StatCounter

Tuesday 1 July 2008

Local Council priorities

The Times reports that:
"Violent assaults and serious antisocial behaviour are lower priorities for councils than stopping people smoking, town hall targets showed yesterday.

Despite a government poll showing community safety was voters' overwhelming priority, anti-crime initiatives will not be the main focus of authorities.

Details published yesterday by Hazel Blears, the Communities Secretary, set out the targets picked by each local authority — and agreed by her department — to be their future priorities. While performance will be measured across the whole range of 198 indicators, targets will be set only for the 35 chosen as top local concerns.

Jobless 16-18 year olds, reducing teenage pregnancy, providing housing, protecting the environment and cutting child obesity were the five selected by most councils. While reducing “serious acquisitive crime” such as thefts from cars was sixth, cutting the rate of “assault with injury” was 13th and domestic violence 20th.

Considered a higher priority than both by most councils were stopping smoking and boosting the numbers of local people “who feel they can influence decisions in their locality”.

The local targets are agreed with central government after consultation with bodies such as local police, health service and jobcentres.

Alongside the new targets, Ms Blears published a YouGov poll, commissioned by the Government, showing that 82 per cent of respondents considered “creating safer communities” among their top priorities.

The councils that do best at meeting their chosen targets will qualify for extra cash.

Ms Blears said that the initiative would mean that councils could concentrate efforts on the the specific needs of the local people.

Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, added that the Government had made “huge progress” tackling crime and antisocial behaviour in recent years."

Is it just me or do the local councils priorities seem out of kilter with that of their council tax payers? Now which should have priority?

1 comment:

John M Ward said...

Councils don't have anywhere near as much of a free choice in their target-setting as the public might think.

A big clue is in the way so many councils have gone for a lot of the same targets. Coincidence? Hardly possible! No: this is centrally-driven, with conditions, bribes and threats as always with the current Government when it comes to their dealings with Local Authorities.

I'm pleased to be out of it, especially with two local gov't White Papers due to impact councils next year.

Still, at least there are now only a 'mere' 198 targets to meet...