Speakers included: 

• Prof. Ian Cole, Professor of Housing Studies, Sheffield Hallam University
• Jim Ripley, Chief Executive, Phoenix Community Housing
• Mike Gaskell, Partner, Trowers and Hamlins 
• Cliff Mills, Principal Associate, Mutuo 
• Gareth Swarbrick, Chief Executive, Rochdale Boroughwide Housing
• Hannah Fearn, Editor, The Guardian Local Government and Housing Networks

The value of the housing mutual model

The event began with the recognition that the concept and purpose of social housing is changing. Professor Ian Cole considered these changes necessary owing to a widespread consensus that the social housing system status quo is unsustainable, which necessitates a new model to address the issues of debt and future challenges, such as the energy crisis and declining quality of life. A mutual organisation can be an ideal way for local authorities to pursue a transfer of council housing to a co-ownership model that avoids risk-heavy options, prioritises the tenants’ needs, and increases their sense of involvement and ownership. A mutual model can also play an instrumental role in encouraging tenants and staff to become more involved in the governance and direction of the organisation, and deliver on transparency at the most local level.

From the perspective of a corporate governance expert, Cliff Mills, Principal Associate at Mutuo, argued that the major weakness of the existing social housing system was the lack of democratic accountability through the involvement of tenants. He agreed that the representative mechanism in the housing mutual model could empower grassroots activists (including the tenants and employees’ representatives) and external stakeholders like experts in different areas for consultation during the decision-making process in a housing committee, managed by a CEO and director of finance. The model can therefore form a collective voice in public interest. In assessing future options for development, Prof. Cole, also Chair of the Investment & Involvement Commission, outlined the criteria for consideration, including financial sustainability, investment options of stock/capital and the expanding social role of the landlords and tenants’ involvement.

Tangible benefits to communities

The panel were at a consensus that a mutual housing model can revitalise the ownership and governance of social housing in the UK. Gareth Swarbrick, Chief Executive of Rochdale Boroughwide Housing, drew examples from Rochdale’s housing stock, which has been transformed over the past two years. It has been a bold move for a housing service provider, particularly because Rochdale is rated one of the most deprived boroughs in England. This project has proved to be a success as nearly 96% of tenants supported the structural change. It has also resulted in significant improvement in quality of life for the tenants through initiatives such as the sustainability of revenue, generation of new investment, increased accountability of the management, participative decision-making, creation of local employment opportunities and falling crime rates. Not only was the borough and housing stock a challenging case, it also faced broader concerns such as the economic downturn.

Mr Mills interviewed Mrs. Lynne Brosnan and Mr. Phil Cole, both tenants at Rochdale Boroughwide Housing, on the benefits and challenges that have emerged from the mutualisation project. The mutual transfer has brought positive and progressive impacts in the local community and instilled a sense of involvement in younger tenants. Mrs. Brosnan commented that the housing commission’s work had been “rather a steep learning process of executing one’s power in the decision-making process, learning principles of governance, and delegating the tenants’ vision on their neighbourhood.” To Mr. Cole, the commission’s work has turned out to be a very constructive process of collecting ideas, debating strategies and breaking socio-economic barriers that have obstructed co-operation in the past.

Sourcing investment with a participative and social platform

From the perspective of a legal expert in community housing, Mike Gaskell, Partner at Trowers and Hamlins, argued that democratic principles of the social ownership model is no longer a barrier to sourcing investment. In fact, the major concerns for funders of housing projects have been the structure of the representative board and the effectiveness of the decision-making process in these structures. The principle of electing a representative body and its links with mismanagement or ‘mischief’ in the official housing committee has been a major consideration when calculating the risks involved. They had a perception that the chances of having employees protecting their interests over the board’s decision-making process could have been an obstacle to the successful leadership of community affairs. In a housing mutual, there is, however, a mechanism already in place to prevent such situations, such as employees being unable to undertake executive positions. The success of the on-going community ownership housing projects has already convinced investors on the potentiality and reliability of these housing mutuals.

Phoenix Community Housing, which serves the Bellingham, Whitefoot and Downham areas of Lewisham, is the only resident-led housing association in London using the “community gateway” model. Jim Ripley, Chief Executive of Phoenix Community Housing, highlighted the significant levels of deprivation in the neighbourhood and the problems that families have in the area with “nearly 45% of the residents there have a family member with certain type of disability”. Barclays has been the primary creditor of the residents’ group on the understanding that the representative structure of the project differs from that of Rochdale Borough Committee as staff members are not entitled to vote, and the committee’s co-chairmen are both tenants. A new community centre – being built from the ashes of the local community pub ‘The Green Man’ –will provide ideal venues for community events and services such as vocational training courses and apprenticeship schemes more cost-effectively.

The panel discussed the various financial risks entailed in housing mutual projects; and the capacity of the principles of accountability, competence and membership-based housing mutuals to ensure sustainable governance. Both Jim Ripley and Gareth Swarbrick reiterated that getting tenants and employees involved in housing committees enabled them to oversee throughout the decision-making process by avoiding the adoption of risk-heavy options for their communities. Cliff Mills emphasised the importance of the financial stability of community housing projects as being in the best interest of the crediting institutions. Potential funders should understand well the risks involved, the governance structure, principles of operation and objectives of the organisations to which they have allocated resources. Panellists agreed that housing mutual co-operatives encouraged tenants’ commitment to the place they live in and their full understanding of their responsibilities in maintaining their own estates.