Source: The Conversation – UK
On his first day as prime minister, Andy Burnham promised to end rough sleeping, and pledged an additional £340 million to the cause. A positive aim for society, to be sure, but what he didn’t mention is that we’ve nearly solved this before. The question isn’t whether ending rough sleeping is desirable or achievable, it’s why previous attempts have collapsed.
On a single night in England last autumn, 4,793 people slept rough. This was a 96% increase since 2021; 171% since 2010. A further 134,210 households, among them 175,000 children, spent that same night in temporary accommodation.
But before this, homelessness rates had begun to fall. Between 2003 and 2010, the number of people recorded as homeless by local authorities fell by around 70%. This was driven by an approach introduced by Tony Blair’s government, that tasked local authorities to work together with health and social services, and to intervene early with tenancy support, mediation and advice.
Rough sleeping in England started to climb again from 2010, up to the record figures we see today. Housing market conditions, and sluggish delivery in new building for rent, mean that demand for truly affordable housing far outstrips supply, particularly in cities.
The Welfare Reform Act in 2012 introduced public spending cuts, benefit caps and freezes in the rates of individual housing benefit, which did not keep pace with housing costs. However, it didn’t reduce the national welfare bill either. Local authorities still had a legal duty to help when people presented as homeless.
Without access to a sufficient stock of council or housing association affordable housing, this was often achieved by using temporary accommodation in the private sector. In some cases, the private housing that councils were having to use for temporary accommodation were the very same properties that had been lost from public ownership through Right to Buy.
Analysis last year found London councils were spending £5.5 million a day on homelessness.
This figure puts Burnham’s five-year £340 million funding pledge in perspective. That amount, the government has said, is to acquire and provide 1,200 homes and provide “intensive support” to 3,000 people. We know from other parts of the world that integrated, but housing-led approaches like this can work. Nevertheless, more investment will be needed for this to work long-term.
Finland is one example of such a “Housing First” approach, which aims to give people permanent housing as quickly as possible. Nested within the country’s universal, integrated health and social care system, the country’s strategy involved building high-support housing and providing daily contact and peer support. The dramatic effect on the country’s homelessness figures lasted decades. Recently though, the numbers have been rising because of cuts in housing-related benefits – a familiar story in the UK.
The UK has tried Housing First approaches too. Greater Manchester’s “A Bed Every Night” scheme cut rough sleeping from 268 in 2017’s annual rough sleeping snapshot, which counts people on one night, to under 90 by 2021. Unfortunately, Burnham missed his own 2020 target, and numbers climbed back to 197 by 2025. This was partly, he could argue, because the local commitment and ambition (including Burnham’s own contribution to the scheme from his salary) was not matched by national policy.
At the national level, we saw rapid success with the “Everyone In” scheme during the pandemic. The government prioritised urgent action, provided funding and facilitated collaboration across sectors. Every rough sleeper was brought in from the street, but it was only a temporary measure.
Read more:
Homelessness in England has reached record levels – here’s why, and how to fix it
Housing first, not housing alone
On my way home from work after Burnham’s speech, I spoke to a man outside the train station, who I have known for a while and who has experienced homelessness for a persistent period of time. I asked what he thought of Burnham’s pledge and what he thought was needed. He said that if he had his own flat tomorrow, the biggest fear wasn’t the rent, it was being alone behind a locked door. Similar experiences have been reflected repeatedly in research on long-term homelessness.
That fear of being alone is exactly what “housing first” approaches were designed for: people dealing with the effects of multiple social policy failures and traumatic periods in their own lives need support to feel at home.
But housing first doesn’t mean housing alone. Any serious homelessness strategy needs to fund social connection as deliberately as it funds bricks and mortar. This would mean multiyear funding tied to health and social care, and recruiting a dedicated support workforce. This requires a bigger, more specific commitment than five years of funding alone can achieve.
It may matter, then, that John Healey, with his past housing political experience, is now chancellor. Burnham and Healey could enable the Treasury to treat housing benefit and supported housing as economic questions, not just welfare spend. Investing in the longer-term affordable housing stock for rent could enable thousands of families and vulnerable people to move from temporary housing into permanent, affordable homes.
Burnham referred to this as a moment to “bring back hope”. A sceptic might argue that “hope” risks romanticising hardship or shifting responsibility from state to individual resilience. My own homelessness research finds hope in societal capability – a lever for organisations to work together to share risks and amplify local agency.
The new PM, with the new chancellor and reinstated housing secretary Angela Rayner, has a chance to demonstrate hope in action. But to make it a reality in longer-term plans and spending reviews, local authorities must have the support they need to enable everyone to live well and to end homelessness for good.
Jo Richardson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/07/22/andy-burnham-says-hell-end-rough-sleeping-heres-whats-needed-to-make-it-happen/