The silent killer.
H/t to Iain Dale this morning, for pointing me in the direction of Dennis Sewell’s excellent article. I confess I had given up reading the Spectator, but shall return to the fold if they are going to run articles of this quality.
I had been pondering Hopi Sen’s chilling piece yesterday on the way in which Labour have made it impossible to remove Brown before the next general election, despite the many ‘hopeful’ pieces that say ‘Brown is on his way out’; it seems that short of Brown choosing to resign, he can only be removed by a vote of more than a fifth of Labour MPs calling for a leadership election – which in itself calls for a vote at the next Labour party conference – and there isn’t a Labour party conference between now and the General election. Game, Set and Match. There is no way to depose the man.
That in turn set me pondering on the legislation Labour are setting in place – pace the bear trap embedded in the Child Poverty Bill making future governments liable to judicial review if they fail to meet the targets which Labour themselves have been unable to meet, to reduce the mobile ‘child poverty’ target.
Et voila! Along comes Dennis Sewell, with facts and figures to give you nightmares, of the Labour ‘cronies, placemen and political stooges’, in control of vast quango budgets, who will seek to continue to exercise the control freakery for which Labour has become synonymous.
With 700,000 employees and boards that read like a who-was-who of the Blair/Brown era, the quangos will represent Labour’s stay-behind fifth column. Not only are the quangocrats implacably opposed to the Conservatives’ reform programme, but they are better placed than even the wiliest Sir Humphrey to thwart change and mount a guerrilla insurgency against public spending controls.
We bloggers have been obsessed with rooting out a cure for the irritating verruca that is Nu-Labour’s wildest excesses; the control of public dissent – the censorship of the Internet; the permission required – and refused! for public demonstrations; the MPs expenses, now being investigated by a woman who has herself benefited from an enviable second home allowance. A verruca, however, is merely surface damage; the real danger is the silent killer, the spreading tentacles of an octopus like tumour that has invaded every sector of public life.
Yet card-carrying, politically motivated placemen represent probably less than half of the problem. Even more sinister is the way that the new recruitment practices ensure that even the politically non-aligned appointees have a bureaucratic, centralising mindset. A creeping credentialism threatens to circumscribe ever more narrowly the pool of potentially successful applicants for senior appointments. The loyalty required is not so much to the Labour party itself, but to the bureaucratic method.
Preferment goes to those already established within the system, and those joining public bodies from outside tend to be either the sort who have been schooled by one of those faintly repellent leadership organisations such as Common Purpose, or have been recruited from the big accountancy and management consultancy firms, most of which have been complicit in this government’s serial failures.
In the same manner as Hopi Sen’s devastating assessment of the impossibility of removing the Prime Minister, so have these appointments been ‘dug in’.
By the simple ruse of stripping away the Prime Minister’s powers of patronage and establishing an independent appointments system, the Labour nomenklatura have dug themselves in for the long term. Many of the most ideologically hostile quangocrats have notionally won their positions on merit and the legal obstacles to their extirpation could be immense.
In the 1970s, Britain was convulsed by the labour pains of Margaret Thatcher stripping the Unions of the power they held over government. I urge you to read Dennis Sewell’s article in full – and weep; you will realise that far more painful surgery is ahead of us for parliament to regain control of government. The bear trap legislation, not least the Human Rights Act and the Lisbon Treaty, and the power of the Quangos, the cancer that has been Nu-Labour extends into every part of the body Britannic.
The verruca was the least of our troubles.
-
1
September 6, 2009 at 12:47 pm -
great picture but keep that octopus outta my house!!
new labour have truly fucked this country for aeons and it’s gonna take some long, hard struggles (again) for the brits to regain their sense of value and confidence in the world. winning the ashes is nothing next to this. to think none of them have ever had a proper job and all of them are lying, scheming scum.
-
2
September 6, 2009 at 1:00 pm -
I could weep.
-
3
September 6, 2009 at 1:01 pm -
The quango bureaucrat infection can be cured with enough MPs prepared to shoulder their responsibilities and suties themselves rather than shovel authority off to their chums, demand the same from all of us and also admit that the State is not the answer to every ill.
The current generation of politicians are far too lightweight and from a selfish point of view, too sensible, to do that. There are far too many voters with vested interests as well.
