WRITTEN EVIDENCE
SUBMITTED BY
THE CHARTERED
INSTITUTE OF
HOUSING (LOCO 064)
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 CIH welcomes the opportunity to respond to
the Select Committee's Inquiry. CIH is the professional body for
people involved in housing and communities, with a diverse and
growing membership of over 22,000 people both in the public and
private sectors. CIH exits to maximise the contribution that housing
professionals make to the wellbeing of communities. We have a
clear interest in the impact that moves to localism could or will
have on the provision and management of housing; the nature of
communities; and the local services used by those communities.
2. GENERAL COMMENTS
2.1 CIH cautiously welcomes the move towards
greater decentralisation and localism which is at the heart of
the coalition government's agenda for change and its proposed
legislative programme. The government has set out great ambitions
around decentralisation and localism. Initial steps relevant to
the housing sector have already been taken, and we expect to see
more delivered through the Decentralisation and Localism Bill
which will be published soon.i The government has established
its commitment to reducing public spending and developing trust
in democratic accountability. Government is committed to providing
public services which are more transparent, more effective, and
cheaper; simultaneously
enhancing local accountability to local people for services delivered
locally.ii
2.2 The shift to localism is a significant change
for government, local people, councillors and the whole housing
sector. The new government's commitment to localism offers some
significant opportunities but it also poses real challenges around
provision and management of housing and related services. The
housing sector is keen to make the most of localism but also wants
to be upfront about tackling any risks.
2.3 As the shift to localism is a significant
departure from the current way in which governance is carried
out and the way in which housing and planning is delivered, the
transition is one which is likely to take time to develop and
one which needs to be resourced properly so that local authorities,
elected leaders and local people have the skills and capacity
to ensure its success.
2.4 There is a need to ensure that those in society
who are less articulate and marginalised are able to fully contribute
and participate in the localist approach should they wish to and
also that the housing needs and aspirations of the most vulnerable
groups in communities are safeguarded.
2.5 There will not be a one-size fits all approach
to decentralisation and localism as the needs and aspirations
of local people will be different in different localities.
2.6 There is significant appetite for greater
involvement in local decision making:
¾ 78%
of people in England said it was important to feel able to influence
local decisions.
¾ 27%
of people in England said that they would like to be more involved
in decisions affecting the local area.iii
¾ In 2008-09,
47% of all people in England said they had carried out at least
one form of civic engagement activity
¾ One
in five people engaged in civic activism is a member of a tenants'
group or committee: possibly as many as three-quarters of a million
people.iv
¾ 65%
of people questioned in a recent Ipsos MORI poll favour smaller
developments of up to 25 homes in their local area if it would
mean more affordable housing.v
2.7 Government believes that greater participation
will result in better decisions. People voicing local priorities,
having a say in decisions which affect their lives and neighbourhoods,
the ability to influence change and a sense of control and power
(participative democracy). A key measure of people's satisfaction
is the amount of involvement they feel they have in a particular
decision even when they are not pleased with the outcome.vi
It is argued that it can lead to better citizens serving as an
educative function which strengthens local democratic leadership
and capabilities which re-invigorates trust in the democratic
process.
3. SPECIFIC ISSUES
3.1 This section will now address the specific
issues that the Select Committee has raised for consideration.
The extent to which decentralisation leads to
more effective public service delivery; and what the limits are,
or should be, of localism
3.2 There is the assumption that decentralisation
and localism which allows for greater participation at the local
level will lead to better decisions and therefore, more effective
public services.
3.3 CIH believes that decentralisation and localism
have the potential to result in more effective public service
delivery: quality services in which local needs and priorities
are addressed, which can involve innovative solutions to complex
issues resulting in improved outcomes, value for money and efficiency
gains alongside increased customer satisfaction.
