Neither strike me as particularly good on that score, although the British government is probably somewhat better than the US government. The worst places in the UK are not as broken, desperate and crime-raddled as the worst of the USA.
I think disinterested firstly because of a track record of decades of general inertia, and secondly in motivation because fundamentally I don't think the government serves the people who need their local schools and neighbourhoods improved much. In the latter case, because business, the rich and powerful have a hugely undue influence on decision-making and all they see or care about in social improvement is getting taxed more, and secondly because poor people rarely shift the vote, where the middle classes and wealth of the rich do.
We just had an incident in the UK where the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government intervened in a planning decision to help property developers avoid paying a £45 million tax to the local government of one of the poorest areas of the country. That tax was specifically designed to help local governments claim something from development profits to help combat deprivation and improve social services in their areas. I mean, what the fuck. He was caught and forced to back down, but you could not have a plainer example of who he thinks he serves: obviously not the best interest of communities and local government, even despite that being his official job. And just in case you wonder if he was just a "bad apple", he still has his job: evidently the PM doesn't think it a problem.