Standing outside the official residence of the British Prime Minister after receiving a royal summons to establish a new administration, Andy Burnham declared that tackling street homelessness would be his foremost objective.
He revealed plans to allocate an additional £340 million across a three-year period to create 1,200 dwellings alongside comprehensive assistance programmes. The former Greater Manchester Mayor expressed his intention to expand initiatives similar to A Bed Every Night, which he previously championed, stating that public funds should support people’s pathways to stability rather than merely managing ongoing problems.
This £340 million allocation comes in addition to the £3.6 billion already pledged by Keir Starmer through his strategy aimed at eliminating homelessness across the nation.
Having spent more than three and a half decades working directly with those experiencing homelessness, I welcome Burnham’s commitment. In what ranks as the world’s fifth wealthiest nation, the presence of individuals sleeping rough on our streets represents a disgraceful situation, particularly in prosperous urban centres such as Brighton and Manchester.
Yet my professional experience has instilled a cautious perspective. While politicians frequently articulate noble intentions and bold proposals, these do not automatically translate into meaningful transformation. I sincerely hope that my inherent scepticism proves unfounded on this occasion. Nevertheless, despite Burnham’s notable accomplishments in Manchester, he did not succeed in eradicating street homelessness during his nine-year tenure as the city’s mayor.
When Burnham commenced his mayoral term in 2017, official records indicated 268 individuals sleeping on Manchester’s streets. By 2021, this figure had declined to 90. While Burnham deserves partial recognition for this improvement, the Conservative administration must also be acknowledged for its Everyone In scheme, which provided emergency accommodation funding during the coronavirus crisis. Following the withdrawal of this governmental support, street homelessness in Manchester rose to 149 in 2023, 154 in 2024 and 197 in 2025.
If Burnham proved unable to eliminate rough sleeping within Manchester despite managing a comparatively modest population of street sleepers, what strategy will enable him to address the nationwide figure of 4,793 individuals?
Resolving street homelessness cannot be achieved through financial injections designed solely to move people into housing. This approach was tested during the coronavirus pandemic, yet the street population subsequently rebounded. Rough sleeping functions as a symptom of deficiencies in other policy areas. The underlying drivers must be confronted, or the cycle of successive generations experiencing street homelessness will continue and intensify.
When I commenced my career supporting homeless individuals in 1985, five distinct groups comprised the majority of those sleeping rough: individuals struggling with substance dependencies, those experiencing mental health challenges, former military personnel, individuals leaving institutional care, and survivors of domestic violence and abuse. Upon my retirement, these same demographics remained the most vulnerable to rough sleeping, alongside an emerging category of individuals whose circumstances had deteriorated due to financial hardship.
For Burnham to genuinely end rough sleeping, he must prioritise tackling addiction issues, enhancing mental health provisions, ensuring comprehensive care for former service members and care leavers, and intensifying efforts to eliminate domestic violence and abuse.
Significant resources and optimism are directed towards the Housing First model. According to the campaigning organisation Homeless Link, this approach provides individuals who are chronically homeless with complex needs immediate access to stable, permanent accommodation, offering flexible ongoing assistance without requiring occupants to demonstrate readiness for housing or resolve pre-existing difficulties before being given a home.
Housing First occupies a valid position within the spectrum of responses, though its role should remain limited and supplementary. Implementing it effectively demands an indefinite financial pledge. Such an unconditional, open-ended spending commitment proves unsustainable within current economic constraints. Available housing stock remains scarce, and residents living near Housing First facilities have limited options when confronted with anti-social behaviour or illegal drug activity.
The fundamental limitation of Housing First lies in its failure to address the root causes of homelessness and rough sleeping. Those provided with accommodation through this approach are unlikely to thrive or reach their full capabilities. Anyone claiming that Housing First represents a comprehensive solution and the optimal path forward is either misguided or being deliberately dishonest.
Any serious programme addressing rough sleeping must incorporate substantial investment in alcohol and drug rehabilitation services, rather than relying on substitute medication schemes that ultimately create additional channels for drug distribution, effectively transforming the National Health Service into an alternative supplier.
I desire Burnham’s success in this endeavour. I wish him well in his aspiration to eliminate rough sleeping. I have witnessed comparable pledges previously, alongside some genuine progress during Louise Casey’s tenure under the Blair administration. However, the fundamental systemic issues largely persisted unaddressed.
While I appreciate Burnham’s ambition, he must avoid overpromising spectacular results and then delivering only modest, inadequate outcomes. Andy Winter is a former local authority member who spent four decades working within social care and homelessness services.