New recommendations aim to improve how developer contributions are used, helping unlock vital infrastructure, affordable housing and new development.

Published: 4 November 2026
Authors: Sarah Fitzpatrick & Thomas Hall

Shoosmiths and Hallam Land are backing new recommendations aimed at improving how developer contributions are used to deliver vital infrastructure and support new homes.

The recommendations, set out in the Fabian Housing Centre’s new Community Gains report, published on 3 November, include a proposed five-year ‘use it or lose it’ rule for future developer contributions.

The recommendations were discussed at a launch event at Shoosmiths’ London office following a stakeholder workshop involving policymakers, local authorities, housing experts and industry representatives.

£6.3bn in contributions remain unspent

The report draws on Home Builders Federation research identifying £6.3bn in unspent developer contributions across 233 English local authorities, comprising £4.6bn in Section 106 contributions and £1.7bn in Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) receipts. This includes £1.1bn in unspent Section 106 funding earmarked for schools and education, £530m for highways and roads and around £400m available for affordable housing.

While the figures do not cover every English council and do not indicate that all funding is overdue or immediately available to spend, the report identifies a range of barriers to delivery, including shortages of specialist council staff, restrictive Section 106 agreements, poor monitoring and delays involving other public bodies.

A five-year ‘use it or lose it’ rule

Among the seven recommendations to government is a new five-year ‘use it or lose it’ rule requiring future developer contributions to be spent within five years or passed to a strategic authority, unless legitimate delays apply.

Other recommendations include support for councils to employ dedicated Section 106 and CIL monitoring officers, more flexible agreements, improved transparency and reporting, and a mechanism for pooling contributions that have remained unspent for more than five years into Regional Infrastructure Investment Funds.

The recommendations focus on improving the way existing contributions are deployed as part of wider efforts to increase housebuilding, with infrastructure such as roads, transport connections and utilities often needed to unlock land for development.

They also raise an important consideration around greater flexibility in the use of contributions. Section 106 contributions are connected to the mitigation required for particular developments, meaning the underlying planning tests remain important when considering whether funding could subsequently be used for a different purpose.

Sarah Fitzpatrick, Head of Planning at Shoosmiths, said:

“Section 106 agreements and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) play a vital role in ensuring that new development delivers the schools, transport, sports and other infrastructure communities need in connection with new development. But paying section 106 contributions and CIL is only part of the process. What matters is that the funding is used effectively and translated into delivered benefits on the ground.

“By failing to deliver the funded benefits it brings both unjustified criticism to developers and fails to deliver the infrastructure needed by communities. This report shines an important light on where the system is falling short and the impact this has on local communities. By bringing together evidence and perspectives from across the sector, it provides a valuable basis for improving how planning contributions work in practice and helping to deliver the places communities need.”

Ben Cooper, Research Manager and Head of the Fabian Housing Centre, The Fabian Society, said:

"Building more homes is only part of the challenge. We also need to make sure that new developments come with the schools, GP surgeries, roads and transport links that communities need.

"Our research shows that too much of the funding collected from developers is not being translated into improvements on the ground. This isn't simply about putting more pressure on councils. They also need the resources, skills and flexibility to get that money spent effectively.

"Our proposed five-year 'use it or lose it' rule, alongside wider reforms to support councils, would help ensure that communities see the benefits of development and give people greater confidence in housebuilding."