Another month, another odpm select committee report – that's how it feels anyway. The review of the role and effectiveness of the Housing Corporation is the 14th piece of work undertaken by Andrew Bennett's committee this year. Such productivity is certainly impressive, but the reaction of the sector has been a resounding "so what?".
No one is going to argue with the conclusion that there is a degree of confusion and possibly even duplication between the work of the corporation and its sister quangos, the Audit Commission and English Partnerships.

Likewise, what the committee says about the thorny issues of paying social housing grant to developers or merging the regional housing and regional planning boards echoes the sentiments of many in the sector.

The point is, though, these issues are already either being addressed or consulted on. The corporation and commission have admitted they need to sort out who does what and are already working on ensuring that regulation and inspection dovetail more effectively. Indeed, Jon Rouse, the corporation's new chief executive, is on the verge of unveiling a shake-up of the body's organisational structure to this effect (page 7).

With regard to getting the private sector more heavily involved in social housing provision, the government intends to press ahead at least until the idea has been trialled early next year. And as for the merged regional housing and planning boards, the ODPM is consulting on this. Regions such as the North-west are protesting loudly while others feel the link-up would be a logical step towards elected regional assemblies taking control of the housing and planning role.

The ODPM select committee is arguing the toss over debates that have already been played out

While the committee argues the toss over debates that have largely already been played out, the government's end-to-end review of the corporation, published yesterday, is raising more fundamental points in Whitehall. The investment role of the corporation and how this will work with the devolution of power to elected English regional assemblies is one such point.

Another crucial debate concerns the strengthening of ties between the ODPM and the corporation and the effect this will have on whether borrowing by associations is classed as public or private finance (page 15).

The Treasury is concerned that the closer the corporation is to the ODPM, the more likely it is that borrowing by registered social landlords on the private market will be construed as public sector debt. It remains the case that if an association is unable to meet its repayments, the corporation is expected by lenders to bail it out. Lenders may like this but the Treasury objects to the risk of borrowing being borne by the public rather than the private sector.

Source

Housing Today