You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
Should the sector have done more over the past decade?
David Montague reflects on his 10 years as chief executive of L&Q – a time of huge change and disruption for social housing providers
This March I will have been L&Q’s chief executive for 10 years.
As I travel from one investor to the next to raise £500m on this week’s L&Q bond roadshow, I have been reflecting on how things have changed since 2008.
Ten years ago I took on the job with a combination of fear and excitement.
Inspired by my own upbringing on a council estate and by Professor John Hills’ report Ends and Means – his call to tackle the polarisation of communities and deprivation brought about by generations of bad housing policy – this was my chance to challenge social housing stigma.
In my first week as chief executive I visited one of Ujima’s care homes, which we acquired one month earlier.
There I learned that a resident had just doused himself in petrol and set himself on fire. An unthinkable tragedy that a vulnerable young man should end his life this way.
READ MORE
In the same week I arrived at my office one morning to find a woman sitting outside with her daughter.
They had just been evicted and had nowhere to go.
“Where do you expect me to take my daughter?” the mother asked.
“I couldn’t help feeling then and can’t help feeling now that people in social housing are being let down.”
Ten years on it still hurts for me to tell these stories.
I couldn’t help feeling then and can’t help feeling now that people in social housing are being let down.
Then the recession hit us.
The Labour government took the bold decision to bring forward a whole parliamentary term of housing investment so we could keep building homes. For a while it worked, but the recession bit deep.
Along came David Cameron and George Osborne, Liam Byrne’s “there’s no more money” note and the austerity agenda which followed.
Valiantly the sector did its best to keep the show on the road driving efficiency, taking measured risks and investing in homes and communities.
The cross-subsidy model was invented, we took on new risks and recruited new people to manage those risks.
“The Tories saw us as inefficient; Labour believed that we had abandoned our social purpose.”
But somewhere along the way we lost support.
The Tories saw us as inefficient; Labour believed that we had abandoned our social purpose.
Our rents were cut and we were left facing some difficult choices. “Restore your margins,” said the rating agencies, “or we will down-rate you.”
“But don’t do it by increasing your sales exposure,” they cautioned, “or we will down-rate you.”
The National Housing Federation responded with Homes for Britain, an Ambition to Deliver, and Owning Our Future.
In the face of political hostility and market uncertainty we reconnected with our ambition and our social purpose, we restored confidence among key political stakeholders and as house builders stepped sideways, we stepped forward.
For a brief moment housing associations found their place in the sun. Then 71 people died in Grenfell Tower.
Former housing minister Alok Sharma went on the road to speak to social housing tenants. And what did they say? That, as social housing tenants, they were stigmatised.
So on my 10th anniversary in the job I find myself asking whether, in the pursuit of growth in an era of austerity, we unwittingly reinforced the stigma that we are here to eliminate.
The answer, in my view, is no. And yes.
“However much we change and diversify, the sector remains deeply rooted in its social purpose.”
No because our regeneration and community investment projects have transformed communities.
Because, despite the funding challenge, we are still building social housing – in L&Q’s case 10 times more than in 2008. And because, however much we change and diversify, the sector remains deeply rooted in its social purpose.
But yes because some of our older homes aren’t good enough.
We met the Decent Homes challenge, we funded it ourselves, but are we proud of every home we own and manage?
Some of our older estates are crying out for regeneration. We should have done more.
For L&Q, Grenfell Tower marks a turning point. I am proud of our achievements over the past 10 years but the next 10 years will see a shift of emphasis.
“Would we choose to live in our own homes? And if not, how do we justify letting them to someone else?”
Housing supply will always be important to us. We are a housing charity; we face a housing crisis. And it is our job to tackle it head-on.
We will build as many homes as we can, and as many of those homes as possible will be for social housing.
But from next year our plan will reconnect with Professor Hills’ call to action – the conversation we started and which was rudely interrupted 10 years ago.
Our plan will start with social purpose. Then it will focus on our existing social housing tenants – their homes, their communities, our service.
Then we will broaden our view to ensure that every L&Q resident lives in a home and receives a service that we can be proud of. And only then will we talk about growth.
“Our plan will start with social purpose.”
Ten years ago we couldn’t have foreseen the extraordinary changes we have witnessed over the past decade.
And in 10 years’ time we are bound to look back with amazement at how much has changed again.
Working with Network and Clarion, our Future Shape of the Sector Commission will ask questions which shine a light into our future.
At L&Q’s last board meeting we had a dry run at answering these questions.
If we can ignite across the sector the same debate we had in the L&Q boardroom, we have much to look forward to.
David Montague, chief executive, L&Q
