http://www.navca.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/CB516891-615E-4670-918B-9608AB5CF2B...

http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/org/la-data.do

MORE than two thirds of Londoners say their council makes a positive difference in their area, according to a new survey.

A poll by London Councils to mark Local Democracy Week (12-18 October) found 68 per cent of respondents living in the capital think their borough makes a positive difference, compared to 26 per cent who do not.

See the results here.

This is more than the national average of 55 per cent of people who agree their council makes a positive difference in their area compared to 35 per cent who do not.

In London, 38 per cent of people feel they have a say in the decisions made by their local council, compared to 57 per cent who feel they do not. This reflects the national picture – 37 per cent of people felt they do have a say and 56 per cent of people said they do not. People aged between 55-64 were more likely to agree (42 per cent) than young people (24 per cent).

London Councils is drawing up a best practice guide for councils ahead of the London local elections in May 2010. It aims to help them work more closely with the communities they serve.

Councillors, residents and council officers from seven London boroughs are being asked to share their experiences and the challenges they face. They are also being encouraged to suggest how a councillor’s role could be made easier.

These case studies will be included in the guidance, which is due out later this year.

London Councils’ chairman Councillor Merrick Cockell said: “It is a great endorsement to hear that two thirds of Londoners feel boroughs are doing a good job for the communities they serve.

“Councillors and councils have a major role to play in making a positive difference to people who live and work in their neighbourhoods.

“But there is always more to do to help councillors across the capital win the trust of the public in local politics and get them more involved in making the decisions which affect their daily lives.

“We want to show that by empowering individuals and communities we can achieve results on the really difficult issues facing communities.”

London Councils’ Be A Councillor campaign aimed to persuade more women, young people and those from the ethnic minorities to stand for election as councillors in the 2010 London local elections. The initiative was so successful it was rolled out nationally.

Notes to editors:

London Councils commissioned BMRB to carry out a telephone survey of 1,000 people on October 3 and 4.

For full results of the survey, visit: INSERT WEB LINK HERE

Boroughs involved in the best practice guide are: Brent, Camden, Kensington and Chelsea, Lambeth, Newham, Sutton and Waltham Forest.

http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/media/current/pressdetail.htm?pk=804&sh...

London is the world's number one location and we want it to stay that way. The three draft strategies on this site are central to shaping London's future. Make sure we hear your views by reading the draft strategies and telling us what you think.

http://www.london.gov.uk/shaping-london/

The first European HIV Index calls for leadership and radical improvement. Luxembourg is the European champion

Last Updated (October 13, 2009) Written by Administrator October 13, 2009

HIV infection keeps growing in Europe. In order to improve care and conditions for people living with HIV/AIDS but also to prevent further spread of the disease, there is urgent need of reviewing and radically improving disease management in HIV/AIDS. Such change should include legal aspects, HIV care and social conditions. This was advocated by the Euro HIV Index (EHIVI) 2009, which was presented today in Brussels. Luxembourg leads the ranking among European 29 countries in this first survey of HIV policy and best practice, with 857 points (out of 1,000), followed by Malta (791) and Switzerland (775).

The Euro HIV Index Director, Dr. Beatriz Cebolla, comments on the results: "While the number of People Living With HIV (PLWH) increases in every member state of the EU, budgets in several countries are reduced. Sexual risk behaviour is becoming more and more regular practice. Criminalization of HIV is a problem in many countries, and still HIV-specific legislation exists in some countries; people can get prosecuted also for unintentionally and unknowingly transmitting the virus. The access to care for marginalized groups such as undocumented migrants is not guaranteed almost anywhere in Europe. Discrimination and stigma against PLWH is frequent at work and in schools. Harm reduction strategies in prisons are still weakly implemented, especially in the Eastern European countries."

Johan Hjertqvist, President of Health Consumer Powerhouse, commented: "There is a general lack of leadership in HIV management. Alarmingly enough, no government seems to know the true number of HIV-infected inhabitants. The main conclusion of this very first HIV Index is that there is still a lot to do."

• Download the Euro HIV Index 2009 Report >>
• Download the Index Matrix >>
• Download the General Press Release >>

Index performance criteria

The EHIVI ranks the HIV situation across 28 indicators, covering 4 sub-disciplines that are key to HIV: Involvement and rights, Access, Prevention, and Outcomes. Each sub-discipline is weighted for importance in contribution to the overall Index score. The individual sub-discipline leaders were as follows:

Involvement and rights:                                 Luxembourg

Access:                                                             Luxembourg

Prevention:                                                       Switzerland

Outcomes:                                                        Malta

The Index is part of the Swedish EU presidency of autumn 2009. It has received an unrestricted educational grant by Gilead Research.

http://www.healthpowerhouse.com/

New rules forcing councils in England to publish chief executives' salaries are to be introduced by the end of the year, the government has said.

Local government minister Rosie Winterton said people had the right to see the full picture.

About 20 council bosses are thought to earn more than the prime minister's £194,000 salary.

The Society of Local Authority Chief Executives said it was advising members to be open about their pay.

The proposed rules would force up to 475 local authority bodies, including Transport for London and police and fire authorities, to detail the salaries, bonuses, pensions, perks and compensation pay-offs of their most senior staff.

'Mood music'

In a speech to the society's annual conference in Brighton, Ms Winterton said: "In the current climate, the public rightly expect greater value for money from local services.

"We are setting some pretty clear mood music about making sure every taxpayer's pound is worked as hard as possible.

