Government Policy Archives | Nationwide Sureties

Apprenticeship Construction Government Policy Nationwide Sureties News

Government prepares construction jobs plan

The Government is drawing up a new Construction Jobs Plan aimed at tackling the shortage of workers across the UK construction industry, with Housing and Planning Minister Matthew Pennycook confirming that a comprehensive package of measures will be published later this year.

The plan is expected to address not only the number of people entering construction, but also the industry’s ability to train, retain and upskill workers at a time when the Government is simultaneously seeking to accelerate housebuilding, retrofit and major infrastructure projects.

Giving evidence to the House of Lords Built Environment Committee, Pennycook acknowledged that construction is facing “quite serious pressures” on its workforce and said the Government needs to do more to expand, upskill and diversify the sector.

Government prepares construction jobs plan — https://depositphotos.com/portfolio-1004918.html?content=photo

“We are going to publish a construction jobs plan later this year,” he told the committee. He described it as a “far more comprehensive package of support from the Government and what the industry is doing, as well, to address shortages”.

The announcement comes as the latest figures from the Construction Industry Training Board (CITB) underline the scale of the challenge. Its Construction Workforce Outlook 2026-2030 estimates that an average of 41,200 additional workers will be required every year between 2026 and 2030.

That equates to around 206,000 additional workers over the five-year period, taking the projected UK construction workforce from 2.61 million in 2025 to around 2.68 million by 2030. The requirement reflects both anticipated growth in construction activity and the need to replace workers leaving the industry.

Construction workforce under pressure

The timing of the Construction Jobs Plan is particularly important because the Government has set ambitious targets for housebuilding while the industry is already struggling with recruitment and retention.

CITB forecasts that construction output will remain subdued during 2026 before recovering from 2027 onwards. Public new housing is expected to be one of the strongest areas of growth, with average annual growth of 3.6% between 2026 and 2030. Infrastructure is forecast to grow by 2.5% annually, while private new housing is expected to increase by 2.5%.

The Government is committed to delivering 1.5 million homes in England during the Parliament, alongside its ambitions for social housing, infrastructure and the retrofit of existing properties.

That creates a fundamental problem: planning reform can make land available and speed up permissions, while investment can create demand, but neither can deliver homes if there are insufficient skilled workers available to build them.

Pennycook told peers that the workforce challenge was not specifically related to the Government’s New Towns Programme, but was a national issue.

“There is no doubt that there are quite serious pressures on the construction workforce,” he said. “We said, from the moment we were elected, that we have to do more to expand and upskill that workforce, and diversify it.”

He also sees the New Towns Programme as an opportunity to provide greater certainty for construction businesses, particularly firms involved in modern methods of construction (MMC).

Pipeline certainty is critical

One of the most important themes emerging from the Government’s thinking is the relationship between workforce capacity and a reliable pipeline of work.

Pennycook argued that one reason Category 1 MMC has struggled to develop is the lack of certainty over future demand. A long-term New Towns Programme, he said, could provide the pipeline required to give MMC businesses the confidence to invest and grow.

This is an important point for the wider construction sector. Businesses are unlikely to recruit and train significant numbers of workers if they cannot see sufficient work ahead to keep those employees occupied.

The National Federation of Builders (NFB) believes the same principle should apply to traditional SMEs.

Richard Beresford, chief executive of the NFB, said: “The government has put several strategies in place to better align a pipeline of work with the ambition to grow the construction workforce, and they have been communicative across industry to understand our perspectives.

“The recognition of the MMC pipeline that secures employment and investment must be carried into the broader jobs strategy, particularly in planning reforms and procurement. Underpinning any plan must be the understanding that because SMEs train 8 in 10 construction apprentices, they are key to capacity growth. The mantra must be ‘ensuring the trainers and retainers win work’.”

The argument is that construction workforce policy cannot simply concentrate on training places. Employers need the confidence to take on apprentices and new workers, while those workers need sustainable careers once their training is complete.

Government already investing in construction skills

The Construction Jobs Plan will build on substantial investment already announced by the Government.

The £625 million Construction Skills Package is designed to deliver up to 60,000 additional skilled construction workers during the Parliament. It includes increased training provision, improved teaching, industry placements and ten Construction Technical Excellence Colleges.

A new Foundation Apprenticeship is also intended to provide another route into the industry, while the Government has highlighted the importance of attracting women and people returning to the workforce.

The Government has also allocated funding to expand construction training capacity. Some £195 million is being used to increase capacity in construction courses, with employer involvement a key requirement of the programme. (GOV.UK Assets)

However, the CITB figures demonstrate why further action is required. Even if the Government achieves its target of 60,000 additional skilled workers, that represents only part of the additional workforce requirement identified by the industry body.

The Government therefore needs to address recruitment, training and retention simultaneously.

NFB warns against repeating MMC mistakes

The NFB has also warned that the Government needs to learn lessons from previous attempts to stimulate MMC.

Rico Wojtulewicz, director of policy at the NFB, said: “Any measures to grow and sustain worker capacity require an understanding of how industry operates. For example, the Conservative government spent billions of pounds on MMC but because they focused on volumetric, ignoring 99% the of MMC that 100% of industry can utilise, their approach failed.

“Labour are right to use new towns to enable MMC, but if it is just those built in factories, rather than enabling the definitions already established by the broader MMC Framework, they will embed failure and do little to nothing to ensure we increase the skills and workforce required to retrofit 28 million UK homes.”

Wojtulewicz believes the decline of SME housebuilding illustrates the importance of maintaining a diverse construction base.

“History teaches us that the mantra of ‘ensuring trainers and retainers win work’ is the one to follow and the Government is right to link demand with workforce growth,” he said.

“In the 1980’s, SMEs built around 40% of homes and we trained more than 20,000 bricklayers and carpenters. In 2026, SMEs build 9% of homes and in total, fewer than 20.000 construction apprentices get trained.”

His comments underline a wider concern that concentrating too heavily on large developers and factory-based construction could fail to address the underlying skills shortage.

Can the Construction Jobs Plan deliver?

The Government has already acknowledged that the answer requires more than simply increasing the number of training places.

Pennycook pointed to investment in skills, the work being undertaken by the Department for Education, greater devolution of skills provision and initiatives such as Technical Excellence Colleges and homebuilding hubs on large-scale sites.

The challenge will be turning those individual initiatives into a coherent workforce strategy.

