Communities and Local Government

• Corporate
• Newsroom
• Speeches, statements and articles
• Chartered Institute of Housing Conference

www.communities.gov.uk

Chartered Institute of Housing Conference

Date of speech	19 June 2007
Event summary	Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH)

---

Transcript of the speech as delivered.

Thank you Paul [Diggory] for that kind introduction.

It's a pleasure to be back in Harrogate.

I gave one of my very first speeches as Communities Secretary here a year ago.

And I'd like to pay tribute to the efforts of the CIH and all its members over the past year.

But now I want to set out my vision of one of the key challenges not just for the housing sector, but for our society as a whole.

How we build on ten years of progress in social housing. Progress that has already made a real difference to the homes and estates of hundreds of thousands of families.

How we go beyond bricks and mortar, and put a new and unequivocal emphasis on tenants' needs and aspirations.

And how we can do this by placing greater power and responsibility in the hands of front-line housing professionals.

Today I am putting forward a wide-ranging package of reforms, informed by Martin Cave's independent report into the regulation of social housing.

I warmly welcome Martin's report.

I am going to set out some key elements of the Government's responses and how these can help every social tenant play a fuller role in their community.

But first, let me put this in the broader housing context.

Housing matters: success in the past year

Every individual needs a place they can feel proud to call home.

And we can be proud of the progress we have made in the past decade.

Working together, we have reversed a legacy of underinvestment and neglect.

The market has revived in areas of low demand, we have brought new hope to crumbling estates, and breathed new life into inner cities that were once no-go areas.

But the challenges that we face today are very different from those of ten years ago.

Take the need for greener housing. Scarcely recognised ten years ago. Today, a major issue.

Last December I announced an ambitious new timetable for making all new homes zero-carbon by 2016.

At that announcement I had environmental groups like the WWF on one side, and the Home Builders Federation on the other. What struck me was that everyone agreed that we were heading in the right direction. It will be vital, I believe, to build that kind of consensus about the next phase of reform in social housing.

Or take the progress we've made on housing supply, where Kate Barker's landmark report has met with widespread consensus.

Almost everyone now recognises this as a challenge not just for today or next year, but for a generation to come. We all want our children to be able to access decent, affordable housing, whether through ownership or renting.

With over 180,000 new homes built last year, we are building more than at any point since 1990.

But the Government's ambition is to be building at least 200,000 homes a year by 2016.

And with a predicted 223,000 households being formed each year we clearly need to debate how and when to go further.

In the last year we have taken steps - for example on planning - not just to make it easier for those homes to be built, but also to underline that they must be sustainable, decent and well-designed; with good access to transport and jobs.

And the five new Eco-Towns, proposed by the Chancellor, shows just how high we are lifting our sights.

The drive to build new homes must also mean building more social homes. It's clear we need to go further than the current level of 30,000 homes a year - including more family homes, to help us tackle the problem of overcrowding. This has always been my top priority in the Comprehensive Spending Review.

Social housing: the Hills reform agenda

But if we're serious about the future of social housing, we cannot simply content ourselves with building more homes - crucial though this is.

We need to ask whether the approach of the past ten years is still appropriate as we rise to the challenges of the next ten.

At last year's conference I asked a big question - what is social housing for?

Professor John Hills brought to bear his characteristic acute analysis.

I very much welcome his report, which has kick-started a vital debate

He says - and I agree - that the fundamental principles behind social housing remain sound.

But he also makes a number of criticisms of the current system.

And if we really care about the lives of people in social housing, government simply cannot afford to duck those challenges.

Worklessness

Take the clear link between social housing and worklessness.

If we are serious about making social housing a better platform for social mobility - we need to do more to support local authorities and partners to innovate and try out new solutions.

For example my Department, together with the Department for Work and Pensions, is funding the "working future" pilot. This is testing whether reduced rents and better employment advice can get more people in temporary accommodation into jobs. The early results are really impressive.

And Government backing is helping the West London Housing Partnership develop an innovative 'one-stop shop' service bringing together housing and employment advice.

These projects will help inform our approach for the future.

