DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Bodies Handbook – Part 1. Classification of Public Bodies: Guidance for Departments

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Bodies Handbook – Part 1. Classification of Public Bodies: Guidance for Departments Public Bodies Handbook – Part 1 Classification Of Public Bodies: Guidance For Departments Introduction 2 Introduction The Importance Of Classification About This Guidance Administrative classification will provide departments with the guidance and ability to create This ‘Classification of Public Bodies’ document is departmental guidance from the Cabinet arm’s length bodies that fulfil their governance objectives within a clear, consistent and Office. It sets out the different categories of the UK’s public bodies, and: comparable system. This system will lead to a simplified and more transparent public bodies’ landscape, promoting greater accountability. It will provide a clear and intelligible map of the provides a high level introduction to the early decision making process for establishing different landscape and aid public and internal understanding of relationships between public bodies types of public bodies; and government ministers. It will also promote efficiency and effectiveness, helping to drive strategic reform of the landscape and the development of best practice models. summarises and provides a first point of reference on the main characteristics of each of the ALBs that the Cabinet Office focusses on, as well as those of other forms of public bodies; and The Classification Framework provides information on the some of the now defunct or legacy forms of public bodies that The system of administrative classification comprises the ‘framework’, and the ‘process’ of still exist. applying that framework to public bodies. This is the part of the classification system that handles the application of the framework as public bodies are established, modified or closed. This document is to be read as an introduction and high-level guide for establishing public The framework is the supporting structure to administrative classification. bodies. It should be read in conjunction with the rest of the Public Bodies Guidance Handbook, which will cover in more detail the actual steps required to setting up ALBs, and related The guiding principle underlying the framework is that the classification of an arm’s issues. Part 1 of the Handbook provides guidance on the classification of public bodies and length body (‘ALB’) should be determined by the degree of freedom that body needs provides definitions of the categories ofpublic bodies that operate within the public sector. from ministerial control to perform its functions. The main focus is on arm’s length bodies, though for context it also provides an overview of public corporations, certain Parliamentary bodies, public bodies belonging to the Devolved It is made up of three categories of ALBs: Executive Agency, Non Departmental Public Body, Assemblies, Local Government public bodies and some entities that operate within Ministerial and Non Ministerial Department. The framework establishes the differences between these Departments. Whilst there may be other entities that perform a public or Government function categories and the relationship each has to its home or sponsoring department if it has one. unless they fall into the above forms, they are out of scope, as are private sector entities. It updates and replaces the Categories of Public Bodies: A guide for Departments issued by the Cabinet Office in April 2012. 3 Introduction Public bodies are diverse, which means classification is not always a simple process. For ease of reference, and to help departments understand the different delivery models that exist, this guidance sets out the main categories of public body. This guidance covers: The ALBs that are classified. Other non-classified central government and parliamentary entities. Department Specific, Devolved Assembly and Local Government public bodies. Public corporations. The information on bodies that are not administratively classified has been included to provide an overview of the wider UK public bodies landscape. It does this in a way that allows for relatively easy comparison between these different types of public bodies, by looking at the sorts of factors that impact on their design and creation, then listing the key common characteristics that make up and differentiate each category of public body. The Role Of The Public Bodies Reform Team The Cabinet Office’s Public Bodies Reform Team should be contacted by departments that wish to establish new ALBs. Early involvement of all relevant parties, including the department’s central governance (or dedicated public bodies) team and the relevant HM Treasury Spending Team, is important to ensure that a body is classified correctly and in accordance with Government and departmental intentions for the body in question. This also allows scope for amendments to the governance and control arrangements to be considered before the public body is formally classified to a particular category of public body. 4 Introduction The Public Sector & Its Public Bodies Public Sector Once the ONS has classified a body as public More details on sectoral classification for the Charities sector (its general corporate policy is controlled national accounts are available from the ONS The ‘public sector’ is defined by the Office by the government) it is classified to a particular website http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide- It is worth noting that some Public Bodies are of National Statistics (‘ONS’) with reference sub-sector based on its characteristics. These method/classifications/na-classifications/ also classified and registered as