Whether everyone agrees with this approach is another matter – some think the pendulum has swung too in favour of residents. So we ask what, in an ideal world, would a perfect regulator that pleased everyone look like?
Back in the real world, although some feel neglected by the new approach, the sector seems broadly supportive of the recently proposed framework for regulation. For those who haven’t yet settled down to read the document at bedtime, we provide a quick round-up.
A year is perhaps not sufficient time to judge whether the TSA is doing a good job as regulator – it hasn’t been around long enough or got its hands dirty enough for that. April 2010, when the watchdog expands its remit to regulate councils, will be one watershed. But really, it needs two candles on the cake and at least one big challenge before anyone can truly judge its success.
That isn’t stopping shadow housing minister Grant Shapps, who gives the impression that he’ll be making the TSA a footnote in history if his party wins next year’s general election.
So should the TSA be saved to celebrate its second birthday? Find out more about its prospects.
But whether or not you’re a signed-up supporter of Operation Pink, the campaign to save the regulator, it seems foolish to get rid of the TSA without discovering whether all that consultation and all those bus miles were worth it.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (1)
Chris | 17/12/2009 8:27 am
There can hardly be a bigger waste of public money than an organisation that thinks value for money is spending £80,000 to convince the politicians that created it that it is doing a good job, and an obscene amount of money on a pink bus and 'national conversation' that reached only a tiny fraction of the people it is supposed to be representing.
The TSA represents big brother style, centralised, Government at its worst.
Scrap it and let the sector do what it does best - provide homes for those in most need.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment