To consider the Government’s Green Paper entitled ‘A new deal for social housing’ and to reflect on the questions asked within the document in order to provide a response to the consulation.
Minutes:
The Group had before it a copy of the Government’s Green Paper * entitled ‘A new deal for social housing’. Within the document there were a number of questions that interested parties were encouraged to think about and provide a response to as part of a national consultation.
In an effort to aid discussion, the Group Manager for Housing had provided some suggested responses to each of the questions (see Appendix A). The Group discussed each of these in depth and provided the following comments and where necessary, amendment, to the suggested response:
1. How can residents best be supported in this important role of working with landlords to ensure homes are safe?
Suggested response was agreed. The Group noted that it is the view of this Council that when a housing authority has stock that is maintained to a good standard and offers a high standard of service delivery, it is less likely that tenants will come forward to get involved although the Council worked hard to encourage them to do so.
2. Should new safety measures in the private rented sector also apply to social housing?
The word ‘Yes’ to be added to the start of the suggested response as the Group felt it should be equitable on both sides.
3. Are there any changes to what constitutes a Decent Home that we should consider?
In addition the Group suggested that the definition of a “decent Home” should implicitly include consideration of any adaptations needed as a result of an aging population; this may include, for example, the provision of storage facilities for mobility scooters.
4. Do we need additional measures to make sure social homes are safe and decent?
Agreed suggested response. The Group considered that the Council was doing all it could to provide a comprehensive adaptations service.
5. Are there ways of strengthening the mediation opportunities available for landlords and residents to resolve disputes locally?
Agreed suggested response. The Council was currently doing all it could to resolve disputes locally and the Group were satisfied that a robust system was in place.
6. Should we reduce the eight week waiting period to four weeks, or should we resolve the requirement for the “democratic filter” stage altogether?
Agreed suggested response to reduce to four weeks.
7. What can we do to ensure that the “designated persons” are better able to promote local resolutions?
Suggested response agreed as written.
8. How can we ensure that residents understand how best to escalate a complaint and seek redress?
Suggested response agreed as written.
9. How can we ensure that residents can access the right advice and support when making a complaint?
Suggested response agreed as written.
10.How can we best ensure that landlords’ processes for dealing with complaints are fast and effective?
Suggested response agreed as written.
11.How can we best ensure safety concerns are handled swiftly and effecting within the existing redress framework?
Suggested response agreed as written.
12.Do the proposed key performance indicators cover the right areas? Are there any other areas that should be covered?
Suggested response agreed as written.
13.Should landlords report performance against these key performance indicators every year
Suggested response agreed as written.
14.Should landlords report performance against these key performance indicators to the Regulator?
Suggested response agreed as written.
15.What more can be done to encourage landlords to be more transparent with their residents?
Suggested response agreed with the addition of ‘….and carefully listens to its tenants….’ At the end of the first sentence.
16.Do you think that there should be a better way of reporting the outcomes of landlords’ complaint handling? How can this be made as clear and accessible as possible for residents?
Suggested response agreed as written.
17.Is the Regulator best placed to prepare key performance indicators in consultation with residents and landlords?
Suggested response agreed as written but with suggestion that all Registered Providers should subscribe to Housemark as the benchmarking service which they provide represents the industry standard.
18.What would be the best approach to publishing key performance indicators that would allow residents to make the most effective comparison of performance?
Suggested response agreed as written.
19.Should we introduce a new criterion to the Affordable Homes Programme that reflects residents’ experience of their landlord? What other ways could we incentivise best practice and deter the worst, including for those providers that do not use Government funding to build?
Suggested response agreed as written.
20.Are current resident engagement and scrutiny measures effective? What more can be done to make residents aware of existing ways to engage with landlords and influence how services are delivered?
Suggested response agreed as written.
21.Is there a need for a stronger representation for residents at a national level? If so, how should this best be achieved?
Suggested response agreed as written.
22.Would there be interest in a programme to promote the transfer of local authority housing, particularly to community-based housing associations? What would it need to make it work?
Suggested response agreed as written but with the inclusion of the word ‘No’ at the start of the first sentence.
23.Could a programme of trailblazers help to develop and promote options for greater resident-leadership within the sector?
Suggested response agreed as written but with the inclusion of the word ‘No’ at the start of the first sentence.
24.Are Tenant Management Organisations delivering positive outcomes for residents and landlords? Are current processes for setting up and disbanding Tenant Management Organisations suitable? Do they achieve the right balance between resident’s control and local accountability?
Suggested response agreed as written.
25.Are there any other innovative ways of giving social housing residents greater choice and control over the services they receive from landlords?
Suggested response agreed as written.
26.Do you think that there are benefits to models that support residents to take on some of their own services? If so, what is needed to make this work?
Suggested response agreed as written but with the inclusion of the word ‘No’ at the start of the first sentence.
27.How can landlords ensure residents have more choice over contractor services, while retaining oversight of quality and value for money?
Suggested response agreed as written.
28.What more could we do to help leaseholders of a social housing landlord?