That will mean making construction careers more attractive, reducing the number of people who leave the sector, improving training and ensuring employers have sufficient confidence in the future pipeline to take on apprentices and new entrants.

It will also require construction to attract workers from a broader section of the population, including women and younger people, while ensuring existing skilled workers remain in the industry for longer.

The Government’s planning reforms are intended to accelerate housebuilding and create greater certainty for developers. New planning rules introduced in August are designed to fast-track homes around stations and other well-connected locations, while wider reforms seek to create a faster and more predictable planning system. (GOV.UK)

But the success of those reforms will ultimately depend on whether the construction industry has the capacity to respond.

The forthcoming Construction Jobs Plan therefore has the potential to become a critical part of the Government’s wider housing strategy. With CITB forecasting a requirement for 206,000 additional workers by 2030, the issue is no longer simply about how many homes Britain wants to build.

It is about whether the country has enough people with the right skills to build them.

Cowboy Builders Government Policy Nationwide Sureties

The problems caused by cowboy builders and the government response

Few phrases strike as much dread into a homeowner’s heart as “cowboy builder”. Anyone who has commissioned building work, whether a loft conversion, an extension or a simple kitchen refit, will know the fear of handing over a deposit to someone who then disappears, does shoddy work, or leaves a job half-finished and moves on to the next unsuspecting victim. It is a problem that has plagued the UK construction industry for decades, and one that successive governments have struggled to get a grip on. Now, following a new announcement from Downing Street, ministers say they are finally putting the cowboys out of business.

What exactly is a cowboy builder?

The term “cowboy builder” is used to describe a tradesperson, or more often an unregulated firm posing as one, who takes on building work without the skills, qualifications or intention to complete it properly. Some cowboy builders are simply incompetent, cutting corners on materials or workmanship to save money and boost their profit margin. Others are outright fraudsters, who take large upfront payments and either vanish altogether or spin out a project for months while extracting more and more money from an increasingly desperate homeowner. Because anyone in the UK can currently call themselves a builder, with no legal requirement to hold a qualification, register with a trade body, or demonstrate competence of any kind, the industry has long been an easy target for opportunists.

The scale of the problem is considerable. Government figures show that more than one in four UK adults who carried out home improvement work in the past eighteen months experienced problems with their builder, ranging from projects abandoned halfway through to shoddy workmanship and even, in some cases, elderly homeowners being pressured into paying over the odds. More than a third of those affected faced additional costs, losing an average of £750 as a result. Across the country as a whole, people lost more than £10.3 billion in 2024 alone on home and garden maintenance work due to overcharging, unfair practices or work that simply never materialised. Beyond the financial hit, the human cost is significant too, with families left living in a building site, sometimes for months on end, and suffering the kind of stress that can affect health, relationships and daily life.

The government’s response

The prime minister, Andy Burnham, has now unveiled a package of measures designed to tackle the problem head-on. Speaking as the plans were announced, Burnham did not mince his words about the damage rogue traders cause. “Cowboy builders don’t just rip people off,” he said. “They leave families with months of stress, the disruption of unfinished work, and that horrible feeling of being taken advantage of. Not only that, but they give the vast majority of decent, hardworking tradespeople a bad name.” He added that the goal of the new measures was straightforward: “We’re putting the cowboys out of business. These changes mean you’ll now have the option to keep your money safe and release it bit by bit as the work gets done.”

At the centre of the announcement are two new initiatives. The first is an Approved Code, developed jointly by the Furniture and Home Improvement Ombudsman and the Chartered Trading Standards Institute, which building firms can sign up to in order to demonstrate that they meet higher standards of customer service, transparency and dispute resolution. The code is expected to have its first participating firms on board by the end of September, with full implementation planned for December 2026. The second, and arguably more significant, measure is a new payment platform called Trusted Payments. Rather than handing over large sums upfront, homeowners using the app will be able to link their payments to specific project milestones, releasing funds only as agreed stages of work are completed. Built on payment infrastructure provided by Stripe, with retention monies held through an independent trust arrangement, the system is designed to give both parties confidence: homeowners know their money is protected, while reputable builders are assured of prompt payment for completed work. The app is expected to be available to more than 100,000 traders by the end of September.

Business secretary Jonathan Reynolds framed the changes as part of a broader push to protect consumers, saying the government was “taking action to protect consumers, support reputable traders and make sure people can spend their money with greater confidence and security.” Downing Street has also linked the announcement to a wider series of consumer protection measures, including recent action against subscription traps and misleading discount pricing.

Industry reaction: cautious welcome, calls for more

The response from the building trade itself has been broadly positive, albeit with a significant caveat. Brian Berry, chief executive of the Federation of Master Builders, called the plans “a great move for the industry” but warned that voluntary schemes have a poor track record of solving the problem on their own. “It is a real concern that this is just another voluntary programme without regulation behind it,” he said, arguing that the long-term solution has to be a compulsory licensing scheme for building companies, since currently anyone can set up as a builder with no minimum competence requirement.

The National Federation of Builders struck a similarly supportive but pointed tone, welcoming the direction of travel while noting some overlap with existing industry codes of conduct, and suggesting the scheme could evolve into a fully digitised Building Passport that records the history of work carried out on every property. The National Federation of Roofing Contractors also backed the principle behind the reforms, though it cautioned that any new payment system “must not place an unreasonable administrative or financial burden on contractors who are simply trying to get paid fairly for work they have completed.”

What homeowners can do now

Until the new code and payment system are fully bedded in, homeowners are not without options. Checking whether a firm is genuinely registered with a recognised trade body such as the Federation of Master Builders, rather than simply claiming affiliation, remains a sensible first step, as does searching for accredited traders through TrustMark, the government-backed quality scheme. Word of mouth recommendations from neighbours or local community groups continue to be one of the most reliable ways of finding a trustworthy tradesperson, and paying at least part of any large bill by credit card offers an extra layer of protection, since card providers share liability if a firm fails to deliver. Above all, trusting one’s instincts still counts for a great deal; if something about a builder or a quote feels wrong, it usually is.

The measures announced this week will not eliminate cowboy builders overnight, and critics are right to point out that a voluntary scheme cannot force rogue traders to change their ways. But for an industry that has operated for years with virtually no formal safeguards for consumers, the combination of an accredited code of conduct and a milestone-based payment system represents a meaningful step forward, and one that reputable builders, who have long been undercut and outshouted by the cowboys, are likely to welcome.

