Not a tenant but share Kass' sentiments on how 'social housing' become deiberately synonomous with sink estate / hot bed of crime etc etc. Yet keepgoing back to CIH and their pie in the sky scenarios and kite flying wish lists.
No pun intended but CIH should get their own house in order first - ensuring that decent homes targets produce homes fit for people to live in. If you build poor quality housing, not enough of it, fail to maintain it properly as a landlord or landlord regulator then you're asking for trouble. Get the bricks and mortar right, then the community, then the wider socially inclusive role you claim to seek.
Knee-jerk hypothetical reactions to the latest initiative, having to respond to the latest aspect of 'social housing' is simply closing the door after the horse has bolted. Get the basics right and then build on them. Have homes where people WANT to live and not are forced to accept.
Lobby for the third/ fourth/fifth option on level playing fields tocentral government first and ONLY when thats done talk about wishful intentions. Threaten to take away accreditation of those RSLs that cant meet the standards -even councils if necessary - radical!! - so what? If radical needed and it is stop playing games - games that will go on and on until realcrisi point reached and whole system of social housing fails. Then again if you shy away from such radical issues your just making the already soory state of social housing gradually worse by avoiding doing something.
Only, when social housing is fit to live in will people exercise choice and become a community to keep what they have.
The CIH is living in cloud cuckoo land here - and victimising 'tenants' - a nice easy target rather than using its weight to attack central govt or RSLs -much harder targets when they also fund you - naive sentiment and outrageous policy intentions cant deflect whatyou should be doing and have done for last decade or more