The national governments of Wales, England and Scotland are expecting local authorities to improve the standard of their housing stock. But how does the detail compare?
| Wales | England | Scotland | |
| Key national policy documents | Better Homes for People in Wales | Communities Plan, PSA+ Review | Modernising Scotland’s Social Housing |
| Standard local authority stock expected to reach | Welsh Housing Quality Standard by 2012 | Decent Homes by 2010 | Scottish Social Housing Standard (being consulted on along with timescale for compliance) |
| Requirements on local authorities | Welsh local authorities to quantify the extent of the repair and improvement liabilities in respect of their stock (already submitted to Assembly), and to produce plans that demonstrate that stock will be regenerated within ten years | English authorities to complete option appraisals by May 2005 to be signed off by Government Office and integrated with wider renewal strategies | Scottish authorities expected to analyse the condition of their stock and the extent and cost of the investment required as part of local housing strategy process – by April 2005 at latest and April 2004 if possible |
| Changes to housing investment arrangements | Prudential Borrowing from 2004/05 | Prudential Borrowing from 2004/05, Single investment pot to bring together Approved Development Programme and Housing Investment Programme – to be allocated by Regional Housing Boards | Prudential Borrowing from 2004/05 |
| Methods of investment | |||
| Stock retention
Major Repairs Allowance as of April 2004, Introduction of Prudential Borrowing may enable some authorities to have some additional investment powers |
Major Repairs Allowance since April 2001, Strong encouragement to separate landlord/ strategy roles, Action to achieve Decent Homes assessed as part of the Comprehensive Performance Assessment rating – failure to achieve Decent Homes linked to intervention, Introduction of Prudential Borrowing may enable some authorities to have some additional investment powers | Encouragement to separate strategic housing role from housing management function, Introduction of Prudential Borrowing may enable some authorities to have some additional investment powers | |
| Stock transfer | Overhanging debt and early debt redemption costs covered by the Treasury, Gap funding for negative value transfers via Social Housing Grant, Preferred model – Community Housing Mutuals and Local Community Mutuals | Overhanging debt and early debt redemption costs covered by the Treasury, Overhanging debt grant for partial transfers, Possible gap funding for negative value transfers, Emerging model – Community Gateway Model – still in pilot stage and not yet tested | Debt write-off for whole-stock and partial transfers, £175 million by 2005/06 for regeneration linked to Community Ownership, Community Ownership model – well established |
| Arms Length Management Organisations (a form of stock retention) | Not ruled out but no additional financial support | Round 3 launched with £700 million, Clear link to inspection results, Requirement for clear separation of ALMO from the authority, Consultation on ‘ALMO Plus’ borrowing freedoms | Not an option |
| Private finance initiative (a form of stock retention) | No credits specifically for housing PFI projects | £635 million in new credits | Not an option |
| Mix and match | Mix and match options fine within overall strategy | Partial transfers to be set in the context of how the remaining housing stock will be brought up to the Scottish Social Housing Standard, a minimu m size of transfer may be necessary and financial support will not exceed that which would have been provided for whole-stock transfer |