Mutuals and the Big Society New mutuals in Housing

1. Mutuals and the Big SocietyNew mutuals in Housing Cliff Mills

2. This presentation • Can you “mutualise” something? • What does that mean – what are we trying to do? • What are the ambitions at Rochdale Boroughwide Housing? It’s all about relationships

3. Can you “mutualise” something? • Can you take a business or service and put it into a mutual box? • No. It is not a “top down” exercise • Creating a mutual legal constitution and structure is cosmetic • Can only create a mutual from the bottom up • Please explain …

4. People in communities lacking something Get together collectively to find a solution Create new relationships Commit themselves to trading together for the common good Create an organisation (members, rules, elections, governance) Need Collaboration (co-operation) Commitment Structure Mutuals emerge

5. You cannot impose mutuality • Conceptual inconsistency • (The Foundation Trust experience) • Mutuality was a solution to a problem • A self-help solution provided by people in communities • Self-help starts at the grass-roots • The mutuality pre-exists: the structure (organisation) comes later

6. So what are we up to? “The days of big government are over” “Centralisation and top-down control have proved a failure” “Disperse power more widely” “Help people come together to make life better” “Create a Big Society: completely recast the relationship between people and the state” (The Coalition: our programme for government)

7. Coalition aims “We will support the creation and expansion of mutuals, co-operatives, charities and social enterprises, and enable these groups to have much greater involvement in the running of public services” (The Coalition: Our programme for government) “The big, giant state monopolies – we’re breaking them open to get new ideas in.  Saying to the people who work in our public services - set up as a co-operative, be your own boss, do things your way.” (David Cameron, conference speech, October 2010)

8. The new mutual argument • State-ownership is being phased out • The future for public ownership is co-operative and mutual ownership • It is a way of doing business which is • for the public benefit • robust, accountable and sustainable • capable of competing with private businesses

9. How will it be delivered? • By engaging with people in communities and building new relationships based on what people want and need • By capturing that interest, and using it • to inform what services the organisation delivers and how they are delivered • to drive continuing efficiency and improvement • Redesigning the business to respond to these new relationships and drivers

10. Ambitious aims! • What does it mean in practice? • Let’s look at what Rochdale Boroughwide Housing is thinking of doing

11. What do the people of Rochdale need? • Secure and decent home to live in • Access to warmth and essential services • A safe environment • Ability to look after their own health and well-being • Opportunity to learn and be trained • Jobs and work • Tenants need these things, so do staff, 85% of whom live locally

12. The gloomy prospects • Drastic cuts in services, higher prices, fewer jobs • The prospects for many (not just Rochdale) • Increasing rents, reduced housing benefit • Reduction in incomes/loss of jobs and ability to earn • Increased levels of poverty • Fuel poverty, colder homes • Decline of physical and mental health

13. Finding solutions today • We have to find our own solutions – the state will not be able to do it for us • We need organisations which • help people to address their needs • support rather than create barriers to self-help • go with the grain of mutual support within families and communities • are driven by customers and staff to • provide relevant services • to be efficient and continually improve

14. RBH’s ideas: (1) membership • Existing models in social housing have tenants as members, but not staff • Both tenant and staff membership is needed to • Create a sense of joint-ownership and responsibility • Support the culture change needed through getting tenants and staff to work together in co-production • In other areas (health and leisure services) staff membership is well established • Both “customer” and staff ownership is needed to protect public interest.

15. RBH’s ideas: (1) membership • Membership is important, but not a panacea • It makes tenant involvement part of formal arrangements • It can provide a platform for formal staff involvement • Membership is the basis for • Engagement and participation • Co-operation between tenants and staff • Driving the organisation to stay true to its purpose, and to deliver • Membership is the basis for co-ownership

16. RBH’s ideas: (2) governance • Current approach in social housing generally based on • non-executive boards comprising local authority (appointed), tenant (sometimes elected) and independent members • separate executive, not on the board • Drawbacks: • Can be difficult for some board members to make an effective contribution at board level • Scrutiny of the executive can be weak • Executives do not share legal responsibility

17. RBH’s ideas: (2) governance • Modern governance thinking favours a balance of executive and professional non-executive directors to carry legal responsibility and control • They need to be properly held to account • Tenants and staff have a legitimate voice and must play a proper part in governance • The local authority must have a voice • It may be appropriate for wider interests to have a voice as well – e.g. health, education • A new approach is emerging in the public sector

18. Emerging public sector governance • New approach which • Seeks to assure board competence • Creates a new accountability framework • Better matches individual capability to roles • Based on “two-tier” approach • Board of appointed directors comprising executive and non-executives • A representative body comprising elected individuals (majority), some appointed by partner organisations

19. Possible structure Members (tenants, staff, etc.) Partner organisations Representative Body Board of Directors (Executive and non- executive)

20. Board of Directors • Board responsible for running the organisation • Majority are non-executives, including chair • Minority are executives, including at least • Chief Executive • Finance • Preference for smaller board: 7 – 10 • Non-executives – to challenge and question • must have relevant skills and experience • must be objective and independent • could include tenant non-executive

21. Representative Body • Majority of members elected by and from membership constituencies (tenants and staff) • Balance between constituencies set by constitution • Minority of members appointed by key partner organisations, such as • Local authority • Other public sector (health, education etc.) • Existing community or voluntary bodies • Size: less constraints, could be 15 – 20

22. Role of Representative Body • Formal roles • Appointing and removing non-executive directors • Approving appointment of chief executive • Feeding into and approving future plans • Receiving annual report and accounts from Board • Informal roles • The link between the Board and members • Sounding board, source of advice and support to Board • Point of contact for members and community

23. Where does this model come from? • Based on traditional co-operative and mutual concepts • Draws on the model for NHS Foundation Trusts • This approach being replicated elsewhere (leisure and culture, other health bodies) • Increasingly recognised and understood in public sector

24. Why is RBH interested in mutuality? • RBH needs to have a bigger role than that of traditional landlord • Addressing fuel poverty and financial exclusion are priorities • This cannot happen without the active engagement of tenants and staff (co-ownership and co-production) • The development and delivery of services will require collaboration across sectors • Tenants and staff need to work together to reduce costs, preserve the assets, improve opportunities

25. Concluding comments • So what is really happening in Rochdale? • RBH has a vision for new relationships with tenants and staff (and the wider community) • Gareth and his colleagues are already facilitating the emergence of these relationships • They need a different ownership and governance model to underpin and give substance to these relationships

26. Questions and Discussion