Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Savings from quango bonfire 'exaggerated'

Oliver Wright
Monday 23 April 2012 18:43 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The Government's claim to have saved billions of pounds for the taxpayer from its "bonfire of the quangos" is likely to have been exaggerated and should be reassessed, an influential committee of MPs concludes today.

Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office minister, claimed last year that moves to abolish 262 government agencies would lead to £2.6bn of "administration savings". But in a critical report the Public Accounts Committee has taken issue with Mr Maude's assessment and questioned whether they were "genuine" savings.

It suggested the figure might include cuts in services, rather than genuine savings resulting from administrative reorganisations, and said not enough account had been taken of the additional costs to other parts of government of taking on functions previously carried out by abolished bodies. The report comes a day after the Treasury announced that government departments would have to identify around £16bn more savings.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in