Developers Government Policy House Building Nationwide Sureties News

Andy Burnham’s £10bn housing pledge is a bold first step

Prime Minister Andy Burnham has confirmed one of the most significant housing interventions in recent memory, allocating nearly £10 billion to 33 Strategic Partners tasked with delivering 73,600 new social and affordable homes across England, outside London, over the next decade. The announcement, made alongside Housing Secretary Angela Rayner, represents the first major tranche of the wider £39 billion Social and Affordable Homes Programme (SAHP) and signals a deliberate shift back towards council-led housebuilding after decades of decline.

The scale of the funding is matched by the scale of the need it addresses, with close to 180,000 children currently reported to be growing up in temporary accommodation and many more households stuck on local authority waiting lists.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham stated: “No child should be raised in a hostel room. And no family should wait ten years for a front door of their own.”

He added: “Councils built this country out of a housing crisis once before. Backed properly, and trusted to get on with it, they will do it again.”

That framing matters, because the practical heart of this announcement is not simply the cash but who is being trusted to spend it. For the first time, individual councils have been awarded Strategic Partnership status directly with Homes England, rather than having to bid scheme-by-scheme as in previous funding rounds.

Cambridge City Council, Eastleigh Borough Council and Newcastle City Council are the three local authorities to secure this status, joining a roster of 33 partners that also includes major housing associations such as Clarion and Stonewater, and developers including Vistry Homes, several of which have picked up the maximum individual allocation of £350 million.

Angela Rayner, speaking alongside the Prime Minister, brought a personal note to the announcement, saying that families should not be left raising children without a place to call home and that nobody should spend years waiting for somewhere safe and affordable to live. She also drew on her own background, recalling that a secure home was the foundation of a better life for her and that she would not have reached her current position without one. That personal framing is likely to resonate with voters who feel housing policy is too often discussed in abstract, technical terms.

On the numbers, roughly £9.58 billion of the total is earmarked for the 33 partners outside London, with around 60 per cent of the resulting homes expected to be for social rent, the cheapest form of tenancy, let at close to half of typical market rates. More than £2 billion is destined for mayoral areas, with Greater Manchester alone in line for an estimated £529 million to support around 4,400 homes, reflecting Burnham’s own political roots as the region’s former mayor. Liverpool City Region has been told to expect £380 million. London, meanwhile, is being handled separately through the Greater London Authority, which has secured up to £11.7 billion of its own funding envelope for the capital.

Beyond the headline grant, the government has attached some supporting measures designed to help councils actually use the money. An additional £46 million will be invested over three years to build up councils’ skills and capacity for large-scale housebuilding, an area many local authorities have struggled with after years of reduced direct delivery. Ministers have also pointed to Right to Buy receipts, worth £1.61 billion from sales in the last financial year alone, as a further funding stream councils can draw on alongside the new grant.

Reaction from the housing sector has been broadly welcoming, if watchful. Gavin Smart, chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Housing, welcomed the strong focus on social rent homes and the recognition of the role councils, housing associations and other providers will play in delivering the next generation of affordable housing, while noting that the investment could meaningfully reduce homelessness and ease pressure on temporary accommodation if it is delivered at pace. That caveat, delivered at pace, is likely to be the defining test of this policy over the coming years, given the well-documented planning, procurement and construction capacity constraints that have slowed previous housebuilding drives.

It is also worth noting the political backdrop to the announcement. Burnham had previously argued, before taking on the role of Prime Minister, that the entire £39 billion fund should be reserved for social rent housing rather than split between social rent and other forms of affordable tenure. The 60 per cent split confirmed in this announcement represents something of a compromise on that earlier position, a reminder that even flagship housing policy is subject to the trade-offs of government. Separately, the government used the same announcement to confirm it will strip back social value requirements on government contracts, removing certain sustainability and net zero conditions, a move that has drawn less attention but could prove significant for how these homes are built.

Taken as a whole, this is a genuinely substantial commitment, both financially and symbolically, restoring councils to a central role in housebuilding for the first time in a generation. Whether it translates into front doors for the families currently stuck in temporary accommodation will depend less on the size of the headline figure and more on the unglamorous work of planning permissions, contractor capacity and local delivery over the next ten years. For now, the ambition is clear; the proof will be in the build.

Construction Government Policy Nationwide Sureties News

What do the proposed changes to earned settlement mean for construction

The Government’s proposed overhaul of UK settlement rules could have significant consequences for the construction industry, which relies heavily on migrant labour to fill skills shortages.

The proposed earned settlement system would replace the current model under which many migrants can apply for indefinite leave to remain (ILR) after five years. Instead, the Government wants settlement to become something that migrants must effectively earn through their contribution to the UK economy and society.

The consultation on the proposals closed in February 2026 after receiving more than 200,000 responses. However, the Government has yet to publish its final response. In July, Immigration Minister Mike Tapp confirmed that a substantive response would be provided alongside the consultation outcome in autumn 2026.

What is earned settlement?

Settlement, also known as ILR, gives a person the right to live and work permanently in the UK without the restrictions attached to most temporary immigration routes.

Under current rules, many Skilled Worker visa holders can apply for ILR after five years, provided they meet the relevant requirements. Once settled, they are no longer dependent on an employer for immigration sponsorship.

The Government’s proposed earned settlement model is based on the principle that permanent residence should reflect an individual’s contribution and integration rather than simply the passage of time.

The Home Office says settlement should recognise “sustained good conduct, contribution and integration”, with applicants assessed against four broad pillars: contribution, integration, character and residence.

The central proposal is to increase the standard qualifying period from five to 10 years, with the possibility of reducing or extending that period according to an individual’s circumstances.

How would the new system work?

The consultation proposed a 10-year starting point, with a series of adjustments.

For example, achieving C1-level English could reduce the qualifying period by one year. Earning taxable income of at least £50,270 for three consecutive years could reduce it by five years, while earning £125,140 or more for three years could provide a seven-year reduction.

Five years of employment in a specified public-service occupation could also produce a five-year reduction, while significant community involvement, such as volunteering, could potentially reduce the period by three to five years. Global Talent and Innovator Founder applicants could potentially benefit from a seven-year reduction.

The proposals also contain penalties. Receiving public funds for less than 12 months could add five years to the qualifying period, while receiving them for more than 12 months could add 10 years. Illegal entry, entering on a visit visa or overstaying for six months or more could add up to 20 years.

