ÐÇ¿Õ´«Ã½

Central government looks to private housebuilders to deliver most of the Communities Plan. They build some 140,000 homes a year; associations build only 20,000. However, even 160,000 is far short of what's required. It is unlikely that housebuilders will expand their capacity much further, so how do associations boost production?

Inevitably, this debate has to tackle what associations will do to make their supply-chain management and development procedures more cost-efficient. Potential methods include:

• European models of managing publicly owned land where, for example, councils invite tenders for land they own and work in partnership with at least two organisations, often with registered social landlords taking the lead
  
• RSLs and housebuilders could enter into long-term preferred partnering deals. This would expand production, but profit margins may be reduced because of the higher degree of quality demanded
  
• the Housing Corporation could sacrifice the amount of approved development programme cash for land banking, and English Partnerships could give preference to associations – with the proviso that they find a private sector partner.

There also needs to be a major discussion about the capacity of associations in acquiring land, and the ways in which Housing Corporation investment can help land acquisition. I hope the review of the corporation announced by the ODPM (HT 5 September, page 7) will find better ways of using grant to acquire land and building early on in the cycle, so we can begin to think longer term about development programmes.

The ability, and desire, of associations to use greater standardisation and large-scale procurement of materials is another key factor. Associations tend not to operate in the same way as housebuilders. In many ways, this is a good thing. However, there are significant inefficiencies in the way we operate. This is not to say that we should slavishly follow the builders, but use the best of their techniques to deliver higher-quality design in sustainable neighbourhoods.

Associations tend not to operate in the same way as housebuilders. In many ways, this is a good thing. However, we should use the best of their techniques

The role of associations as masterplanners needs to be developed. Getting a track record in masterplanning will help associations drive up design standards and promote the development of community infrastructure. But if the cost of doing this is too high because our development systems are inefficient, we may not get the chance.

It is an encouraging sign that, during the NHF conference, Margaret Ford, the chair of English Partnerships, announced an open competition for associations to bid for the masterplanning and development of EP sites in Milton Keynes. This reverses the usual process where masterplanning competitions are available only to private companies, which then choose RSL partners. It's time for RSLs to assert their role in masterplanning high-quality integrated communities. I am sure we can rise to the challenge but, to be given the opportunity to do so, we will need to do more work on our supply chain.

The Local Improvement Finance Trust is an innovative public-private partnership scheme to provide NHS primary care infrastructure.