New towns programme in England: Lords Built Environment Committee reports

Approximate read time: 15 minutes

The House of Lords is scheduled to debate the following motion on 10 June 2026:

Lord Gascoigne to move that this House takes note of the report from the Built Environment Committee ‘New towns: Laying the foundations’, 25 October 2025, HL Paper 183 of session 2024–26

1. Government plans for a generation of new towns in England

The government argues that a new generation of new towns is “essential to address England’s structural housing shortage and unlock economic growth”.^[1] Ministers contend:

Housing constraints are limiting labour mobility, productivity, and social outcomes, with knock-on effects for health, education, and family formation. New towns represent a bold and nationally significant response to address these challenges and to seize the significant opportunities that they represent. We want to make sure that we are not only building new homes, but new communities which can support people throughout their lives.

Building at scale is central to this strategy. Each new town will deliver at least 10,000 homes, with many expected to exceed that threshold. This scale enables efficient land use, supports supply chain growth and innovation, and creates the conditions for integrated infrastructure and high quality placemaking. It also provides the opportunity to deliver affordable housing and social infrastructure in a way that smaller sites cannot, ensuring that new towns provide homes for everyone to live in.^[2]

In 2024, the Labour government announced that it had set up a new towns taskforce, chaired by Sir Michael Lyons.^[3] The taskforce published its report on 28 September 2025 along with the government’s initial response.^[4] The taskforce identified 12 potential sites for new towns, which were prioritised based on the criteria of supporting or unlocking economic growth and addressing present or anticipated strong housing demand relative to supply. It also recommended ‘place-making principles’ for new towns such as environmental sustainability, transport connectivity and business creation and employment opportunities.

The government welcomed the taskforce’s report and commissioned a strategic environmental assessment (SEA) to understand the environmental implications of new towns development.^[5] It said this would support final decisions on precisely which locations were taken forward. The government also said that ministers and officials would begin work with local partners to develop detailed proposals and “enhance our understanding of how different locations might meet the government’s expectations of what a future new towns programme can deliver”.

The SEA report was published in March 2026 accompanied by a consultation exercise that ran from 23 March to 19 May 2026 where the government sought views on a refined list of locations as well as how the programme should be delivered.^[6] The consultation document noted that all the proposed locations for new towns had been evaluated and that those which stood to deliver the greatest benefits had been prioritised:

This is an ambitious programme that will take decades to deliver, and government cannot support every place at once. We have therefore prioritised proposals of the most ambitious scale, with the greatest potential for economic growth, which are capable of unlocking hundreds of thousands of new homes, and improving people’s quality of life in communities across England.^[7]

As such, and subject to the outcome of the consultation process, the government has proposed to take forward new towns in the following seven locations:

• Tempsford
• Crews Hill and Chase Park, Enfield
• Leeds South Bank
• Manchester Victoria North
• Thamesmead, Greenwich
• Brabazon and the West Innovation Arc, South Gloucestershire
• Milton Keynes^[8]

Ministers have suggested work could begin on three locations before the end of this parliament:

Collectively, schemes in these locations have the potential to provide hundreds of thousands of new homes in the decades ahead and to make a vital contribution to a stronger and more secure economic future for our country. We are determined to get spades in the ground on at least three new towns in this parliament and will strive to accelerate work on all of the sites that are eventually selected for inclusion in the programme.^[9]

2. Built Environment Committee’s examination of the new towns programme

2.1 The committee’s first report

The House of Lords Built Environment Committee has published two reports as part of its ongoing inquiry into the government’s new towns programme. The first, ‘New towns: Laying the foundations’, was published on 25 October 2025.^[10]

In that first report the committee said the new towns programme provided a “major opportunity to deliver high quality, affordable, and sustainable new towns and expanded settlements at scale”.^[11] The committee said that it had examined the ‘frameworks and foundations’ that need to be in place for the government to deliver its new towns programme, which it identified as: vision and purpose; master planning and design; governance and stewardship; and finance and funding.

