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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
20 of 51 shown
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.
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.
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.