In this week's blog, amid persistent housing shortages, high interest rates, and tightening planning constraints, the UK's housing market finds itself once again at a crossroads, where everyone is looking for answers. The Government's target of 1.5 million new homes within this Parliament seems to have set it up to fail, and with completions in 2024 at just over 153,000 (as listed by the Office for National Statistics), it looks like a target that will be increasingly difficult to meet.

That's why a growing chorus of policymakers, economists and industry leaders are calling for housing to be recognised as Critical National Infrastructure (CNI), putting it on a par with energy, transport, and water systems. The idea is simple: without adequate, affordable, and resilient housing, the country cannot function effectively. It's a little dramatic, and I doubt that housing will ever feature in a Netflix movie about an "Armageddon scenario", leaders will never be rushed into emergency bunkers to watch foundations being laid into an overrun JV scheme in Barnstaple via a sat comm link, but is the speed of the unfolding chaos the only real difference between a Hollywoodized disaster scenario, and our housing situation? In the expression "a slow-motion car crash," the slow-motion aspect in no way diminishes the car-crash element; if anything, it rather accentuates it.

But what would that actually mean in practice? And what impact could it have on smaller developers, the local builders, SME contractors, and regional innovators who form the backbone of the construction ecosystem?

Critical National Infrastructure refers to assets, systems, or networks that are essential to the functioning of the country, things that, if disrupted, would have a significant impact on security, the economy, or public health. Traditionally, this has included energy grids, railways, airports, water systems, and communications networks. If housing were added to the CNI framework, it would mean recognising the delivery and maintenance of homes as integral to national resilience, a shift from treating housing as a market-driven sector to viewing it as a vital public utility. For small and medium-sized developers (SMEs), this could represent a profound change in how projects are funded, approved, and supported because budgets would shift. The UK's housing shortage is not just a social issue; it's an economic vulnerability. When key workers cannot afford to live near hospitals, schools, logistics hubs or power stations, productivity and service resilience are threatened. By classifying housing as CNI, the Government would formally acknowledge that secure, accessible housing underpins the entire economy.

Major infrastructure sectors attract institutional investors precisely because they are stable, predictable, and backed by public policy. If housing were treated similarly, pension funds and sovereign wealth funds could be more easily channelled into development, unlocking new sources of long-term, low-cost capital. For small developers, this could translate into new partnership opportunities and access to patient institutional finance, particularly through structured platforms like Invest & Fund that already specialise in complex, high-impact projects.

Infrastructure projects designated as nationally significant benefit from centralised oversight, faster approvals, and simplified statutory hurdles. Extending that logic to housing could cut through some of the bureaucracy that currently delays smaller developments, especially on brownfield or infill sites. A CNI approach could establish "housing delivery zones" with accelerated planning and pre-approved design codes, empowering SMEs to deliver more homes, faster.

If something like this were attempted, and please understand this is just a thought exercise at this time, there would be significant pushback and issues to overcome for SME developers who rely on market flexibility and entrepreneurial risk-taking, which could dampen innovation should a heavy reliance on emergency state funding be required. Also, this categorisation could favour large corporate developers and public & private consortia, as they're better equipped to navigate infrastructure-style procurement processes. Without safeguards, smaller developers might again find themselves sidelined, which would run counter to our mission to assist them.

There are huge positives, though, should this scenario play out. With infrastructure-level backing, platforms like ours could mobilise institutional funds toward SME developers, improving liquidity and lowering the cost of finance. On top of that, a nationally coordinated pipeline of pre-approved housing projects could remove some of the unpredictability that often hinders small sites.

At Invest & Fund, we've long believed that housing development should be seen not just as a private enterprise, but as a pillar of national stability. That's why our platform focuses on complex development transactions projects that contribute to regeneration, sustainability, and community resilience. If housing is to be treated as Critical National Infrastructure, finance will play a pivotal role. New frameworks will require lenders, developers, and policymakers to collaborate closely to ensure that the benefits of this shift are distributed fairly, empowering smaller players, not just the major housebuilders.

We're ready for that future if it's one of the many that transpires. Our team already works with developers delivering schemes that strengthen local economies, from urban infill sites to mixed-use regeneration projects. We understand the capital structures, risk profiles, and community outcomes that make such developments truly "critical".

Invest & Fund has returned over £330 million of capital and interest to lenders with zero losses, showing the rigour that governs our business.

To take maximum advantage of this robust and exciting asset class, please visit www.investandfund.com

Don't invest unless you're prepared to lose money. This is a high-risk investment. You may not be able to access your money quickly and are unlikely to be protected if something goes wrong. Take 2 minutes to learn more.