In its conclusions and recommendations, the committee identified several key concerns including the need for strong and dedicated leadership, and argued for the creation of a new agency to oversee and run the new towns delivery programme. Its findings included the following:^[12]

• The committee argued that strong and dedicated central government leadership was essential if the next generation of new towns was to succeed. It said this would not be possible without the government being able to communicate its overall vision for the new towns programme in terms that resonate with the public, parliamentarians, local authorities and the built environment sector. For this, the committee argued the government needed to be clear about what it was aiming to achieve through the programme.
• The committee contended the necessary leadership and long-term stewardship of the programme and of each individual new town would not be achieved through existing structures. It said that, while the presence of a dedicated, cabinet-level figurehead at the heart of government would be essential, a new agency should be created to run and oversee the delivery programme.
• The committee noted that funding was one of the most critical issues facing the programme. It observed that the original post-war new towns programme received very significant public funding in the shape of long-term loans, with the Treasury acting as a patient investor, underwriting the programme for decades, from planning, through construction, and on until maturity. In the current fiscal context, the committee said that the ability of the government to provide funding at this level was significantly reduced, meaning that alternative funding models will be needed to “plug the gap”.
• For the committee, one clear route to encouraging and supporting the provision of this kind of funding from the private and alternative sectors was by delivering the infrastructure first—for example, building the public transport links, schools, and hospitals—before breaking ground on new housing. In the course of the inquiry, the committee said that it saw clear examples of how this approach was able to support the delivery of thriving and innovative communities and could, in time, provide a source of ongoing funding for development. The committee also argued that the government would also need to take steps to ensure that it was able to capture as much of the land value for the selected sites as possible, including through reform of the compulsory purchase regime, “not least by ensuring that hope value is excluded from land valuations”.
• According to the committee, delivery of the new towns should, in almost all cases, be through development corporations. It noted that a number of possible models were available, but the committee recommended that democratic accountability should be ensured through local authority representation within those delivery and governance structures. Whatever model is used, the committee said it must be clear that it is there for the long term, with a clear responsibility for stewarding the project through delivery and community building, and for managing community assets.

2.2 Government response to the committee’s first report

The government responded to the committee’s first report on the new towns programme on 28 January 2026.^[13] The government welcomed the committee’s report but said given ongoing work to develop a new towns programme, and the report from the taskforce published in September 2025, it would “address many of its recommendations in more detail in the spring, following the necessary consultations and assessments”.^[14]

Where it did comment, on issues such as funding for example, the government said:

The delivery of new towns will be backed by funding across the government’s landmark housing programmes, such as the £39bn social and affordable housing programme, hundreds of millions of grant[s] from the national housing delivery fund, and additional capital funding managed by the national housing bank.^[15]

It also noted that the government had established a new towns unit to bring together relevant ministers and officials:

The housing minister has established the “new towns unit”, bringing together officials in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government with Homes England, to fast-track development and ensure new towns are great places to live and provide a single front door to government. To drive delivery, this new towns unit will lead on discussions with places and work across government departments to stress-test spending and delivery plans for the vital economic and social infrastructure that each new town will require.^[16]

The government response also said:

The government supports the aims of the placemaking approach recommended by the new towns taskforce in its report. This includes its recommendation that long term stewardship is considered at the outset of any new towns, as part of its core recommended placemaking principles. The report is also clear that new towns should offer a mixture of housing, including opportunities for self-build and community-led housing.^[17]

On design and infrastructure, the government response added:

The government has been clear that we want exemplary development to be the norm, not the exception. The next generation of new towns must be well-connected, well-designed, sustainable, healthy and attractive places where people want to live and have all the infrastructure, amenities and services necessary to sustain thriving communities established from the outset.

The government therefore supports the placemaking approach recommended by the taskforce and is encouraged by the aims of its recommended placemaking principles. This includes its recommendation that new towns will include the aim of a minimum of 40% for affordable homes of which half is for social rent as well as the importance of social, physical, and environmental infrastructure.

Final selection of placemaking principles will be subject to environmental assessment and consultation, however we are committed to new towns being places for everyone to live, and they should have a range of housing types available, including genuinely affordable homes.^[18]

2.3 The committee’s second report

The Built Environment Committee’s second report, ‘New towns: Creating communities’, was published on 26 March 2026.^[19] It focused, in the committee’s words, on “the fundamentally human issues of what it takes to create thriving communities”, which it identified as: vision, placemaking, design, and creating environments that are accessible, age-friendly and safe.