charities by to the European System of Accounts 1995 sub-sectors are: the-ons-classification-process/index. the Charities Commission. This is a separate in accordance with EU requirements for html. system of classification that applies to Governments to produce accurate public Central Government: institutions that are established for charitable sector finances and national accounts. The includes Government Departments and their Public Bodies purposes only and subject to the control of National Accounts (or Sectoral) classification ALBs: Executive Agencies, Non-Departmental the High Court’s charity law jurisdiction. This of entities as public or private depends on the Public Bodies, Non Ministerial Departments, A ‘public body’ is a formally established is mentioned for information only, and is not level of government control over the general and any other non-market bodies controlled organisation that is (at least in part) publically within the scope of this document. More corporate policy of the entity being classified. and mainly financed by them; funded to deliver a public or government information about UK charities can be found This can be direct or indirect and may be service, though not as a ministerial department. here: https://www.gov.uk/government/ evidenced by indicators that include: Local Government: The term refers to a wide range of entities that publications/what-makes-a-charity-cc4/ includes those types of public administration are covered as within the Public Sector. This what-makes-a-charity-cc4 The ability to appoint those in control, or those that only cover a specific locality and any non- does not include forms of public entity that who determine the policy of the entity; and / or market bodies controlled and mainly financed do not require staff to carry out their functions, by them (see chapter 5); and such as public funds or trusts. A right to be consulted over such appointments, or to have a veto over appointments; and / or Public Corporations: Arm’s Length Bodies market bodies controlled by either Central The provision of funding accompanied by Government or Local Government. These The main focus of this document and of rights of control over how that funding is include any type of public entity that is a market most interest to departments are ‘arm’s spent; and / or body. Market bodies are defined as entities length bodies’ or ‘ALBs’. These are a specific that gain over 50 per cent of their income from category of public body that are administratively A general right to control the day-to-day purely commercial activities (see chapter 6). classified by the Cabinet Office. ALBs include: running of the body. Executive Agencies (‘EA’), Non Departmental Public Bodies (‘NDPBs’) and Non Ministerial Departments (‘NMDs’). 5 Chapter One How To Reach The Right Category Of Public Body 6 Chapter 1 | How To Reach The Right Category Of Public Body 1.1 Determinant Factors Chart 1 Initial Questions On Setting Up Public Bodies New public bodies should only be created if there is a clear and pressing requirement, a Is the proposed public or government Yes: clear need for the state to provide the function service or function really needed, and Required Function or service through a public body, and no should it be provided by the state? viable alternative - effectively establishing new public bodies as a last resort. This is to prevent any unnecessary increase in the number of public bodies. Is there sufficient demand for this, No: Consider Waiting Yes: Consider and does it contribute to Government Until Actual Demand Next Step Departments should consider whether the policy, committment or legal Before Setting Up. proposed functions are needed, and whether obligation? there are any alternatives to establishing a new public body (this requires at least a basic understanding of the various alternatives for Is it unique or something sufficiently Similar: Link Yes: Consider delivering new services or functions). These similar already being provided To Existing Next Step initial considerations form the first
Load more

Recommended publications
  • News Release
    Press Office Threadneedle Street London EC2R 8AH T 020 7601 4411 F 020 7601 5460 [email protected] www.bankofengland.co.uk 29 April 2004 Finance for Small Firms - An Eleventh Report The Bank of England today publishes its 11th annual report on Finance for Small Firms. The report reviews the availability of finance for small firms in 2003; how the Basel II Accord might affect access to finance for SMEs; competition in the SME banking market; and it includes a special article on developments in the financing environment for small firms in the last decade. This will be the last such report. In the foreword (copy attached) Nigel Jenkinson, Executive Director for Financial Stability, explains the Bank's decision. Mr Jenkinson says: "In recent years there has been a major expansion in government resources devoted to small firms. The Small Business Service was set up in 2000 as an executive agency of the DTI, to be a centre of excellence on the whole range of small business issues, including access to finance. The Bank has strongly supported the SBS, including seconding one of its senior staff to be the SBS' first Director of Investment and SME Finance from 2000 to 2003." He adds: "Given the substantial improvement in information flows over the past ten years and the growing importance of the SBS in addressing access to finance issues in the government's Action Plan for Small Business, there is no longer a need for the Bank to be involved in these issues. The principal objective of supporting an improvement in the financing relationship has been achieved, and stepping back from the work stream will avoid potential overlap and duplication with the work of the SBS..
