Report comment

In support of the first post: We have this level of scrutiny because the previous government believed in control as the principle measure of their success. They convinced us that £63bn a year needed to be spent on quangos most of which were organisations offering scrutiny or were a body not directly delivering services. What country could afford this?

The previous Government convinced us that scrutiny was required because these unaccountable faceless bureaucrats running PCTs, SHAs, DH and Trusts could not be trusted to spend our money wisely. But the AC failed to check this and the NHS wasted billions on everything from poorly negotiated GP contracts through to a PCT buying a £400k yacht. The provider Trusts are the only part of the NHS that has even got close to accountability.

Accountability should rest with statutory bodies. The issue is many statutory bodies don't do anything (hence many are going). Those that remain need freedom and greater public accountability. That's what's happening and it's certainly better than control and wasted £billions offered by the Labour Government.

As for AC specifically, their conflict of interest with DH and their need to be 'independent' led to their demise and general opinion around here is this was a long time coming.