| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
144840
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The House of Commons select committees witnessed some of the most constructive political theatre of the 2010-2015 Parliament. Recall Rupert Murdoch's public contrition, Margaret Hodge's assault on MNC tax evasion and Keith Vaz's timely interrogations of G4S, etc. The committees also embraced social media and adopted public engagement as a key task. These developments all reflect a newly emboldened system. In recent months, four reports have been published which reflect on these developments. They also look forward to the further substantial development of committee activity. The system thus sets sail with an abundance of specific suggestions, including ideas that could have far wider and more far-reaching democratic implications.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
133232
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Attitudes to quangos are paradoxical. On the one hand they are perceived to be undemocratic, unaccountable organisations, while on the other they are seen to improve effectiveness, limit political interference and increase public confidence in government. This paradox is reflected in the behaviour of political parties, which generally adopt a harsh line towards quangos in opposition, but come to rely on these bodies in office. Ahead of the 2010 general election it was, however, noticeable that the Conservative party rejected this dynamic by promising to pursue 'a more sophisticated approach'. This article explores the Coalition government's subsequent 'public bodies reform programme', assessing its progress against recommendations contained within the Institute for Government's Read before Burning report of July 2010. It concludes that while the Coalition has addressed long-standing concerns about the day-to-day governance of public bodies, it has failed to resolve a set of broader and strategic (metagovernance) issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
103546
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Quangos (or more accurately, arm's length bodies) are the subject of repeated culls by incoming governments, yet individually are seen as useful devices to reassure the public and give confidence in the performance of public functions. We argue that the confused landscape and poor governance has contributed to the view that, as a class, ALBs are inefficient and unaccountable. The government needs to take the opportunity of its review to rationalise the complex landscape of ALBs, and put governance on a more robust long-term footing based on the degree of freedom an ALB needs to command public confidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|