While I agree some of the 440 or so perform useful functions, I don’t see why those that are required can’t be moved inside ministries where they are more accountable?
It’s the autonomy that’s the problem, bolstered by legislation, which should also go.
These things were largely set up because the EU preferred to deal with centres of competence rather than govt bodies.
Now we’re out, why not just relocate the useful bits, and make some useful economies?
I agree we would probably need some civil service reform too, but if the reporting line is the govt minister, he can’t hide behind the Quango/legislation and I would hope be more proactive along with his advisers.
I think the aim of the quango was to make its work more transparent and accountable rather then be buried inside the Ministry of Miscellaneous Affairs. There are no easy answers here.
The Quango was designed to deal with the European Union who prefer to deal with centres of competence. Now we’ve left we don’t need them. And indeed on that basis they should have less control….it should be in the hands of a minister & govt policy.
I am sure we have always had some Quangos like the Met Office, HMSO, Land Registry or Ordnance Survey. They were staffed by experts, had their own hierarchies and had clear missions. The EEC/EU mindset was a different order and a way for politicians to promise more and deliver less with the help of a new clerisy that could be flattered and bribed to promote the delusion.
The reality Martin is that successive governments including this one and its predecessor has used Quango's and ALBs to take the flack aka Sh1t when things go wrong - far easier to sack /remove a Quango CEO than have a Minister or Sec of State in the firing line - Starmer has made accountability a chimera into an art form with the not-me-Guv attitude.
It's a deep subject and downstream - IMO - of government trying to do too much and promise all things to all people and seeing management as systems rather than hierarchies of competence. This leads to a doomloop where all the parts blame each other - quango blames minister blames parliament blames [or did blame] Brussels which blames quango and so on and so on.
Quango's really help the development of The Technocracy much beloved of the EU - they help remove/obviate government accountability - which is, of course, infeasible, but helps the government get away with murder.
The Romans had a lovely phrase which puts it all into perspective:
"Who guards the guards" is a translation of the Latin phrase quis custodiet ipsos custodes? by the Roman poet Juvenal, posing the philosophical dilemma of who supervises those in power. It highlights the issue of accountability for authorities. "
Most quangos are there for a purpose. They could be better managed and benefit from less political interference. The Land Registry was a byword for efficiency and experts in their field who knew their area. Government reorganised, closed local offices, lost expertise, brought in computers and consultants. As users pay, cost is not an issue, but service levels have suffered dramatically. There was no need for any of this, but this outcome reflects our culture as well. Change for the sake of change. Indifference to experience and expertise. Slop is better than hard work.
Lowe is a Thatcherite. unfortunately. But to remove millions of migrants will take an awful lot of security people.
Police, borders people, armed forces, civil servants to ID and interview, computer personnel to process, prison officers, customs officers and flight personnel to escort deportees.
Some of them can be selected from quangos, ex civil servants and ex armed forces personnel, so costs can be contained.
But we are in a crisis - so bringing in a Thatcherite is acceptable. It’s just a pity that those against her politics, in power, aren’t also fighting against mass migration.
For me the thing that springs to mind is Richard's "Double Coffin Lid" from Brexit. And how untethered from the EU, we still end up beholden to rules from and agreements with international organizations.
I certainly remember reading back in those days that local councils get their marching orders from these international orgs (eg UN's sustainable development agenda, Agenda 2030, etc) - beyond the scope of UK central government.
It would be nice to see if any or many of these arm's length organizations are similar.
The target then would be why non-UK institutions are permitted to interfere with UK affairs, and deal with getting rid of that. Or bringing the decision-making back into the UK exclusively. And then the relevant quangos would die a natural death, if we decide domestically that the functions it/they carry out are surplus to requirements.
It might be that the function simply changes to something else, or something opposite to what it is currently doing, and that the quango continues, but with the new remit.
So the civil service and quango bloat, that happened due to covid, should just be absorbed? That is the route to ever growing government. We could simply say, 'reduce your workforce by 10%' and force departments/quangos to implement. It has been done before - painful yes, but it has results.
We are on the same page...https://aethelstan.substack.com/publish/post/162775299
Oh dear it would appear all my Right Wing desires are pointless rhetoric leaving us the Lefties to carry on for a while longer! 🤪🤣🤪🤣
That's his thesis. Overall everything's fine!
While I agree some of the 440 or so perform useful functions, I don’t see why those that are required can’t be moved inside ministries where they are more accountable?
It’s the autonomy that’s the problem, bolstered by legislation, which should also go.
These things were largely set up because the EU preferred to deal with centres of competence rather than govt bodies.
Now we’re out, why not just relocate the useful bits, and make some useful economies?
Why are they more accountable being tucked away in a bloated ministry?
I agree we would probably need some civil service reform too, but if the reporting line is the govt minister, he can’t hide behind the Quango/legislation and I would hope be more proactive along with his advisers.
I can’t believe it would be any worse?
Is anyone 'accountable' anymore?
I think the aim of the quango was to make its work more transparent and accountable rather then be buried inside the Ministry of Miscellaneous Affairs. There are no easy answers here.
The Quango was designed to deal with the European Union who prefer to deal with centres of competence. Now we’ve left we don’t need them. And indeed on that basis they should have less control….it should be in the hands of a minister & govt policy.
I am sure we have always had some Quangos like the Met Office, HMSO, Land Registry or Ordnance Survey. They were staffed by experts, had their own hierarchies and had clear missions. The EEC/EU mindset was a different order and a way for politicians to promise more and deliver less with the help of a new clerisy that could be flattered and bribed to promote the delusion.
Yes, it’s an institution that’s been abused to the extent we now have 440 of the little beggars 😳
The reality Martin is that successive governments including this one and its predecessor has used Quango's and ALBs to take the flack aka Sh1t when things go wrong - far easier to sack /remove a Quango CEO than have a Minister or Sec of State in the firing line - Starmer has made accountability a chimera into an art form with the not-me-Guv attitude.
It's a deep subject and downstream - IMO - of government trying to do too much and promise all things to all people and seeing management as systems rather than hierarchies of competence. This leads to a doomloop where all the parts blame each other - quango blames minister blames parliament blames [or did blame] Brussels which blames quango and so on and so on.
Quango's really help the development of The Technocracy much beloved of the EU - they help remove/obviate government accountability - which is, of course, infeasible, but helps the government get away with murder.
The Romans had a lovely phrase which puts it all into perspective:
"Who guards the guards" is a translation of the Latin phrase quis custodiet ipsos custodes? by the Roman poet Juvenal, posing the philosophical dilemma of who supervises those in power. It highlights the issue of accountability for authorities. "
Reminds me of a joke I told about DOGE.
I see the Department of Governent efficiency has been a raging success.
So much so 3,000 people now work for it.
Wrote that one myself, feel free to pinch...
Most quangos are there for a purpose. They could be better managed and benefit from less political interference. The Land Registry was a byword for efficiency and experts in their field who knew their area. Government reorganised, closed local offices, lost expertise, brought in computers and consultants. As users pay, cost is not an issue, but service levels have suffered dramatically. There was no need for any of this, but this outcome reflects our culture as well. Change for the sake of change. Indifference to experience and expertise. Slop is better than hard work.
Lowe is a Thatcherite. unfortunately. But to remove millions of migrants will take an awful lot of security people.
Police, borders people, armed forces, civil servants to ID and interview, computer personnel to process, prison officers, customs officers and flight personnel to escort deportees.
Some of them can be selected from quangos, ex civil servants and ex armed forces personnel, so costs can be contained.
But we are in a crisis - so bringing in a Thatcherite is acceptable. It’s just a pity that those against her politics, in power, aren’t also fighting against mass migration.
For me the thing that springs to mind is Richard's "Double Coffin Lid" from Brexit. And how untethered from the EU, we still end up beholden to rules from and agreements with international organizations.
I certainly remember reading back in those days that local councils get their marching orders from these international orgs (eg UN's sustainable development agenda, Agenda 2030, etc) - beyond the scope of UK central government.
It would be nice to see if any or many of these arm's length organizations are similar.
The target then would be why non-UK institutions are permitted to interfere with UK affairs, and deal with getting rid of that. Or bringing the decision-making back into the UK exclusively. And then the relevant quangos would die a natural death, if we decide domestically that the functions it/they carry out are surplus to requirements.
It might be that the function simply changes to something else, or something opposite to what it is currently doing, and that the quango continues, but with the new remit.
So the civil service and quango bloat, that happened due to covid, should just be absorbed? That is the route to ever growing government. We could simply say, 'reduce your workforce by 10%' and force departments/quangos to implement. It has been done before - painful yes, but it has results.