Tenants are willing and able

I felt Niall Dickson raised a valid point about the accountability of arm's-length management organisations, which reinforces David Walker's concerns about tenant involvement ("Getting to grips with the new public services", 18 July, page 18 and "Tenants take control … or not", 18 July, page 21).

The absolutely fundamental requirement for accountability is going to be achieved, to a significant extent, by tenants' ability to participate as board members.

Walker suggests that there may not be enough people willing or able to participate, but from my experience both as an ex-board member of a registered social landlord and now a board member of an ALMO, that is far from the case.

The issue is whether they are provided with the necessary support, which will vary for every tenant, to enable effective participation.

If the true dividends of tenant participation are going to be achieved, the provision of this support, which is going to be a cost for the organisation concerned, has to be seen as the long-term investment that it surely is.

As for finding independent board members, isn't Walker one himself? Is he in it for the money (I doubt it), for the professional opportunities it gives him (perhaps) or because he believes he has something to contribute to the benefit of an RSL? I would like to think that the last is the case and that there are more people who are prepared to contribute to these sorts of organisations than one might think.