3.4 Existing localist approaches which have been
adopted regarding the delivery of public services within local
government and within the housing sector illustrate the potential
benefits which can come from a localist approach. These include:
3.4.1 Local government: Local Strategic Partnerships:
Local authorities have a central role with funding powers to transform
neighbourhoods and communities. Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs)
provide the structure for joint-working to implementing housing
and regeneration and neighbourhood renewal initiatives. Local
Strategic Partnerships are overall bodies created to bring together
the three sectors (public, private, voluntary) to set a "strategic
vision" for the local authority area, lead the drive to improve
public services. In the Long-term evaluation of local area
agreements and local strategic partnerships - Report on the 2008
survey of all English local strategic partnerships, respondents
reported progress in joint funding of projects, services better
meeting needs in priority areas, levering in additional resources
and efficiency gains through joint working. Respondents also reported
that barriers to aligning mainstream programmes were central government
constraints around targets and priorities.
3.4.2 Local government: Total Place: The
Total Place initiative, introduced by the last administration,
looked to identify and avoid overlap and duplication between organisations
to deliver both service improvement and efficiency at the local
level. Total Place evolved from the Treasury's Operational Efficieny
Programme (OEP) which aimed at achieving greater efficiency in
a number of cross-cutting areas.vii Total Place looks
at how a "whole area" approach to public services can
lead to better services at less cost.viii There are
13 pilots operating nationally. The final evaluation report Total
Place: a whole area approach to public services found that
there were significant benefits from the pilots, including improved
outcomes, citizens placed at the heart of service design, greater
value for money and the elimination of waste and duplication.
3.4.2b The Durham Total Place pilot focused
on "housing in relation to regeneration". The pilot
was delivered in partnership with local, regional and national
stakeholders, including local communities and residents. Housing
in relation to regeneration was selected because of the
correlation between the housing profile of the county and its
economic performance. The final report identified the following
benefits to local citizens in relation to the implementation of
Total Place:
¾ Home
energy efficiency - single one stop shop for advice and support;
funding goes further due to lower overheads.
¾ Home
adaptations - simplified system that treats citizens as consumers,
with quicker handling of cases, more equitable treatment.
¾ Jobs
and employment - better access to advice and training opportunities
for social housing tenants.
¾ Improved
standards of housing for those on benefits renting in the private
sector.
¾ Consistent
standards of services and support across social housing providers.
¾ Integrated
place-based regeneration plans developed in partnership with local
communities, with flexibility to meet local priorities.ix
Other advantages for the local authority, residents
and other partners included:
¾ Stronger
collaboration with the local authority and other providers including
developers and housing providers through the Housing and Regeneration
Partnership.
¾ A opportunity
for private developers to influence the local authority's spatial
priorities for development.
¾ More
flexible use of funding.
3.5 Whilst such approaches (representative democratic
models) clearly demonstrate the multiple benefits of decentralisation,
these approaches, however, offer limited opportunities to increase
the participation and power of communities and public service
users to engage in local governance and in housing and planning
decisions. Key to the government's agenda is its vision of the
Big Society, one in which people have control over the decisions
that affect them (participative democracy). The government's central
objectives around the Big Society and housing and planning include
"open source" planning, increased tenant power, community
management of resources and the opportunity for communities to
set up local housing trusts.
3.6 We believe that the social housing sector
has much experience to share with local authorities and many public
sector services due to the active role it has undertaken to develop
tenant and resident involvement which is now fairly well advanced
and reasonably resourced. There is a spectrum of activities which
provide involvement opportunities for tenants and residents and
certainly mainstream providers integrate involvement into their
daily business and deliver increasingly good results. Examples
of tenant and resident involvement in the sector include:
3.6.1 Housing: Arms length management organisations:
Arms length management organisations (ALMOs) already provide the
basis for extensive tenant involvement in governance. ALMOs have
one-third (or more) tenant board members and additionally involve
tenants at all levels in other areas. Derby Homes ALMO, for example,
has about 30 tenants involved in governance who have had training
to assist them in their role. Tenant involvement has helped many
ALMOs deliver efficiency savings: by having tenants involved they
can make changes that might otherwise be resisted. Derby Homes
has achieved £100,000s in savings e.g. in cleaning contracts
and other aspects of service delivery, by working with tenants
to change contracts/specifications, etc.
