While this is clearly bad news for the regulator’s 231 staff, are Grant Shapps’ plans equally bad for the wider sector?
At first glance, there is logic to concluding that, in terms of service provision, there is no longer a need for the TSA now its (largely welcomed) new regulatory framework is up and running. The beauty of the ‘local offer’ idea is that responsibility for service provision rests squarely with providers, although TSA staff may ponder whether their success has ultimately been their downfall.
Mr Shapps has acknowledged that there will need to be an enhanced role for the Housing Ombudsman Service to resolve more entrenched disputes. However, as Mike Biles, the ombudsman, revealed on these pages in February, the service is already stretched. More resources are sure to be needed, especially if the ombudsman is to fulfil the central need identified in the 2007 Cave review of social housing regulation of ensuring tenant choice. It is unclear at this stage whether Mr Shapps agrees that this is important. He may conclude that as a result of the TSA framework this responsibility has effectively passed to landlords already.
An area where Mr Shapps’ thinking definitely seems to have evolved is with regard to the regulation of governance and viability of housing associations. Initially, it was rumoured he intended to hand this role to local authorities, but he seems to have been swayed by the argument that such a move could jeopardise the terms on which banks have lent almost £60 billion to housing associations.
Given the low regard in which the Conservatives hold the Audit Commission, handing the HCA an enhanced role was the last option left to Mr Shapps. In practice many of the TSA’s regulatory staff are likely to transfer to the HCA (or should that be Housing Corporation Agency?) so the disruption seems set to be slight.
All of this begs the question though: is it worth it? OK, as Mr Shapps says, a quango will be ‘deleted’, but given the costs inherent in a further reorganisation, how much will really be saved? I wager not much.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (2)
Rick Campbell | 18/06/2010 12:29 pm
The framework is only that - something to build upon and enhance. Fhe trouble with the TSA is/was they didn't appear to give a toss about tenants and/or services for tenants.
They seemed to believe that the wat forward was to listen to the great and the good rather than those who mouth off who may have suffered injustice from their landlord.
It is often the case that when an individual highlights a weakness that colleagues tend to ignore it as being sour grapes or as self interest and that, by inference, does not benefit tenants as a whole.
It is truly amazing that Grant Shafts and HAs don't save thenselves a lot of time and money by talkind with, listening to, and acting upon the input from those tenants who robustly and straightforwardly identify weakness in services.
The TSA failed to do this and instead went along the jolly happy clappy route.
When, if ever, will peole learn?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Dave Hollins | 19/06/2010 8:50 am
Stuart - you seem to know nothing about the TSA regulatory system. It placed the burden on the provider and was a devolved system that needed tenant empowerment to make it work, but the role for the central regulator was clearly defined and absolutely essential. The HCA is not capable of undertaking this role and has no culture of working with tenants at all. The original Cave review made it clear why the investment and regulatory roles should be split, the arguments have not changed.
In the end, lenders will insist on proper regulation - it's why housing associations borrow so cheaply - so there will probably be very few savings over and above those that the TSA were going to make anyway.
The reason for getting rid of the TSA is ideological - Shapps showing he's in charge and can do as he pleases irrespective of the wishes of tenants and providers. He's the new playground bully, determined to destroy social housing as we know it. There's only one way to deal with bullies and that is to stand up to them.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment