Council housing as a lasting public resource

Shelter argues for council housing to be treated as an enduring public asset. Its recommendations support delivery of 90,000 social rent homes annually for ten years across providers, through new building and acquisition. Councils would play a substantially greater role, supported by sustained central government action.

The report proposes cancelling £31.8 billion of Housing Revenue Account debt, increasing investment and reforming the fiscal framework. Debt cancellation would create capacity to invest; additional funding would be needed to deliver homes. A national council housing mission would align government priorities with local authority delivery, supported by stronger planning and development teams, pooled resources and consideration of Modern Methods of Construction.

Public land would be prioritised for public benefit, including social housing, alongside stronger council land assembly powers. A separately funded acquisitions programme would bring empty and neglected properties into permanent social rent use. Shelter allows initial use as temporary accommodation, with conversion to social rent within ten years of purchase. The intended destination remains a permanent, affordable home.

ExoSett is an architecture for reconfigurable buildings in which accommodation modules are supported independently within engineered exoskeletal frames. This separation allows accommodation to be installed, removed and replaced, with the potential to relocate modules as needs change. The accommodation frame provides the supporting structure.

Shelter’s emphasis on lasting public value provides a useful context for examining that adaptability. Maintaining useful infrastructure while renewing accommodation could help a public asset evolve over generations. Potential economic, environmental and delivery advantages, including those of repeated relocation, require further demonstration through engineering, whole-life assessment and practical projects.

The National Accommodation Service (NAS) is a related but independent proposal. It envisages central government coordinating a permanent national stock of publicly provided accommodation, with local authorities identifying sites, managing local requirements and overseeing delivery. It aims to maintain and expand that resource over decades and generations.

Permanence of accommodation stock does not require permanence of geographical location. A public resource could endure while some of its accommodation is adapted, replaced or relocated in response to changing demand.

The NAS and Shelter’s proposals share substantial common ground: increasing permanent public accommodation, national coordination and substantial local involvement. The NAS considers an additional question about accommodation as an adaptable national resource. This is a possible complementary development of that thinking, alongside the financial, institutional and land reforms Shelter advocates.

The NAS and ExoSett are independent concepts. ExoSett could provide a useful architecture for implementing elements of the NAS; neither requires the other’s adoption.

Three distinct forms of permanence matter:

• The public accommodation resource is maintained and expanded for future generations.
• People have secure, permanent homes, with continuity and control over their lives.
• Buildings or modules may remain in one place or be relocated over their service lives.

Physical relocatability must not become a reason for temporary tenure or routine displacement. Security includes connections to neighbourhoods, employment, schools, care and support networks. Decisions about replacement or relocation would require resident involvement and safeguards that protect those connections. Engineering alone cannot provide housing security.

This concern also runs through the discussions of housing adequacy and residents’ experiences of permanence.

• How should long-term public value be assessed across maintenance, replacement, reuse and redistribution, including site works, transport and disruption?
• What standardisation and manufacturing arrangements would enable components to remain compatible across suppliers and generations?
• When would relocation respond effectively to changing geographical demand, compared with adaptation in place, acquisition or new construction?
• How can adaptable infrastructure provide secure, permanent homes while protecting residents’ choices and continuity of community?

Read Shelter’s original report, return to Research and Reading, or explore ExoSett design.