Will Burnham take Housing First national?

The question is no longer whether a Housing First philosophy works, but whether the political system is ready to embrace it, says Sophie Boobis, Homeless Link's Head of Policy and Research, in an article for Inside Housing.

From the moment it became a real possibility that Andy Burnham could take over as the UK’s next prime minister, a cautious optimism rippled through the homelessness sector.

In the first speech of his leadership campaign, Burnham made clear his intention to  “adopt a ‘national housing first philosophy”. This reference sparked a real hope he could bring ‘Manchesterism’ to the UK – to finally and fundamentally reshape the country’s approach to homelessness. And standing on the doorstep of Number 10, pledging to end rough sleeping as his Government’s first priority, seemed to justify this sense of much-needed hope.  

Many of us working across housing and homelessness understand Housing First to be a targeted homelessness intervention. Its core premise is deceptively simple: homelessness is solved by giving people a permanent home alongside tailored support. Or put even simpler: housing, first.

Mr Burnham’s Housing First philosophy takes this central idea but expands it far beyond homelessness.

A Housing First philosophy means everything in life starts with a good home: health, education and the ability to thrive in communities.

Taking an idea that has so far existed to support some of the most vulnerable people in our society and expanding it to the whole country is a transformational shift in the way housing is understood: not as a commodity, but as the foundation of a good life.

For this to become a reality, we first need to make sure that we have sufficient high-quality affordable housing. We have seen some significant housing reforms under this Labour government, including the £39bn new Social and Affordable Homes Programme and the Planning and Infrastructure Act.

While there are indications that these changes may be starting to bear fruit, we are still woefully short of the number of social and affordable homes we need to meet demand. Mr Burnham must revitalise housebuilding momentum, perhaps by bringing the ambition he set out in Greater Manchester, with a pledge to build 10,000 new council homes by 2028, to the nation.  

We have long experienced the negative consequences of not centring housing as the priority it should be. This includes the mental and physical health impact of poor-quality housing, and the temporary-accommodation crisis driven by an insufficient number of affordable homes.

With the potential of a Housing First philosophy guiding the wider government agenda, it is no wonder we are feeling hopeful.

But amid implementing a Housing First philosophy for the whole country, we must not forget the population it was designed for: people experiencing homelessness. And here, too, there is the potential for transformative change to how we prevent and end homelessness.

When Mr Burnham first spoke about his Housing First philosophy in relation to establishing the Greater Manchester Housing First unit, he said lessons would be drawn from his local pilot.

Since being established in England in 2010, Housing First has enabled excellent outcomes across tenancy sustainment, health and well-being, and offending behaviour for the people it supports. It has expanded locally and through the government’s three regional pilots in 2018, with around 140 services in operation in 2024. 

Yet, the growth of Housing First has stalled, with projects competing for the same funding as all other services across the homelessness system.

This competition for funding is telling. Housing First in England developed in parallel to traditional homelessness services, often being seen as a very specific model for a very defined cohort, and separate from the wider accommodation and support offer. Scaling up a Housing First philosophy could integrate what we know has worked, and suggest how it might apply to the whole homelessness sector.

Some of this has started to happen naturally. Person-centred approaches are so widespread that they have been incorporated into the new national supported housing standards. Services are also starting to redesign their models to move away from the arbitrary time limits on supported housing that have long been the hallmark of homelessness provision.

This example gives us the biggest clue as to what a Housing First philosophy applied to the whole homelessness system might mean. If the stability of a good home is key to helping people thrive, why would that not also apply to people experiencing homelessness? At the moment, the way the homelessness services are funded forces them into a crisis-driven response that is structured around being temporary. Temporary accommodation, hostels, even homelessness supported housing are all based on principles of transition and move-on, contrary to the ideas of safety and security Mr Burnham talks about in a Housing First philosophy.

Housing First has been proven to work, and we should absolutely be looking to embed and scale it up so that everyone who needs it can access it, no matter where in the country they live. This must include a national commitment to resourcing Housing First properly.

Housing First will not be suitable for everyone, and the homelessness sector benefits from a diversity of options to meet different people’s needs. For those with lower support needs, floating support or tenancy sustainment services should be integral under a Housing First philosophy. They already follow the same idea: give someone a home and the support they need to keep it.

Good-quality supported housing will also be key to any homelessness response, but there is an opportunity here to transform the way these services operate so that they, too, can integrate into a Housing First philosophy. Properly funding support, and committing to this as part of a long-term strategy, must be the first step.

We must also move away from the idea that there is a maximum amount of time that someone can stay in supported housing, and instead allow both the expertise of the service and the individual to choose when they are ready to move on to a new home.

Successive governments have lacked the political will to commit to the considerable upfront investment needed to transform the homelessness system. Mr Burnham’s rhetoric suggests that he may be prepared to drive this change. He has hinted at a willingness to “break Treasury orthodoxy”, challenging the short-termism that often defines public spending decisions.

For Homeless Link, which has spent years advocating for Housing First and a reset of the homelessness system and the way it is funded, this moment feels pivotal. For now, the sector watches closely. The question is no longer whether a Housing First philosophy works, but whether the political system is ready to embrace it. 

Mr Burnham has stated that “everything starts with a good home and this country has to put that at the top of its priority list”. Could his premiership do just that?