Quangos are a simple target for the opposition as proven by Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and now David Cameron. Since the Quango, like the Civil Service, must remain politically impartial it becomes very simply to score political points off these organisations. It is similar to winning a debating competition where one participant has gagged and chained their opponent.
Furthermore, there has been little in the way of inspiration leadership from David Cameron, recently it almost seems that he is playing 'leader-of-the-opposition by numbers';
- first attack the Governments public spending plans,
- then mention how the opposition will increase efficiency of the public sector therefore saving the tax payer billions,
- and finally attack Quangos
Admittedly there needs to be reform of the system of Quangos, in terms of accountability and transparency, but to return them to their original government department would create a similar megalith just under a different guise and in a different place.
The result would be the next leader of the opposition would attack the size of the bureaucracy and government. Now that is a vicious circle...
Posts
camerons leadership has been all about the simple/cliche ways to score points in opposition, hence the lack of tory gains as labour crumble.
ReplyDeleteIt's a bitter pill to swallow for those in need of support (i.e. nhs, local government, charities) when that much money is tied up in the decision making process. It's somewhere around 500 quid for every person in Britain.
ReplyDeleteThe sheer amount of money involved in those institutions will continue to fuel headlines in the Daily Mail and the Sun (amongst others) for the simple reason that most people don't understand their purpose. The Blair PR machine would have dodged such headlines with ease.
Mandy is the only one left from that teflon age!
Agreed. However, as work for an NDPB I cannot claim objectivity... Here in Scotland, the SNP promised their own version of a bonfire of the quangos - and currently have proposals which are damaging to the services provided by one current body in particular. But they achieve that through a very broad definition of 'quango'. They abolish local arrangements (local authority based) and create a 'super' administration to house them all - thus being able to claim they have delivered a 'reduction'. I despair. Maybe it's simply a case of 'we get the politicians we deserve...?'
ReplyDelete