"Right to Own"

Or think about providing ladders into ownership. Something that we know many tenants want.

I have said before and say again that my party will never be caught the wrong side of the debate on aspiration.

That's why I want to make it possible for social tenants to own a share of their property, potentially building up with time according to their circumstances.

Last year I set out my thoughts about what you might call a new "right to own." And this is a debate we will need to return to over coming months.

Tenant focused reform

But today I want to focus on another issue raised by John Hills - the need to ensure that social housing is more responsive to tenants particular circumstances.

John presented some striking facts about levels of satisfaction. Tenant satisfaction is high compared with some other services. You can all be proud of that.

But we should also all sit up and take note when we read that dissatisfaction with landlords is going in the wrong direction. Dissatisfaction has increased from around 12 to 20 per cent between 1997 and last year.

In part this may be because expectations are rising, particularly among younger tenants.

But it could also be an unintended consequence of the way central government has sought to lift standards in the past.

In 1997 we inherited a massive backlog of social housing repairs - £19 billion of underinvestment. Our immediate priority - and rightly so - was getting homes up to a decent minimum standard.

Making homes warm and weatherproof, with reasonably modern facilities, for all.

To do this we provided £20bn investment over ten years.

And as in health, education and indeed local government, our natural instinct was to drive performance hard from Whitehall, with clear targets and strong incentives for delivery.

In housing - as across all public services - this has paid dividends. This government has won the argument about the need for well funded high quality public services.

We have transformed the lives of over a million families, giving them decent kitchens, bathrooms or central heating sometimes for the first time.

But though this approach has delivered, we should be frank about its limitations.

Sometimes it has made professionals feel undervalued, and limited their discretion to respond to what people wanted.

And sometimes it has encouraged a box-ticking mentality, with front-line staff spending too much time looking upwards to government, and too little time looking outwards to the people who really matter - the tenants.

This must change.

As we continue to invest more in the coming years, we also need a new phase of reform.

One in which we think about more than just bricks and mortar. Which starts with the people who really matter. Which puts tenants in the driving seat.

Enabling them to take more choices about how social housing can deliver for them.

Ensuring that they feel that services are being provided on their terms, not those of their landlord or the government.

The Cave review

Today, we are consulting on an ambitious package of reforms.

Its heart is a consultation on how we take forward Martin Cave's review of regulation in the sector.

Amazingly, it has been thirty years since anyone seriously had a hard look at this issue. And given how much the world around us has changed, it is hardly surprising that Martin makes the case, not for piecemeal adjustments, but for a fundamental transformation.

I'd like to thank Martin for all his hard work and indeed all of you who have been involved in discussions with him and his team in recent months. I welcome the report, and the insights it brings to this complex area.

I welcome too his proposal to separate regulations from investment and an approach that, in principle, looks at all social housing providers on the same basis.

I look forward to hearing and discussing your views.  

But let me make clear I see in the review the core of a powerful set of changes. Not just reforms that guarantee good value for the tax payer. But the possibility of a new deal between central government and housing professionals. A new deal ultimately aimed at delivering for tenants.

For me, that deal comes in two parts.

The first is freeing up the front-line.

We must move away from a Whitehall knows best attitude, to an approach that recognises that front-line housing professionals and residents are often the people who can find the best solutions to the challenges that communities face.

That is why the regulator must not breathe down everyone's neck all the time.

The burdens we currently place on some social landlords mean they spend too much time talking to government when they could be talking to their tenants.

Of course any regulator must retain the power to step in when there are serious problems. It's vital to get to grips with the small minority who don't make the grade. Any effective watchdog needs teeth.

But balance is crucial. We must not suffocate innovation and dull the commitment of front-line workers.

That is why the first part of a new deal with the professions is a move towards a risk- based, more proportionate system of regulation.

This should mean no more routine inspections. Any high performing provider should be left to get on with it.

And I agree that some information which central government asked for in the past - like annual efficiency statements - should not be needed any more.

But there must be a second part to the deal. If we free up professionals, we also need to make sure that they are more locally accountable , and that tenants have more opportunities to have their say.

