The inclusion of the third point might sound incongruous, yet for millions of people in England it will be one of the key differences in their lives over the past 10 years.

To mark the end of the decent homes programme next year, we are this week publishing the first of a series of pieces examining the impact of the billions that have been invested through housing associations, arm’s-length management organisations and local authorities to improve England’s social housing.

Stock transfer associations, the focus of our first piece, have invested £16 billion in 700,000 homes since the decent homes programme was launched in 2001. The journey has been far from smooth, but the bulk of tenants have seen their homes transformed for the better since voting ‘yes’.

That is not to say that there isn’t still room for improvement. The line had to be drawn somewhere and this means that many people have been left with old kitchens and bathrooms that will not meet the standard shortly after the programme ends.

Others who were in a minority who voted ‘no’ to stock transfer may feel they would have been better off staying with their local authority - just ask residents in Birmingham who voted against transfer but who have still seen improvements to their homes.

Then there is the argument that decent homes is actually an opportunity missed since it has not done all it could have to make homes more environmentally sustainable. This argument has merit as more sustainable materials could have been used and higher energy-efficiency standards set.

However, the fact remains that Labour inherited a £19 billion repairs backlog. It is to the government’s credit that it pushed the programme through rather than delaying it.

Labour politicians fighting for survival in the 2010 election might not think housing offers much to shout about given the problems of building enough new homes. But improving millions of rented homes is a legacy to be proud of - and not a bad vote winner either.

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment