It may not seem like it, but the battle to prove just how efficient the sector really is has begun. The first shot has come from the Audit Commission, which is to use the same inspection ratings for RSLs as it does for councils.
The commission has long planned to take this entirely sensible step that will make it easier to compare housing providers' performance, but it must be put into context.

In Whitehall at the moment, all roads lead to and from the efficiency review led by Sir Peter Gershon.

The message being received loud and clear by civil servants is either to prove they are shaping up for the fight on public sector flab or to prepare for change to be imposed from above.

The commission's move is part of its reaction to this; the ODPM has also responded, with three planned submissions to Gershon's team (page 10).

The Housing Corporation has been giving off similar efficiency vibes for six months, having been stung by repeated criticism from the Barker review and Treasury of RSLs' cost-effectiveness.

In the next few months, expect league tables to encourage competition, a continuation of stricter treatment of failing housing providers of all types (page 12) and a lighter touch for those the regulators can hold up as proof that social housing is a lean, mean, efficient machine.

This is likely to be a painful process for some and performance incentives in certain areas need attention, such as for those for three-star ALMOs.

In Whitehall at the moment, all roads lead to and from the efficiency review led by Sir Peter Gershon

Yet it is a wholly necessary one: much better to deal with the devils you know in the commission and corporation, than those from the Treasury that will be unleashed if the sector isn't seen to be putting its house in order.

Bad planning
The Planning Bill has finally made its meandering, tortuous way through parliament. However the question quite rightly asked by our panel of experts on page 18 is: has it all been worth it?

On the one hand, at least brow-beaten planners can now venture out from behind their desks and try to make the new regime work.

Yet this very system, new as it is, already seems out of date. And with consultation on a "planning gain supplement" looming and housebuilding set to rise in the wake of the Barker Report, the only thing that seems sure is further upheaval.

What's needed is certainty; models and processes that, even if flawed like section 106, allow people to get on with delivering more homes.

Source

Housing Today