I'm writing to you just to get something off my chest really. I work for an Advertising Agency in XXXXX and we do all the advertising for XXXXX XXXX XXXXXX which is the Regional Development Agency (or something like that!). Now, they came to us last week to tell us that they had £200k that they still hadn't spent for this year and could we come up with ideas to essentially get rid of the money. Am I alone in being totally outraged by this £200k? I know it's probably a drop in the ocean in terms of Government spending but if 20 agencies did similar things then that's a decent amount of money. I think the current policy is that if they don't spend all the money they've been allocated then they won't get it next year, so agencies are being actively encouraged in my eyes to spend sums of money (essentially waste the money) which could be put to use elsewhere. I'm still staggered by it and find it disgusting but just wanted to get it off my chest to you.Consider your chest offloaded...
Friday, December 07, 2007
Do all Government Departments Operate in This Way?
Another email on government waste...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
Was it the South West Regional Development Agency by any chance?
http://thisiscornwall.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=144125&command=displayContent&sourceNode=232510&home=yes&more_nodeId1=232470&contentPK=19170233
The quango charged with bringing prosperity to the Cornish economy spent more than £60,000 of taxpayers' money at a property trade show on the French Riviera.
A delegation from the South West of England Regional Development Agency (RDA) racked up the bill in Cannes at an event described by one guest as a lavish "four day party".
Details of the cost of the trip to the Mipim show, based in the Palais des Festivals, were obtained under the Freedom of Information (FoI) Act.
They show that in March 2007 - days before Hollywood stars descended on Cannes for its famous film festival - the South West RDA was among eight of the nine development agencies in the country to travel to the event. Deidre Hipwell, deputy news editor of Property Week, said the jamboree featured special theme nights as well as parties on luxury yachts.
"It's on the Riviera, it's a beautiful setting," she said. "There's definitely more of a party atmosphere at Mipim than at other events of that nature."
The figures disclosed by the South West RDA show the quango also spent £61,000 on its annual staff conference at a Center Parcs site in Wiltshire, plus £28,279 on another staff meeting last year at the Riviera Centre in Torquay.
Its total bill for corporate events in 2006-7 amounted to £278,560.
The scale of the expenditure - obtained by Norman Baker, Cabinet Office spokesman for the Liberal Democrats - yesterday prompted concerns from party colleague Matthew Taylor, MP for Truro and St Austell.
"The RDA is spending multi millions - and a couple of hundred thousand on corporate events might not sound like a lot of money," he said.
"But it is and I can think of half a dozen businesses in my constituency that would benefit from this investment. It can make all the difference to a business in Cornwall."
Mr Taylor said he believed the county would be better served by a Cornish development agency instead of one that covered a swathe of the South West, from Swindon to Land's End.
"It is very doubtful that a single Cornish development agency would dare spend £61,000 going to Cannes," he added.
This week it emerged that the Commons' business and enterprise committee is to launch a fresh investigation in the New Year into the development agencies' spending.
Mr Baker accused them of being "cavalier with taxpayers' money". He also demanded curbs on their expenses and an investigation by the National Audit Office.
"No elected politician would get away with this and there is no reason why obscure, unelected, unaccountable officials should either," claimed Mr Baker.
But the South West RDA yesterday defended itself and insisted it was reaping rewards for Cornwall and the region.
Richard Thomas, director of marketing and communications, said: "Last year, we attracted tens of millions of pounds of investment into the region and created over 5,500 jobs.
"To do this we need highly-motivated, skilled people working for us. Therefore events for our staff, such as the annual staff conference, are crucial to helping us achieve lasting economic success for the region. Center Parcs provided the best value for money.
"It is also vitally important to promote the strengths of South West England both at home and abroad," added Mr Thomas.
"To do this we must maintain a presence at important events such as Mipim, the premiere international property event.
"This allows us to work with and lobby directors from large property developers. This has helped the South West RDA to secure a number of private sector investors."
Corporations and departments within them do that too.
It's called spending your budgeted amount for the year because if you don't you've got no chance of getting an increase for the next year.
well if they can't find productive ways to spend £200k on regional development on their own then that's a failing in itself. why isn't the mindset to do something positive, rather than trying to get rid of the money? if they really don't need the money it should be allocated elsewhere in the region; i'm sure there are schools and hospitals that would be very keen to get their hands on that money
Iain I agree it is bonkers. It is a tired old stupid accounting rule.
Basically if you allow a little for contingency then you don' get it next year. if you budget for what you think it will cost, but then get a better deal, you are penalised. Stupid.