3.6.2 Housing: Community Gateway organisations:
Community Gateway was pioneered in Preston and now several stock
transfers have taken place on a gateway basis. This means tenants
have a bigger role in governance than in a normal housing association;
and also that they can elect to run estates themselves as part
of the Gateway approach. There is investment in developing residents'
capacity to help them take bigger roles in governance.
3.6.3 Housing: Resident led self regulation
and enhanced tenant scrutiny: CIH has developed the concept
of resident led self-regulation which offers a model for housing
organisations to let tenants at a local level influence decision
making in their communities. Resident-led self-regulation is a
form of organisational self-regulation, in which an organisation
develops formal frameworks and mechanisms for controlling
its own behaviour. Component parts of housing associations' existing
self-regulation frameworks include the business planning cycle,
internal audit, setting and monitoring key performance indicators,
options appraisals, and oversight and scrutiny by the board. Self-regulation
frameworks are already at the heart of housing associations' operations.
Moving to resident-led self-regulation is simply about
making residents central to these frameworks. Meaningful resident-led
self-regulation would be where residents have a formal, strong
role to assess and influence performance and behaviour and take
an empowered role in their communities.x
3.6.3b Tenant scrutiny at Stockport Homes:
Stockport Homes' tenant scrutiny structure gives tenants power
in the way the business is run. Tenants' views are fed into improvement
plans developed by a customer scrutiny panel. The plans are then
presented to the executive team and the board, which must respond
to these suggestions and recommendations.
3.6.3c Empowering residents at Aldwyck Housing
Association: Aldwyck's customer scrutiny panel is a tenant
body which pro-actively challenges service delivery in the organisation.
The scrutiny panel's work has led to real benefits including the
replacement of contractors based on tenant-led assessment of performance,
and increased resident empowerment opportunities.
3.6.4 Local Tenant Panels: Government
has suggested that Local Tenants Panels could form a mechanism
by which greater accountability for the delivery of local services
is achieved. Welwyn and Hatfield Local Tenants Panel is a structure
formed in 1994, consisting of 24 tenant members and three leaseholders.
The Panel monitors the performance of the housing service and
discuss housing and other local issues. The Tenants' Panel aims
to develop partnerships between the Community Housing Trust, tenants,
leaseholders and the council, to raise standards and improve services.
It monitors the work of the Trust, the council, and their contractors;
and to protect tenants' rights and ensure that local services
meet the needs of all the community.
3.7 The limitations and challenges of localism
3.7.1 Whilst there are significant benefits including
effective service delivery to adopting a localist approach, there
are also clear risks, limitations and challenges which must be
highlighted particularly around the Big Society agenda and participative
democratic approaches.
3.7.2 Firstly there is a potential tension between
the place-based (Total Place) approach and the Big Society agenda.
The place-based model is fundamentally strategic and collaborative
in its approach to public service delivery, thereby facilitating
increased efficiencies, the elimination of duplication, a comprehensive
approach to complex problems as well as improved outcomes for
communities.
3.7.3 Devolving decision making down to the spatial
level of neighbourhoods could potentially make it difficult to
adopt a strategic approach to the planning and delivery of public
services including the planning and delivery for the housing needs
and aspirations of a locality. There is the risk that this would
result in more costly and less effective services and the housing
needs and aspirations of communities not being met.
3.7.4 CIH's submission to CLG Select Committee
Inquiry into the Abolition of Regional Spatial Strategies, provides
a detailed response on the key issues raised by the abolition
of Regional Spatial Strategies including for levels of housing
development.
3.7.5 There is risk that more challenging issues
could be sidelined and resisted by local communities, for example,
the development of housing in a local area and support services
to marginalised groups including gypsies and travellers and people
who misuse drugs and alcohol. Clearly, there is a need for strong
local leadership to safeguard the needs and aspirations of such
groups. How local leadership is organised may vary depending on
the local area but could include a mayoral figure, elected councillors
at ward level or leaders chosen from the community.
