Tick-box culture

Published: 19 March 2010

THIS week, after three years as chair of Holland Walk Area Housing Panel, I tendered my resignation. I’d like to praise all the resident representatives who seek to improve conditions for other residents. They are even more admirable when you reflect that in my three years as chair of a panel which discussed report after report on housing matters only three decisions it voted on were ever agreed by Homes for Islington (HfI) board of directors. 

This was only because on three rare occasions they agreed with us. This would be the same board that claims to be so invested in the community to have a number of “resident directors”. 

The only time our panel ever saw any of these “directors” (with the noted exception of the diligent and sincere Adam Borrie) was when they came to ask us to vote in favour of their becoming paid for their work.

The notion of the benefits to people of “resident directors” is as much a sham as the whole idea of consultative panels being a vehicle for consultation, when in reality they are both as much a part of the tick-box culture so central to the modus operandi of HfI. 

This is hardly surprising when you consider that the single shareholder of HfI is Islington Council, which is now making tenants pay twice for services they should be receiving through their council tax payments, now taken from already stretched-to-the-limit rent and service charges. 

We need an entire regime change if residents are ever going to have any influence or any hope of effective democratic housing management in Islington. 

Justine Gordon-Smith 
Ilex House, N4