-
4
September 6, 2009 at 1:50 pm -
The answer is simple – remove the quangos and repeal the legislation that set them up in the first place, and while they’re at repeal about 99% of all the legislation of the last 13 years.
Unfortunately there are no politicians with the guts to do that and I doubt there will be for the foreseeable future.
To put it simply – unless we have someone like Cromwell to put things back on the right footing there is no real future for the UK and it might as well become just a state of Europe.
-
6
September 6, 2009 at 2:32 pm -
Anna, that is why I said there would need to be the repeal of the legislation that set them up – if there is nothing there to support their existence then they go.
-
7
September 6, 2009 at 6:12 pm -
Sorry, Butt I have some problems with Child Poverty. We don’t need a Quango or Targets to tell us that it is how people spend their money, and not how much they get. The current benefits are enough to sustain a reasonable life style. Okay, it’s not gloriously generous, but then I don’t think it is supposed to be.
How you go about educating parents in providing a reasonable diet and decent clothes is another matter. Personally I have always known how to provide a decent meal for next to nothing, and most of my childrens’ clothes were bought at Jumble Sales. And none of mine ever lived in poverty despite a serious lack of money.
I can’t think of one single Quango that has ever accomplished anything.
As for Brown, I guess you all will just have to hang in there, and the vote out The Labour Party. But don’t hold your breath while hoping that The Conservatives will do any better. They are all in it for themselves.
-
8
September 6, 2009 at 10:41 pm -
Is there not a Labour Party Conference this year? Can’t find anything to say it has been cancelled? *Clutches at straw*
-
9
September 7, 2009 at 1:52 am -
They’ve lost the plot, Lilith. They seem to think that if they hang on to Brown it will show some sort of unity. And then Labour will win the next Election.
The Daily Telegraph has done the country a great service. Never again will politicians of any party get away with sailing along in the good ship “Arrogance”. It appears that there is still much to be uncovered, but it seems to be underway.
Sorry about the pun, entirely accidental.
-
10
September 7, 2009 at 6:16 am -
Sabot
“The current benefits are enough to sustain a reasonable life style. Okay, it’s not gloriously generous, but then I don’t think it is supposed to be”indeed – who exactly are you talking about? and what makes you think benefits should be a form of punishment?
“Never again will politicians of any party get away with sailing along in the good ship “Arrogance”.”
excuse me? arrogance is in the blood whether MPs are right or rightFFS!!!
-
11
September 7, 2009 at 1:05 pm -
Sorry Blink, I don’t know how I have managed to upset you. I don’t think Benefits are a form of punishment, just a safety net while a job is found. If there is no job then at least people won’t starve. I don’t think it was ever designed to provide luxury.
As far as politicians are concerned I was thinking in terms of the abuse of expenses and the way in which they appear to think that we are all stupid. Often this arrogance appears after they have been elected.
-
12
September 7, 2009 at 10:03 pm -
What Sewell’s forgetting is quangocrats are spineless bootlickers and Cameron will be controlling the purse strings.
Far from launching an entrenched guerilla war against the Tories they’ll be fighting each other for the chance to get their tongues up some Tory bumcrack in the hope of being the one to survive the wind change.
It’s a simple concept. If a particular quango doesn’t deliver what Cameron wants he cuts their budget. They’re in a much, much weaker position to oppose central government than local authorities with a mandate and local taxation.
That’s why central governments from Thatcher onwards have promoted quangos so intensively and why Cameron will continue to do so.
Sewell’s just talking rubbish but hey, it’s the Spectator what do you expect.
-
13
September 7, 2009 at 11:49 pm -
There is no way to depose the man.
There is always a way – here is one.
If enough people got the stones and made an effort to shake that particular tree parliament could be dissolved overnight; I would very much like to see the Mandlesnake try to weasle his way out, the BBC to ignore it or Cameron not to realise the long term implications; that he and his clowns are there by the grace of the electorate.
Everyone: send your Queen a letter; she has the power to stop this madness and make a lasting statement against the collectivists in government – whether you agree with her existence or not her powers should not be underestimated.
-
14
September 10, 2009 at 11:17 pm -
All these politicos, bureaucrats, beurocrats, quangocrats and gongocrats are paid with taxpayers’ money.
Why do we pay taxes?
{ 14 comments… read them below or add one }