"Councils must be able to show they are providing a fair deal on pay in an open and transparent way - the public have the right to see the full picture."

If nobody knows what you do, how do you expect them to assess your value? Spokesman for the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives

She said the new disclosure standards would bring councils in line with standards required of civil servants, the government and private sector organisations.

Average pay for local government workers has gone up £6,000 in seven years, but the average pay of chief executives has risen by £40,000, according to the Department for Communities and Local Government.

A spokesman for the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives said its members had been told it was not worth jousting with journalists and taxpayers' lobby groups and better to publish their salary on their website.

He said this would be an opportunity for them to explain to the public what their job involved.

"If nobody knows what you do, how do you expect them to assess your value?," he added.

'Boomerang bosses'

John Ransford, chief executive of the Local Government Association, said it was right that chief executive pay was subject to public scrutiny.

"Councils need talented people in top management positions and in deciding salary levels they have to balance this with other policy objectives, including the need, in a tight financial situation, for all salaries to be demonstrably reasonable," he added.

Ministers have been concerned that chief executives' salaries appear to leap whenever they move to a new job, with little evidence that the performance of the local authority improves.

Earlier this year, Communities Secretary John Denham asked the Audit Commission to look at so-called "boomerang bosses" who walk away with huge payouts, straight into the next job.

He has also said he wanted to look at ways to limit pension entitlements of the highest earners.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8320538.stm

Capital Ambition has been working with London authorities to deepen our understanding of the impact of the recession on London and share information on how councils are responding to the challenge.

From this work we have produced a booklet that continues to build on this work, showcasing local perspectives on tackling inequality for greater efficiency. It provides innovative and practical examples of how authorities have been promoting equality to deliver efficient and effective everyday services.

Head to our Publications section to see more booklets, guides and our annual report.

Released on 23 October 2009

related documents

Equality + Efficiency = Excellence (PDF, 3,831.84Kb)

http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/capitalambition/news/news.htm?pk=822

The ring fence money provided by central government for the local delivery of housing-related support and other services offered to vulnerable groups should not be reinstated, but services must be protected, says the Communities and Local Government Committee in its report on the Supporting People programme.

• Report: Supporting People Programme
• Communities and Local Government Committee

Committee Chair, Dr Phyllis Starkey, launching the report said:

"The flexibility provided by the removal of the ring fence is clearly well worth having. Fears about the potential for loss of funding must be countered by maintaining high levels of transparency, rigorous service delivery and strong monitoring frameworks so that the Supporting People programme continues to deliver vital services to some of the most vulnerable in our society.

"Central government must show how much money it provides for Supporting People within each local area-based grant. Local authorities should be free to manage their own budgets, but must then be prepared to justify any decisions to redirect Supporting People funds to deliver other locally targeted services"

The Committee’s inquiry stemmed from widespread concern that the government’s decision to remove the ring fence around the Supporting People budget in April 2009 could result in substantial loss of funding for SP services over time.

The report concludes:

• The Supporting People programme has achieved a great deal— delivering savings to the Exchequer of £3.4 billion for a £1.6 billion annual investment that is spent well supporting the needs of the most vulnerable and socially excluded members of society. Any avoidable threats to the programme’s continued success must be averted.
• Pressure on local authority budgets in the face of a recession poses a real threat to the future of some existing Supporting People services and heightens the risk that current unmet need will not be addressed.
• Central government must take care to ensure monies intended for Supporting People are not misused in local authorities where this programme is either misunderstood or not seen as a mainstream part of service delivery. Delivery of Supporting People does not, however, need to be placed a statutory footing, and local authorities should not be compelled to adopt mandatory performance indicators for housing-related support.
• The standard of service delivery varies widely across the country. However, the quality of partnership working in some local authority areas under the regime—which has led to the creation of many innovative and person-centred services—is excellent and should be used to provide a blueprint for future partnership working in other areas of local service delivery.
• The Government has made good overall progress against its commitments in the 2007 Supporting People Strategy but there should be an accelerated movement towards the needs-based allocation of funding under the SP Distribution Formula and more rapid progress towards certain objectives.
• In particular, further focused effort is required to curb the burden imposed by the competitive tendering regime for SP services on small third sector organisations. Such organisations—which have a wealth of knowledge and expertise about the needs of vulnerable people—must not be overlooked or squeezed out by tendering arrangements that focus on cost of service delivery at the expense of service quality.
• Against a background of tightening budgets and the challenges of multi-agency service delivery, the mechanisms employed to ensure service-user involvement in decision-making must be preserved and their effectiveness should be examined during inspections.
• The future of accommodation-based services for older people is a major concern. The separation of funding for accommodation and support under the Supporting People regime has created serious issues for providers and users of sheltered housing, and there is a strong case for reconsidering sheltered housing’s place in the Supporting People programme. The Government should develop a more coherent strategy for the provision and funding of housing and support services for older people, making clear the role of sheltered housing.
• The department should redouble its efforts to encourage local authorities to identify need and plan services together for those groups of service users who are ‘transient’ and may rely on services being joined up across local authority boundaries. (To that end, housing-related support should be specifically referenced in new guidance for joint strategic needs assessments of health and social care).
• Key management tools that have been developed to help deliver the SP programme—notably the Quality Assessment and Outcomes Frameworks—must be retained. The Outcomes Framework in particular, which shows how service users’ needs are met, provides a much-needed evidence base for which interventions best meet service user needs that will be of considerable value in the long term for the provision of all housing-related support.

http://news.parliament.uk/2009/11/report-looks-at-local-support-for-vuln...