Parliament has returned after the summer recess. But one seat at the ministerial table remains unfilled: the Minister for Homelessness, who resigned just before recess, has yet to be replaced.

At first glance, this might look like a routine reshuffle delay. But the vacancy matters - and so will the choice of who fills it. Homelessness is not confined to a single department. It stretches across welfare, health, immigration, and local government. Without clear leadership at the centre to join these threads together, the system risks drifting, crisis spending rises, and opportunities for prevention are missed.

This isn’t just about filling a role. It is about appointing a leader with the authority and reach to work across Whitehall, to connect Number 10 and the Treasury with local government, and to ensure that the delivery structures are put in place to keep the whole system focused on results. With the right leadership, progress is possible. Without it, the challenges only deepen.‍

The scale of the challenge

Today, more than 150,000 children in England are growing up in temporary accommodation. Behind that number are families moving from one temporary flat to another, children travelling long distances to stay in the same school and embarrassed or unable to invite friends over to play, and councils booking hotels at short notice just to keep a roof over people’s heads. Councils are spending over £2 billion each year on emergency measures. And evidence shows that children who experience homelessness are significantly more likely to face it again as adults.

The cost is not only financial - it is generational.

Our recent report with the Institute for Government highlighted how weak accountability and fragmented delivery structures at the centre have locked the system into an expensive cycle of crisis management. Without reform, resources will continue to flow into temporary fixes rather than long-term solutions.

Interim findings from our systems-wide evaluation reinforce this picture. Despite genuine effort and innovation, the homelessness and rough sleeping system still lacks the coherence and shared incentives needed to align around prevention. Whitehall departments too often work at cross purposes, leaving local authorities to carry the weight without the national leadership required to turn the tide.‍

Why this appointment matters

Homelessness is a cross-government challenge. It cannot be solved by housing policy alone. It is shaped by decisions in welfare, immigration, health, justice, and local government finance.

This means the next Homelessness Minister cannot be a junior voice lost in the machinery. They must have the political weight to convene departments, the skill to broker agreements, and the authority to hold the system to account.

The evidence shows that when systems lack clear leadership, departments drift apart, crisis spending escalates, and prevention remains sidelined. Where progress has been made internationally, determined leadership at the centre has been the catalyst. Finland’s success, for example, was not only about Housing First but about a government-wide strategy backed by strong political champions.

England now needs the same resolve - a leader with both the mandate and the means to bring coherence where fragmentation has held us back.‍

What the evidence shows is needed to prevent homelessness

The lesson from both history and international experience is clear: progress in preventing homelessness doesn’t come from small adjustments. It comes when governments are willing to act boldly, align leadership at the centre, and hold the system accountable for delivery.

First, bold national measures. Incremental changes won’t do. England’s homelessness system is under intense pressure, yet too often the response tinkers at the edges. A truly preventive approach would mean using the levers only national government controls.

That could include ringfencing the £100 million for early interventions to prevent homelessness announced in the Spending Review for genuine prevention, rather than allowing it to be absorbed into short-term crisis budgets. It could mean building on past lessons from the Hostels Closure Programme and Places of Change Programme launched by a previous Labour government in 2005 - but this time, using a conversion programme to turn expensive hostels into Housing First housing, where people can build stability rather than cycle through temporary beds. It could mean giving a serious injection to prevention beyond homelessness, recognising that issues like family breakdown, debt, and health crises often push people towards the cliff edge. And it must mean delivering affordable homes in the right places, so councils are not forced to rely on emergency placements at spiralling cost.

This is what happened in Finland: reforms were anchored not only in Housing First, but in long-term investment to repurpose hostels, expand housing supply, and put homelessness prevention at the centre of strategy. England now faces the same choice - whether to continue patching the system at its breaking point, or to confront the roots of the problem with the boldness the moment demands.

Second, strong political leadership. Where homelessness has been prevented at scale elsewhere, there have always been determined figures at the centre able to cut through departmental boundaries. Finland’s progress rested not just on Housing First but on ministers who championed a whole-of-government strategy for more than a decade. In England, too, when rough sleeping fell in the late 2000s, it was because there was a clear ministerial lead with the authority to convene welfare, housing, health, and local government around a shared goal. Leadership is what turns good ideas into sustained outcomes.

Third, delivery structures that work. Political will must be matched by machinery that translates ambition into results. England has seen strategies falter before because there was no backbone to drive delivery across Whitehall. Our research with the Institute for Government shows that without clear accountability and mechanisms that bind departments to shared goals, even the best prevention strategies lose momentum.

That means creating structures that keep prevention on track - for example, a dedicated delivery unit for homelessness and prevention with the authority to troubleshoot obstacles and report directly to Number 10 and the Treasury. It could mean cross-departmental taskforces with real teeth, not just forums for discussion. And it must include a shared outcomes framework, so that housing, welfare, health, and local government are pulling in the same direction rather than working at cross purposes.

Take any one of these away, and the system falters. Bold reforms without leadership stall in the Whitehall machinery. Leadership without delivery structures fades into rhetoric. Delivery structures without ambition only manage decline. But when all three are in place, the evidence shows that real, lasting progress in preventing homelessness is possible.

‍Local progress vs national direction

Across England, local leaders are working hard to respond to rising need. Through our Accelerator pilots with Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region and London, we see combined authorities investing serious effort in trying new approaches - building the stronger data, evidence, and governance architecture required to accelerate progress. They are treating the current crisis with the urgency it merits, knowing that without better infrastructure, even the most committed local action cannot keep pace with demand.

But their experience also underlines the limits of what local areas can do alone. Neither combined authorities nor councils can change welfare rules that push families into arrears. They cannot align immigration policy with housing provision. They cannot, on their own, address the structural shortage of affordable homes. Without national leadership to match local innovation, even the most promising groundwork risks being overwhelmed by the wider pressures of the system.

This is why direction at the centre matters so much. Local pilots can demonstrate what is possible, but only national government can create the conditions for those lessons to take hold everywhere. Without that partnership, England risks remaining trapped in an expensive cycle: progress in preparation, but drift in outcomes.

When bold national measures, strong political leadership, and delivery structures that work are aligned with the effort already visible in local areas, the system as a whole can finally begin to turn the tide.‍

A moment of choice

The absence of a Homelessness Minister is more than a gap on the Government’s organisational chart. It is a test of political will. The appointment now is an opportunity to demonstrate seriousness - to show whether government is prepared to match local innovation with national resolve.

That is exactly the theme of this year’s Impact Forum: Delivering the Prevention Turn. As government prepares to publish its first-ever homelessness strategy for England, the Forum will bring together policymakers, practitioners, researchers, journalists, community leaders and people with lived experience to bridge strategy with tangible impact.

Because evidence shows that with bold measures, strong leadership, and delivery structures that work, progress is possible. Without them, more children will grow up in temporary accommodation, with consequences that echo into future generations.

Appointing the right kind of Minister is not just an administrative decision. It is the missing piece that will determine whether England continues to drift - or begins to turn the tide.