LETTER: Our secretive government

Mr James Gibson-Watt
Thursday 28 September 1995 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

From Mr James Gibson-Watt

Sir: Sarah Hogg presents a quaint but blinkered view of the conduct of government in Britain ("Opening up the staff of politics", 26 September). She praises cabinet committees, agencies, self-governing bodies, regulators and inspectors as being a manifestation of open government. Really? Well, government may look more transparent from within; it certainly does not from without.

Mrs Hogg, in telling only half the story about how the UK government disburses its business, makes the mistake of believing that the citizen is only concerned with the delivery of service, and need not concern him/herself with the means of that delivery. She is wrong.

The other part of this story is of how nearly half of public expenditure is now disbursed by agencies whose activities are entirely obscured from public scrutiny and accountability, "new" or electoral. There is no sign of transparency in a quango board whose meetings are held in secret, the minutes (if such things exist) unavailable to the public. Our money is being spent in ways of which we can have no knowledge, by people appointed without explanation or election.

League tables, published standards and systems of redress are no substitute for the kind of accountability provided by democratically elected bodies meeting and taking their decisions in public. Voting is only part of the accountability process, the other is the ability to get information and view the day-to-day process of decision-making. This Government has forgotten that, or finds it inconvenient. It is not open and it will not do.

Yours,

James Gibson-Watt

Hay-on-Wye, Powys

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in