ÐÇ¿Õ´«Ã½

Governance in the housing sector is under the spotlight as never before. Two of England's biggest registered social landlords are under scrutiny: Places for People, put under Housing Corporation supervision following a major rift in its board (HT 17 October, page 7) and Shaftesbury Housing Association, which has new members appointed to its board by the Housing Corporation appointing new members to its board. On Tuesday, Leeds-based Unity Housing Association became the latest to be supervised. The three are far from alone: in the year to the end of April, a total of 23 housing associations were put under supervision and last week, the Audit Commission slammed the performance of almost every public sector service in its Corporate Governance Report.

The number of supervisions raises questions about how many boards are working, although associations are not exactly at crisis point.

But it's not as if the sector is short of ideas on how it could change. In June, Julian Ashby, managing director of consultant Hacas Chapman Hendy, drew up governance guidelines for the National Housing Federation (see "Ashby's route to a better board", right). He suggested fixed terms of office for board members to ensure the circulation of fresh blood. His ideas echo similar proposals for the private sector made in a Department of Trade and Industry report published in January. The study, by former banker Derek Higgs, said non-executives should only work for a limited number of organisations.

Housing Today conducted a straw poll of 20 of the country's biggest RSLs and found that 11 have, or plan to have, fixed terms of office for some or all board members. Many housing professionals believe limiting terms of office is a great way to guarantee new faces and to stop the relationship between chief executive and chair getting too cosy, but others say it is a risk because it could mean the loss of talented and enthusiastic people. "I'm opposed to fixed terms, fixed anything," says Simon Dow, chief executive of the Guinness Trust. Guiness' chair, the Marchioness of Douro, herself in her 50s, has led the board for more than 10 years and has been a trustee for about 25.

Dow argues that responsible landlords should be able to police their board members without an official time limit. Dow says: "I worked in one organisation where the cut-off age was 70. We had one or two great 70-year-olds and one or two useless 40-year-olds. We have to rely on boards to look at themselves and politely move on those who aren't making a contribution."

Ashby disagrees. "The principle of renewal is important," he says. "I have no strong feelings about whether the limit should be two, three or four terms. It's important they come to a conclusion."

Ashby recommends that associations advertise for these new people, but a Housing Corporation survey of 3567 board members published last month reported that almost half of members were recruited by word of mouth, and only 17% through advertisement (HT, 19 September, page 13).

"We rarely see board member jobs being advertised," says John Belcher, chief executive of the Anchor Trust, "so where do these people come from? Is it a tap on the shoulder from the chair?" Some chief executives argue that shared values and chemistry between board members are key, and that these can only be found by personally inviting people to apply. But the corporation's survey also found that boards are predominantly white and male (HT 19 September, page 13) and this could be down to recruitment methods.

The issue of pay
Paying board members is seen by many as a way to tempt under-represented groups onto boards and five of the 20 RSLs in Housing Today's survey have already decided to pay. Belcher, for example, has just advertised for three board members, to be paid £12,000 a year, and plans to offer £20,000 to his chair. He was stunned by the response. "We advertised for three non-executives and got 700 CVs," he said. "I have never had 700 CVs for any position I've advertised in my life, and I was impressed with the calibre."

When it comes to the payment of chief executives, there is even more controversy. Sanctuary Housing Association came under fire, but was cleared of any impropriety, for the size of its relocation payments to senior managers (HT 29 August, page 7).

Most of the 20 associations in our survey have remuneration committees and some also take advice from consultants. But in the light of recent accusations of "fat-cat" pay deals, it seems not all remuneration committees are making the right decisions. One housing consultant says: "Most associations have an audit committee but often won't have one for remuneration, and my experience of them taking independent advice on pay is patchy."

But Anu Vedi, chief executive of Genesis Housing Group, says: "As long as there are transparent systems about how remuneration committees come to decisions, that's fine. The point is transparency."

Most of the associations in our survey are reviewing governance arrangements. Places for People commissioned consultant Sue Goss and researchers from the Institute of Directors three months ago to do review how the organisation is run.

Chief executive David Cowans explains: "It will start off with asking 'what's the board's main task in life and what do we need in place to deliver?'" It will also look at how to keep the board informed and whether fixed terms of office are useful. The review will be finished in the next six months and Cowans hopes it can be used by other registered social landlords revisiting their governance.

You are not alone
The housing sector is not the only one with problems: the Audit Commission's report last week slammed much of the public sector, including the NHS, for its risk management systems and scrutiny arrangements, and said councils should boost managerial and political leadership, financial management, and focus more on users.

Belcher says: "We have some way to go in matching the skills and abilities of private sector boards. If we take the NHS, we are probably on a par or slightly better. However, there are limits to how long you can serve on an NHS board, but you can be on a housing association board for 25 years. I think that's wrong. The NHS and the private sector are better at bringing in new blood than we are."

All vacancies on health boards must be advertised and recruited centrally via an appointments committee. But the NHS is moving towards a model similar to that used in housing: foundation hospitals will have to take service users onto their boards in the same way that RSLs must have tenant board members.

Although the lack of rigid guidelines for RSL boards might be taken to mean the government is happy, change is needed. The sector is taking on more commercial risk: it competes with private developers in building homes for market sale and could soon be battling with them for a slice of development grant; mergers are on the horizon as the corporation whittles down its list of developers; housing benefit is in the throes of radical change that could push up arrears. As associations become hybrid organisations pitched between the public and private sectors, they will need new structures.

Ashby says: "I'd be surprised if many associations were using all of my proposals. There are some that are almost there, but most have some gaps."