At a milestone

Housing has PLAYED A MORE prominent role in 2005’s general election campaign than in others of recent years. All parties are vying to appeal to first-time buyers and increase owner occupation. Levels of housebuilding have also received plenty of attention. But one area that hasn’t been grabbing headlines is housing in relation to the regional agenda. This was swiftly pushed down the list of priorities after voters in North-east England rejected proposals for a directly elected regional assembly last November, dashing deputy prime minister John Prescott’s hopes of elected assemblies across England (HT 12 November 2004, page 11).

But the government hasn’t shelved its plans for regional structures altogether. In 2003, nine regional housing boards were set up in the same areas as the nine regional assemblies. In economist Kate Barker’s 2004 report into housing supply, she recommended that these nine housing boards – along with the regional planning bodies – should be merged into the regional assemblies, a proposal that the ODPM is currently consulting on.

The outcome of this consultation will be revealed at some unspecified point after the election – if Labour are re-elected. But until 5 May is out of the way, a big question mark hangs over the future of regional governance; whether it has any future at all depends on who gains power.

What if... Labour win?

Four government departments – the Treasury, the ODPM, the Department for Trade and Industry and the Department for Transport – together published a paper last December that provides some clues on how the regional agenda might develop under a third Labour term. Devolving Decision Making: A Consultation on Regional Funding Allocations called for greater integration between housing, economic development and transport considerations in planning at a regional level. This would require assemblies to advise ministers on priorities in their areas. The paper also suggested the regions advise government on allocation of funds to these areas.

Given the fact that housing, economic development and transport all need a long-term approach to planning, and that none of these policy areas fits neatly into local administrative boundaries, if Labour win the election it will be vitally important that they set out exactly how such a funding regime would work.

A hugely positive spin-off of the regional agenda is that it has spurred collaboration among councils and housing providers, such as arm’s-length management organisations and social landlords. All areas of England now have housing forums, with representatives from both.

But there are some risks for social housing in the proposal that regional assemblies advise ministers on funding allocations for areas such as economic delivery and sustainable communities. Faced with local resistance to demolitions or new-build schemes, for example, wouldn’t the regions be tempted to advise dropping potentially unpopular plans, such as neighbourhood and housing market renewal?

If anyone has doubts over how much weight the assemblies might carry with ministers, it’s worth reflecting that ministers rejected recommendations from regional housing boards on just two issues following the first round of regional housing strategies in 2003. The two issues were how much housing investment programme funding was to be allocated to the area of Derby; and how much approved development programme funding would go to key worker housing in the greater South-east.

What if... the Conservatives win?

The Conservatives have promised to abolish the regional assemblies.

Apart from the role assemblies play in planning and housing, they also have an influence on the work of the regional development agencies, which are responsible for the economic strategies of the regions. So abolishing them would effectively remove the entire structure of regional government. Such a return to a national and local framework, however, would require the establishment of some kind of alternative mechanism to preserve joined-up working.

The system that existed before the regional structure often did not work because decisions on, for example, housebuilding could be made at one council without consideration of its impact on a neighbouring authority. Now, regional housing forums coordinate their activities better.

Of the three parties the Liberal Democrats appear most committed to elected assemblies

An example of this would be the West Midlands regional housing partnership. This partnership is trying to draw people back to urban areas, while also taking into account the knock-on effects on nearby rural areas that have affordability issues.

If assemblies were abolished, would things go on as though the regional framework never existed or would it leave a legacy? In some areas, regional working would be likely to continue in some form: organisations such as the Welland partnership of local authorities and housing associations in the East Midlands is a well-known grouping that existed before the assemblies and would be likely to remain.

And in Cambridge, local authorities began working together to tackle problems of housing affordability even before the first regional housing strategy was created. Regional working like this, which pre-dates regional housing boards, is likely to endure.

What might be more difficult to maintain would be the links between agencies in charge of areas such as planning, economic development, transport and health. They could include education authorities, primary care trusts and rail networks. These links are still in their infancy and the assemblies could be a key driver in pulling them together.

What if... the Lib Dems win?

Of the three parties, the Liberal Democrats appear most committed to elected regional assemblies. They also recently stated their wish to remove quangos such as the Housing Corporation and channel all regional housing funding through the assemblies.

Tighter funding control and a proper local mandate would help remove the conflict between being a voice for their region and delivering the national government’s agenda that afflicts regional assemblies.

For national housing providers, it would become ever more important to think about schemes in terms of regional need, as regional elections accentuated the differences between regions.

No matter what the result...

Whatever the outcome of the election, the pressures the regions face in terms of high and low demand for housing won’t disappear. In fact, it was these pressures that prompted some councils and associations to work together beyond local boundaries before regional assemblies were even set up.

So it is likely that a degree of wider working may continue no matter what happens to the regional assemblies – although reductions in public spending may make this more of an aspiration for some.