The Government has also proposed removing the existing 10-year long-residence route, replacing it with the new system of adjustable qualifying periods.

One particularly controversial element is the suggestion that some lower-skilled workers could face a 15-year baseline. This matters considerably to construction because a number of trades have historically relied on overseas recruitment.

Why construction could be particularly exposed

Construction already faces persistent shortages in skilled workers, while the industry has a substantial migrant workforce. Research cited by PBC Today puts the proportion of construction workers born outside the UK at around 16%.

The Government’s own immigration rules also demonstrate the importance of overseas recruitment to some construction trades. Bricklayers, roofers, carpenters and joiners, and certain construction trades are currently included on the Immigration Salary List, allowing qualifying workers to access reduced salary and skills thresholds.

That creates a potential mismatch between immigration policy and the industry’s labour requirements.

A worker may be sufficiently skilled and sufficiently valuable for a construction business to sponsor them, but still earn below the proposed £50,270 threshold needed for the five-year settlement reduction. Such a worker could therefore face the full 10-year qualifying period, or potentially longer if the final rules retain differentiated treatment for lower-skilled occupations.

This is particularly important for trades where salaries do not necessarily reflect their economic importance. A highly experienced bricklayer, carpenter or roofer may be difficult to replace but is unlikely to earn anything close to £125,140 a year.

The House of Commons Home Affairs Committee has already questioned the logic behind the proposed earnings thresholds. Dr Madeleine Sumption of the Migration Observatory described the use of tax thresholds as “a little arbitrary”, while former Migration Advisory Committee chair Professor Alan Manning warned that the £50,270 threshold could even create an incentive for employers to suppress migrant workers’ wages to delay their settlement.

That is a significant concern for construction employers because the ability to retain experienced workers is already an important part of managing skills shortages.

Sponsorship costs could increase

For construction businesses, the practical impact would extend beyond immigration status.

A worker who takes twice as long to achieve settlement could remain sponsored for twice as long. That means additional visa applications, immigration administration, compliance responsibilities and associated costs.

Joanne Hennessy, partner and head of business immigration at TLT, warned that employers who previously expected to face “at most five years of cost and compliance” could potentially see that period double. She also highlighted the risk that longer settlement routes could make it harder for construction companies to attract and retain international workers.

There is also a retention issue. Once an employee obtains ILR, they have considerably greater freedom to change employer. Keeping someone on a sponsored visa for longer may therefore give employers greater control, but it can also make the UK less attractive to workers considering where to build a long-term career.

That could become particularly problematic when construction companies are competing internationally for experienced engineers, project managers and specialist tradespeople.

A potential incentive to pay more

There is, however, another side to the proposals.

Linking settlement to earnings could encourage employers and employees to invest in progression, training and higher-skilled roles. A worker who moves into a more senior position and crosses the relevant earnings threshold could potentially shorten their route to settlement.

For construction, that could support career progression from skilled trades into supervisory, managerial and technical roles.

But it also risks creating a two-tier workforce in which the workers most essential to delivering projects are not necessarily those who benefit most from the settlement system.

The Parliamentary Home Affairs Committee has warned that the proposed earnings reductions could be poorly targeted. It noted that the median income of Skilled Workers, excluding Health and Care workers, was £56,600 in 2023/24, meaning many would potentially qualify for the five-year reduction, but questioned why someone making a positive fiscal contribution while earning below £50,270 should face the full 10-year route.

What happens next?

The most important point for construction employers is that earned settlement is not yet law. The existing settlement rules remain in force while the Government considers the consultation responses.

The Government has indicated that the final consultation response is expected in autumn 2026. It is also considering whether transitional arrangements should protect people already in the UK who are working towards settlement.

That transitional issue could be critical. Applying substantially longer settlement periods retrospectively to workers who came to Britain expecting to qualify under the existing five-year system has attracted strong criticism. The House of Lords Justice and Home Affairs Committee described retrospective changes as potentially “manifestly unfair” and recommended against applying them to people already on a qualifying route.

For construction businesses, the sensible approach is therefore to treat earned settlement as a significant potential workforce-planning issue rather than a settled immigration rule.

The industry needs clarity on whether existing workers will be protected, how lower-paid but strategically important occupations will be treated, and whether the final system will recognise contribution in terms broader than salary alone.

For a sector already struggling to recruit and retain enough skilled people to meet housing, infrastructure and net-zero ambitions, making the route to permanent residence longer and less predictable could carry a substantial cost. Unless the final rules are carefully designed around genuine skills shortages, there is a risk that earned settlement could make the UK less competitive in the global market for construction talent at precisely the time the industry needs more workers, not fewer.

Construction Government Policy Nationwide Sureties News Public Works Contract

New Hospital Programme awards 11 construction partnerships

The Government has taken another major step in delivering its long-term NHS infrastructure plans by confirming 11 construction partnerships under the New Hospital Programme (NHP). The agreements mark a significant milestone for the programme’s innovative Hospital 2.0 delivery model, which aims to build hospitals faster, more efficiently and at better value for taxpayers through standardised design and collaborative procurement.

The partnerships will deliver the first wave of major hospital projects using the Hospital 2.0 Alliance (H2A), bringing together NHS trusts and leading construction companies under a new collaborative framework designed to replace traditional procurement methods that have often delayed major public sector projects.

The announcement represents one of the most significant developments in the Government’s wider £37 billion New Hospital Programme, which aims to modernise England’s ageing hospital estate while creating greater certainty for the construction industry and supporting thousands of skilled jobs.

Hospital 2.0: A New Way to Build Hospitals

At the heart of the programme is Hospital 2.0, a standardised approach to designing, constructing and operating NHS hospitals.

Rather than treating every new hospital as a bespoke project, Hospital 2.0 introduces repeatable designs, standardised components and modern methods of construction. Around 80% of each hospital will follow common design principles while allowing the remaining elements to be tailored to local clinical requirements. The approach is intended to reduce design costs, speed up construction, improve quality and enable multiple hospitals to be built simultaneously.

The programme also focuses on improving patient outcomes. New hospitals will feature predominantly single-patient bedrooms, digitally enabled facilities, flexible clinical spaces, improved patient flow and sustainable building techniques. The standardised designs are intended to provide hospitals capable of meeting NHS needs for at least the next 60 years while enhancing infection prevention, staff wellbeing and operational efficiency.

