What the construction sector needs from this month’s Budget

As autumn deepens and another Budget approaches, those of us in the construction industry will once again be listening for hints of good news amid the usual political theatre. For all the talk of 1.5 million homes over this parliament, grand infrastructure projects, levelling up towns and cities, what the industry craves is not rhetoric but delivery.

This chancellor has already flown more kites than Mary Poppins before her fiscal event on November 26. Yesterday’s unprecedented preparatory speech in Downing Street only added to the sense of anticipation. She has all but pole-axed the housing sector with her speculation around stamp duty reform and taxation.

Our sector has been through a turbulent few years, buffeted by inflation, Brexit, covid-19, supply chain disruption, labour shortages and regulatory churn. The autumn Budget presents a rare opportunity to offer stability and direction.

A sensible Budget would reconfigure the system: more funding for apprenticeships in shortage trades, more flexibility in how the levy can be spent, and relief for SMEs that invest in training but cannot shoulder additional costs

The most immediate problem is people. Construction has always been labour-intensive, but the pipeline of skilled workers is drying up at an alarming rate.

A sensible Budget would reconfigure the system: more funding for apprenticeships in shortage trades, more flexibility in how the levy can be spent, and relief for SMEs that invest in training but cannot shoulder additional costs. This would not be a handout but an investment in productivity and in the ability to meet national targets.

Just as pressing is the issue of viability. The recent report from the Home Builders Federation will have made depressing reading for the new housing secretary. Their Mind the Gap report points out that only 30,000 homes were completed in London in the year to June 2025. The report cites official figures showing planning permissions have dropped to their lowest level since records began in 2006, with just 996 projects approved over the previous 12 months.

With the government setting a requirement for London to deliver 88,000 homes a year over the next decade, output would need to increase dramatically to meet that goal, casting serious doubt on the capital’s ability to meet future needs and make the required contribution to the 1.5 million homes target. Meeting this number is not just totemic but fiscally essential for the chancellor.

What industry longs for is clarity and stability: a set of standards that are rigorous but predictable, allowing us to plan investment without the fear of the goalposts shifting every 18 months

If they are unable to meet the target, better to say so at the Budget, blame failure on the newly departed Angela Rayner and move on. Cynical, I know, but living in the real world is a necessity for the prime minister and chancellor if they are to survive.

What the Budget could also usefully do is earmark meaningful resources for local planning teams, alongside commitments to simplify and align regulations. Currently we face a thicket of requirements – building regulations, environmental assessments, net-zero compliance – all essential, but too often inconsistent and duplicative.

What industry longs for is clarity and stability: a set of standards that are rigorous but predictable, allowing us to plan investment without the fear of the goalposts shifting every 18 months.

Yes, the Labour government argued that it wants to remove these barriers, but it is too slow in coming. Just look at the log-jams caused by the Gove-created Building Safety Regulator.

It has been the regulatory fatburg in the sclerotic property pipeline which needs a good old flush. This maybe not the role of the chancellor in her Budget, but her success or failure is very much dependent on the success or otherwise of our sector.

The same clarity is required on net zero. Few dispute the necessity of decarbonising the built environment; indeed, many in our sector are enthusiastic pioneers of modern methods of construction, sustainable materials and retrofit technologies. I count myself among these advocates.

Companies will invest in training, plant, technology and innovation if they can see a clear and stable pipeline of work ahead

But the costs are real and the supply chain is not yet scaled. If the government wishes the industry to move at pace, then it must underwrite that ambition with fiscal support. There should be grants and tax incentives for retrofit, R&D funding for sustainable materials, and targeted assistance for SMEs who make up the bulk of our supply chain but lack the balance sheets to absorb additional compliance costs.

Above all, what the sector needs from this Budget is certainty. Companies will invest in training, plant, technology and innovation if they can see a clear and stable pipeline of work ahead.

That means multi-year commitments to infrastructure and housing spend, not the stop-start announcements that have characterised recent years. It also means a procurement regime that is fair and transparent, with sensible risk allocation and timely payment. Currently, construction makes up a startling 17% of all company insolvencies in the UK.

Next month, the chancellor has the chance to provide the clarity, support and stability we need to get on with the job. If she does, we will respond with energy and enthusiasm. But, if she does not, the gap between government ambition and what gets built will only widen.

For an industry that measures progress not in speeches but in reality, the message is clear: give us the tools, and we will build the future. Your success depends on us.

Richard Steer is chair of Gleeds Worldwide and a Building The Future Think Tank commissioner