Axing quangos is really about political capital
As the spending review approaches, a leaked list of doomed quangos suggests that these cuts are abou
By Caroline Crampton Published 24 September 2010 17:33
A list leaked to the Telegraph reveals the 177 quangos that are allegedly to be the first on to David Cameron's "bonfire of the quangos".
The full list includes a dazzling array of bodies, with examples as varied and esoteric as the Agricultural Dwelling House Committees (comprising 16 bodies), the Public Guardian Board and the Teachers TV Board.
It's easy to react with bemused horror to the array of obscure-sounding titles. But the list does demand slightly closer scrutiny -- also marked for burning are the Audit Commission, British Waterways, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, and the Women's National Commission, to name just a few. Baroness Deech has already gone on the offensive this morning's Today programme to point out that much of the £5m budget for the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority comes from patients, not taxpayers, and that axing it thus achieves very little in budgetary terms.
As we get closer to October's Comprehensive Spending Review, the debate surrounding the future of these bodies and others is obviously going to intensify. Other high-profile examples, such as the BBC World Service, the British Council, the Office of Fair Trading and the Carbon Trust, are still under review.
But while these bodies await their fate, I thought I'd share a small insight into one of the bodies that is reportedly going to be axed: the Government Hospitality Advisory Committee for the Purchase of Wine. A while ago, consumed with curiosity as to what this committee was actually up to and how much of taxpayers' money it was spending on wine, I put in a Freedom of Information request, and discovered the following:
- The government calculates that it will use around £90,00-£100,000 worth of stock (wines, spirits, beers, etc) a year for "high-level events".
- Government Hospitality, the department within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office that administers the committee, spends roughly one-eighth of its £800,000 annual budget on restocking the wine cellar.
- The committee has five members, who meet four times a year and are not paid for their time (apart from travel expenses). It is chaired by Sir David Wright, the former British ambassador to Japan.
- According to minutes, tastings take place during meetings. Recommendations are then made about purchases.
None of this is of anything other than passing interest. But it does provide a small amount of background to one of the entries on the baffling list of soon-to-be-extinct quangos. It also raises a bigger point about the motivation behind the coalition's war on quangos.
Wines will still need to be purchased, so it is unlikely that major savings will be made there, and the existence of the committee itself costs almost nothing, so "burning" this quango achieves very little in the way of saving costs. Without having investigated them all, I still would wager that a significant portion of the rest of the list falls into the same category -- fulfilling functions that will go on being necessary, at relatively small cost.
A senior Whitehall source told the Telegraph that "these reforms represent the most significant rolling back of bureaucracy and the state for decades. Our starting point has been that every quango must not only justify its existence but its reliance on public money."
This connection between abolishing quangos and "rolling back bureaucracy" is the real story here. Getting rid of these quangos isn't going to eliminate the Budget deficit, but it will give the coalition political ammunition once more against the "bloated bureaucracy" instituted by Labour, and put the government on the offensive as public support for the spending cuts wanes and the spending review itself approaches.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















9 comments
Savings ?...some. Enough ?... no. More ?... please !
Quite disturbed by the loss of the OFT. Really surprised to see the Environment Agency on the second list for potential elimination. That is not some insubstantial body but one with large over arching statuatory obligations. What body would those fall too in the event of the EA being wound down? Local authorities? Directly by DEFR? Some super quango that absorbs the EA, British Waterways etc. Can't wait for the next deluge somewhere and the finger pointing that will follow.
There are some quangos which seem pointless and a complete waste. It is no coincidence though that this leak of 177 targets including many that seem pointless has suddenly appeared. Buried in that list are some that do a vital job like the Administrative Justice Committee (another attack on the justice systen -see Paul Chambers) The Advisory committee on borderline substances ( miow miow or Ivory Wave anyone?)
County Court Rule and Magistrate's Court Rule Committee ( see above) Committee on Medical Aspects of Air Pollutants
Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment
Committee on Mutagenicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment
Committee on the Safety of Devices
Etc etc
This need careful scrutiny.
This is a brilliant article, shows that 'quango' is a broach church. Like much else, the Tories will be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
I assume Robert Taggart is a Glenn Beck fan.
ConDems are causing chaos, and they should not be doing what they're doing overnight. It's madness, on the timescales.
They are all a bunch of numbnuts, as I have always been saying.
Some on the political-left, get bloated unaffordable and wasteful government bureaucracies with good governance. The truth is, abolishing these often pointless government departments, will prove very popular with the general public, and the political-left better by very careful not to defend the indefensible.
Do you really think that with all the public scrutiny from the press et al, "pointless" bodies were set up that serve no useful purpose?
The functions of each quango will almost certainly be taken on by the relevant ministry and the actual savings to the public purse will be very small.
Why do the goverment not take a cut in there wages if the people in this country are strong enough we put them in power we can take that from them the goverment anr put in power by the people to serve the people and the country so i think that the people can take that away from 5 years is nothing but do you want 5 years of this goverment god help this country
re: Hans Castorp. Glenn Beck ? Oh, have just Googled such, No. Never watched (do not subscribe), but, methinks this country could do with its own GB ! This would help to counteract the tiresome Guardianistas who foist their prejudices upon us all each and every day.