Councillors clash over performance targets

Voters were "misled" over council targets for crime reduction, road improvements and housing, claim Lib Dem's

WEST Berkshire Council's two main political parties have clashed over the authority's performance targets.

A report put before the council's overview and scrutiny management commission to note a rise in the number of missed year-end performance statistics against those predicted was evidence of a “dramatic decline”, according to the leader of the opposition Jeff Brooks (Lib Dem, Thacham west).

The report showed that the number of targets which the council had failed to achieve had risen from 15 to 28 in the final quarter of 2010/11.

The remarks were dismissed as “misleading innuendo and destructive rhetoric” by the leader of the council, Graham Jones (Con, Lambourn).

During the scrutiny meeting on June 28 Mr Brooks said: “The failure of the council to meet its own targets for crime reduction, for the condition of our roads, and for the building and maintenance of good quality affordable housing is deplorable to say the least. These are vital issues, on which any council ought to be putting in every effort to make sure they reach their targets.”

Fellow Liberal Democrat councillor David Rendel (Thatcham central) also claimed the ruling party had misled people over the number of targets it was due to hit at a pre-election meeting of the council's executive, in an effort to dupe voters.

This remark drew scorn from the chairman of the committee Brian Bedwell (Con, Calcot), and was also criticised by Mr Jones after the meeting; Mr Jones said that setting tough targets was ambitious and challenging, and had helped West Berkshire become one of the top performing authorities in the south east.

“In setting particularly stretching an challenging targets it is perhaps inevitable that some that we do not achieve,” he said.

“This does not necessarily mean a drop in performance, simply, that our threshold for success was especially high.

“For example, although we reported not achieving a 9 per cent reduction in house burglaries (our outturn was a 7 per cent reduction), the rate in real terms still was reduced by nearly 19 per cent on the previous year.”

In noting the report, the scrutiny committee requested that clearer data must be given when compiling the performance charts to help explain the effect of the missed targets and what could be done to mitigate the losses.