Still looking after my ‘babies’ but now I’m the granddaddy

So, have I gone over to the dark side, leaving my councillor colleagues in the light? Is this the usual hypocrisy you’d expect from a politician, or is it a Damascene conversion?

Well, it’s none of the above, actually. It’s more complicated than that.

If there are proper safeguards for staff, I don’t care whether housing is provided by councils, RSLs or even the private sector. What I do care about is the provision of high-quality services to those that need them at the right price.

There are some jobs that RSLs can do better than councils. In the case of Liverpool there is a very strong, home-grown RSL movement. This is partly because 30 years ago the Liberal council (of which I was a part) set up the biggest housing action area and general improvement area programme in the country, and 20 years ago the Liberal-led housing committee (which I chaired) set up the largest new-build housing co-operative programme in Western Europe. For both, the involvement of the RSL sector was essential.

But what RSLs cannot do is develop integrated strategies linking all strands of public sector provision. They do not have a democratic mandate from the residents of an area to proceed with big programmes for change. The fundamental difference then between councils and the RSL sector is the democratic legitimacy of councils. RSLs are only providers and influencers and not deciders in the wider scheme of things.

One of the things that surprises me most is the lack of understanding of this in much of the movement. “We are private sector”, say chief executives and chairs alike.

I beg to differ. RSLs are part of public sector provision. We bid for grants to keep us going. When we borrow it is against assets that were largely funded by the public sector. Quite rightly, we are both regulated and inspected. Those mechanisms serve as a proxy for the market in the field in which we work.

Have I gone over to the dark side? Is this the usual hypocrisy that you’d expect from a politician, or is it a Damascene conversion?

What RSLs do have is the ability, where appropriate, to bring private sector solutions and practices to bear on problems in ways that our even more regulated colleagues in local government are unable to do.

I agreed to be chair of Plus Housing Group because it shares these definitions. The group exists to be part of the public sector and to work closely with councils to deliver joined-up services to those that need them.

Our most important focus is not our balance sheet and size but our delivery and our enabling role in helping make lives better for our tenants and the communities in which they live. We do this by being a good landlord – we recognise that we could be better, but we do it by being the public sector’s delivery mechanism for a range of necessary services.

I wanted to chair the group because I believe that by doing so I can help bring Plus even closer to the rest of the public sector. Perhaps, in time, we can become an even greater example of that and encourage stronger links between the two parts of the public housing sector.

But there was also a selfish reason. Plus Housing looks after most of the co-operatives I helped to set up 20 years ago. It is the parent company for Include, the housing regeneration company that I set up and chaired, until recently, and which has been recognised by the neighbourhood renewal unit as the heavyweight champion of neighbourhood management.

These are my “babies” and I want to look after them. I haven’t gone over to the dark side, but I do feel like I’ve gone from father to grandfather – in one move.