How Targets Went Wrong
Article Abstract:
In order to keep government expenditures down, the local authorities of the United Kingdom are subject to penalties if they do not keep expenditures below targets. However, the system is going against the principal reasons for block grants and is punishing non-metropolitan counties out of proportion to needs. Block grants were introduced in 1981 to solve problems with the former method of grant distribution. One problem with it is that it had no ceiling on total expenditure, so the penalty system with targets was introduced. The inequality results from the fact that need is not individually assessed at each interval after the initial assessment. Targets are based on past expenditures which provides incentives for spending up to target, whether necessary or not, just to continue receiving grant money. The metropolitan counties had the highest expenditures in the first place, receive increases in target spending based on expenditures which results in the gap between 'winners' and 'losers' ever widening. The main objectives of the block grant system - needs and resources equalization - are losing ground in the view of the government toward the economy, rather than the objectives of the program
Publication Name: Public Finance and Accountancy
Subject: Business
ISSN: 0305-9014
Year: 1983
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Creating Public Interest and Emphasising Achievement
Article Abstract:
The winner of the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy of the United Kingdom's Public Sector Accounts Awards, John Barton of Cambridgeshire CC, describes development of the financial report of the county as an effort to increase readership. The format has been redesigned and includes pictures, colored graphs and positive, achievement-oriented text. They produced a forty-eight page report with an internal effort to plan the work carefully as well as obtaining professional advice on the presentation and layout of the report. The structure of the document is laid out as follows: 1) introduction, 2) summary of spending and manpower, 3) service reviews, 4) accounts, 5) performance review and 6) general. The report appears successful, as it has been more widely read and understood. It even received compliments from readers. Posters and copies were made of the report to be placed in schools for educational purposes.
Publication Name: Public Finance and Accountancy
Subject: Business
ISSN: 0305-9014
Year: 1984
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Digital Now partners with Jun Ming to expand into Chinese markets. Lucky Film plans to expand to 2,700 stores
- Abstracts: The relation between perceived accounting quality and economic characteristics of the firm. Non-US firms' Accounting Standards choices
- Abstracts: Market reactions, characteristics, and the effectiveness of corporate layoffs. The impact of receiving debtor-in-possession financing on the probability of successful emergence and time spent under Chapter 11 bankruptcy
- Abstracts: Power and international accounting standard setting: Evidence from segment reporting and intangible assets projects
- Abstracts: Small manufacturers - when going outside makes sense. Increasing employee ROI in the small business. Managing Accounts Receivable in a Small Business