Eleven Partnerships Confirmed

The Hospital 2.0 Alliance has matched ten leading construction organisations with 11 Wave 1 hospital schemes following a collaborative allocation process.

The proposed delivery partnerships include Airedale NHS Foundation Trust with GRAHAM; Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust with Willmott Dixon; Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust with Sacyr UK; Hinchingbrooke Hospital with Kier Construction; Hillingdon Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust with Laing O’Rourke; James Paget University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Queen Elizabeth Hospital King’s Lynn NHS Foundation Trust with Skanska; Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust with Integrated Health Projects; Milton Keynes University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust with Morgan Sindall Construction; North Manchester General Hospital with Bovis Construction; and West Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust with Dragados.

The collaborative model differs significantly from conventional procurement by creating long-term partnerships rather than one-off contracts. The intention is that lessons learned on one hospital can be rapidly applied across future projects, improving productivity, safety and consistency throughout the programme.

Cutting Bureaucracy and Speeding Up Delivery

The Government says the new arrangements will reduce procurement delays that have historically slowed major NHS capital projects.

Karin Smyth, Minister of State for Health, said: “For too long, the construction of new hospitals has been bogged down by bureaucratic procurement processes, even after full approval and funding was in place, and we’re determined to change that.

“The changes announced today are a major step forward in streamlining the procurement process. Patients can look forward to new hospitals being delivered quicker, industry can plan with certainty, and taxpayers can be assured that we are getting maximum value for their money.

“With stronger collaboration, shared learning and a boost for jobs, this further demonstrates this government’s commitment to the New Hospital Programme, providing world-class facilities for the NHS and helping the economy in the process.”

Learning from Every Project

One of Hospital 2.0’s defining features is the creation of a collaborative supply chain through the Hospital 2.0 Alliance.

Instead of contractors working independently on individual projects, the framework encourages knowledge sharing across every scheme. Construction partners will work to common standards for health and safety, quality, sustainability and productivity, enabling continuous improvement as each new hospital progresses.

The programme also places significant emphasis on industrialised construction methods, including greater use of off-site manufacturing, standardised building components, digital design and data-driven project management. These approaches are expected to reduce waste, improve programme certainty and help address skills shortages within the construction sector.

Delivering Better Hospitals

The first annual New Hospital Programme report highlights Hospital 2.0 as a key enabler for delivering future NHS infrastructure more efficiently following the programme’s reset in 2025.

The report states that the standardised design is now substantially complete, with prototype patient rooms already tested and final design products being shared with participating NHS trusts. The programme has also strengthened governance, commercial oversight and technical expertise through the appointment of its Health Delivery Partnership and the mobilisation of the Hospital 2.0 Alliance.

While challenges remain, including maintaining market capacity and delivering multiple large-scale projects concurrently, ministers believe the new delivery model provides a more realistic and sustainable framework for transforming the NHS estate.

For patients, the programme promises modern, digitally enabled hospitals designed around privacy, safety and clinical efficiency. For the construction industry, it offers a long-term pipeline of work with greater certainty. For taxpayers, the Government hopes Hospital 2.0 will deliver better value through standardisation, collaboration and reduced procurement delays.

Construction Government Policy House Building Nationwide Sureties

Angela Rayner reaffirms commitment to 1.5 million new homes

Housing Secretary Angela Rayner has reaffirmed the Government’s commitment to delivering 1.5 million new homes during the current Parliament, insisting she will not abandon one of Labour’s flagship housing pledges despite mounting economic and construction challenges.

Speaking after Prime Minister Andy Burnham placed housing at the heart of his new administration’s agenda, Rayner acknowledged the scale of the task but stressed that the target remains unchanged: “1.5m homes is a difficult target. It was when I made the target, but I’m going to keep the target, and I’m not going to be defeated.”

The comments come as the Government seeks to accelerate housebuilding through planning reforms, increased investment in affordable housing and a renewed emphasis on council house construction, with Burnham promising the largest council housebuilding programme since the post-war era.

Housing target remains central to Government plans

The commitment to build 1.5 million homes has been a cornerstone of Labour’s housing strategy, but recent figures have highlighted the scale of the challenge.

Higher construction costs, labour shortages, elevated borrowing costs and slower-than-expected housing completions have all raised questions over whether the target can realistically be achieved within the parliamentary term. Rayner herself has acknowledged that rising build costs have made the objective even harder to reach, although she has rejected suggestions that ministers are preparing to abandon it.

Alongside maintaining the target, Rayner has ruled out introducing rent controls, arguing that increasing housing supply remains the most effective long-term solution to improving affordability.

Construction industry welcomes ambition but calls for further action

The construction and housebuilding sectors have broadly welcomed the Government’s determination to increase housing delivery but warn that planning reform alone will not be enough.

The Home Builders Federation said the return of Rayner as Housing Secretary provides continuity and welcomed the Government’s commitment to housing. However, it stressed that wider barriers must also be addressed, including planning delays, viability issues, infrastructure investment, workforce shortages and the availability of development finance if the industry is to deliver homes at the required pace.

Industry experts have repeatedly highlighted shortages of skilled tradespeople, including bricklayers, electricians and plumbers, alongside supply chain pressures and rising material costs, as significant constraints on increasing housing output. These challenges have become more acute following several years of inflation across the construction sector.

Many developers also argue that greater certainty around planning decisions, faster approvals and continued support for affordable housing are essential to unlock new developments.

Housing sector backs renewed council housebuilding

Construction industry welcomes Burnham’s housing and skills ambitions — Official Portrait. Image: GOV UK

The Government’s renewed focus on council housing has been welcomed across much of the housing sector.

Responding to Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s pledge to expand council housebuilding, Gavin Smart, chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Housing, said:“Andy Burnham’s speech rightly puts housing at the centre of the national debate, recognising that a safe, secure home underpins people’s life chances and the country’s economic success. The focus on large-scale council housebuilding reflects the urgency of the housing crisis, but delivering on this ambition will require sustained investment and a whole-sector effort.

“CIH will continue to work with government, local authorities, housing associations and partners across the sector to help turn this ambition into reality – delivering the homes people need and the foundations for healthier, fairer and more prosperous communities.”

The Chartered Institute of Housing has consistently argued that increasing the supply of affordable and social housing is critical to reducing homelessness, easing pressure on temporary accommodation and improving long-term economic productivity.

