank the hon. Member for Harrow East for securing the debate. I have absolutely no doubt that when it comes to debates in Westminster Hall on this subject, this ain’t going to be the last.

10:58

[Bob Blackman]

I thank the Minister, the shadow Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), and the 13 Back-Bench Members who contributed to the debate. It is clear that we have a serious challenge on our hands. In relation to the long-promised strategy, it is only a few days till we break up for the Christmas recess and the strategy is supposed to be released before Christmas, so we look forward to it coming very soon. During the debate, we have exposed the fact that it is not just funding that is required. The reality is that we need a wholesale strategy to prevent homelessness in the first place and then to make sure that local authorities and other bodies are carrying out their duties properly.

The Minister rightly referred to my Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act. The reality is that the regulations were prepared before the general election, consulted on when new Ministers took office and should now be enforced. Local authorities are going off and doing their own thing when we should have a clear strategy for how we do this. There are measures in the Act that the Minister could introduce today, without having to rely on the consultation that is taking place. I urge her to take that opportunity so that we can make sure that we prevent homelessness in the first place.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the adequacy of funding to support homeless people.