3.7.6 For tenants and communities to be able
to participate in local decision-making and, if they choose, delivery
of local services, they need a certain level of capacity and social
capital. This capacity is known to be lacking in many areas, meaning
that some communities could be excluded from the "Big Society"
approach. This might be especially the case for the less articulate
members of a community. The success of Big Society requires all
communities to participate, and therefore some financial support
for communities is required to build skills and enable involvement.
3.7.7 CIH believes that the government should
recognise the need to resource skills development for younger
citizens of school age. Many children and young people are marginalised
in terms of their ability to meaningfully participate in their
communities. A Jospeh Rowntree Foundation Report in 2002 which
looked at meaningful engagement initiatives with local authorities
found that young people had a real enthusiasm for getting involved
in decision making. Points of engagement included concerns about
crime, personal safety, education, facilities for young people,
the environment and housing.xi CIH has actively supported
pioneering work in youth empowerment capacity building for the
housing sector undertaken by the National Youth Agency (NYA).
Their "Hear by Right" scheme uses measurable standards
to map the current level of young people's participation across
a wide range of service providers and then strategically develops
an action plan to further this.xii
3.7.8 CIH consultation has highlighted concerns
of tenants and residents, both working and not working, who are
in receipt of social security benefits that they could jeopardise
their entitlement to benefits (Incapacity Benefit/ESA and JSA)
by participating in voluntary activities. For people who are not
in work, current eligibility rules for JSA state that a recipient
must be available to start work at short notice and defines "voluntary
work" as employment with charity or not-for-profit organisation.
This could exclude some types of community activity.xiii
CIH recommends a more flexible approach to benefits and volunteering;
so people who are receiving benefits can still make a meaningful
contribution to their community without concerns that their benefits
might be stopped.
3.7.9 CIH believes that government in the forthcoming
Comprehensive Spending Review should make funding available for
building skills and capacity at the local level. CIH, in its submission
to the Comprehensive Spending Review Responsible choices for
a fairer futurexiv recommended that government
made available £2.5 million per year at national level to
specifically support local empowerment and capacity building in
the social housing sector.
3.8 Examples of developing local skills from
the housing sector
3.8.1 In its Tackling Worklessness toolkitxv
CIH shows how housing, employment, economic activity and skills
community skills capacity building are interlinked. Many social
housing residents currently commit large amounts of time to community
activity including running community assets and participating
in governance and regeneration activities. CIH supports initiatives
such as "Off the streets and into Work" (OSW) which
provides resources and information to support homeless people
and social landlords to engage with volunteering.xvi
In addition, CIH has devised the Active Learning for Residents
project which recognises the skills and achievements of tenants,
residents and staff involved in participation and empowerment
activities. The project allows participants to achieve nationally
recognised qualifications at Level 2 in Community Action, at Level
3 in Tenant Participation and Neighbourhood Renewal; and at Level
4 in Governance. Initial evaluations of the project show that
in addition to improving the skills, knowledge and capacity of
participating tenants and residents, it has also raised aspirations
and has led to service improvements in some organisations.xvii
3.8.2 Furthermore, it is very likely that this
support will need to be extended to local officials and civil
servants so they have the capacity to understand and respond to
the Big Society agenda in order to fully support their citizens
and local communities. This support may be critical given that
the localist approach potentially presents a very different way
of working and thinking which could result in either resistance
or inability to respond by officials and elected leaders.
The lessons for decentralisation from Total Place,
and the potential to build on the work done under that initiative,
particularly through place-based budgeting
3.9 Place based budgeting: Local government
has achieved efficiencies of £3 billion between 2004 and
2007 and is on course to make further savings of £5.5 billion
in the current spending review period to 2011. Local pilot work
undertaken for the Local Government Association has shown the
potential for savings through sharing services assets. LGA estimates
that in Leicestershire, there could be annual savings of between
£3.75 million and £5.25 million from rationalising the
number of public service access points of which there are 450
face-to-face service points, 65 telephone centres and 75 separate
websites. In Kent, the public asset base is valued at £5
billion. LGA estimates asset disposals could generate net capital
receipts of £200 to £280 million over five years, with
savings of £40 million on the annual running costs of £300
million.xviii LGA is proposing replacing accountability
through multiple departmental funding streams, top-down targets
and regulation through multiple public bodies, with outward-facing
accountability to local people through devolved governance made
up of democratically elected local councillors. LGA argues that
Total Place pilots (2.3) demonstrate that devolved governance
of public services, results in better value for money.