Balancing ambition with reality

While many within the housing and construction sectors support the Government’s ambition, most agree that delivery will require far more than political commitment alone.

The industry continues to call for sustained investment in infrastructure, expanded skills training, greater certainty for developers and long-term planning reform to enable local authorities and housebuilders to accelerate delivery.

Burnham has pledged to publish a wider 10-year plan for Britain later this year, with housing expected to remain a central pillar of the Government’s economic growth strategy. The Prime Minister has also made ending rough sleeping and expanding council housing early priorities of his administration.

For construction firms, developers and housing providers, Rayner’s latest comments provide reassurance that the Government remains committed to its headline housing pledge. However, with completions still well below the level required to meet the target, the coming years will determine whether planning reforms, investment and industry collaboration can translate political ambition into homes on the ground.

Construction Government Policy Nationwide Sureties

Construction industry welcomes Andy Burnham’s housing and skills ambitions

The UK construction industry has broadly welcomed Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s commitment to a major council house building programme and a renewed focus on technical education, while stressing that success will depend on long-term investment, planning reform and tackling persistent skills shortages.

In his first speech outside 10 Downing Street, Burnham pledged to “build more council homes”, overhaul the education system to help more young people into work, continue devolving power “to every postcode in the land”, re-industrialise parts of the country left behind since the 1980s and publish a new 10-year plan for Britain later this year. He also promised immediate measures to ease the cost-of-living crisis and give households “some breathing space”.

For the construction sector, the speech offered a strong indication that housebuilding, skills and regional investment will sit at the heart of the new government’s economic agenda.

Burnham’s commitment to expanding council housing echoes proposals he outlined during his Labour leadership campaign, where he described plans for the biggest council house building programme since the post-war era. His wider vision includes making greater use of public land, strengthening British supply chains through public procurement and creating stronger links between technical education and industry.

The emphasis on vocational education has also been welcomed across construction, an industry that continues to face acute labour shortages. Burnham said the education system would place greater emphasis on helping young people into work while improving mental health support, signalling a move towards greater parity between academic and technical routes. His approach is widely expected to build on the Skills Bootcamps introduced under Sir Keir Starmer’s government.

Industry commentators believe a stronger pipeline of skilled workers could help address one of construction’s biggest challenges. Employers have consistently warned that shortages of bricklayers, carpenters, electricians, plumbers and site managers remain one of the biggest barriers to increasing housing delivery and infrastructure investment.

Reaction from across the sector has been cautiously optimistic. Industry publication PBC Today noted that while Burnham’s speech contained relatively few policy details, his commitment to building more council homes and reforming education represented encouraging signals for construction. It added that expanding technical education and potentially extending Skills Bootcamps could further strengthen recruitment into the industry.

However, many organisations are now looking beyond the rhetoric and awaiting greater detail. The promised 10-year plan, expected later this year, is likely to be closely scrutinised by developers, contractors, housing associations and local authorities seeking clarity over funding, planning reform and procurement.

The proposed devolution of power has also generated interest across the sector. Burnham pledged to continue transferring decision-making away from Westminster and into local communities, arguing that growth is best delivered locally rather than through centralised government. For construction businesses, greater local control over housing, infrastructure and regeneration could accelerate decision-making and allow investment to better reflect regional priorities.

Similarly, Andy Burnham’s ambition to re-industrialise areas that have struggled since the 1980s could create significant opportunities for construction firms involved in manufacturing facilities, industrial estates, transport infrastructure and energy projects. His commitment to favour British industry through public procurement may also provide additional opportunities for domestic construction supply chains.

The government’s focus on reducing living costs has indirect implications for the industry as well. If successful, measures to improve affordability and increase housing supply could stimulate demand across the residential construction market while supporting wider economic confidence.

Nevertheless, analysts have cautioned that delivering a large-scale council house programme will not be straightforward. Rising construction costs, planning constraints, limited availability of development land and continuing skills shortages all present significant challenges. Recent analysis has questioned whether the proposed investment alone would be sufficient to deliver housing at the scale suggested without broader planning and private sector reforms.

The coming months will therefore be critical. Construction businesses are expected to welcome the government’s clear recognition of housing and skills as national priorities, but they will also be looking for practical measures to support delivery.

If Andy Burnham’s forthcoming 10-year strategy combines sustained investment, planning reform, expanded technical education and genuine devolution of power, it could provide the construction industry with the long-term certainty it has sought for many years.

For now, the sector appears encouraged by the direction of travel. The challenge facing the new Prime Minister will be turning ambitious commitments on housing, education and regional growth into projects that can be delivered on the ground.

Government Policy Homes England House Building Nationwide Sureties

MP’s call for the use of historic buildings as homes

A hard-hitting new report from Parliament’s Culture, Media and Sport (CMS) Committee has warned that the UK’s approach to protecting its built heritage is “failing miserably”, as leaking roofs, crumbling brickwork and vacant premises continue to blight historic buildings across the country.

Published on 13 July 2026, Protecting Built Heritage is the result of an 18-month inquiry into the funding, planning and workforce challenges facing the UK’s historic environment, from listed buildings and places of worship to industrial heritage and conservation areas. The committee received 113 written submissions and held five oral evidence sessions with heritage charity leaders, architects, church officials, local authorities and government ministers.

https://depositphotos.com/portfolio-60530558.html?content=photo

The report’s headline finding is stark: Historic England estimates that up to 670,000 homes could be delivered by bringing vacant or under-used historic buildings back into residential use, equivalent to almost half the government’s target of 1.5 million new homes by 2029. Yet the committee found this potential remains largely untapped, with reuse still treated as an afterthought rather than a priority in housing and planning policy.

“A Deep Complacency”: The Chair’s Verdict

Dame Caroline Dinenage MP, Chair of the CMS Committee, did not mince her words when the report was published. “Old buildings and other pieces of our past play a vital economic, social and cultural role in our communities, but the sight of leaking roofs, crumbling brickwork and vacant premises illustrates how the current policy approach to heritage is failing miserably to support either its protection or potential,” she said.

She went further, criticising the government’s ambition on housing: “Historic England says that there is potential to create a whopping 670,000 new homes and yet the government’s approach reveals a deep complacency, is devoid of ambition, and shows a complete lack of imagination.”

