Source · Select Committees · Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee
Recommendation 51
51
Acknowledged
Paragraph: 201
Whilst understanding the advantages of a relatively light touch regulatory regime, we still find the...
Conclusion
Whilst understanding the advantages of a relatively light touch regulatory regime, we still find the regulator to be extremely reticent and passive in its use of its enforcement powers. It is appropriate for the regulator to punish providers responsible for the most serious service failures. If used sparingly, the power to impose fines would have a negligible impact on the sector’s financial position. The fact that the Government is legislating through the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill to remove the cap on fines suggests it agrees with us that the regulator should be fining providers, at least in the most serious cases of service failure.
Government response summary AI-generated
The government welcomes the Committee’s views on the Regulator’s independence, noting that it operates at arm’s length and determines how to exercise its powers.
Summary of the government's response below — read the verbatim text to verify.
Paragraph Reference:
201
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government · verbatim extract
Acknowledged
The Government welcomes the Committee’s views on the Regulator’s independence. The Regulator operates at arm’s length from Government, and it is for the Regulator to determine how to exercise its powers. The Department engages regularly with the Regulator to understand how it is discharging its duties and to ensure that the Department’s policy intentions are understood.
Read the full response on Parliament ↗