    [Show full text]
  • Performance, Stakeholder Stability and the Survival of UK Executive Agencies Paper Presented to Public Management Research Confe
    Performance, Stakeholder Stability and the Survival of UK Executive Agencies 1 Paper presented to Public Management Research Conference, Maxwell School of Syracuse University, June 2 nd -4th 2011 Panel 34 International Perspectives on Government Performance Oliver James Department of Politics, University of Exeter (contact author [email protected] ) George A. Boyne Cardiff Business School, University of Cardiff Alice Moseley Department of Politics, University of Exeter Nicolai Petrovsky Martin School, University of Kentucky Abstract: We develop and empirically evaluate a performance management theory of the survival of public organisation as senior management structures. The theory suggests that organisational performance and stakeholder stability - defined as congruence between the stakeholders who set up and those who subsequently assess the organization - are both positively related to survival. We test the theory for semi- autonomous central government executive agencies in UK central government from 1988 to 2011. The key stakeholders for these bodies are executive politicians, who not only set performance targets each year but can also create and abolish them without the need for legislation. The preliminary findings from survival analysis incorporating a set of control variables suggests that, for the performance variables, only high performance is a predictor of lower risk to survival. However, the congruence of political control between the party initiating an agency and subsequently overseeing it substantially lowers the risk of termination. 1 This paper includes preliminary empirical results from ongoing research. Before quoting the empirical parts of this paper, please check with the contact author whether an updated version is available. Email: [email protected] .
    [Show full text]
  • Not So 'Arm's Length': Reinterpreting Agencies in UK Central Government
    Not so ‘arm’s length’: reinterpreting agencies in UK central government Thomas Elston, PhD Candidate, International Centre for Public and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, UK Email: [email protected] Paper presented to the panel, Executive Politics and Institutional Approaches, convened by the Executive Politics & Governance specialist group at the annual conference of the Political Studies Association (PSA) in Cardiff, March 2013 ***Comments welcome; please do not cite without permission*** Abstract As prominent expressions of new public management (NPM) and its recent attenuation, agencification and de-agencification have been subject to sustained empiricist investigation. However, interpretive analysis remains incipient. Accordingly, this paper explores the evolution of agencification within the UK by attending to its changing discursive construction. Drawing on a three-part analytic framework, which interprets meaning through the rhetoric of argumentation, narrative voice and discursive differentiation, the recent Public Bodies Reforms are shown to narrate a significant reinterpretation of the original executive agency idea of the Next Steps programme. In particular, the old emphasis on managerialist empowerment and decentralisation has given way to new themes of corporate integration and ministerial control. Thus, while no formal or legal redefinition has occurred, the UK’s ‘arm’s-length’ agency model has been discursively ‘departmentalised’. This highlights the potential limitations of using empiricist, ‘population
    [Show full text]
  • NILQ 62. FOREWORD.Qxd
    NILQ 63(4): 509–32 Modernising environmental regulation in Northern Ireland: a case study in devolved decision-making SharoN TurNer aNd CIara BreNNaN School of Law, Queen’s university Belfast * Introduction or over a decade, controversy about the quality of environmental regulation has cast a Fshadow over the effectiveness of environmental governance in Northern Ireland. Most fundamentally this debate has centred on a crisis of confidence about the quality of regulation and a consensus that effective reform depends on the externalisation of this responsibility from central government. Not surprisingly, the causes of weak regulation were rooted in the eclipsing impact of the Troubles and the fossilisation of government that occurred during the decades of Direct Rule.1 However, although the first steps towards meaningful reform were eventually taken under Direct Rule, the restoration of devolution and the stabilising power-sharing process has meant that the trajectory of regulatory reform has been largely shaped by a devolved administration. The purpose of this paper is to examine the nature and implications of that process. Pressure for regulatory reform is an issue that has confronted both configurations of Northern Ireland’s power-sharing Executive. Despite its brief and tumultuous lifespan, the first Ulster Unionist Party (UUP)/Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP)-led administration was immediately faced not only with the evidence of serious regulatory dysfunction but also the first stage of what became a concerted civil society campaign for independent regulation. The collapse of power-sharing did nothing to quell this pressure. Instead, when devolution was restored five years later the new Democratic Unionist/Sinn Fein-led administration was faced once again with pressure for regulatory reform.
