Over the summer I blogged about the Treasury’s curious admission that it doesn’t know how much money it spends on, in the words of the question, “branding and marketing”. This week Dizzy Thinks spotted another example; the Treasury doesn’t know how much it spends on heating, electricity or water either. Perhaps it would be easier for someone to just ask what it does know?
Subscribe
-
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
-
Like us on Facebook
-
Subscribe to our feed
-
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Most Read
Search
Op-eds
-
Lincolnshire – a flawed reform of local government and why it matters (Nigel Lindsay)
-
Welcome to my day: 3 August 2026 – some thoughts on migration… (Mark Valladares)
-
Tom Arms’ World Review (Tom Arms)
-
Observations of an Expat: Gaza Sceptic (Tom Arms)
-
The Social Liberal Forum, a strategy for relevant liberalism (Roger Hayes and John Shreeve)
-
Blunders for Mr Burnham to Avoid
-
The Joy of Six 1557
-
Man vows to "never travel to Lincolnshire again" after Humber Bridge fines
-
The government's near-invisible power to veto legislation
-
Public urged to help complete landmark survey of Welsh chapels
-
The hidden history of Euston, a lost canal and Cumberland Market
-
Liverpool Labour's lack of ambition over the Commonwealth and Europe
-
Northwood Lane, Bewdley: The Elan Valley Aqueduct, The Singing Detective and Jonathan Meades
-
First Clacton by-election opinion poll released
-
Prince Philip sent 12th-century font to Charles' boarding school in the 1960s
Recent Comments
George Thomas
Perhaps my most illiberal "opinion" is that automatic freedom of movement for immigrants is possibly a bad thing*. I remember speaking with a recent refugee who...
Chloe
'underlying emotions are fear, resentment and inadequacy relating to their own lives' Are you saying the residents of Crowborough or Bicester who've protested ...
Andy Daer
We're talking about two different things here. The reasons our potential workforce doesn't fit with what the economy and society require are one thing, and the ...
David Raw
Very sorry to mention this, but I'm old enough to remember when Rumswoth in Bolton West had a a Liberal M.P. (my late friend Arthur Holt). But now, sadly, in a ...
Peter Wrigley
Here's an extract from a Jonathan Liew article in today's Guardian (4th August): " . . .[W]hat if migration is only a problem to those who want it to be? Wh...


8 Comments
Why am I not surprised?
Some years ago I got a job with a household-name state-owned company just weeks before it was privatised. They too had only the most rudimentary accounting system; it could just about say how much money came in and how much went out but anything inbetween was pretty much a mystery.
It also turned out that even the most senior staff didn’t know how to evaluate a capital project even though capital spending was a large part of total spending at the time.
I didn’t stay long!
The Tories are, presumably, blaming this on Labour incompetence, when of course this has nothing to do with the party in charge but instead is a stark example of the inherent flaws of government.
I don’t see any reason for it to be an ‘inherent’ flaw. If ministers spent just a little time and effort thinking about efficiency (or at least requiring their departments to do so) then govt would run a whole lot better. Sadly, the culture seems to be to regard the taxpayer as a bottomless money-well.
So where has the culture come from?
Good question.
My guess is that too many (all?) ministers prefer to rush out a response to any “something must be done” headline in the media without pausing to consider alternatives, especially if the best alternative is likely to be a harder initial sell.
Absent a very clear and determined lead from the PM that value matters over spin, this tendency will soon become the rule. Blame Blair for exacerbating an existing trend.
The implication is that this leaves an open goal for a party with a credible committment to value for money. We can’t in any case go on as before – that way lies national bankruptcy.
I’m afraid I find that explanation rather too similar to the Tory position – ie. that there are no structural problems, it’s just a matter of management. We just need new politicians who will manage things better, and, predictably … we’re the party to do it!
As much as I dislike Labour (and believe me, that is an awful lot) I don’t buy the argument that their ministers are significantly lacking in values when compared to either Tory or LD MPs.
It’s the system that’s at fault. If we can’t offer radical liberalism, we should at least offer radical localism.
I didn’t say “there are no structural problems”. In fact I think the opposite – that there are enormous structural problems and that there is no particular reason to think one Party’s ministers would somehow be systematically better than another party’s ministers.
However, that said the cultural problem that afflicts all parties is so deep that it amounts almost to a structural problem in itself – culture becomes structure.
Agreed, hence why the only solution is to significantly reduce the power-structures of Westminster and Whitehall – by both liberalisation and localisation.