Friday, April 28, 2006
BUMQA Nomination- Strategic Health Authorities
A few weeks back I met up with a government waste expert in the cost efficient surroundings of a student coffee bar behind the LSE. Over a sumptious cheese toastie we discussed the BUMQAs and the difficulties of choosing the winner among such a vast array of magnificently useless quangos.
The expert was William Norton- among other things a consultant to the James Review- and he's now produced a excellent paper for the TaxPayers' Alliance on those strong BUMQA candidates, the Strategic Health Authorities (see here).
As we know, SHA's are an expensive group of quangos which exist primarily to add a further layer of bureacracy between patients and healthcare professionals. William looks in detail at London SHAs and concludes they cost £24m in management costs alone.
As Matthew Elliott, the TPA's Chief Executive, says: “Resources should be transferred from the backroom bureaucrats to doctors and nurses on the frontline, enabling them to give patients the best treatments and medicines they require. It’s disgraceful that drugs like Herceptin have been blacklisted by health officials when money is being wasted on the Strategic Health Authorities. To put it simply, taxpayers want less bureaucracy and better healthcare.”
The SHAs are firmly in the BUMQA running.
PS You're quite right- that splendid new Home Office logo doesn't really belong here, other than William discovered it.
Posted by Mike D at 11:24 am