    [Show full text]
  • Department for Education Mid-Year Report to Parliament Chris Wormald, Permanent Secretary
    Department for Education mid-year report to Parliament Chris Wormald, Permanent Secretary April to September 2013 Contents Executive Summary 3 Performance 4 Coalition Priority - Increase the number of high quality schools and introduce fair funding 4 Coalition Priority - Reform the school curriculum and qualifications 5 Coalition Priority - Reduce bureaucracy and improve accountability 6 Coalition Priority - Train and develop the professionals who work with children 6 Coalition Priority - Introduce new support for the Early Years 7 Coalition Priority - Improve support for children, young people and families, focusing on the most disadvantaged 7 Financial Performance 9 Management Commentary 10 Resource 10 Capital 11 Cash 11 Major Projects 12 People 13 Management Commentary 15 Annex A: Input and Impact Indicators 17 Tables Table 1: Year to date expenditure against Main Estimate Plan 9 Table 2: Workforce Information 13 2 Executive Summary The Department for Education (DfE) continues to make good progress against its six priorities set by the coalition. In addition to delivering against these priorities the department has continued to drive forward the wider reform agenda. Substantial progress has been achieved in support of the recommendations set out in the DfE Review which was published in November 2012. We continue to deliver improvements and efficiencies and are on track to secure at least a 50% reduction in our Administrative expenditure by 2015-16. The pace of change has been very rapid during the six months to September, particularly for staff within the department. The pace and scale of this change has influenced elements of our staff survey results. 3 Performance The six Department for Education coalition priorities are set out below with key achievements across the mid-year reporting period.
    [Show full text]
  • 191004 VCA Framework Agreement FINAL
    Vehicle Certification Agency Framework Agreement Moving Britain Ahead August 2016 The Department for Transport has actively considered the needs of blind and partially sighted people in accessing this document. The text will be made available in full on the Department’s website. The text may be freely downloaded and translated by individuals or organisations for conversion into other accessible formats. If you have other needs in this regard please contact the Department. Department for Transport Great Minster House 33 Horseferry Road London SW1P 4DR Telephone 0300 330 3000 Website www.gov.uk/dft General enquiries: https://forms.dft.gov.uk © Crown copyright 2020 Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. You may re-use this information (not including logos or third-party material) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected] Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Contents 1. Introduction 5 2. The Agency 6 Main Activities 6 Review 7 3. Governance and Accountability 9 Ministers and Parliament 9 Parliamentary business 9 The role of the Department 9 Submissions to Ministers 11 Chief Executive 11 4. The Agency Board 14 The Chair’s Personal Responsibilities 15 Non-Executive Directors 16 Board sub-groups 16 Board effectiveness 17 Board appointments 17 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Business Plan 2018 / 19 Contents
    Business Plan 2018 / 19 Contents NISRA at a glance Chief Executive’s Foreword 1 Context 2 Vision & Mission 3 Principles of Purpose 4 Balanced Scorecards 2018 / 19 5 NISRA (Statistics and Research) Balanced Scorecard 7 General Registrar’s Office Balanced Scorecard 9 Official Statistics 11 Financial Resources 14 Appendix 1: NISRA Branch Details 16 Appendix 2: NISRA DoF Targets 25 Appendix 3: Glossary 26 NISRA at a glance Headquarters Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency Colby House, Stranmillis Court, BELFAST, BT9 5RR. Status Executive Agency within the Department of Finance (DoF) Chief Executive & Registrar General Siobhan Carey Number of staff at 1 April 2018 484 staff in total of which 50 are (currently) temporary Structure 42 branches, across 22 Government Departments, Executive Agencies, Arms’ Length Bodies, and Local Councils Vision Trusted statistics and research for a better society Website www.nisra.gov.uk Email [email protected] NISRA BUSINESS PLAN 2018 / 19 Chief Executive’s Foreword This year is one of those years when we will look back and say it was a watershed moment. The context in which we operate is changing, there are new data sources becoming available and there are new tools and techniques that can be deployed. The Digital Economy Act (DEA) provides new gateways to share and link data for the production of statistics and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) strengthens the requirements to be transparent about what we do with data and how we protect it. And there is increased demand for sound evidence. The draft Programme for Government has data front and centre.
