Friday 17 June 2011

Does Housing Get Diversity Wrong?

The ever-controversial “D word” has been heard in the THT offices with indecent regularity of late. In this context the D doesn't refer to death or debt; rather it's something that in certain quarters is considered even more taboo: diversity. Our own diversity discussions centre around the work we're doing to expand our 2006 Race Charter of Commitment to include age, disability, faith, gender and sexual orientation. We're asking our tenants to tell us what their opinions are and so I have been thinking on the issue myself. My worrying conclusion is a gnawing fear that as a sector we've got diversity wrong.


I’ve been working in housing for a very long time and I’ve seen equal opportunities and diversity approached in many ways. The unifying factor of these approaches is that they have so often been working "against the grain". Is that because in people’s minds this is rooted as being something that’s different, something that must be done, rather than something that just happens? My other concern is whether a systematic approach to diversity creates filters that we view our customers through, which, although supposed to help us see and understand people better, actually just serves to obscure that they are an individual, with individual requirements?

Granted, people often identify themselves with different groups, and acknowledging that can help us to understand them, but when we start to develop a one-size fits all approach for everyone in that group, then our customer service becomes less flexible. Before this sounds like a mea culpa, I’m not saying that THT have done anything alarmingly wrong regarding diversity - as an aside I'm very proud of the achievements we've made in this area - it's just that I'm aware that we're part of a sector who perhaps aren't getting it right.

And this isn't just a Trafford issue, or a Northern issue, or even a UK issue. It seems clear that regardless of the area a housing association is based in, the question of diversity will raise issues. For example, an area where the ethnic mix is very low could itself present significant diversity problems, and that's even before diversity strands other than race are considered.

The demographics of Trafford are interesting. Around 10% of the population is non-white indigenous, but that rises to over 30% in some wards in the North of the Borough and represents over 40 different faiths and backgrounds. By comparison in the middle and South of the borough the BME population is as low as 1 or 2%.

This “banded” nature of the Borough raises a particular diversity challenge as we consider the implications of the new affordable housing regime. It seems increasingly likely that we will be able to build around 300 new homes under this programme, which is obviously great news. But the implication of this essential new development is that roughly the same number of our existing properties will, each year, have to be let at the higher rent on fixed length tenancies.

The problem comes when you consider that if a higher proportion of these are to be in the North of the Borough then how do we ensure that this doesn't hit BME households harder, because that would be unfair. And fairness is really the key to the issue. In fact, the reason I wonder whether we've got the issue wrong is a nagging question of whether we sometimes diminish, rather than enhance, the overall fairness through our work on diversity.

Clearly, the thinking on this topic, and these challenges, will continue but I should point out that posting on this topic hasn't happened because I think I'm an expert on the issue. Far from it. It just comes from a gut feeling that I wanted to share and see if anyone else gets a similar impression. 

No comments:

Post a Comment