NHF chief hits back at further talk of housing associations managing rather than owning homes

She added: “But I think, longer term, it just makes much more sense for social housing to partner, to work with, a wide range of investors, but ensuring that there is an asset to be able to borrow against, to invest in, but also that [the] guardianship is in the public good.”

When asked how to mobilise long-term capital more efficiently, Ms Henderson said that when seeking new investment and partnership, it is important to think about “the right type of partnerships”.

This is to ensure that the investment will benefit social tenants, who are here for the long term, she added.

“For us as a sector we’ve got a really good track record of innovating and of investing and of partnering and of borrowing,” Ms Henderson said.

“As a sector, we have £130bn worth of debt facilities, but our ability to continue with that model really depends on the government working with us to rebuild our capacity. I think there’s absolutely a role to play for innovation and for partnership in this space.

“But it’s really, really important, when we are thinking about the future of investment and the type of models we might seek to work with, that we recognise that social housing is a public good.

“And I think for us, it’s really important that public good is governed in the public interest, either in local authority ownership or not-for-profit ownership.”

Ms Henderson said the difference between the housing association model and a private equity model is that “everything is reinvested into our homes and our communities, into new build”.

She said: “We do not have the pressure of returning money to shareholders for profit.”

But she emphasised that for-profits could still contribute to the housing sector: “There absolutely is an active for-profit sector, and that’s making a really important and valuable contribution.”

Speaking on the same panel session, Steve Coffey, group chief executive of Torus, also had his say on the debate of managing versus owning housing stock.

He said that since austerity cuts, housing associations have stepped into the space of providing other services within their communities, and questioned whether providers would still do that if they were just agencies managing properties.

He said that as well as changing this dynamic “massively”, the financial position of housing associations would also be impacted.

“The financial proposition of stock when you own it is fundamentally different to managing, and the risk associated with that,” Mr Coffey said.

The debate around ownership in the sector has been heightening in recent months.

Ms Henderson’s comments today come two months after she told parliament’s Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee that there is talk of “wholesale privatisation” of housing association homes.

When giving evidence to the MPs, Ms Henderson said that for-profit providers are not “the answer to the social housing crisis”.

For-profits responded by arguing that they play a “crucial role” in tackling the shortage of homes.