    [Show full text]
  • VEHICLE CERTIFICATION AGENCY an Executive Agency of the Department for Transport
    VEHICLE CERTIFICATION AGENCY An executive agency of the Department for Transport Annual Report and Accounts 2007 - 2008 Presented to Parliament in pursuance of the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 21 July 2008 VEHICLE CERTIFICATION AGENCY An executive agency of the Department for Transport Annual Report and Accounts 2007 - 2008 Presented to Parliament in pursuance of the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 21 July 2008 HC931 London: The Stationery Office £14.35 THE VEHICLE CERTIFICATION AGENCY 20087 -200 © Crown Copyright 2008 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and other departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. For any other use of this material please write to Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU or e-mail: [email protected] CONTENTS Tackling E Page No by CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S FOREWORD 2 by INTRODUCTIONsup 3 STRATEGICby OUTCOMES 4-6 2007-2008 by TARGETS SET BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE 7-8 con MANAGEMENT COMMENTARY AND BUSINESS PERFORMANCE 9-21 by REMUNERATION REPORT 22-24 Dev CONTACTING VCA WORLDWIDE 25 ImprovedFINANCIAL V STATEMENTS i-xviii by rec set Our missio WWWVCAGOVUK THE VEHICLE CERTIFICATION AGENCY 2007-2008 1 Tackling E CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S FOREWORD by I am delightedby to report that In financial year 2007-08, VCA has continued in its upward direction,sup growing revenues a further 12.3% to £11.4 million over the prior year.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Impact on Policy
    Research impact on policy Overview UK, lays out the roles of legislatures, governments and judiciaries in the UK, and describes how they use The policy landscape is complex and made up of research. numerous and varied bodies and organisations on local, regional, national and supranational scales. Other kinds of public bodies and These bodies play different parts in the law- and policy- making processes. This briefing gives an overview of organisations that use research the different public bodies that use – or may use – This section presents non-ministerial government research, and through which research may have impact departments, agencies and other public bodies, on policy. regulatory bodies, local government, and international public bodies – all of which may draw on research. The briefing was written to support impact assessors participating in the 2021 Research Excellence Framework exercise (REF 2021). It gives a high- Research impact on policy level, introductory overview, illustrated with familiar This section briefly details how policy impact may examples. The briefing is not exhaustive, and should take place, before highlighting the diverse potential not be taken as a ‘complete picture’. There are beneficiaries of policy impact. It then outlines the numerous organisations, structures and mechanisms challenges of both evaluating and evidencing policy operating in the policy landscape that are not impact. mentioned here. Nor are all the diverse stakeholders who engage with the policy- and law-making processes and who may – one way or another – generate or Research impact on policy in REF 2021 enable research impact on policy. This section lays out research impact on policy as The briefing is divided into four sections: recognised in the REF 2021 guidelines.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 the Management and Rationalisation of Existing Regulations
    5. THE MANAGEMENT AND RATIONALISATION OF EXISITING REGULATION – 107 Chapter 5 The management and rationalisation of existing regulations This chapter covers two areas of regulatory policy. The first is simplification of regulations. The large stock of regulations and administrative formalities accumulated over time needs regular review and updating to weed out obsolete or inefficient material. Approaches vary from consolidation, codification, recasting, repeal, ad hoc reviews of the regulations covering specific sectors, and sunset mechanisms for the automatic review or cancellation of regulations past a certain date. The second area has gained considerable momentum over the last few years and concerns the reduction of administrative burdens. Government formalities are important tools to support public policies, and can help businesses by setting a level playing field for commercial activity. But they may also represent an administrative burden as well as an irritation factor for business and citizens, and one which tends to grow over time. Difficult areas include employment regulations, environmental standards, tax regulations, and planning regulations. Permits and licences can also be a major potential burden on businesses, especially SMEs. A lack of clear information about the sources of and extent of administrative burdens is the first issue for most countries. Burden measurement has been improved with the application by a growing number of countries of variants on the Standard Cost Model (SCM) analysis to information obligations imposed by laws, which also helps to sustain political momentum for regulatory reform by quantifying the burden. 1 A number of governments have started to consider the issue of administrative burdens inside government, with the aim of improving the quality and efficiency of internal regulation in order to reduce costs and free up resources for improved public service delivery.
