UK housing crisis: commission urges cost freeze alongside action on demand

What happened

The UK housing crisis cannot be addressed through planning changes alone, according to proposals published by the Prosper UK Housing Commission on 12 October 2026. The group, chaired by former housing minister Gavin Barwell, argues that developers face two connected obstacles: difficulty selling new homes and rising costs that make some approved schemes financially unworkable.

Its report, Solving the Housing Crisis: A Plan to Make Homes More Affordable in Every Postcode, recommends a three-year freeze on regulatory burdens. It also proposes changes to developer contributions, a national service for major planning applications and a review of green belt land. These are recommendations from the commission, rather than an announcement of new legal requirements.

The commission attributes half of a £76,000 increase in housing construction costs since 2020 to regulation, policy and tax. It says those rising costs, alongside flat house prices, have left many developments unable to proceed despite already having planning permission. The distinction matters because permission to build does not, by itself, establish that a scheme can cover its costs.

On demand, the report says weaker consumer confidence has made it harder for developers to sell homes already under construction. Its argument concerns the ability and willingness of households to buy, rather than an absence of housing need. Property Pulse UK's reporting on family-home affordability and mortgage costs examines a related constraint on buyers.

The commission says the number of planning permissions granted in 2025 was the lowest since 2013. Barwell also argues that the government is well behind the pace needed for its ambition to build 1.5 million homes over five years. His assessment is that planning reform and affordable housing funding, while welcome, have not been enough.

The background

Development viability is the financial assessment of whether a project can proceed after its costs and expected income are considered. Land, construction, finance and planning obligations can all affect that assessment. The commission's diagnosis is that increasing costs cannot readily be absorbed when the prices developers expect to receive are not rising.

The report calls for section 106 obligations to focus on what an individual development requires, rather than wider community demands. In England, section 106 agreements are legally binding planning obligations that can secure affordable housing or contributions towards infrastructure. Changing their scope would therefore concern both the cost of building and the way development supports local services.

An example reported by The Times and cited in Today's Conveyancer concerns a proposed 485-home development in West Suffolk. The developer was reportedly asked to contribute towards swimming lanes and 98 fitness stations across the district. The account illustrates the type of wider-area requirement being questioned, but does not establish how common such requests are.

Today's Conveyancer also describes a London student accommodation scheme that reportedly faces a requirement to install gas connections in every bedroom, despite not using gas. The account does not identify the development or the body responsible for the requirement. It therefore provides an example of the concern without enough detail to assess the individual decision.

The commission's proposal for a national green belt review concerns a separate constraint: where development can take place. Green belt is a planning designation intended to restrict development and prevent urban sprawl, rather than a description of land's environmental quality. A review would not itself give planning permission to build on any particular site.

Read moreReform UK planning cuts: disputed figures raise questions over appeals

What people are saying

Barwell argues that the recommendations must work together rather than being adopted selectively. In his assessment, supporting demand without increasing supply would benefit some households while disadvantaging others. Equally, he says improving the financial viability of schemes would achieve little if developers still could not find buyers.

Barwell said the government had already adopted one recommendation before publication and that the Conservatives had committed to another. The source account does not identify either measure, so those remarks do not establish that the proposed regulatory freeze or planning service has been accepted. His broader criticism is that the housing problem has developed over almost 50 years and requires action on several fronts.

Richard Cook, chief development officer at Clarion Housing Group and a commission member, said there was no single remedy for the housing market's problems. He argued that the package could nevertheless make a substantial contribution. Lucian Cook, another member and Savills' director of residential research, also supported a broad approach rather than isolated interventions.

Commission member Jackie Sadek emphasised the economic consequences and the disadvantages facing younger people. She argued that housing shortages carry substantial social and public-finance costs and require sustained action. The pressure on households is also reflected in Property Pulse UK's coverage of rental affordability and supply outside London, where average rents have passed £1,400.

The commission says its members participated in a personal capacity. Their recommendations should therefore not automatically be treated as the policies of their employers, including Clarion Housing Group or Savills. The source account contains comments from commission members, but no detailed response from the government or councils to the package.

What happens next

The proposed three-year freeze would need a government decision before developers could rely on it. The source account does not set out which regulatory burdens would be covered, when the period would begin or whether any requirements would be excluded. It should not be read as confirmation that existing obligations have been suspended.

Under the commission's planning-service proposal, a national body would assess major applications against policies agreed locally. That distinction preserves a role for local policy within the proposed national assessment process. The account does not specify which developments would qualify or how the service would interact with existing planning authorities.

The section 106 recommendation would also require detail about which contributions remained acceptable. For buyers considering a new development, the practical questions include what affordable housing and infrastructure are secured through its planning agreements. The commission's proposal does not establish that any obligation attached to an existing scheme has changed.

On demand, Barwell's warning leaves a question for policymakers: how to help households buy without simply increasing competition for the homes already available. The source account does not describe the commission's specific demand-support measures. Nor does the report provide a basis for predicting an immediate change in sale prices; Property Pulse UK's coverage of regional house-price differences shows why national figures need local context.

For households waiting for a home, the commission's central distinction is between securing permission and delivering a completed property. Its diagnosis suggests that progress on approvals alone would not resolve the sales and funding difficulties it identifies. The source account gives no implementation timetable for the package or date for a formal government response.

Why this matters

For buyers and renters, the commission's warning is that more planning permissions do not automatically produce more available homes. It says developers also need schemes that can cover their costs and buyers able to purchase the finished properties. Its proposed changes to developer contributions raise a further question about how local infrastructure would be funded. Nothing in the source account confirms an immediate change to household costs, existing planning obligations or the availability of new homes.