This week I have been mostly reading... 22nd - 28th August 2009
Saturday 22nd August
Mark Pack explained why the Taxpayers' Alliance is wrong to oppose public sector experiments.
Sunday 23rd August
Stephen Glenn asked if LDV readers are headline whores.
Monday 24th August
Liberal Eye asked what the clear target for those not planning to go to university should be.
Tuesday 25th August
My Two Penneth explained how she fell in and then out of love with the Labour Party.
Wednesday 26th August
Jane Watkinson asked how there can possibly be another 12 year delay for Lords reform when Labour have already had 12 years.
Thursday 27th August
Another excellent post from Liberal Eye who traced the seven ages of supermarkets from "good thing" in the 1960s to "bad thing" now.
Mark Wadsworth highlighted misleading statistics around Cannabis related deaths.
The Other Taxpayers' Alliance has issued an excellent tongue in cheek "Media Guidelines" for reporting the Taxpayers' Alliance. There is a serious point behind it though. (This link opens a PDF file).
Friday 28th August
Liberal Burblings pointed out that the current youngsters getting their GCSE results are the first ever to have been fully educated under contiguous Labour governments.
And a special bonus this week. For all you fans of The Smiths, marvel at how many Smiths song title references Chris Packham managed to squeeze into this year's Springwatch programme with this little montage.
Posts
2 comments:
I think the TA is right and Mark Pack is wrong.
Of course, we all like to see progress but the rush for progress
should not be blind.
Is there an alternative to blind experimentation? Yes, I think so.
The answer is to set up processes and procedures to filter out bad
ideas.
Politicians may love to be seen as great innovators but we should
not feed that love.
There are plenty of experiments that can be done but that does not
mean they should be done.
A council could "take a bold step forward by hiring an astrologer".
Disaster will no doubt follow.
What has happened to due diligence and thinking things through?
I read recently that the Lib Dems have a web site for people to post
ideas about how to save money in the public sector.
Why could they not ask inside the party for ideas first? Where is the
proof-of-concept showing that significant money can be saved? It is
very easy to say "oh there must be ways to make savings".
On balance I agree with Mark.
It doesn't have to be scattergun. Different areas will generally be trying things that they think have a good chance of working (perhaps they have been tried in other counties etc.) rather than just plucking things out of thin air at random.
Anyway, this is just a roundup! If you want to debate this fully you might want to leave your post on Mark's blog and get him involved in this.
Post a Comment