Chancellor Reeves has spoken repeatedly about the need to kickstart economic growth and deliver the homes this country desperately needs. We agree with her on both counts. Whilst the political will to build is arguably stronger than it has been in a generation, however, the infrastructure needed to turn that ambition into bricks and mortar is under serious strain – and the Spring Statement on 3 March is the moment to address that honestly.
The Government has set itself an ambition of 1.5 million new homes. We welcome it. But ambition without capacity is simply a target on paper. Planning departments have been hollowed out by years of underinvestment. Councils are being asked to do more with considerably less. And the engineering workforce that will physically deliver these homes is shrinking at precisely the moment it needs to grow.
The Royal Academy of Engineering has warned of a shortage of up to 1.5 million engineers by 2030. ECITB data tells us that 19% of the current engineering workforce will retire by 2026. We cannot build 300,000 homes a year – or anything close to it – without confronting that reality directly. Chancellor Reeves has made growth her defining mission. Growth requires builders. And right now, we do not have enough of them.
We are doing our part. Sutcliffe has committed to training 40 new engineers over the next decade, investing in apprenticeships and graduate programmes that create genuine pathways into the profession. But individual firms cannot solve a systemic problem alone. We need the Chancellor to match industry commitment with meaningful investment in skills infrastructure – and to ensure that financial barriers, including the cost of four-year engineering degrees which can now reach £89,000, do not continue to lock talented people out of the profession.
However, a scheme of targeted government funding for SMEs to help move young people out of NEET and into employment and training is needed. For many smaller businesses, the real cost of taking on and developing an unskilled 21-year-old is simply prohibitive.
Planning capacity matters too. Without adequately resourced planning departments, permissions stall, projects are delayed, and the homes communities desperately need simply do not get built. If Chancellor Reeves is serious about housing delivery, resourcing the system that enables it cannot be an afterthought.
Housing is not a discretionary spend. Schools and hospitals matter enormously, but housing underpins everything — health, wellbeing, economic productivity, community stability. The Chancellor has a genuine opportunity on 3 March to demonstrate that she understands the difference between housing as a political ambition and housing as a national infrastructure priority. We urge her to take it.
