Is Tower Hamlets the death knell for sector-led regulation? It is a question that was posed to me earlier this week, shortly after communities secretary Eric Pickles announced he was sending a team of consultants to investigate the troubled borough.Tower Hamlets has been a ‘problem child' of the sector for a long time. An area with complex social issues and a diverse population, difficult politics and a high turnover of staff at a senior level – all of which have all added to the strains. While opting for a directly elected mayor in neighbouring Hackney seemed to be the answer to its problems – perhaps because the electorate chose Jules Pipe – if anything, it has exacerbated the issues in Tower Hamlets. But, if we are in a new era of self-regulation and sector-led improvement, where has the sector been? Why has the LGA not rushed to its aid, been accepted into the Tower Hamlets fold, and helped it up its performance? And, what about the district auditor – was there no hint that something was amiss? Regardless of the findings of PwC – whether the council is guilty of wrongdoing or not – the impact of the Panorama programme and the Government intervention will be felt across the sector. As the LGA and CIPFA take on their respective powers from the near-defunct Audit Commission, they will not only have to regulate and improve the sector – it is also important to be seen to be doing something. It may have been appropriate for the LGA to play a behind-the-scenes role while the Audit Commission was being the bad cop of regulation, but now it just looks like the LGA has allowed failures to happen. At a time when local government is calling for more powers and more fiscal freedoms, a single council failing makes it hard to argue the sector can be trusted so it is up to the whole of local government to stand up against failure. The alternative, for the moment at least, is Pickles-led improvement. It doesn't bode well for the reputation of the sector.