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.
This is part of Hazel Blears' new inititative to measure local councils on performance, based on the top 35 targets chosen as 'local concerns'. Naturally, the councils are to choose their own targets and therefore will ignore anything that looks too difficult or expensive to enforce!
Ms Blears said that the initiative would mean that councils could concentrate efforts on the specific needs of the local people.
Except, it doesn't mean that at all, does it sweetie? And yet, you think we haven't seen right through it....
6 comments:
So how many of these are Conservative councils, then? Your "loony liberals" are very often from the right, actually.
Interestingly, the article doesn't name the councils, and so far, nor has any other report.
Yes, councillors in general behave like all politicians once they get their nose in the trough, party no exception.
While I am not naive enough to think that it is our votes which set the priorities for our local council, I do think Ms Blears is rather more forthright about central diktat than is usually allowed under Project rules.
The choice of targets isn't as free as the Government implies. They still dictate some of them, and others are "incentivised" one way or another. Finally, yes -- it is indeed a question of money, as so many councils have been severely underfunded for years.
By way of example, my own local council has £28 million taken away every year from what is required to do the specified work (and that's from official figures, as well as being able to be determined by year-on-year tracking). See HERE if you are interested in this case.
It becomes physically impossible to do the basic stuff effectively if funds are diverted into expensive additional functions.
What is needed is proper (and independent) funding of Local Authorities, then we can have the true community-driven governance for which I have consistently argued.
"It becomes physically impossible to do the basic stuff effectively if funds are diverted into expensive additional functions."
Spreading discontent with local councils no doubt helps to deflect anger with central government.
All part of Blair's (now Gordon's) plans...
Fuck you, SWEETIE.
Wanker.
Post a Comment