The committee said that the evidence it received was consistent on the potential of new towns but came with a warning on what is needed for them to deliver:

The evidence we received was remarkably consistent. There was broad support for the new towns programme across our witnesses and contributors. However, that support comes with a clear warning: without a galvanising vision, people-friendly placemaking, early social and health infrastructure, inclusive and adaptable design, and plenty of green spaces, these new towns will struggle to live up to their promise and create healthy, sustainable communities.^[20]

The committee set out its key findings as follows:

• Placemaking should be people-centred, nature‑rich and locally distinctive. The new towns must avoid homogeneity. In addition to prioritising walkable neighbourhoods, high‑quality public spaces, and biodiversity, they must incorporate diverse plot sizes and reuse existing structures as much as possible, drawing on the local landscape and heritage to create distinct identities.
• Health and inclusion must be designed in from the start, not retrofitted. The new towns must embed opportunities for active travel, green/blue infrastructure^[21] and social spaces that support physical and mental wellbeing and proactively support access for all. New towns should embed the principles of the NHS 10‑year health plan, co‑locating care in community settings and enabling green and social prescribing to improve outcomes and reduce demand on acute services. We also recommend delivering at least one flagship intergenerational housing pilot within the programme. Each new town should appoint an accessibility champion to oversee the design and construction process and avoid costly retrofitting. There should also be a central accessibility champion to provide oversight across all schemes.
• Master planning must be flexible, phased and infrastructure‑first. Each new town must be delivered in phases with regular reviews of the masterplan so that they can adapt to the changing needs and aspirations of the community. Essential social, health, active‑travel and green/blue infrastructure must be in place from the day the first residents move in, with temporary ‘meanwhile’ spaces used to bridge early gaps. Masterplans should include diverse, SME‑sized plot parcels and make routine use of open design competitions to encourage purposeful innovation while adhering to established, evidence‑based design principles.
• True value for money comes from early investment, patient capital, and “meanwhile” delivery; cutting corners will cost far more. There must be adequate funding up-front for social, health, and green infrastructure (including temporary, flexible community spaces). This requires all stakeholders to take a whole‑life view of each new town: good design and stewardship reduce costs and increase value in the medium- to long-term; speculative, low‑cost delivery ultimately only leads to failed communities and far higher remedial costs. The government and delivery bodies should use digital twins and whole‑life value metrics, including the Construction Innovation Hub’s value toolkit and robust social‑value measures, to track outcomes, demonstrate value for money, and share best practice.^[22]

The committee also reiterated several recommendations from its first report, in particular calling for the government to “establish a single, autonomous central body, reporting directly to a cabinet-level minister with sufficient authority to coordinate departments, steward quality and manage new town assets over the long term”.^[23]

The government has yet to publish its response to the committee’s second report.

3. Stakeholder reaction

Several stakeholder groups have been active in examining the government’s new towns programme, and some have given evidence to the Built Environment Committee and responded to its findings. For example, the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA) said of the committee’s first report:

The TCPA’s written evidence and evidence in public to the House of Lords Built Environment Committee’s modular inquiry into new towns stressed the need to use existing powers in the New Towns Act [1946] to assemble land and to retain land-value uplift for public benefit. This has been echoed by the committee in its report, alongside calls to embed community ownership in long-term stewardship arrangements for new towns. The TCPA also advocated for a ‘compelling, values-based national vision’ rooted in social purpose, which has yet to be articulated by government, with this requirement endorsed by the committee.^[24]

The TCPA also cited the importance of master planning, design codes and community engagement from the outset, and the “need to start with people and place rather than density and targets”.^[25] It noted this view was embraced by the committee, which also agreed with the TCPA that land-value capture and early public investment were necessary for viability and that the up-front creation of community-owned institutions was vital in order for people to have access to their facilities from the start.

Several stakeholder groups have also commented on the government’s new towns programme or published their responses to the recently closed consultation, including:

• Campaign to Protect Rural England, ‘Seven new town sites proposed by government: Our response’, 25 March 2026
• Royal Town Planning Institute, ‘Futureproof new towns’, 12 February 2026
• National Association of Local Councils (NALC), ‘NALC warns the government that new towns must not bypass local democracy’, 18 May 2026
• Demos, ‘Beyond bricks: New towns and the citizenship opportunity’, 4 December 2025
• Nicholas Boys Smith, ‘New towns. Old wisdom?’, Building Design, 21 October 2025

---

Image by Louis Reed on Unsplash.