Why can't we have some deflation in public services for a change?
News that the Big Lottery Fund - a super quango encharged with distributing funds to the good causes - spends 12 per cent of its budget on administration, six times more than some well-known charities and has has an astonishing 1,103 administrative staff despite a falling income – comes as no surprise to those of us who have been arguing for lottery reform for some time.
These kinds of balooning costs are all too common in the public sector. That's because - quite unlike Camelot who runs the National Lottery - there is no competitive pressure to reduce costs and improve service for those quangos distributing the funds. If Camelot fails, it loses its license. When did a quango last get sacked for being cost-ineffective?
Public bodies will always come a poor second to Companies or even Charities in the cost-effective and quality provision of public services. They just don't feel under any commercial threat.
Recent Comments