Reply: I trust so – David Cameron made a good speech on waste recently

As an example a “Champagne Socialist” friend of mine who is a well respected doctor involved in neuro research within the NHS in Cambridge stated “if we increased income tax by only 1p in the pound we could have the NHS we all deserve”.

I tried to explain to her the economic principle of a taxation bell curve that if taxation is too high the tax take is actually less as more people avoid paying or refuse to work. She seems totally oblivious to the rampant tax and spend of Labour.

I cannot believe that the Government cannot find a 15% cost saving in it’s budget easily. Even a saving of 10% would amount to over £60bn at a time where taxpayers are having to make drastic economies to cover the increased costs of mortgages, fuel and food (and tax!)

But despite a Government clearly incapable of managing it’s own costs, I remain to be convinced that the David Cameron would be strong enough to take a suitably large knife to Government spending. I know that is something Mr Redwood believes in strongly, but he’s not leading the Conservatives. Cameron dances around the subject when he should be making a commitment.

so much for the peoples representatives.

the oil crisis is fake.

You talk as if your party in government has acted with perfect hindsight. I have no direct experience of government but have seen a lot. You guys are all the same. “this lady’s not for turning!”

It is hard to believe that the civil service does not already contain people with appropriate knowledge and experience to assist government on almost any issue without the need for any additional expenditure. But where additional expertise is needed I see no reason why it must always be paid for at premium rates.

A lesson can be learned from the way Parliamentary Select Committees gather expert opinions and advice. When a matter is being considered they invite contributions from the public and receive detailed and highly informative submissions from genuine experts. Such submissions are made free of charge because people consider their contributions to informed debate that can help improve law-making to be a matter of public service.

I know not whether this is a practical suggestion, but why not prevent government from hiring any external consultants without the consent of the relevant Commons Select Committee? It would certainly focus minds on whether there is any genuine need for paid external help.

In a similar vein we saw recently a most bizarre situation in which companies bidding to take over Northern Rock had their costs paid out of the public purse. They would not have been bidding at all if they did not see a potential profit and I see no reason why such a normal business cost should be paid by taxpayers.

Presumably, these are legally-watertight contracts which any administration is committed to paying out for over the next 30 years (and assume Mr Brown, as is his wont, went to some trouble to lock a succeeding administration into that commitment).

Not much room for negotiation, then. Horrendous penalties for early termination.

The question is: Are you stuck with this multi-billion pound set of gorillas on the balance sheet?

Reply: Yes, with some of them. They will need review to see how we can manage the risks better.

It’s not just the quangos. Take the MoD for instance. What seems to be happening is that image conscious civil servants, possibly colluding with ministers, are shunting money around so fast that the auditors cannot keep up with it. So no-one can tell if the spending for many projects is being counted once, twice, three times or (most likely) not at all.

They do not know how many civil and/or public servants they employ directly. They do not know how many consultants and outside contractors they employ. They do not know how many committees they have and how much they are remunerated. They are clueless about the present and future pension commitment the taxpayer will have to stand.

When the time comes for a change of government, the Tories will be forced to take a very long time just to get to grips with the scale of the problem. It will take even longer for the taxpayer to recover from the damage that this government has done to the nation.

In the UK we must as John Redwood suggests get tough with QUANGO’s & civil service budgets and matching the very public spending plans that have done so much harm would be madness . We need more value for money on what is already being spent – taxpayers have suffered enough ! If the Lib Dems want targeted cuts in taxation & public spending then such ideas must be popular – what is George Osborne and for that matter David Cameron waiting for ?

Astonishingly, we heard “sell your car if you don’t like it” from one minister, along with proud boasts that future tax increases had been delayed a few months, and that French tax other things (QED this tax rise is okay??). Not one of them could actually bring themselves to say “tax cut”

And several of the leftist commentators actually seem to be rejoicing in the destruction of our haulage industry, urging Gordon to “stand firm” on the green agenda.

Well, if that’s the battleground they choose, good luck to them in the next election.

Presumably he’s going to impress them with his grasp of the situation by encouraging them to lower their prices so that they don’t make as much profit.

I hope you appreciate this little parable…….