3.9.1 Other lessons to be learned from Total
Place are referred to in the earlier part of this submission,
under 3.4.2 Local Government: Total Place and 3.4.2b The Durham
Total Place pilot.
3.9.2 Whilst there are significant benefits to
adopting a whole area approach to public service delivery, it
also potentially presents some challenges. The Total Place evaluation
report stresses that the role of leadership is critical to the
success of Total Place which will require that all public leaders
take a broader view of the leadership task and new key skills
including customer insight and excellent partnering skills. Local
authorities can be expected to fulfil this role in many local
areas. However, as we have already stated in 3.2.2 of this submission
it should be recognised that there will be variability of confidence,
skills and capacity across local authorities. Similarly, local
partners need to be prepared and confident to take new approaches.
Operating in times of financial difficulties can drive organisations
to retrench and compete, rather than taking new approaches and
collaborating.
3.9.3 If local authorities are to be encouraged
to adopt a whole area approach then they must be supported by
government. The evaluation report suggests that this could be
achieved through locality-based leadership development programmes.
CIH believes that this is an appropriate way forward. We have
concerns that government actions do not always support local authorities
to move towards a whole area approach. Some ministers have spoken
critically of local authority activities which help to build understanding
of the local population and thus help local partners to target
resources accordingly. It will not be possible to integrate funding
and budgets without local insight.
The role of local government in a decentralised
model of local public service delivery, and the extent to which
localism can and should extend to other local agents
3.10 Currently, local authorities and elected
councillors have the leadership role and strategic responsibility
for their local area working with their partners and engaging
their communities for the social, economic and environmental well-being
of their local area.
3.10.1 Local authorities are also responsible
for the strategic housing function working with their partners
to meet the housing needs and aspirations of their local area,
contributing to economic growth and prosperity as well as to other
social and environmental objectives. Strategic housing is at its
most effective when local leadership is strong, consistent, and
focused on the needs of the whole community. Significant investment
has been made in the strategic housing function within local authorities
in recent years, but more is needed to consolidate and sustain
improvement in the skills and growth in capacity for the function
to continue to take place.
3.10.2 In the localist and Big Society agenda,
local authorities are likely to continue to be responsible for
providing strategic leadership. Existing structures such as LSPs
and newly developing ones such as Local Enterrprise Partnerships
will enable local authorities to fulifil this role.
3.10.3 The Decentralisation and Localism Bill
will further enhance local authorities' leadership role as local
authorities will be given a new general power of competence. The
House of Commons Briefing notexix on the general power
of competence states that the implications of this new statutory
presumption are (intentionally vast) and no action except for
raising taxes will be beyond local government, unless that action
is preventable by law.
3.10.4 Whilst local authorities will continue
to exercise a leadership role in their local area, CIH believes
that the shift towards a more participative democratic approach,
will mean that they are likely to be working much more closely
with their citizens and communities rather than working on behalf
of them. The precise way in which this is achieved in each locality
will be different depending on the needs, skills and experiences
of each local area and which will continue to evolve over time.
However, it is certainly likely to require a new flexibility from
local authorities, a change in culture and developing new skills
so that local authorities can enable ongoing dialogue and negotiation
between themselves and their citizens and between citizens. Effectiveness
in strategic housing can be enhanced where engagement with the
community runs through all processes and is not restricted to
formal consultation periods.