Suggested response agreed as written.
29.Does the Regulator have the right objective on consumer regulation? Should any of the consumer standards change to ensure that landlords provide a better service for residents in line with the new key performance indicators proposed, and if so how?
Suggested response agreed as written.
30.Should the Regulator be given powers to produce other documents, such as a Code of Practice, to provide further clarity about what is expected from the consumer standards?
Suggested response agreed as written.
31.Is “serious detriment” the appropriate threshold for intervention by the Regulator for a breach of consumer standards? If not, what would be an appropriate threshold for intervention?
Suggested response agreed as written.
32.Should the Regulator adopt a more proactive approach to regulation of consumer standards? Should the Regulator use key performance indicators and phased interventions as a means to identify and tackle poor performance against these consumer standards? How should this be targeted?
Suggested response agreed as written.
33.Should the Regulator have greater ability to scrutinise the performance and arrangements of local authority landlords? If so, what measures would be appropriate?
Suggested response agreed as written.
34.Are the existing enforcement measures set out in Box 3 adequate? If not, what additional enforcement powers should be considered?
Suggested response agreed as written.
35.Is the current framework for local authorities to hold management organisations such as Tenant Management Organisations and “Arms Length Management” Organisations to account sufficiently robust? If not, what more is needed to provide effective oversight of these organisations?
Suggested response agreed as written.
36.What further steps, if any, should Government take to make the Regulator more accountable to Parliament?
Suggested response agreed as written.
37.How could we support or deliver a best neighbourhood competition
Suggested response agreed as written.
38.In addition to sharing positive stories of social housing residents and their neighbourhoods, what more could be done to tackle stigma?
Suggested response agreed as written subject to the correction of two typo’s and the addition of a comment that ‘stigma’ in this context is not so much of an issue in Mid Devon; there are many people living in private sector housing who are keen to move into social housing on the basis that homes in the management of the Council and other RP’s are in good repair and on the grounds of affordability. This is evidenced by the large number of housing applicants who have been placed in Band E on Devon Home Choice. Band E is the band of “no housing need”. We believe that the issue of “stigma” is one of public perception but the Council’s believes that there is a positive view of social housing generally in our District. Nearly half of our own retained stock has been sold so the majority of our estates are now mixed tenure.
39.What is needed to further encourage the professionalisation of housing management to ensure all staff deliver a good quality of service?
Suggested response agreed as written with the addition of the following:
This Council would suggest that Housing Associations should be subject to the same degree of rigour in terms of training responsibilities as local authorities.
We would also suggest that consideration needs to be given to ensuring that there is a clear line of responsibility within housing associations with regard to health and safety matters. In local authorities, the Chief Executive has clear responsibility for these and we believe that putting in place arrangements to ensure that responsibility rested with one paid Officer would deliver greater accountability.
40.What key performance indicator should be used to measure whether landlords are providing good neighbourhood management?
Suggested response agreed as written.
41.What evidence is there of the impact of the important role that many landlords are playing beyond their key responsibilities? Should landlords report on the social value they deliver?
Suggested response agreed as written with the additional comment that the Council would query how you could define social value.
42.How are landlords working with local partners to tackle anti-social behaviour? What key performance indicator could be used to measure this work?
Suggested response agreed as written.
43.What other ways can planning guidance support good design in the social sector?
Suggested response agreed as written with the addition of the following:
The Council believes that it is important to deliver “homes for life” which meet the needs of households as their circumstances change and design principles need to incorporate this. It also supports the use of pepper potting to ensure that no differentiation can be made between the social housing and the private housing on new estates.
44.How can we encourage social housing residents to be involved in the planning and design of new developments?
Suggested response agreed as written.
45.Recognising the need for fiscal responsibility, this Green Paper seeks views on whether the Government’s current arrangements strike the right balance between providing grant funding for housing associations and Housing Revenue Account borrowing for local authorities.
Suggested response agreed as written.
46.How can we boost community-led housing and overcome the barriers communities experience to developing new community owned homes?
Suggested response agreed as written with the additional comment as follows:
This Council would suggest that a review of the funding mechanism to support the development of Community Land Trusts would help. The monies received in this area related to the number of second homes in Mid Devon and there is therefore only a limited pot. We would add that, in our view, most local authorities do not have the resources to deliver a wholesale transfer of housing stock.
47.What level of additional affordable housing, over existing investment plans, could be delivered by social housing providers if they were given longer term certainty over funding?
Suggested response agreed as written.
48.How can we best support providers to develop new Shared Ownership products that enable people to build up more equity in their homes?
Suggested response agreed as written.
The Group wished for their comments and amendments to be incorporated into the final suggested response to the consultation and that, with approval from the Cabinet Member for Housing, these go forward as the official response from the Council to the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government by the deadline date of 6 November 2018.
The Group passed on their thanks to the Group Manager for Housing for her hard work in relation to this matter thus far.
Note: (i) * Green paper circulated; copy attached to the signed minutes.
(ii) Suggested responses attached as Appendix A.
Supporting documents: