Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
14 October 2010
08:2474952#1
Something to gladden the heart....
Francis Maude will announce that 180 QUANGOES will be abolished under the "bonfire of quangos". He told the BBC that the main reason for the cull was to make government bodies accountable. We also know, of course, that they waste £billions every year and that will be a welcome saving. Some are completely pointless.
Among those we know about are The Health Protection Agency and the Advisory Committee on Organic Standards, the government has already announced that the UK Film Council and the Audit Commission will go.
I personally hope that the Equalities Commission will also go.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
14 October 2010
08:2874954#2
barry,is the tory party as a quango go as well.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
14 October 2010
09:0474957#3
No Brian, the Tory party is nothing like a quango and more like a gentlemens' club paid for by its members. Unlike the Labour Party which only gets its funding if the unions like the way it behaves. Oh, and the Tory party is flush while Labour is almost bankrupt, intellectually, financially and morally.
PG.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
14 October 2010
09:2674959#4
peter,i forgot that lord ashcroft is bankrolling them.
14 October 2010
09:4874965#5
I think we will find that quangoes, like PCTs, will simply re-group. But hey, we might save a buck or two in the process.......
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
14 October 2010
10:2874973#6
that still leaves over 500 quangos remaining, i would like to see some of this money go to our elected district and county councils.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
14 October 2010
10:3974977#7
A lot of the functions they perform can simply be allowed to disappear as being unnecessary governmental interfence.
The 500 figure Howard is controvercial and depends on what you incude as a Quango. That alone is a debate in itself. 180 is a good start on the job.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
14 October 2010
11:1874979#8
just seen on sky news page 197 quangos are to go,while others are to merge or shifted around.no clue on savings yet.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
14 October 2010
12:1374980#9
I have just read the actual announcement:
Francis Maude said 192 are to be scrapped entirely and 481 being reformed.
Abolition examples -
- Devolving responsibility for the work of Development Corporations to local government;
- Bringing organisations under more direct Ministerial control, such as the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission, Renewable Fuels Agency and, as previously announced, the Appointments Commission; and
- Enabling organisations, such as the Design Council and the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts (NESTA), to become charities.
Maude also gives the following as reform examples -
- Strengthening the competition regime by forming a single competition and market authority; and
- Substantially reforming organisations such as the Environment Agency and the Homes and Communities Agency working with them to streamline their work.
I like what he said: "Today's announcement means that many important and essential functions will be brought back into departments meaning the line of accountability will run right up to the very top where it always should have been."
This is better than most people originally thought.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
14 October 2010
12:2374981#10
sounds like mr maude has been listening to me, i have been banging on for ages about the regional development agencies being a waste of money and that county and district councils are much better able to make decisions locally.
another organisation (the regional growth fund) is now in the mix, many people would like to know what they are actually for and how much funding they will get.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
14 October 2010
17:3275011#11
Baz;
Whlst fully support the abolition of quango's yourself and the Tory party supported them fully when last in goverment.
But pleased you both agree wth howard now.
Peter;
Labour is not bankrupt Financially or any other way.
I realise you lean heavily towards the conservatives and that's fine, but labour just getting ready to take over in 16 months time when ths cobbled together govement falls apart completely
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
14 October 2010
18:1175016#12
Keith - what makes you think that?
Apart from anything else the last 13 years have seen an unprecedented boom in quangoes. It has gone far too far and even many people who may have supported their use 13 years ago rightly feel that they need some serious trimming in numbers, cash and roles.
Unregistered User
14 October 2010
19:0975031#13
Howard, the Regional Growth Fund is not a quango but a funding mechanism used by Gov.depts to allocate infrastructure money around the country's EU designated regions.
Watty
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
14 October 2010
19:1675034#14
thanks for that paul, love the political speak.
my question/s would be, who would decide what region needs the money, then who recieves the money?
i hope that your answer to the second one will be "elected authorities".
Unregistered User
14 October 2010
19:2775040#15
Each authority puts in priority schemes and come to agreements on rankings within their county/unitary area.
These are then judged on national programme [i.e. housing, transport, etc] criteria. ability to deliver in budget cycle
timetables and tender price estimates.
Simple really Howard!! It's taken me years to fathom the processes.
Watty
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
14 October 2010
20:0475046#16
thanks again paul, wish it was always as simple as that!!!
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
14 October 2010
21:0175057#17
Barryw I don't disagree with the view on quango's going i dont care who formed them.
Tory, labour or lib dem
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
15 October 2010
05:2375077#18
Merely responding to your misinterpretation of the facts in your post #11 Keith.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
15 October 2010
06:4575082#19
I think it is generally accepted by one and all that this latest 'bonfire of the vanities' is not saving any real money. It is merely shuffling the deckchairs about on the playing fields of Eton.
Two brains Willetts said as much on TV last night, and Francis Maude said roughly yesterday when pressed that its not about saving money at all but about tightening up the red tape of government.
However as Max Hastings, one time editor of that illustrious organ The Daily Telegraph, said on Question TIme last night... " all governments do this, wipe out Quangos only to replace them with more Quangos of their own."
For example two massive new Quangos are now needed, one to administer the oddball distribution of wealth to Doctors in the health service, and the second one..to deliver management of of this new deeply unpopular debt ridden University payment sheme.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
15 October 2010
09:2075086#20
Barryw
I'm also merely replyng to your post's that could also be said is incorrect as t gives the impression the tories always wanted to be rid of quango's when in reality when last in govt they created loads and made sure they stayed.
go further and say lets also look at other groups that can influence your life and do deals behind closed doors, free masons for one
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