3.10.5 CIH believes that the localist approach
should extend to other local agents in terms of localised participative
decision making and accountability. As the Total Place pilots
showed, the collaboration between partners has resulted in considerable
benefits and outcomes. The complex and interrelated issues in
an area require all agents to work together and to engage with
local communities when setting priorities. For example, promoting
community safety might require local authorities to work in conjunction
with the police, housing providers, probation services, etc to
identify and address local priorities through coordination of
activity and resources.
3.10.6 Some explanations of the localist approach
suggest that local authorities can be expected to play a lead
commissioning and enabling role. Whilst this is appropriate, CIH
believes that the role of local authorities should not be limited
to this and that they should continue to be key agents and providers
in the delivery of valuable, efficient and quality public services
where this is desired and appropriate.
The action which will be necessary on the part
of Whitehall departments to achieve effective decentralised public
service delivery
3.11 As already stated in this response a critical
role for government is to provide the resources and financial
support to develop the skills and capacity of local authorities,
elected leaders and citizens in local areas to step up to a leadership
and provision role. In many places this capacity is not present,
and so creating a framework where decisions and services can be
made and run locally will not be enough to enable local control
to take place.
3.11.1 CIH in our submission to the Comprehensive
Spending Review, Responsible choices for a fairer future,
commented that the costs of participation and development of skills
for active social tenants are, and should be, borne by the landlord.
However, there is a clear need for additional funding through
the area-based grant given to local authorities to support (a)
training and capacity building for tenants/communities, (b) networks
of active tenant/community members to share learning and provide
mutual support and (c) members of the community to influence strategic
decisions on housing supply and investment. The value of a government
funded programme is that it makes resources available to tenants
without them having to rely directly on their landlord.
3.11.2 A key role for Whitehall departments is
to diffuse innovation and learning across boundaries so that local
authorities, elected leaders, their partners and local people
recognise and understand what good effective public services might
look like and how they might be achieved. This will be a valuable
resource in the absence of government issuing any guidance, performance
indicators or detailed frameworks. The government has given an
indication of its intention to do this for example, in a briefing
note to Members of Parliament on local authorities: the general
power of competence states, "A Conservative Government will
disseminate case studies of the use of the power to all councils
to illustrate its scope and publicise its potential impact, so
that - at all levels of local government, and among people at
large - there is an awareness of the new found freedom of action
for local communities. CIH believes this should apply across all
public sector services including housing and planning.
3.11.3 Whilst centrally imposed targets and performance
indicators will be removed, CIH believes that there should be
some mechanism by which outcomes in local areas and at national
level can be measured to allow local people and government to
be able to assess the impact of localism and whether local priorities
and national objectives are being met. The simplest way in which
this might be achieved is by local areas setting local targets
against identified priorities and reporting on them. However,
whilst this might allow assessment at a local level, this would
not enable comparison across local areas.
3.11.4 Whilst government has made it clear that
it is no longer going to issue guidance and prescriptive frameworks
or procedures as to how local areas conducts its business, CIH
believes that government still needs to articulate a vision for
the country and be responsible for setting out a national strategic
overview of national priorities and national frameworks to help
achieve the vision where necessary
3.11.5 CIH believes that there needs to be some
consideration by government as to how a situation might be dealt
with in a local authority area in which local actions and decisions
significantly jeopardise achieving national and local objectives.
For example, if local communities and local people are still resistant
to the development of new housing in their area despite the New
Homes Bonus, how might this situation be resolved? CIH would welcome
further clarity by government regarding this.
What, if any, arrangements for the oversight of
local authority performance will be necessary to ensure effective
local public service delivery
3.12 Current partnership working facilitated
through the operation of Local Strategic Partnerships have acted
as a mechanism to assist local authorities and their partners
to focus on meeting objectives and targets. In the localist approach,
there will be few centrally driven targets and objectives but
CIH believes it is important that there is some arrangement in
place to enable synoptic and comparative assessment of local authority
performance. This will be particularly important in areas of thematic
risk such as health and safety and equality and diversity. In
addition, this will enable local authorities and local people
to identify priorities at a local level; and for local authorities,
local people and government to judge performance locally. The
removal of the CAA reporting website, which provided information
to the public in a clear and comparable format, is unfortunate
in this regard.