She called for a fundamental shift in mindset, arguing that “‘reuse first’ should be the guiding principle, with a heritage to housing scheme offering a clear win-win by preserving our historic buildings and helping to meet the pressing need for new homes.” She also pressed ministers to address funding gaps and the skills shortage that is undermining the sector’s ability to carry out repairs.

Dame Caroline reserved particular criticism for double standards in how public and private heritage assets are treated, noting that “it also shouldn’t be right that private owners face significant obligations to protect historic buildings, while government departments are able to allow heritage assets to rot at public expense.” She warned that continued deterioration risked “not just links to our past but… opportunities for economic growth and regeneration in our communities.”

Learning from Italy’s €1 Homes Scheme

Among the report’s central recommendations is a call for a UK “heritage-to-housing” scheme modelled partly on international examples, most notably Italy’s much-publicised €1 homes initiative, which sells historic properties cheaply on condition that new owners restore them.

Tanya Szendeffy, Senior Conservation and Design Officer for Lewes and Eastbourne Councils, told the inquiry that a similar approach could be adapted for British conditions, suggesting “a company could be formed between local government and the developer which would ideally be the local community who can then rent etc to whomever they wish.” The committee acknowledged the Italian scheme has not been without problems, including heavy renovation costs and speculative purchases, and recommended any UK version include strong safeguards for genuine long-term occupation.

Industry Voices: “The Greenest Architecture Is the Building That Exists”

Witnesses were united in stressing that active use, not preservation in aspic, is the best safeguard for historic buildings. Ben Cowell, Director General of Historic Houses, told the committee “the best protection for a building in the long term is for it to be occupied, used, utilised, lived in and loved.” Camilla Finlay, Director of Clews Architects, made a similar point, observing “our greenest architecture is the building that exists.”

The report also flagged deep concern about the specialist skills pipeline. Emma Squire, co-Chief Executive of Historic England, warned that “76% of heritage construction organisations cannot find people with relevant skills when they go out to market and one in six are turning down work due to skills shortages,” adding that the sector faces an additional 105,000 jobs a year in demand through to 2050 it currently cannot fill.

On funding, the Heritage Alliance told the inquiry that 81 per cent of heritage organisations it surveyed cited a lack of funding as a major concern, with a third ending the last financial year in deficit. Reverend Paula Griffiths, a retired Church of England priest, criticised the closure of the Listed Places of Worship Grant Scheme, arguing “without it, the cost of all repair schemes will increase by 20%, whether or not the parish are successful in any grant application.”

VAT, Planning and the Public Estate

The report is also sharply critical of the current VAT regime, which charges 20 per cent on repairs and alterations to listed buildings while new-build construction is largely zero-rated. Witnesses described this as a “catastrophic” burden on major restoration projects, and the committee has urged the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to open formal talks with the Treasury on targeted relief.

MPs were equally scathing about the government’s own record as a custodian of heritage. Responsibility for publicly owned buildings, including former Ministry of Defence sites, is spread across departments with weak oversight and no mechanism to enforce standards, leaving public assets to fall into avoidable disrepair.

On planning, the committee welcomed reforms recognising reuse of vacant buildings as a public benefit, but warned changes may not go far enough to tackle the delays discouraging investment in historic buildings.

What Happens Next

The government is now expected to respond formally to the committee’s recommendations, which include a national dataset on the condition of heritage assets, protected training pathways for endangered heritage crafts, and embedding heritage considerations within the One Public Estate programme. The committee’s message is unambiguous: without urgent reform, the UK risks losing not only irreplaceable pieces of its past, but a substantial opportunity to tackle the housing crisis and drive local economic growth.

Civil Engineering Government Policy News Public Works Contract

Northern Powerhouse Rail faces HS2-style risks unless lessons are learnt

The government’s flagship Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR) programme risks repeating many of the costly mistakes that plagued HS2 unless governance, planning and cost control are significantly improved, according to a damning report from the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

In its latest report, the influential cross-party committee warns that, despite renewed political commitment to improving rail connectivity across the North of England, there remains considerable uncertainty over the project’s scope, delivery and affordability. Perhaps most significantly, MPs question whether the scheme can realistically be delivered within the government’s £45bn funding cap when much of the railway has yet to be fully designed or costed.

Northern Powerhouse Rail faces HS2-style risks unless lessons are learnt — Manchester Piccadilly Station. https://depositphotos.com/portfolio-7196216.html?content=photo

The PAC concludes that the Department for Transport (DfT) has failed to demonstrate a convincing plan for delivering NPR within budget and has not provided sufficient evidence that it has learnt the lessons from the failures that beset HS2. The committee is particularly concerned that key decisions on routes, capacity, governance and delivery remain unresolved more than a decade after Northern Powerhouse Rail was first proposed.

Clive Betts MP, deputy chair of the Public Accounts Committee, said: “The government’s growth strategy earlier this year signalled that there is still an appetite to finally deliver the transport infrastructure the North so badly needs. But the spectre of HS2 hangs over Northern Powerhouse Rail.

“Our Committee has heard troubling echoes of the same mistakes in loose governance that HS2 made early on, and so much of the project remains almost impressionistic, twelve years on. HS2 have even been brought on board to develop NPR’s own plans. As HS2 has been a casebook example of how not to run a major project, so their involvement in NPR does not fill us with confidence.

“Both the Treasury and DfT have questions to answer about the project’s £45bn funding cap. Given the fact that this project has not been fully scoped or designed, it is hard to see how the government was able to arrive at a hard £45bn cap.

“We have therefore written to the acting accounting officer asking that question. We need to know how this figure was arrived at and how DfT will keep to it. Capping a project’s funding before it was even designed or costed feels like putting a roof on a house before the foundations are even laid. We also need to understand how mayoral authorities will have enough scrutiny for this project to be delivered successfully.

“Northern towns and cities desperately need better connectivity, and the growth that it will provide; what they and this Committee need right now, is a clear and deliverable plan to achieve that.”

The committee’s concerns centre on the £45bn funding cap announced as part of the government’s transport strategy. MPs argue there is little evidence explaining how this figure was calculated, particularly when the overall programme has yet to be fully scoped. Without detailed engineering designs and reliable cost estimates, the PAC believes there is a significant risk that NPR could follow HS2’s trajectory of escalating costs and repeated revisions.

