The latest Housing Delivery Test (HDT) results, covering 2022/23 to 2024/25, were published in mid-August combining two years of data in one release after delays caused by recent planning reforms. Unlike most planning metrics, the HDT measures actual delivery rather than permissions granted, and the results reveal an increasingly uneven housing market.
Of England's 301 local planning authorities, 147 (49%) delivered less than 95% of their assessed requirement and now face an action plan or stronger consequence. Ninety-three fell below 75%, triggering a presumption in favour of development, up from 63 at the time of the last publication in December 2024, and 29 delivered less than 45% of target. At the other end, 154 (51%) authorities avoided any formal consequence and 146 exceeded 100%.
Regional disparities are stark. London performed particularly poorly: only five boroughs exceeded their requirement, almost two-thirds face the presumption in favour of development, and the City of London hit just 4% of target, building 15 homes over the three-year period. Boroughs including Lambeth (39%) and Hackney (52%) scored well below the national benchmark. By contrast, several Northern and Midlands authorities dramatically exceeded theirs, led by Burnley (478%) and Preston (460%).
Three patterns are emerging. First are persistent under-performers, such as Basildon, Castle Point and Portsmouth, where very low scores have become an established feature of the housing delivery landscape. Second are new entrants to failure, including many London boroughs and major urban authorities which continue to approve and deliver substantial numbers of homes but are increasingly struggling to keep pace with ever rising housing targets paired with eyewatering build costs. London's poor performance suggests that the challenge is not just a lack of planning permissions: high build costs, infrastructure constraints, regulatory requirements, labour shortages and viability pressures are making delivery increasingly difficult. Finally, there are recovering authorities, such as Bury, which improved from 64% in 2023 to 114% in 2025, demonstrating that Housing Delivery Test performance is not fixed and can improve significantly when action plans are followed, sites come forward and market conditions align.
The results reignite a familiar debate: councils are assessed on completions they don't fully control. SEC Newgate's National Planning Barometer 2026 found 35% of planning committee members surveyed reported increased housing consents following Labour's reforms, but many cited build-out rates, viability and infrastructure funding as the real barriers to delivery. The debate, in other words, is shifting from consent to delivery.
For developers, the implications are significant. Authorities below 85% must apply a 20% buffer to their housing land supply calculation, while those below 75% with a presumption in favour of development will come under increased pressure to approve applications on sites both in, and outside of, the Local Plan. As our National Planning Barometer reveals, many councillors increasingly question why authorities are being penalised for weak delivery when significant numbers of homes that benefit from planning permission are not yet built. Developers will need to do more than remind councils of their 5 year land supply. They will need to demonstrate how schemes can overcome viability challenges, unlock infrastructure constraints and accelerate delivery through effective partnerships with councils, landowners and communities. Clear communications will be critical, helping stakeholders understand not only why new homes should be permitted, but how they can realistically be delivered in a challenging development environment.