The interesting issue that has come out of this, where there is a sticking point, is the question of housing associations. We will probably have to come back to this. Again, I start with the people out there rather than the structures and institutions. If you ask people who live in an area where the big associations run what people still think of or still call council estates: ““Are those housing associations private bodies or public bodies?””, they will say that they are public bodies. Many people do not distinguish between the housing association and the council.
I accept exactly what the Minister said about the legal status, but we are not talking about legal status here. They may be private bodies, but I described them as being quasi-public bodies. The reason I did that is precisely for the reason that the Minister said: most of their funding comes through the Homes and Communities Agency. The local authority still has the strategic housing responsibility for negotiating and discussing with the funding agencies, especially the HCA. The local authority has responsibility for discussing with the HCA the strategic needs of its area. The HCA will certainly negotiate directly with housing associations, but the local authority has a direct relationship with the housing association in agreeing the allocation of funds.
In many cases where there have been stock transfers, there are close financial relationships between the transferred housing association and the local authority involving millions of pounds that go in both directions. In many cases where there has been a transfer from the local authority, a significant number of the members of the housing association board are appointed by the council. It is not true to suggest that housing associations are completely private and have nothing to do with and are not connected with local authorities. In terms of their functions, there is no doubt that housing associations are quasi-public bodies.
The Minister referred to traditional, small, charity-based housing associations, which I accept are quite different. However, to be included in the Minister’s description of local governance and the local organisations, it is not a requirement, despite the fact she said that it was, to have democratic arrangements. Many of them do not have democratic arrangements, but they have to be included as part of the description of who does what and what happens, because if you do not include them, it does not make sense to people. They look at this and say, ““You have missed out all of the council estates””, ““You have missed out this part of the health service””, or whatever. The description of people providing services, even if they are not democratic or open to democratic processes and influences, is an important part of describing how local services are provided. If you do not do that, you are not providing a comprehensive document—which was a point that we made on Monday.
We have to come back to the question of housing associations, particularly the big ones and where there have been stock transfers. I ask the Government to think carefully about how it might be possible to include them in a sensible way, if we decide that that is what we want the Bill to do.
My final point is to read out another list. The names of bodies that I am about to read are not all partnerships, but it is clear to me that if this plan is to work properly and not be too onerous a burden on local authorities, there will have to be a hierarchy of information. If this simply applies at a local, unitary or even a district council level, you will miss out a huge amount of the information that people who want to get involved ought to have in a community or a small town.
I have made a small list from the small town in which I live, Colne in Lancashire. I thought about this on Monday when my noble friend obtained information on more than 100 bodies in Calderdale. A noble Lord opposite said, ““We do not want all these local organisations””. I thought, ““Of course you don’t””. If you live in Halifax, you do not want to know about what happens regarding the trusts and partnerships in Todmorden. If you live there, you do not want to know about what happens at the other end of the borough in, say, Sowerby Bridge. However, you need to know what happens in your patch. If the local authority in its offices, town hall or libraries has a sensible set of information, they will not be in the Government’s lists.
I looked at the list in Colne. There is Colne in Bloom, which is a voluntary group that does very well. The community safety panel is the local panel from Pendle’s crime and disorder partnership. Underneath that, there are monthly PACT meetings —Police and Communities Together—which take place in each ward, at which people turn up to talk about crime and disorder and antisocial behaviour. They are well attended.
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Greaves
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 21 January 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
706 c139-41GC 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:23:33 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_521362
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_521362
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_521362