Labour Still Rules The Quangos, It Would Seem.

[anotheoldgit]

Here is one for all those who were against the Tory removal of the chair of Ofsted, the schools inspectorate, and replacing her with one of their own.

Is there nothing new in politics?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2551264/How-Labour-STILL-rules-quangos-Party-stuffed-public-bodies-supporters-power-establish-government-exile-holds-sway-today.html

[Kromovaracun]

Quangos should not be staffed by people on the basis of who they support - they should be staffed on the basis of merit.

Actually, this would be nice for the entirety of our political system. But the public seem allergic to the idea.

[Gromit]

It was the LibDems who were upset about the removal of the Chair of Ofsted not Labour. But the LibDems are in a coalition with the Tories, so this counter attack is misplaced.

I wasn't too bothered about the Baronesses removal, I posted at time that Labour filled positions with its supporters during their 13 years in power.

What irked me is that the supposed successor had given large amounts of money to the Conservative Party. Labour may have stuffed the quangos with its supporters, but they didn't fleece them for hundreds of thousands of pounds for party funds first.

When money changes hands there is the whiff of corruption or that the position has been 'bought.

[FredPuli43]

Does it matter? What power do these chairs, or the bodies, have? The NHS one might be significant but Cameron has approved a Labour supporter being in that and he has done nothing relating to the others. The main complaint about Quangos is that they mostly do nothing useful except provide jobs for the boys.

And Mr Gove was the man who appointed the Baroness to Ofsted, in the first place. And I can't see that appointing someone because they are big donors would be any worse than doing so because they were in your class at school or for any other personal reason.

[emmie]

same old, same old

[Hypognosis]

I read that the replacement Ofsted appointee (whose name I've already forgotten), as well as being a big party donor, has likely been picked for being supportive of Gove's proposals for Free schools and may even stand to gain from the changes due to businesses he runs which stand to gain financially.

No-one said so in print but when civil servants or Quango members are removed it is most often because they've become obstructive to getting party manifesto promises fully implemented. So we know where the Baroness' views stand.

They even said there were no performance issues with her, so I'm wondering how this can pass by without turning into a constructive dismissal case? Maybe it's 'not the done thing', at this level?

[FredPuli43]

She had a fixed term contract. It ended through effluxion of time. Therefore she cannot claim that she was constructively dismissed; there was no obligation to grant her a new contract.

[youngmafbog]

Personally I would like to see an end to all Quango's, they are pointless money swallowing bodies.

As for the party politics, they all p*ss in the same pot at the end of the day.