3.12.1 There are some areas which need additional
national oversight even where decision making is devolved, because
they are so important for the country's economic and social wellbeing.
For example, CIH believes that to ensure that investment decisions
are transparent and focused on priority areas the number of rural,
supported and family sized homes that are funded should be reported
at both local authority and national level.
3.12.2 In the localist approach there needs to
be robust accountability in place that allows local people to
hold public services to account over and above local elections.
It is worth noting that in many areas structures for local people
to hold local leaders to account beyond council elections are
still poorly developed. Often, the only recourse is the ability
for an individual or a group to lobby an elected member around
a perceived problem. Although the right to petition adds some
formality to articulation of local opinion, additional mechanisms
are needed which give real power. Local people should know their
rights to be informed and to challenge, and local people should
have formal processes to follow that mean local leaders must account
for themselves publicly and be responsive to queries and concerns.
The mechanisms for this will be different in each local area depending
on the arrangements that are agreed. It is critical that whatever
accountability arrangements are agreed these are clearly set out
so that it is understood who is to be held accountable. For example,
would and should an identified leader be held accountable for
every major public governance and community issue in their area
or would accountability rest at a lower level?
3.12.3 Given that the Big Society approach may
potentially result in the voluntary provision of public service
delivery, there also needs to be accountability in place around
the quality of voluntary delivered services. A potential issue
around this is how accountability might look like given that the
nature of the service delivery is voluntary: it seems unlikely
that local people and communities delivering such services could
or should be subject to the same stringent accountability as non-voluntary
delivered public services.
How effective and appropriate accountability can
be achieved for expenditure on the delivery of local services,
especially for that voted by Parliament rather than raised locally
3.13 Robust regulatory and audit architecture
has historically acted as a guarantee of accountability for expenditure
on the delivery of local services. In social housing, the Housing
Corporation (Tenant Services Authority) and the Audit Commission
has exerted strong regulatory impact on the sector; with a focus
on financial viability and the delivery of services to local people
which provide value for money. The Audit Commission has acted
to ensure value for money in public service delivery across 11,000
local authorities to the value of £200 billion. Effective
regulation has also brought significant financial benefits to
the housing association sector: registered providers have borrowed
£40 billion at interest rates that are often 1 to 1.5% cheaper
than those for non-regulated housing developers. In addition,
a secure approach to regulation could level £20 to £25
billion of lending into the social housing sector over the next
five years.xx For this reason, it is important that
in the absence of historic regulatory architecture effective and
appropriate accountability can be achieved for expenditure on
the delivery of local services.
3.13.1 The government has introduced measures
requiring local authorities to publicly publish all expenditure
over £500, with the aim of enabling audit by local people.
CIH believes that this mechanism should not be relied on to ensure
accountability and regulation of local authorities. The publication
of such data only provides a "snapshot" of a given situation
and can be easily open to misunderstanding and interpretation.
Without the availability of additional information and insight,
the practice of "armchair audit" risks being very subjective
and divorced from strategic approaches to long term vision and
decision making, and thus detrimental to local communities rather
than beneficial. Furthermore, there is real potential for inconsistency
in this approach as it will be difficult to compare one public
body with another and across local authorities. CIH believes that
the publication of data could form an element of the need for
a comprehensive and robust regulatory architecture and accountability
mechanisms but it should not be the main element.
4. CONCLUSION
4.1 In terms of achieving a more local approach,
CIH believes the role of tenants and residents should be recognised,
resourced, promoted and skilled. This should be a core element
of government's commitment to localism and increased local accountability.
