Commission admits new indicators have drawbacks

As exclusively revealed in Housing Today last week, ministers have gone ahead with plans to gauge councils on the management and maintenance cost per dwelling, despite the government's own research showing that housing management can't be defined.

However a consultation document on the new Best Value PIs, launched jointly by the commission and the government, admits "the drawbacks of this indicator are recognised and further development work is planned."

And, as also disclosed, councils will only have to set local targets for the amount they spend on management and maintenance costs.

For most of the other housing PIs, the target will be to keep or raise performance to the national level achieved by the top 25 per cent performers within five years.

Audit Commission performance indicator manager Davy Jones conceded that the indicators on management and maintenance costs "may not be perfect, but they are still the closest approximation there is."

Controller Andrew Foster said: "If any of your readers have better suggestions we are seriously interested to hear them, we regularly change our line in response to intelligent comments."

Kirsten Firth, senior research and policy officer at the London Housing Unit, said: "Clearly the nature of the housing management task is different for an inner city council from a leafy suburb. It's not desirable, even if it were possible to set management costs by reference to all local authorities. What you pay for determines what you get. Council tenants may have a strong preference for a higher level of service."

The final list of PIs for consultation is almost identical to a draft list leaked to Housing Today last week. One more PI has been added: the percentage of empty homes brought back into use. And the government has also bowed to pressure from councils on arrears, which will be collected as a percentage rather than a cash figure.

A separate set of PIs will also continue to be collected by the Audit Commission.