I wouldn't mind so much if the government departments I end up supporting did not have the other problem of silly cuts, despite the fact that I provide a commercial service to them at a third of the price that they would budget for if we didn't di that already.
Shockingly bonkers.
Cut the budget to the bone where the current system fails to work so you can spend 3 times as much.
Iain, of course it does. I remember the first time in the NHS when I held a budget and foolishly made the "mistake" of not spending it all before 31st March. I've never made it since and we now always finish comfortably in deficit.
Mad is too tame a word for it.
If you want to see waste from government listen to commercial radio. I listen to digital radio and around half the ads are from one government department or another.
I am constantly told that I must
- disclose any changes in my income, relationships etc to the tax credit department
- not talk on a mobile while crossing the road
- wear a seat belt
etc etc
Thats not counting the ones that may be needed like recruitment for an overstretched army
When I ran a small magazine we were often the benficiaries of "use up the budget" advertisements - anything not spent means you did not need it, so lowers your allocation for the next budget.
Really another version of the simple shopper.
Alan Douglas
Actually the principle is sound. If the department cannot spend the money this year on something worthwhile it means they shouldn't have that cash.
Sadly bureaurats measure their "prestige" by the size of their budgets and numbers of staff not performance or success.
As you mentioned below (and in your Telegraph article), the aim of any conservative government should be the removal of as many of these leaches from the public payroll as possible. A good starting point would be the unelected and possibly unconstitutional regional bodies.
£200K is 20 peoples tax for the year?
Iain you really ought to talk about tax in terms of people not money. I don't know what then average is but you need to talk about it in terms of people.
Do all Government Departments Operate in This Way?
Short answer: Certainly.
But they are not all as cack-handed as this - some of them manage to hide this activity rather better - but it is universal. There is no incentive for reducing expenditure, other than compliance with edicts from Treasury.
Unfortunately, even with the current levels of micro-management, some managers seem to be able to work well within budgets and are then faced with embarrassing underspends. This is simply not good enough. These people must be trained to spend all of the money.
This is not news at all. It has been "normal" for decades across both local and national government, as well as bodies like the NHS, to make sure that end-of-year budgets are "spent up" so as to avoid cuts the following year.
It is yet another discraceful example of the lack of proper management in the public sector and the lack of commitment to using our money well.
Public sector managers could be rewarded for cutting costs and saving money but a better method would simply be to make it a criminal offence to knowingly waste public money. We should also get a proper grip on the contracting companies in the public sector like the big accountancy and computer firms that are literally running rings around government. At the upper levels, ministers in all governments now appear to consider it their main job to defend contractor interests. This is why we are cynical about politicians; it is well know that they no longer work on our behalf but on behalf of certain powerful and wealthy interests.
I recall the same thing happening when I worked as a volunteer in a shop run by one of the biggest children's charities in the country. A middle-management team toured the shops asking in a big rush what we wanted, saying quite clearly they needed to spend what they had left in their budget before year-end.
When they started to buy-in new goods in competition with nextdoor shops who had to pay full rates and staff costs, and when I simultaneously discovered they got huge incomes from Government, I left.
DFES used to have to spend its cash or next year funding would be cut.
Ask why so much IT spending is done in the last quarter of the financial year.
Iain the regional development agencies are a national scandal there was an article in the Spec following Norman baker , who generally I deplore , uncovering what was going on by application under FOI.
The South East England Development Agency ( SEEDA) deserve special commendation. Last year the chairman James Braithwaite spent£51489 , on taxis , going to see other pointless bureaucrats . The agency spent £600,000 last year running ten overseas offices with one representative in Stuttgart paid £89,000 for either months work. One North, the agency for the North spent £965,000 on an offices in China , the USA Japan Korea and Belgium while Yorkshire forward spent £20,000 sending its staff to a film festival in Dubai . These entirely worthless talking shops have an annual budget of £2.3 billion which is an awful lot of Labour glad handing.
It is beyond belief...and yet when it comes to a rural Post Office they have not apenny spare
Heh, this post takes me back to day's at a Tyne & Wear local authority. Like yourself Iain, I too was stunned to find out that any budget not spent would consequently be deducted the following financial year - hence tens of thousands wasted on expenses, PDAs, "fact-finding" and all sorts. Boy it's a cushioned world at your local town hall!
"I work for an Advertising Agency ......so agencies are being actively encouraged in my eyes to spend sums of money (essentially waste the money)"
Is the writer admitting that his/her work is a waste of money?
Yak40 said...
Corporations and departments within them do that too.
December 07, 2007 11:54 PM
Yes, but we have a choice over if we buy from them. The RDAs get money from us by force and we have no choice.
Post a Comment