Ministers admit that list of 14 was too long
Controversial local authority performance indicators are set to be significantly scaled down after ministers conceded this week they had drawn up too many.

A list of 14 measures aimed at gauging the standard of council housing could be slashed before the final list is published next month, it emerged this week.

Local government minister Hilary Armstrong and junior colleague Beverley Hughes admitted they were redrafting the indicators, but would not say which ones will be scrapped.

The revelation comes after the Audit Commission conceded there were 'drawbacks' to the proposals, which are currently being revised (Housing Today, 23 September).

Registered social landlords are likely to have matching indicators to ensure a read-across between the sectors.

Armstrong said she needed to ensure the performance indicators did not force landlords to meet meaningless targets which would not improve the service.

She said: 'I think that we will learn a lot. The indicators will move, they are not static and there forever, we will be learning each year and building on them.

'I think that there is a feeling that we probably consulted on too many. We've got to work with local authorities to refine how you get to the core issues without perverse incentives.'

A reduction in the number of PIs would be welcome, according to Chartered Institute of Housing best value project officer Marian Reid. She said: 'The difficulty is deciding where this should be - especially as gaps have already been identified in the current suggestions for housing.'

But the National Housing Federation hoped the decision would encourage the Audit Commission to cut back on its own indicators, creating a more unified regulatory regime.

After a series of revisions, the commission now has just four indicators. Of these, rent collection and repairs efficiency are unnecessary, the federation argues.

Policy officer John Bryant said: 'It would be nice to go down from 14 Best Value indicators to 10 or 12, but 14 is not outrageous.'

It has also been claimed that including a housing management indicator would run against the government's own research, which showed it is almost impossible to define and cost (Housing Today, 16 September).

Source

Housing Today