The Audit at One Year
And what comes next?
One year and 112 posts ago The Audit kicked and screamed its way into the world. Of course precious few of you would have heard the noise. This thing started with just three subscribers (of which I was one).
Have my most optimistic dreams been fulfilled? Sadly not. But I did manage to avoid my worst nightmare: even on the off chance my posts would turn out to be coherent and useful perhaps no one would ever discover the stuff I was writing.
In fact, while there may not yet be as many of you as I’d hoped, the quality of the subscribers I did get is a source of actual pride. I’m pleased with the unfailingly civil and productive tone of the comments here. And I’m especially grateful to those of you who directly support The Audit through the paid tier. That means a very great deal to me.
I also appreciate the fact that hundreds of you are reading these posts from inside government. There’s something healthy about people who show up even for posts critical of their own departments and with which they might well strongly disagree!
From the outside, government looks a lot like that Robert A. Heinlein gag: “A committee is a creature with six or more legs and no brain.” But I’m warming to the idea that many of those within the civil service are desperate to apply their skills and smarts to make it all work better.
The closest I’ve come to government is the customer side of the counter in the passport office (and I chose the ten year option specifically to keep the relationship as low-key as possible). Being an outsider has probably allowed me greater objectivity, but I have benefited enormously from those of you who reached out with the kinds of insights that can only come from experience on the inside.
So far it’s been great fun. But there’s something bothering me which I’ve also heard over and over again from subscribers: These posts are all well and good, but what comes next? How do we move from identifying problems to fixing them?
I guess whatever value The Audit has would be multiplied if there were more subscribers. But that’s obviously not enough.
If all the waste and distraction I’ve identified here could lead to just one change what would it be? How about an all-of-government review mandating a fresh analysis of every program line item in every department? Everything would be on the table and no program would make it through before being explained and justified. Ideally, decision-makers would include individuals from outside the department, or even outside of government.
If this ever happens, it’ll probably have to wait for the next government (which, considering the remarkable events of the past few days, might not be long in coming). But there’s actually nothing stopping individual departments from getting ahead of the curve on their own initiative.
Any ideas?
Either way, let’s see what Year Two brings.
By the way, I greatly appreciate all the subscribers who replied to a recent post in an effort to help improve The Audit’s sad email delivery rate. Unfortunately, the effort seems to have had no positive impact at all. I have no clue what else I can try to move the needle on the embarrassing ~91% success rate.
I often don’t agree with your conclusions, but I find your data-heavy writing style compelling and always gives me something to think about. I also appreciate how you engage with your readers, and even those like me who have questions. So, I’ll keep on reading and learning and sometimes arguing here. Thanks for writing.
I saw the value in your writing immediately and became a paid subscriber. I see the likes for your entries are never as high as they should be but am happy to hear there are many who do read you. What’s next? I do send my MP links and hope he reads them. I hope others do and we may eventually be able to move this beast of government to a better position. Good luck in your second year!