Isn't this the question we should be asking?

[jodevizes]

I am really perplexed, if we hadn't had this credit crunch and are going to have all this excess public spending cut, so that we can start repaying the debt, would we still be wasting millions on things we don't need?

I guess they could get rid of the Quangos, the Czars and the consultants, that would save a packet but this government wouldn't know how to function would they?

After over 12 years in power, I should have thought that they should have been able to curb this profligate spending of our money on unnecessary things.

Could it be that they have created artificial jobs so that the unemployment figures look better?

Perhaps it is just that they are so used to helping themselves to our money via their expenses that they just do not notice or care about a huge waste of money.

Sorry, what's the question here? Isn't the point of an election for the electorate to vote on what it thinks are necessary and unnecessary things? If everyone agreed, it would be much easier but might feel like The Truman Show.

One person's waste-of-space quango is another person's vital inspectorate of whichever public service, especially if something has gone wrong. Not quite as simple as just saying destroy them all.

My point is that the government, any government, should not waste the peoples money. If they are suddenly able to make all these cuts to save billions, it shows that they have not been prudent with our money.

Most of the quangos inspect nothing but are nice little jobs for the boys.

I would love to see some sort of independent overseeing of government spending, sadly, I fear it would just turn into another fiasco.

I saw an interesting statistic, here in the UK we have well over 100 ministers to oversee us.

India, that is at least 10 times larger and has over a billion people, can govern with 78 ministers.
Enough said.

jd do you really think the tories or lib dems would be any better

quality debate