>Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 06:52:22 +0200
>From: "Chris Barker" <christopher.barker@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [OM] Traffic in National Parks (was "eat your heart out...")
>
>Charles
>
>I'm pretty sure that it is inaccurate to refer to the National Parks
>Service as
>part of the Government (although I confess I am not well up on the way it is
>connected). It is part of what we call the Civil Service (in the UK) or a
>"QUANGO" (quasi non-governmental organisation, the non- is sometimes omitted
>;-)). Quangos in this country are indeed run much of the time by Government
>placemen, but I wonder if the National Parks Service would be the same, or
>merely a well-meaning but generally inefficient organisation whose mission has
>been lost or outdated: it no longer understands its customers. Does this fit?
>
This very off-topic as far as Oly goes but I must comment on this. I have
no connection with the administration of our National Parks (i.e.UK) except
as a frequent visitor,
1. QUANGO stands for Quasi _Autonomous_ Non Governmental Organisation.
Quangos are definately not Governement bodies and in no way are they Civil
Service. They are constitutionally autonomous and the National Parks
Authority is no exception.
2. I've never seen any indications of inefficiency. It must be hugely
difficult in our crowded island to manage the conflicting interests of
enormous numbers of visitors (the Peak District NP is the second most
vistited NP in the _world_) with environmental conservation, all on very
limited resources.
- www.modus.co.uk - web design and publishing, domain names & mailing services.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|