Government ‘encourages discrimination by design’ by deciding to slash Tory accessible housing targets

A disabled people’s organisation has accused the Labour government of “discrimination by design” over a “roll back” in accessible housing targets in the final version of its new national planning policy.

Under plans put forward by the last Conservative government, 100 per cent of homes would have been built to the M4(2)* accessible housing standard.

But the Labour government has decided to set this target at just 40 per cent.

And it has refused to set any target at all for how much housing should be suitable for wheelchair-users.

Between 10 December 2025 and March, the Labour government ran a public consultation on its draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

The document set out its plans for requiring local authorities and developers to build an adequate proportion of homes to decent accessible housing standards.

But the framework severely waters down the previous Conservative government target.

On 18 March 2024, a Tory housing minister finally promised to introduce new rules that would ensure all new homes were built to the M4(2) standard, except for cases where this was “impractical and unachievable”.

Conservative ministers had been considering and consulting on the measure – a long-standing demand of the disabled people’s movement – for at least five years, but the general election came before any further action was taken.

Last December, when the Labour government published its draft NPPF, disabled people accused it of a “horrifying betrayal” when it revealed plans to slash the target to a minimum of only 40 per cent of new homes to be built to the M4(2) standard.

Now the government has published its response to the consultation, alongside the final NPPF, and has decided to stick with the lower target.

The final NPPF says development plans should include “no less” than 40 per cent of homes built to the M4(2) standard although even this will still be “subject to any appropriate exemptions set out in the development plan”, so it could be even lower in some cases.

The government says in the consultation response: “We consider this strikes the appropriate balance between providing a backstop and boosting provision in areas without clear requirements, while ensuring local authorities have sufficient flexibility to maximise housebuilding overall.”

But it accepts that Liverpool, Worthing and the London Plan have all set 100 per cent targets.

Results from the consultation, which invited views on the 40 per cent figure, show “mixed views”.

Of a total of 745 individuals and organisations that responded to the consultation question, there was nearly an equal split among those who agreed, those who neither agreed nor disagreed, and those who disagreed with the target.

In all, 12 per cent strongly agreed, 21 per cent partly agreed, 33 per cent neither agreed nor disagreed, 15 per cent partly disagreed, and 20 per cent strongly disagreed.

But the document does not reveal how many of those backing the government’s target were from the housebuilding industry.

It also asked respondents to say if they would “support an alternative minimum percentage requirement”.

The government response notes how the “mixed views” on the question included “some advocating for a higher figure” because they were concerned that the 40 per cent target “could become a default ceiling”.

It also says that “others” had “argued for a lower figure” due to what it described as “viability concerns”.

The document does reveal how many “developers” opposed another key demand of the disabled people’s movement, for the NPPF to mandate that at least 10 per cent of new housing should be built to M4(3) wheelchair-user home standards.

The NPPF includes no minimum figure for M4(3) homes, despite DPOs warning of a “chronic undersupply” in wheelchair-accessible homes.

The consultation document details that “many developers raised concerns about the significant costs and challenges in building homes to this standard”.

The government response says only that there were “some calls” to set a “national baseline” for M4(3) homes, failing to specify what proportion of respondents backed this option.

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government had not responded by noon today (Thursday) to a request to justify the 40 per cent target and its failure to set a target for M4(3) homes.

Laura Vicinanza, senior policy and stakeholder engagement manager at Inclusion London, told DNS that her organisation “strongly” disagreed with the “decision to roll back the previous government’s commitments”.

She said: “This does not reflect the current or projected need for accessible housing.

“At a time when the ageing population is steadily increasing and demand for accessible housing is growing, the government’s proposals are dangerous and short-sighted.

“England’s existing housing stock is overwhelmingly inaccessible and more costly to retro-fit – new housing supply should correct this historic failure and future-proof our housing stock rather than encouraging discrimination by design.”

*Homes built to the M4(2) standard have 16 accessible or adaptable features, similar to the Lifetime Homes standard developed in the early 1990s to make homes more easily adaptable for lifetime use, while M4(3) homes are those that are supposed to be fully wheelchair-accessible