There is little doubt that the Audit Commission's KLOE-based inspection regime contributed to rising standards for many housing providers. This was particularly evident arm's-length management organisations (Almo) due to the link between inspection and the release of borrowing to meet the Decent Homes standard.
But while the system had its supporters and beneficiaries there were dissenting voices, arguing that service standards, performance outcomes and even "excellence" should instead be measured through a conversation with local residents.
The man now essentially in charge of social housing regulation, Julian Ashby, makes the observation that driving improvement through a single central body could lead to "one size fits all" prescription. His comments highlight a key question that underpins the entire issue of consumer standards regulation: do providers require, as Roger Jarman suggests, "a robust national regulator to defend the interests of tenants suffering from poor or coasting services" – or can they be trusted to go it alone?
While the former housing inspection framework may have offered a consistent approach to regulation, standards, and the way in which KLOEs were used, varied. Although many successful providers used KLOEs intelligently, as only one of several means of informing service improvement, others were insepction obsessed, unable to move beyond the mediocre.
While many organisations did some excellent and innovative work there was also no shortage of poor and coasting services. Might this suggest that, in terms of service quality, the nature of the regulatory framework isn't actually pivotal?
In fact, it could be argued that inspection contributed to a culture of compliance which stifled innovation and offered a substitute for the strategic direction that boards and senior management teams should provide. For housing – as for most industries – high quality, committed leadership coupled with a proper understanding of customer needs and aspirations are the real foundations of organisational success.
The opportunity for the sector is surely to embrace the light touch consumer regulation offered by the Homes and Communities Agency and focus on developing organisational leadership, attitudes and understanding that supports the development of genuinely responsive local services.
This presents a real cultural challenge as housing providers are required to move away from the security and comfort of prescription towards intelligent, meaningful relationships with their customers. Some may find they are better prepared for this journey than others.
There will of course still be those who remain indifferent to the views of tenants and continue to deliver mediocre services, but I question whether the regulation framework is the determining factor.
Richard Gormley is a director of PSI Consultancy
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. Join the housing network for more comment, analysis and best practice
