William Yarwood has a familiar but very interesting Critic piece about the severe nature of the UK quango problem.
Death by quango
If Keir Starmer wants change, he should deconstruct the quango state
Phase two of Keir Starmer’s government and his so-called “Plan for Change” is now in full swing after his first big cabinet reshuffle last week. But let’s be honest, in the grand scheme of things, it doesn’t really matter.
Now I’m not being glib for the sake of it, and I could make the case that it doesn’t matter because of the mediocrity of the ministers shuffled around, but the truth runs a lot deeper than that. It doesn’t matter who Starmer places in which position because the politicians themselves aren’t really in charge...
Unlike how the public imagines the machinery of government to work, the real power is not in Downing Street or Whitehall, but in the vast quango state that has grown unchecked for decades. A shadow state which politicians of all parties have either consciously or unconsciously created and allowed to fester.
We know we have a severe UK quango problem, but the whole piece is well worth reading as a reminder of how severe it is. If we can't even bring an absurd policy such as Net Zero into national debates then we aren't likely to achieve anything else worthwhile. That we can't isn't solely down to Ed Miliband.
Until that reform is undertaken, it doesn’t matter who Starmer or indeed any future prime minister puts in his or her cabinet. The real government of Britain is elsewhere, buried deep in a sprawling, bloated and unaccountable quango state. And until that shadow government is confronted head on by our politicians no reshuffle, no manifesto pledge and no grand plan for change will matter.
God forbid that our politicians/minters should actually have to get involved in minutiae or do any actual work. A deliberate policy introduced by Blair to devolve direct responsibilities from Government Ministers.
ReplyDeleteI refer you to my comment of 12th September.
ReplyDeleteThe notion that Sir Cur Mummysboy would have the penetration to see the need, and the vigour to carry it out, strains credulity.
ReplyDeletePut otherwise: the soft tosser is not up to the job.
Felipe - yes, they seem to like it that way. It's a mess, but nobody seems likely to do anything about it and as far as we can tell, nobody wants to.
ReplyDeletePeter - yes, it's just actors acting and not even doing that well.
dearieme - I agree, he does come across as a mummy's boy, far too soft for the role. His lack of penetration seems to protect him from knowing the extent of his unsuitability too.
It's obviously been effective for some time now as the previous government appeared similarly inured. It's turned Parliament to mush and spun out a huge network of bureaucracy and red tape, crippling our function as a people.
ReplyDeleteTammly - yes, unless the problem is dealt with there doesn't seem to be much point voting for more mush.
ReplyDelete