Bonfire day for the Quangos! 192 abolished, 289 reformed

Mr_Mumble

lemonjelly wrote: »

In addition, a lot of housing related quango's are going. How's that for being on topic?

Thought this was intriguing:

HM Land Registry
Retain and substantially reform - Retain on the grounds of transparency - but Government will undertake a feasibility study to scope out the opportunities presented by private sector investment

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Mr_Mumble wrote: »

Thought this was intriguing:

HM Land Registry
Retain and substantially reform - Retain on the grounds of transparency - but Government will undertake a feasibility study to scope out the opportunities presented by private sector investment

It means they want to privatise the searches.

Sir_Humphrey

For the most part, the functions of these Quangoes (e.g Health Protection Agency) are being transferred to departments to be done by civil servants. I approve of this as it makes them accountable to Parliament rather than just the Secretary of State. Some are downright undemocratic, such as the London Gateway Development Commission (but then again no worse than bodies such as the London Docklands Development Commission, set up in the 1980s and abolished a few years back).

Many of the larger Quangoes are being retained. Many of those being abolished entirely are tiny. Some of the bodies on the list such as Ofsted or the ECGB (both retained) are not actually Quangoes but Executive Agencies staffed by Civil Servants.

This is being spun as a money saving venture, but it really isn't you know.

chewmylegoff

BenL wrote: »

Although the audit commission were not mentioned directly there was a fella on radio5 this morning advising that some non civil service "departments" for want of a better word have civil service type employment contracts. They may still get the payouts.

it's possible. i may have worked for a quango at some point in the past/present/future, and there's doesn't seem to be anything like this in the contract or terms of conditions that i might possibly have/have had/will have, but it's not/wasn't/isn't going to be the audit commission so i don't know about that.

Mr_Mumble

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

This is being spun as a money saving venture, but it really isn't you know.

A point made by Maude and questioned by the FT:

There was no similar sense of glee from Francis Maude, minister for the Cabinet Office, as he described his own bonfire of the quangos this morning. Instead he was careful to argue that the scrapping of up to 200 such bodies was all about accountability rather than saving money. It’s a curious argument and one that doesn’t exactly make sense; as Alex pointed out yesterday, quangos surely need to endure the same depth of cuts as the rest of Whitehall.

Francis Maude is being politically expedient here. All the quangos that are being made charities could be allowed to whither while the subsumed quangos could be in for further cuts. It'll be interesting to see the editorial reaction from papers tomorrow...

Aberdeenangarse

Government Hospitality Advisory Committee on the purchase of Wines


They must be bloody joking.......what on earth were this lot doing? As if we didn't know :mad:

robin_banks

Aberdeenangarse wrote: »

Government Hospitality Advisory Committee on the purchase of Wines


They must be bloody joking.......what on earth were this lot doing? As if we didn't know :mad:

What a job.

The Government Hospitality Advisory Committee for the Purchase of Wine



This committee is responsible for providing advice on the maintenance of appropriate standards of wines for use at Government functions.
To request information from the Committee you can contact them by writing to:

The Head of Government Hospitality
Lancaster House
St James's
London SW1A 1BB

An old soak with 30 years service can then provide 'consultations' to said govt depts for a 'small fee'.

Aberdeenangarse

robin_banks wrote: »

The Head P iss artist of Government Hospitality
Lancaster House
St James's
London SW1A 1BB

I've made a small change

carolt

Can anyone explain this particular entry to me?

I especially loved the stated reason for keeping it:

Restraint Accreditation Board
Retain - Retain on the grounds of transparency


:question:

Sir_Humphrey

Aberdeenangarse wrote: »

Government Hospitality Advisory Committee on the purchase of Wines

Actually, we had a similar reaction in our office today.

In practise, this will mean making sure that the vintage stuff served up to visiting Presidents and Royalty is up to scratch. I cannot imagine it would have more than a tiny handful of staff.

The vintage wine will doubtless continue to be purchased as I cannot see an occasion where a key ally is served Blue Nun.