    [Show full text]
  • Ministerial Departments CABINET OFFICE March 2021
    LIST OF MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITIES Including Executive Agencies and Non- Ministerial Departments CABINET OFFICE March 2021 LIST OF MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITIES INCLUDING EXECUTIVE AGENCIES AND NON-MINISTERIAL DEPARTMENTS CONTENTS Page Part I List of Cabinet Ministers 2-3 Part II Alphabetical List of Ministers 4-7 Part III Ministerial Departments and Responsibilities 8-70 Part IV Executive Agencies 71-82 Part V Non-Ministerial Departments 83-90 Part VI Government Whips in the House of Commons and House of Lords 91 Part VII Government Spokespersons in the House of Lords 92-93 Part VIII Index 94-96 Information contained in this document can also be found on Ministers’ pages on GOV.UK and: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-ministers-and-responsibilities 1 I - LIST OF CABINET MINISTERS The Rt Hon Boris Johnson MP Prime Minister; First Lord of the Treasury; Minister for the Civil Service and Minister for the Union The Rt Hon Rishi Sunak MP Chancellor of the Exchequer The Rt Hon Dominic Raab MP Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs; First Secretary of State The Rt Hon Priti Patel MP Secretary of State for the Home Department The Rt Hon Michael Gove MP Minister for the Cabinet Office; Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster The Rt Hon Robert Buckland QC MP Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice The Rt Hon Ben Wallace MP Secretary of State for Defence The Rt Hon Matt Hancock MP Secretary of State for Health and Social Care The Rt Hon Alok Sharma MP COP26 President Designate The Rt Hon
    [Show full text]
  • After the Financial Crisis, What Should a Model Central Bank Look Like?
    Central Bank Independence Revisited: After the financial crisis, what should a model central bank look like? Ed Balls, James Howat, Anna Stansbury April 2018 M-RCBG Associate Working Paper Series | No. 87 The views expressed in the M-RCBG Associate Working Paper Series are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business & Government or of Harvard University. The papers in this series have not undergone formal review and approval; they are presented to elicit feedback and to encourage debate on important public policy challenges. Copyright belongs to the author(s). Papers may be downloaded for personal use only. Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business & Government Weil Hall | Harvard Kennedy School | www.hks.harvard.edu/mrcbg MR- CBG WORKING PAPER April 2018 Central Bank Independence Revisited: After the financial crisis, what should a model central bank look like? Ed Balls Research Fellow, Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government, John F Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University & Visiting Professor, King’s College London James Howat John F Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Anna Stansbury John F Kennedy School of Government & Economics Department, Harvard University An earlier version of this paper was published in September 2016 as a working paper by the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government at Harvard University. It was largely written during Ed’s term as Senior Fellow at the M-RCBG, during which James was an MPP student and before Anna began her PhD course. Earlier versions of this paper were presented at a Harvard-wide panel event on 27th March 2017, at the Feldstein-Friedman Macroeconomic Policy Seminar in the Department of Economics, Harvard University on 1st March 2016 and to the Senior Fellows Meeting at the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government, Harvard Kennedy School in February 2016.
    [Show full text]