I imagine some of these agencies didn’t exist before 2010, meaning they got staffed under the Tories. I know viewing the Tories as purely bad is a very simplistic way of looking at things, but when Boris was partying in Downing street and clearly resigning on his duties to protect the public, how come this level of resignation didn’t seep into these govt. agencies? From the articles below it seems that even after 14 years fhey still have teeth. Are they independent enough to escape influence from the Cabinet?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/20/the-big-tech-firms-want-an-ai-monopoly-but-the-uk-watchdog-can-bring-them-to-heel https://www.wiltsglosstandard.co.uk/news/national/24470785.data-watchdog-reprimands-school-facial-recognition-canteen-payments/
I’m purely guessing but if the internal staffing is not changed when a new administration, than the office culture, makeup, structure, purpose, and outcome should stay roughly the same.
Only if the office is forced to reform under each administration would it really change. If it was working fine for the Tories, they’d leave it. If anyone else thought it needed to be overhauled they might have done it.
This is what people mean when they talk about the Deep State, though they whisper it conspiratorially.
It’s government professionals, doing their jobs day in and out, no matter who rules the henhouse.
The ICO was established in the purely coincidental year of 1984.
Such bodies tend to operate independently from any government of the time and are often a thorn in their side.
Would it be too scandalous for governments to abolish (or subjugate) them if they already have a majority?
A government can get rid of them, as in 2010’s “Bonfire of the Quangos” (under the guise of austerity) but they can no longer meddle directly with Non-Departmental Public Bodies since the Nolan Report in 1995, which made sure the people appointed to them are truly independent.