Developing the skills and capacity of local communities is integral
to CIH's vision for strong communities. Individual and community
empowerment provides opportunities for people to influence and
shape decision making processes. Individual and community empowerment
can foster a more genuine sense of "community', social cohesion
and collective responsibility. For service providers, it can lead
to better knowledge and awareness of the needs of local communities
and the impact of current service provision. It can also lead
to the development of more informed and responsive services for
the future.xxi
4.2 Whilst there can be significant benefits
to adopting a localist approach, CIH believes that the move to
localism also presents some real risks which we have articulated
in this paper. Of particular concern are the variability of leadership,
capacity and skills at local authority level, and the need for
cultural change to make localism happen. CIH has some real concerns
that the potential lack of cultural change and strategic leadership
could result in the failure of public service provision, in particular
housing supply and services to support residents. .
The Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) is the professional
body for people involved in housing and communities. We are a
registered charity and not-for-profit organisation. We have a
diverse and growing membership of over 22,000 people - both in
the public and private sectors - living and working in over 20
countries on five continents across the world. We exist to maximise
the contribution that housing professionals make to the wellbeing
of communities.
CIH provides a wide range of services available to
members, non-members, organisations, the housing sector and other
sectors involved in the creation of communities. Many of our services
are only available to CIH Members, including discounts. Our products
and services include:
¾ Training.
¾ Conference
and events.
¾ Publications.
¾ Enquiries
and advice service.
¾ Distance
learning.
REFERENCES
i The main proposals
of the Bill include:
¾ Abolish
Regional Spatial Strategies. Return decision-making powers on
housing and planning to local councils.
¾ Abolish
the Infrastructure Planning Commission and replace it with an
efficient and democratically accountable system that provides
a fast-track process for major infrastructure projects.
¾ New
powers to help save local facilities and services threatened with
closure, and give communities the right to bid to take over local
state-run services. Abolish the Standards Board regime.
¾ Give
councils a general power of competence.
¾ Require
public bodies to publish online the job titles of every member
of staff and the salaries and expenses of senior officials.
¾ Give
residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local
issue and the power to veto excessive council tax increases.
¾ Greater
financial autonomy to local government and community groups.
¾ Create
Local Enterprise Partnerships (to replace Regional Development
Agencies) - joint local authority-business bodies brought forward
by local authorities to promote local economic development.
¾ Form
plans to deliver a genuine and lasting Olympic legacy.
¾ Outright
abolition of Home Improvement Packs.
¾ Create
new trusts that would make it simpler for communities to provide
homes for local people.
¾ Review
the Housing Revenue Account.
ii LGA (2010)
Place Based Budgeting, London, LGA.
iii CLG (2009)
2008-09 Citizenship Survey Empowered Communities Topic Report,
London , CLG.
iv Based on analysis
of Citizenship Survey data (April to December 2007) cited
in CLG (2008) Communities in Control: real people, real power,
London, CLG.
v Ipsos MORI (2010)
Public Attitudes to Housing: 31st May 2010,
London, Ipsos MORI.
vi LIGU (2010)
People, places, power: how localism and strategic planning
can work together, London, LIGU.
vii http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/vfm_operational_efficiency.htm
viii http://www.localleadership.gov.uk/totalplace
ix The Total Place
Pilot: Housing and Regeneration in County Durham, Final Report,
February 2010.
x CIH (2008) Resident
led Self Regulation: Potential and Prospects, CIH.
xi Combe V (2002)
Up for it: getting young people involved in local decision making,
York, JRF.
xii http://hbr.nya.org.uk/pages/about_hear_right
xiii CPAG (2008)
Welfare Rights and benefits handbook, 10th Edition.
xiv CIH, NHF,
NFA (2010) Submission to the Comprehensive Spending Review: Responsible
choices for a fairer future.
xv Cope H (2008)
Tackling Worklessness: toolkit, CIH, Coventry.
xvi http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/merger-osw.html
xvii http://www.cih.org/education/activelearning/ALfR-residents-pilot.pdf
xviii http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/total_place_report.pdf
xix http://www.parliament.uk/briefingpapers/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-05687
xx TSA (2010)
www.tenatservicesauthority.org/server/show/nav.14451
xxi Cooper C and
Hawtin M eds. (1998) Resident Involvement and Community Action,
CIH, Coventry.
October 2010
| 