Let me take the first of these in two parts.

Strong, well-funded local government is today in a position to resume a real strategic role over every area - thinking about what it needs to do to meet the needs and aspirations of everyone who lives there.

Few things make a bigger difference to people's quality of life than housing. So local authorities should be working with housing associations, private developers and others to create communities where people are proud to live and work.

And when local authorities see housing associations that aren't delivering, they should be able to get something done about it.

A greater role for elected local government should go hand in hand however with more empowerment for tenants.

Tenants need the information and the opportunity to speak up for what they want.

That's why I agree we need a new era of accountability, where landlords' successes and failures are clear for all to see. Tenants should be involved in the choice of who runs their estate, with clear yardsticks against which to judge how different local authorities, or housing associations are doing. If necessary, tenants should be able to bring their concerns to the watchdog's attention.

So for example where a landlord consistently fails to deal with anti-social tenants, residents themselves could get the watchdog involved.

As well as making it easier for people to have their say about services at a very local level, it's important to give them a stronger voice nationally. We have a consumer champion to stand up for our interests in relation to the utilities we use everyday - the electricity and water in our homes.

Yet for millions of social housing tenants this will have a far more significant impact on quality of life. So it's time to ask whether we need a new national champion for social tenants: an advocate who is able to defend their interests at the highest level.

It must complement, not replicate existing organisations - but I believe there is a strong case for a critical friend to government who can make the case for change when it is needed.

As well as having an effective voice, empowering people also means enabling them to make more choices for themselves.

This can include more control over seemingly little, but actually very important, things. For example, when one housing association asked tenants how quickly they wanted repairs carried out, they discovered that instead of a guarantee that all repairs would be completed within 24 hours, tenants would prefer waiting a little longer if it meant they could set up an appointment at a time that suited them.

But empowering people also means giving them choice on some hard-edged issues -such as who manages an estate. As we move towards a clearer separation of ownership and management, tenants should increasingly be able to vote with their feet and get the service they want, including triggering stock transfer if that is what they think is required.

And finally where people want to take responsibility themselves we need to make that easier too.

In many parts of the country Tenant Management Organisations are enabling residents to get involved in managing the places where they live.

In most cases TMOs perform better than their host local authority: and some 77 per cent of TMO tenants are satisfied, compared to 67 per cent of council tenants.

Given these benefits, it's important to make sure that we improve the opportunities to form TMOs. Currently, the process can be onerous and time consuming.

So I propose to make it simpler. For example, instead of requiring two ballots before an organisation can be set up, I think there should be only one.

This, then, is my vision. Greater freedom for housing professionals. Greater voice and choice for tenants. And a stronger role for local authorities.

Reform that clearly puts tenants' needs and aspirations first.

Communities England

Finally, in all the challenges we face - from affordability, to climate change, to making social housing work for the twenty-first century - the role of the new housing and regeneration body, Communities England, will be crucial.

Communities England will combine three successful aspects of the Government's housing and regeneration work - English Partnerships, the Housing Corporation and delivery functions from my Department.

It offers the opportunity for a more strategic, more effective approach to housing and regeneration that is vital to the quality of life in all our communities.

It will be a stronger partner for other public and private sector organisations.

On the one hand, it will make the most of the potential for private investment to help all our villages, towns and cities stand on their own two feet.

On the other, it will help local government step up to its place-shaping role, building local authority skills, and offering expert support.

Let me be explicit - our goal in creating Communities England is not to centralise. Far from it. It must complement the work of local councils and their delivery partners, not replace it. It must support innovation by local leaders, not hamper it.

And by bringing together the expertise for regeneration and housing into one place it will provide more effective assistance for communities looking to try out creative approaches that best fit their local area.

I'm launching the consultation today on how we make Communities England deliver effectively.

Conclusion

And on this - as on all the other measures - I want to work together with you.

I look forward to hearing your views on the questions I've raised today.

It is your expertise and determination that have brought the housing sector so far over the past ten years.

The measures I'm setting out today give you greater freedom - and greater responsibility - to take it further still. I am confident you will rise to the challenge.