The report also raises questions about governance. It highlights the involvement of HS2 Ltd in developing plans for the Liverpool-Manchester section of the railway, arguing that the company’s record on cost estimation and programme delivery does little to inspire confidence. MPs warn that unless governance arrangements are strengthened from the outset, the project could repeat many of the structural weaknesses that contributed to HS2’s well-documented difficulties.

Beyond governance, the PAC identifies wider delivery risks. It says there remains uncertainty over how local authorities and combined mayoral authorities will oversee the programme, while planning, environmental mitigation and biodiversity requirements could place additional pressure on costs. As seen on HS2, environmental obligations have the potential to add significant expense if they are not properly managed during the design stage.

The committee nevertheless recognises the economic importance of Northern Powerhouse Rail. Better east-west rail connectivity between cities including Liverpool, Manchester, Bradford, Leeds, Sheffield, Hull and Newcastle is widely regarded as essential to improving productivity, supporting housing growth and creating a more balanced national economy. The PAC says its criticism is intended to improve the likelihood of successful delivery rather than question the need for investment itself.

The Department for Transport has rejected suggestions that NPR will become another HS2. Responding to the report, a DfT spokesperson said: “NPR will not repeat the mistakes of HS2 which is why we accepted all the recommendations of the James Stewart Review and are taking a disciplined, phased approach, completing detailed technical work with all stakeholders before fixing precise choices for major infrastructure.

“Since announcing NPR in January, we have worked closely with Mayors to take the project forward. New joint partnership forums are already overseeing the next stage of development and Network Rail has begun developing engineering designs.”

Industry leaders have also stressed the importance of maintaining momentum while improving delivery discipline. The Northern Powerhouse Partnership has consistently argued that better rail connectivity is fundamental to unlocking economic growth across the North, while calling for greater fiscal devolution and stronger collaboration between central government and regional leaders to ensure projects can be delivered effectively.

The PAC’s report serves as a stark reminder that delivering major infrastructure is about more than political ambition. Without clearly defined scope, robust governance and realistic budgeting, even projects with widespread support can struggle to deliver value for taxpayers.

For Northern Powerhouse Rail, the challenge is now clear. The government must demonstrate that it has genuinely learnt the lessons of HS2 by producing a credible delivery plan capable of meeting both the ambitions for the North and the realities of a £45bn funding envelope. Until then, MPs warn, there remains a real risk that one of Britain’s most important transport projects could find itself repeating the very mistakes it was expected to avoid.

Government Policy House Building News

Construction industry backs Andy Burnham’s housing-first agenda

The construction industry has broadly welcomed Andy Burnham’s first major speech as the newly elected MP for Makerfield and the frontrunner to become the next Prime Minister, in which he declared housing would be one of his top national priorities.

Burnham unveiled a 10-year plan aimed at raising living standards, rebalancing regional economies and accelerating council house building. Central to the speech was a commitment to make access to safe, secure and affordable homes a cornerstone of economic and social policy, with proposals for what could become the largest council house building programme in half a century.

For the construction sector, the announcement signals the prospect of a substantial pipeline of public-sector housing work, increased demand for contractors and suppliers, and renewed emphasis on long-term infrastructure and regeneration programmes.

CIH: housing must be treated as national infrastructure

The strongest endorsement came from the Chartered Institute of Housing, which said Burnham had “correctly recognised” that housing is fundamental to improving health, educational outcomes, reducing inequality and supporting economic growth.

In its official response, the CIH welcomed the decision to make housing a top national priority and backed the ambition to expand council house building. The institute argued that a successful programme would require a long-term funding settlement for social housing, reforms to land and planning systems, and greater powers for local authorities to borrow and invest in new homes.

The CIH also stressed that delivery would be as important as ambition. It called for certainty over grant funding, a stable policy environment and support for the housing workforce to ensure councils and housing associations could scale up development activity over the next decade.

Construction sector sees opportunity for long-term growth

Industry commentators have largely interpreted Burnham’s speech as a significant shift towards a more interventionist housing strategy, with council-led development playing a central role.

According to construction industry publication PBC Today, developers, housing providers and built environment organisations welcomed the focus on social and council housing after years of inconsistent policy. The publication reported that many in the sector see Burnham’s proposals as an opportunity to create a more predictable development pipeline and stimulate investment across regional construction markets.

Several industry voices highlighted the potential benefits for employment, skills and supply chains. A sustained council house building programme could provide greater certainty for contractors and manufacturers, helping firms invest in apprenticeships, modern methods of construction and capacity expansion.

Homelessness and affordability concerns

Matt Downie, Chief Executive of Crisis, said: “This was the speech of someone who understands a fundamental truth: a good, affordable home is the essential foundation we all need to build a life.

“We wholeheartedly welcome the prospect of a Housing First philosophy at the heart of Government. It would be transformative with benefits for employment, health, and economic growth. That’s why it must, as Andy Burnham says, be at the top of the country’s priority list.

“The level of ambition set out today – the biggest council house building programme since the post-war period – is exactly what is needed in the face of rising homelessness and record numbers of households in temporary accommodation.

“Words will need to turn into action, but from a housing and homelessness perspective this was one of the most hopeful speeches I’ve heard in many, many years.”

Economic and delivery questions remain

While the overall reaction from the construction industry has been positive, some analysts have raised questions about funding and implementation.

Burnham’s speech proposed a major expansion of council housing alongside wider plans for devolution, public investment and regional economic development. However, details on financing, borrowing arrangements and the pace of delivery have yet to be fully outlined.

Industry experts note that large-scale council house building will require not only capital funding but also planning reform, faster approvals, land assembly mechanisms and a significant increase in construction capacity. Skills shortages, material costs and local authority delivery capability remain potential constraints.

What it means for construction

For contractors, consultants and housing developers, Burnham’s housing-first agenda could mark one of the most significant public-sector housebuilding opportunities in decades.

If the proposed 10-year programme is implemented, it would create demand across the entire construction supply chain, from groundworks and infrastructure through to off-site manufacturing, retrofit and estate regeneration. The emphasis on council housing also suggests a greater role for local authorities as direct clients, potentially reshaping procurement and delivery models in the residential construction market.

The CIH’s response indicates that the housing profession is prepared to support that ambition, provided it is matched by long-term funding certainty and practical delivery reforms. For the construction industry, the message is clear: Burnham’s speech has been interpreted not simply as a political statement, but as a potential blueprint for a new era of publicly led housebuilding.

Older Posts

0151 931 5599

Government Policy