Can Steve Reed make more progress than his predecessor?

Steve Reed certainly enjoyed himself at the Labour Party Conference in Liverpool. The new Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government had lots of fun with his “Build Baby Build” hats.

But there is nothing fun about the task in hand and the question the industry is asking is: how is he going to make more progress than his predecessor who, whatever her other issues with tax advice, was respected for her willingness to make radical change where necessary?

Angela Rayner made a significant impression during her year in the job, but Labour’s commitment to build one and a half million homes in a five-year parliament has already come badly unstuck. In the year to June 2025, the actual number of new homes delivered was a paltry 186,600.

It is hard to attribute the blame to Angela. In truth, the reasons were way beyond her control. Ever since the new government came into office, the news has been universally gloomy. The gaffes have been legion, from the mess over winter fuel payments to the appalling decision to increase employers’ national insurance and the apparent willingness to pay strikers while achieving no productivity improvements as part of the settlements.

Given the inevitability of more tax rises in November, it is little wonder that across the board people are loath to embark on spending. The residential market is effectively dead. Nobody is buying and, as a result, nobody is selling. Will Rachel Reeves scrap SDLT and if so, what will replace it?  Will she tax pensions, or introduce what her backbenchers want, a wealth tax? It is not hard to see why the market is so immobile.

What is just as significant is that several changes introduced by the last government when Michael Gove was housing secretary, such as the insistence on second staircases and the introduction of the Building Safety Regulator, have had a significant impact on delivery however well intentioned.

To add insult to injury, building in London has all but collapsed. London’s target is 88,000 homes a year, a figure most observers believe is far too low given that the capital is where the pressure on the cost of living is at its most significant.

However, the sheer cost of building there, combined with mayoral insistence on 35% affordable housing, means that last year, the number of completions was a pathetic 30,000. If Reed is going to make a real difference in time for the next election, he has to persuade Mayor Khan that only a radical change of course will suffice. The lack of development activity in London is frankly scandalous.

Reed has now announced the government’s intention to build 12 new towns in England, three of which, Thamesford in Bedfordshire, Leeds South Bank and Crews Hill in North London, are set for an early start.

It’s a sensible initiative given the urgency of demand, but when are even these three likely to be completed given the current planning regime? In truth, not one will deliver the planned 10,000 homes by the end of the parliament, even if it stretches to its full five years – a proposition now routinely discounted by most observers.

That said, where are other parties in all this? Reform is keen to abandon the Renters Reform Bill and talks about modern methods of construction and putting people on housing waiting lists in front of migrants but says very little about actually improving housing stock. The Lib Dems want to outlaw land banking and crack down on second homes. Enough said. And since Kemi Badenoch refreshed her front bench, Reed’s opposite number is the amiable Sir James Cleverley. No, I haven’t heard anything from him either.