Sometimes described as 'quangos' . . .

quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisations . . . these public bodies cover a wide variety of functions, including many areas previously regarded as the 'core' functions of government. They manage the national debt (the National Treasury Management Agency), they implement government policy (the Health Service Executive) and they advise on broadband delivery (Telecoms Strategy Group). Food safety, early childhood education and law reform - the quango list is endless.

In 1927, there were three of these type of bodies operating in Ireland. By 1979, the number was put at 80. The figure today - according to a new report by the policy think-tank Tasc . . . is in the region of 500. The report, Outsourcing Government, estimates that there is one public body for every 5,000 people living in the country. But that figure is a conservative one. Bizarre as it may be, the government does not know how many quangos it controls.

In conducting their research, the authors of the Tasc report . . . Paula Clancy and Grainne Murphy . . . struggled to obtain information to put an accurate number on these bodies. The conclusion of the two authors is damning. "It seems self-evident that a state committed to openness and transparency should at the very least provide a clear statement of who these bodies are, what their functions are, their form of accountability to the Oireachtas and the reasons for their existence, a statement which is updated regularly and made widely available to the public." Clancy and Murphy add that "the unplanned and ad hoc mushrooming of public bodies combined with the lack of good information about them is bad for democracy."

The current government obviously takes a different view. It's a big fan of quangos.

Last year alone, ministers announced plans to create six new bodies, including the National Consumer Agency, the Better Regulation Group, a taskforce on active citizenship, a regulatory body to oversee auctioneers and estate agents, an alcohol marketing monitoring body and an archives advisory group.

Along with the permanent agencies, recent governments have also displayed an enthusiasm for 'taskforces' - temporary groups set up to advise ministers on particular policy issues. The Tasc report explains why this type of quango has found favour with politicians: "The minister controls everything from his or her central position, defines the problems, nominates the taskforce members, and controls invitations to interested bodies or individuals to offer information, advice or other forms of co-operation."

Quangos are generally headed and run by non-elected individuals. Many are set up without any discussion in the Dail. They don't come cheap and, in the case of several departments, control a large proportion of public money. According to Tasc, in four departments . . . health, communications, arts and sport, and enterprise, trade and employment . . . the quangos account for some 40% of each department's overall annual budget.

While accepting that many of these bodies fulfil worthwhile roles, the Tasc study is unconvinced that the public is well served by the way the bodies have been established. "The fragmented manner in which such bodies are established has a number of negative implications for good government, " the report states, mentioning, among other things, that many bodies overlap in their functions.

So why does government like these public bodies? It may be because they achieve political distancing . . . they put space between ministers and contentious issues.

If something goes wrong in the health service, blame the HSE. If there's a problem with dodgy estate agents, set up a taskforce.

The real dangers with the 'outsourcing' of government, however, is that it becomes a justification for inaction and absolves ministers for failing to take direct responsibility for decision-making.

Those who advocate this type of 'outsourcing' of government activity say it actually delivers efficient and effective use of resources. But in the Irish case, with such a lack of information on public bodies, it is impossible to stand up such an argument.

Worryingly, given that these bodies account for over 13bn in public money, there seems to be little incentive to avoid a waste of resources. "Accountability to parent departments is poorly developed, " the report concludes. If Fine Gael is serious about its current national billboard campaign, with its message from Enda Kenny to "sack the wasters of public money", then the party might do well to cast its eye over the necessity for retaining so many of these quangos.

The Tasc report also examines the other side of the proliferation of quangos . . . each body that is set up in turn leads to more appointments for ministers to fill. The report estimates that the government now has in its gift some 5,000 appointments.

"Ireland has no clearly-established mechanism to ensure that appointments are free from undue political or other influence, or that there is an effective independent appointment system in place, " say the authors of the report. Many appointees give their time and effort without payment.

But that in itself does not mitigate the fact that ministerial discretion on patronage "requires no justification for those selected nor any demonstration that appointments are made according to specific criteria and after careful deliberation between suitable candidates."

So who runs the country? It's an interesting question. Maybe a quango might answer it.