This debate is now closed.
Should quangos be cut?
David Cameron is pledging to reduce the number of unelected quangos to save money and increase accountability. Will it work?
Mr Cameron will call for a cut in the UK’s 790 quangos - or quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisations – which are estimated to cost between £34bn - £60bn a year.
This weekend the government announced a review of public bodies in a bid to ensure cash goes to frontline services.
Quangos are supposed to enable specialised staff to make decisions in important fields free from the political preference of Government, but their unelected and costly nature has been criticised in recent years.
Are arm’s length public bodies useful? Or would you like to see a cut in quangos? Which organisations should be closed?
Read the full story
Send us your story ideas
You can also send your comments on video to yourpics@bbc.co.uk or text them to 61124. If you have a large file you can upload here. At no time should you endanger yourself or others, take any unnecessary risks or infringe any laws.
Read the terms and conditions
Published:
Monday, 6 July, 2009, 09:15 GMT
10:15 UK
All comments as they come in
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:59 GMT
11:59 UK
Too often Quangos seem to be a meal ticket for some useless but priveleged individuals.
If they add value all weel and good. If they don't then they should go.
But can anytone think of a quango that does any good?
Brian Smith, Cannock
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:58 GMT
11:58 UK
We all use quangos every day, in fact the BBC is a quango. They are not bad because they are quangos or because they are unelected. MAny handle independent or technical stuff. If you abolish them some of the work still needs to be done. National government is sometimes rubbish at doing these things and sometimes the issues are bigger than local authorities. We actually need a complete review with elected regional government taking control in the English regions with devolved roles from London
nick, Dundee
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:54 GMT
11:54 UK
Of course. Quango's should be slashed AND burned...
All quango's are good for is removing accountability from Parliament.
Take the CSA as an example... it was part of the Department for Work and Pensions until recently, accountable to the Works and Pensions Minister.
Now it's called the Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission (CMEC), it has become a glorified debt collection agency and appears to be accountable to no-one.
Get rid of them all, or make them accountable!
Andrew Green, Falkirk
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:51 GMT
11:51 UK
Quangos are a waste of money. They are another tier of government and bureaucracy. No wonder labour loves them so much. Get rid of them all.
Richard, Mansfield
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:50 GMT
11:50 UK
I would rather get rid of David Cameron, an expensive waste.
Andrew Holt, Southsea, United Kingdom
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:49 GMT
11:49 UK
Quango's cannot be a good thing. Unlike a private business which must make profit a quango is public funded. They can do what they want and who will stop them? They may use thier funding inefficiently or lavishly or provide low standard services and who can inforce penalty on them?
This can only be a drain on the public purse. Perhaps outsourcing is the way to go? Or a stricter frame work and a move away from the Quango model.
Savanna Rawson
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:49 GMT
11:49 UK
Get rid of all the Bloody Quangos! They are unelected and unaccountable!
Matt Gompertz, Bromsgrove
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:47 GMT
11:47 UK
If you've ever been in one, you'd know that nothing ever prevails - that's sort of the point. Policy recommendations that expand the size and budget of the quango, are all you get. Unfortunately it even makes a sort of sense: You are all in a quango - ergo it is worthwhile. If it's worthwhile, it's worthwhile to increase it's reach.
The equality commission is a delightful example. They started advising the top brass, and now work at unit level in the military (gender and race).
Steve, London
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:45 GMT
11:45 UK
Is this David Cameron's way of covering up the expenses saga ? They are all the same as each other if you want my honest opion . They will all be on the take no matter what happens . Also dont forget that there is an election looming so there is going to be a lot of False Promises , Promises , Promises and more Promises which incidenally will not really be Promises . We are all about to be fooled again , you will see.
Mr Grunt, London
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:44 GMT
11:44 UK
Well you can see where our money goes just the morning the Race Commission just told us that immigrants arent given preferential housing or favoured ,well this goes against not only public opinion but that of many mp's - are we the stakeholders getting value for money? I dont think so lets scrap this Quango for a start.
[sammon8], london, United Kingdom
==
Just because it's your opinion, doesn't make it right. What's your evidence, aside from anecdote, speculation and resentment?
[UberWithnail], Glasgow, United Kingdom
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:43 GMT
11:43 UK
Easier said than done, we should be more afraid of what dodgy unaccountable organisations will be replacing them!
Dave, Huddersfield
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:40 GMT
11:40 UK
It's not just the Quangos. We need a root and branch review of where all of our hard earned cash goes. Like many others I work long hours, pay my taxes, national insurance, VAT, fuel tax, tax on wine and beer and at the end of it all there's little left for me and and hardly any time for pleasure or leisure. Then I have to sit back and listen to and read about the way my money is wasted by government and bureaucrats and hand outs to foreigners and illegal immigrants. I despair.
MangoQuango, Birmingham
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:38 GMT
11:38 UK
Are you all stupid?
I mean really, really stupid?
These things -need- to be done, who else is going to do them!?
LSC, for example, funding -has- to happen, that's why they're there. How else will learners get funding to do so, or colleges, or schools?!
Mikey, =Newcastle
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:35 GMT
11:35 UK
Amalgamate the useful ones into government offices with severe cuts and dismantle the rest of them. Do we really need 790 quangos that exist solely to give us highly opinionated and biased figures for political parties to throw around in debates? If hte Labour party or the Conservatives want to throw around figures - they should be from independent political research organisations, universities or their own extensive research organs. I don't want to pay for a debate, I want to pay for action.
Hugh Morley, Ashford, United Kingdom
|
Added:
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009, 10:33 GMT
11:33 UK
790 quangos! Unbelievable. Just think of all the expenses they claim. New Labour has used them in a cynical way. Take last weeks effort calling for defence cuts. The idea is to 'condition' the public into accepting these things before government moves in that direction. 'Independant'? No organization that relies on public money is ever independant at all.
Ralph Cook, Barking, United Kingdom
|
|
This Have Your Say is
CLOSED
DEBATE STATUS
Total comments: 1015
Published comments: 953
Rejected comments: 62
From Have Your Say
|
News and analysis
