Steve Pomeroy Senior Research Fellow University of Ottawa Centre on Governance

1. Transferring Social Housing Assets to the Community Sector: Non-Profit Housing in Canada and Lessons for Australia Steve Pomeroy Senior Research Fellow University of Ottawa Centre on Governance

2. Outline • Canada & Australia compared • Some context - Characteristics of Canadian non-profit community sector • Proposed benefits of NP sector • Evaluating outcomes in Canada • Lessons for Australia re stock transfer Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance

3. Canada – Australia Comparable • British colonies;Resource based economies, similar parliamentary and federation structure; large geography and dispersed urban systems. • Very similar tenure mix 69% Ownership; 26% Private Rental; 5% social - but subtle differences (Harloe) • Similar initial evolution – post war public housing (supply response) • But early 70’s divergence • Australia persisted with state owned public housing • Canada shifted to community based Non-profit • (various funding and subsidy arrangements – most F/P cost shared, increasing decentralization) • Important variations in and across the NP sector: PNP, MNP, Coops Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance

4. Research Question Australia seeking to adopt/adapt UK model of loan stock transfer. What are the inherent benefits of a non-profit community based model over state owned managed public housing? What does the Canadian experience with 35 years of Non-Profit housing suggest for Australia? Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance

5. Theoretical Underpinnings • Concepts of Managerialism and New Public Management (Clarke and Newman 1997; Walker 2001) • Decentralization, competition, private business models, efficiency, customer responsiveness and measuring results • Grass roots reformist movement and role of Third Sector (Van Til 2009) Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance

6. Suggested benefits of Non Profit – community sector • Ability to access financing – leverage existing assets (vs. restriction on public sector borrowing) • Cost effective (access charitable funding, voluntary professionals on boards) • Community based providers – smaller scale developments, community support, avoids stereotypes of PH (less NIMBY) • More responsive to residents (satisfaction) • Important role in policy advocacy Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance

7. What is outcome in Canada? • Small community based PNP/Co-ops still confront NIMBY; • Excessive number of small providers = fragmented inefficient sector; • Notion of choice is a myth – sector too small • Access to financing not generally an issue Access is similar for Public or community NP – and both equally constrained in refinancing/levering due to CMHC regs and insurance policy. Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance

8. What is outcome in Canada? Efficiency • Small scale PNPs tend to have lower “manageable costs” but more often in financial difficulty and issues of governance (board burnout). • MNPs higher cost but wider range of service and expertise. Benefits of both alignment and separation (arms length) from municipality. Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance

9. What is outcome in Canada? Responsiveness • Public Housing – large bureaucratic – least responsive, moderate accountability • PNP – small community based but not necessarily more accountable or responsive (boards not publicly accountable) • MNP – small to mid size, very responsive (access to councillor), most accountable Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance

10. Conclusions • Who owns and manages less critical than scale and regulatory regime (permissive vs constraining) which underpins culture of provider. • Separation (arms length and specific focus can help if balanced with right regulatory regime Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance

11. Conclusions • Among Canadian models MNPs may be best option (but larger PNPs also effective) • Local knowledge • Accountable • Access to financial resources and expertise • Critical to support capacity and expertise of sector beyond new build (leadership role in of NP associations – comes mainly from larger professional MNP/PNPs) Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance