Company running FTP has charged £590,000 in expenses – so far

CONSULTANTS being used as part of the States-wide efficiency drive have racked up expenses totalling nearly £590,000 so far.

Mary Lowe

CONSULTANTS being used as part of the States-wide efficiency drive have racked up expenses totalling nearly £590,000 so far.

The figure was revealed in written answers to Deputy Mary Lowe produced before an update report on the financial transformation programme was published for States debate in January.

That report said if the programme delivered on £31m. of annually recurring savings, then Capita would be paid a total of £3.8m. – a figure which did not include expenses.

In November, Deputy Lowe, pictured, asked the chief minister for a breakdown of payments to Capita since the programme began.

The answers revealed that in the first year the States paid £256,437 in expenses, the second £140,052 and in the year up to September 2012 £191,015.

But Chief Minister Peter Harwood said that expenses were payable on all days the company was in the island, capped at £180 per day, but stressed that ‘we are currently working on an average of under £145 per day’.

Comments for: "Company running FTP has charged £590,000 in expenses – so far"


Recent articles have suggested the FTP will not meet its targets so I take it that as project consultants Capita will face penalties.

Oh of course they are consultants - tell us what we already know, take the money and none of the risk.

Seems to be the trend when you are in charge of something (deputies - governemnt, directors - businesses), employ consultants to do what you are paid to do so you can take the credit but avoid the blame if it goes wrong. If you can't hack it get another job.


if you cant be bothered to make your own cuts without outside help what do you expect.

the sooner the states drop their addiction to consultants the better for us all.

More Local Than You

Definition of a consultant:

"Someone who asks to borrow your watch and then charges you to tell them the time".

Shameless waste of money. There are enough civil servants on Guernsey. Get them to do it!


As a retired business consultant, what really surprises me is the lack of Management by all levels of Guernsey States.

Guernsey is a small island community of some 60,000 people - what is so complicated that it needs consultants? Or is it easier to blame them if/when things go wrong?

Management brings responsibility, which is not being exercised. Why is that? Guernsey is living beyond its means and, I suspect, is living in the past when finance was not a problem.

The whole government machine is top-heavy for Guernsey 2013, and beyond. HSSD is a fine example. But if the problem is not faced up to and properly resolved it will only get worse.

Managers are paid to manage, and there are plenty of them. They should be made to earn their pay - set up a small steering group of 5 max to come up with specific cost reductions by end Feb. Then make it happen. Sounds easier than it is, but the only alternative is to raise taxes. And that will lead to even more serious problems. Is anyone in charge? It makes me wonder.

guern abroad

Agree with post 4. We see consultants being used all the time who over specify their findings if only to protect their backs so the spend for Guernsey is a double whammy plus they may not in the first place have the first idea what an island is all about.


Agree with you, Taff.

Guernsey is way over-governed, and too many civil servant managers are abrogating their responsibilites and getting in consultants to do their work.


There is quite a strong trend emerging here....

Island Wide Voting

Any States Department / Committee who feel the need to spend 10K on consultants on one of their projects,whether or not that money is well within their annual budget, should have that spend authorised by the Policy Council before signing on the dotted line

This bad habit was acceptable during the years of plenty but is anything but fine now


Any department that needs to spend any money on consultants should have the manager/director replaced as they are not doing the job they are employed to do. Why is management in guernsey so poor.



So for example, when the States decide to commit £50 million to build some tidal power generators, rather than engaging someone who is an expert in this field who we could hold to account in law if there is a problem and ensure that we build the gennies in the right place where a) they will generate the most power and b) won't somehow be damaged by sediment or shipping.

Or would you insist that the responsibility should rest on, say, the officers of the Environment Department (cos it's environmental) or PSD (cos it's near the Harbours) who will, understandably, have never dealt with this before and have not clue where to start, simply becuase they are the manager/director??

Neil Forman


IF the States spend £50 Million on tidal power generators I would expect the company supplying them to provide their own expert to determine this.

Thick as a plank


Instead of engaging an expert to determine this, a better idea would be to engage an expert to determine this.


And how should the States decide which company to award the contract to? On what terms? How should we determine if the generators the company/(ies) propose are suitable. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Neil ( 2X4 ) Forman ;-)



The States can invite tenders from companies supplying these products with the provision that they do their own selling.

If a company wants Guernsey to buy its product they have to sell it to us. Let them do the leg work.

They can supply their own expert who can tell us where the ideal site is, what power we can expect to generate etc.

If they are also asked for other Governments / companies they have supplied their products to details, the Chief Officer / Minister could pick up the phone and ask them what the product is like.

It doesn't really matter how many tender, the States will just go for the most expensive one as usual.


Great idea Neil. If you want impartial advice, ask the company that is trying to sell you something. They will tell you if it works or not.

Lost for words.

Thick as a plank

Neil 2x4 ;-)

Whereas if it was up to you, you would do without an independent expert who could advise you to steer clear of anyone trying to sell you a cheap load of rubbish. So you would save money by having no expert and save more money by going with the cheapest tender, as long as their own "expert" is included in the deal to advise you badly on the best place to put your cheap load of rubbish.

Even I can understand that.


Thank you folks for saving me the trouble to point out to Mr 2x4 the slight flaws in his reasoning.

One of the problems I think the States face is that, like it or not, there is far more red tape being foisted on us whether we are in or out of the EU/OECD/Gwhatever or other organisations. And tech is ever more and more tech!!!

Therefore we can't hope to do the best job possible with JUST civil servants who are effectively jacks of all trades - so increasingly we will need to buy in expert advice, as we don't have the scale of operations to have our own in-house to cover every eventuality.

Iron Maiden


I can see what you are trying to say,it does make some kind of sence. As usual Spartacus just goes against you which is cause you and gm kicked her #ss in the pension debate.i take it that these people are cival servants who do not want to stop spending other pepoles money.i like Spartacus'new name suits her well

Thick as a plank

Iron Maiden

It would make sense to any idiot.

What's a pepole? Do you look through it?

Neil Forman

Iron Maiden

Thanks! See you Wednesday.

billythefish, Robert & Spartacus

O.K I will bite.

I'll put it in an easier context you may understand.

The suppliers can do the leg work and identify the best site.

The States can then ring others who have had the suppliers product installed and hear how good / bad it is from the horses mouth.


You obviously have a problem with me and that is your prerogative, you can call me whatever you like, I don't care. Sticks and stones, you keep hurling insults behind a pseudonym and act as childish as you like, you are showing yourself up. I personally find your online stalking quite creepy.

I do however have a problem with you abusing a person who posts on this site even though she is dyslexic, well done you! I hope you are proud of yourself.


Neil Two by Fourman

The problem I have with you is that you enjoy getting personal and you encourage others to abuse me. Classic cowardly bully behaviour, just because I don't always agree with you.

You say "you keep hurling insults behind a pseudonym and act as childish as you like, you are showing yourself up." GM and Iron maiden are childish and hurl insults behind pseudonyms but I suppose you think that's OK because they don't direct it at you?

And now you accuse me of online stalking and say I'm creepy. Nice one.

You stick up for iron maiden because you know her personally but you don't know me. She has no opinion on anything she only posts in support of you - you clearly have some kind of personal relationship with her. She insulted me first but that's OK because she's dyslexic right?

Iron maiden seems to think GM kicked my *ss on the pension debate and seemed pleased about that. I assume by that she is referring to GMs relentless personal abuse and she would be right as GM did an excellent job with that. Well spotted iron maiden.

You also seem to endorse GMs abuse of me and pipe in from time to time. Here is a list of the some of insults hurled at me from GM on the pension thread. JUST ONE THREAD!

* You have uttered some absolute garbage in recent times but that post is right up there with the classics!

* confirming to Spartacus that she was completely out of her depth on a subject that she knew nothing about,

* Don’t be stupid

* Theoretically is might be, but to any sane person it clearly isn’t.

* What are you smoking?

* Spartacus unfortunately has a reading age well beneath her actual age

* Sorry but I needed to shout that to get it through your thick skull.

* I somehow that Spartacus has even got past the first chapter of either “Pensions for Dummies” or “Investments for Dummies”

* Indeed it does, in language which even Spartacus should be able to understand.

* whether its your obvious inability to grasp simple concepts

* you really are starting to look very silly indeed

* such dogmatic, stubborn, pigheaded traits

* lack the intelligence to read and interpret the written word

* you are stupid enough to claim that it’s “fact”

* You have completely lost the plot.

* Stark raving bonkers

* Are you insane?

* Are you insane? (again)

* Only an idiot would have made such a statement.

* won’t continue to say that you are insane or mad, even though that’s what I do think

* I am thinking that you are being thick again.

* Stupid statement

* Sheer ignorance.

* You are only making an even bigger fool of yourself

* It didn’t need me to insult your intelligence. You managed that all on your own. I just made sure that everybody else was aware of it



Your completely childish and illogical arguments on the pension debates, together with your absolute refusal to accept clear evidence which counter your arguments, totally justify the comments about you. Your dogmatic "Spartacus is NEVER wrong" stance, even when the facts are staring you in the face, naturally generates such a counter-response. I don't see anybody else accepting any of your points. What does that tell you?

I categorically stand by all of those comments made by me. If your style of debate continues then they will no doubt be repeated, and not just by me. The fact that you have bothered to save them and list them speaks volumes. If you can't stand the heat...

Terry Langlois

Spartacus / Thick as a Plank (that's your own pseudonym by the way, not an insult)

your post of 11 January @ 7.40am has to be the most incredibly puerile post in a very long time.

"But Miss, they called me names first..."

Grow up.



You have been debating the issue with me since November spending huge amounts of time. If you have such a low opinion of me why would you wish to give me the time? If you are so sure my argument is flawed why are you so defensive about it?

As for whether anybody else sees my points we will never know GM because I would not encourage anyone to put themselves in the firing line to be publicly humiliated by the above long list of personal insults intended to humiliate and hurt personally. You categorically stand by all of those nasty comments you made and that proves you truly are an unpleasant individual.

I have retaliated against Neil Forman and Iron Maiden but I am not proud of that. I have made my point but do not relish any ill will. If they have been hurt by any of my comments I apologise. I have been hurt by their comments and by yours naturally so you can all pat each other on the back.

You have expressed your intention to continue to bully and harass anyone who does not share your views, well clearly that's what you think is needed to convince people that you are right because that's the only thing that's important to you.


Terry Langlois

And why are you getting involved? Just fancied a kick yourself did you?


I am new to this site and have been reading with interests all the threads to give me an understanding of what people of Guernsey think. That is not really what you get though is it ? generally the same people all the time. Whoever Spartacus is she seems to take every negative comment as personal but is able to dish it out to others when it suits her (and then apologise for any upset she may have caused) I am afraid I agree with Neil that when you are going to invest thousands?millions of pounds with a company they do the work and give you evidence of their previous successes

Terry Langlois

Spartacus - this is a public conversation on a public forum. The whole point is that anyone can get involved.

If I see someone being ridiculously stupid, I'll tell them so.

And in any event, it matters because the way in which debates have being going recently is seriously detracting from the utility and enjoyment of this site. It is one thing for people to argue their point of view on merits, but for you to go to the lengths that you did to complain about being insulted, when most of the comments that you listed are not personal insults and when you are just as guilty of throwing insults around, is just a waste of space and demonstrates the pathetic level that the debate has reached.

It is the online equivalent of someone coming in to bang heads together. If you cannot use that to wake up and grow up, then that is up to you.



The reason why I wouldn't let go is because its so damn obvious that the liabilities of this scheme are going to sink Guernsey. Our politicians may be afraid to say that. Senior civil servants (snouts in the trough) may be afraid to say that. I have no such inhibitions as my only interest is a taxpayer.

So when you try to claim that all is rosy,and it most unequivocally is not, then I am not going to sit back and let your propaganda pass by. All it takes is for people to pretend that the liabilities don't exist or don't need to be funded, and it just then gets ignored. Before we know it, £380m becomes £600m. Me then saying "I told you so" doesn't help then does it?

You have no idea how inflammatory and incredibly annoying your debating style is. It isn't based on logic or reason. It is based on "I'm right and that's all there is to it". I had exactly the same issues with you in relation to Education. Sorry, but you invite insults out of sheer frustration. But if you think its "bullying" then I'm afraid you are way off target. It is no such thing.

I am in no doubt whatsoever that your snout is well and truly in the trough. My motive is to prevent taxpayers picking up the tab. Your motive is to preserve it at all costs. That tells me a lot.

To whinge after the way you've behaved is frankly pathetic. If you can't see that your style turns people against you then one thing is crystal clear. It will happen again and again.


Terry Langlois

Your point would make sense if you were acting like an adult but you are joining in.


GM you have said all that before, more than once.



You asked me a question. I answered it. Why did you ask me if you didn't want me to answer? Yes you've heard it before - that's because I've had to repeat it umpteen times.

Look - I'm sorry that you have felt insulted, even if I don't feel it necessary to apologise for actually insulting you.

I'm also sorry for not drawing the "debate" to a close much earlier. If I didn't have to work all hours to keep generating tax revenue to help fund the pension scheme, I dare say I could have got there much sooner.

Neil Forman


Your post of Jan 11 @ 0740 is absolute rubbish.

I do not enjoy getting personal and cannot think what you are referring to, I can only assume that you mean the Guernsey 2020 post which I posted tongue in cheek and was meant to be a bit of fun. You did not take it that way so I apologised.

I do not encourage others to abuse you.

As for bullying you, I totally deny this, if I have something to say I will say it, I don't need others to do it for me. I think I have responded very calmly to you in the face of some very insulting and personal comments and have certainly not resorted to name calling, I don't work that way.

GM and Iron Maiden are their own persons, how they react to you is their business, I am talking about you and me.

You do seem to stalk my posts and you have obviously Googled me to find out about my tribunal, I do find this a bit creepy and this has been said by others.

I met Iron Maiden on my campaign and have got to know her. I attend meetings she and her friends hold occasionally. I don't dictate what she posts and I am happy to have her and her groups support. If you look back, she did not quite agree with some of my postings around the time of the election.

As I have said, the way you and GM debate is between you and him. With regards to the pension debate ( which you seem to think I started by posting the figures, which are in the public domain and should have been spotted by people elected to represent us ) I agreed with GM and the points he made. This was no slight to you, I just think that you were wrong. You have your opinion, I have mine. There is no need to resort to name calling, you did.

When I started posting on this forum I admit I did go off half cocked occasionally, I now research as you suggested and on the pension topic I did so in depth, I have talked to experts and they back up what GM was saying.

I enjoy the debates and think that these issues have to be aired. I enjoy the banter which occurs but there is no need to turn it into a slanging match and I will take no part in that. I have told you to be nice on numerous occasions and not to rise to negative comments.

I took your advice, I suggest you take mine. All that stress is not good for you;-))

Neil Forman


I must also add that I do not just pipe in from time to time, during the day I am working and I do not consider it appropriate to post whilst I am doing so. I normally post during the night in my own time.


Neil Forman

You put yourself up for election as a people's deputy in the states of Guernsey, but you don't like it if anyone googles you to find out who you are, what you are about or to find your manifesto.

You have stated your intention to stand again in the next election but you don't like anyone to pay close attention to your public comments.

Because I have done both of the above you have called me a creepy stalker but you say you don't resort to name calling.



At least Neil posts under his own name.

I don't disclose my identity because I'm a major employer in the finance industry and I don't think that posting under my own name is either advisable or appropriate, especially when I post negative comments about aspects of the finance industry, or about regulation. I couldn't say what I do say if I revealed my identity, which defeats the object.

What's your reason for anonymity? States Deputy or Education employee?


At least? Poor judgement call I say.

As for you, freedom of speech is important and anonymity facilitates that and under these circumstances I have no interest whatsoever in any claims you make about yourself.

Anonymity is a great equaliser.

To answer your question my reason for anonymity is for many reasons including the ones above but primarily due to parenthood.

As to the speculation on me, I'm flattered that you think enough people would have confidence in me to vote me as their deputy. That says a lot.



I understand your reason of parenthood re the Education debate.

Don't be flattered about the Deputy suggestion. I would be more worried about how someone with your beliefs could possibly have got elected without those beliefs having been visible in the manifestos which were published!

Interesting that you didn't deny the Education Department link....



There are quite a few elected deputies who's values I admire. The beauty about democracy is that no one can be shouted down when in the voting booth or in the States of deliberation.

I don't work in the education system, but I'm flattered that you consider me knowledgeable enough to have that level of credibility. That says a lot.


We import top senior servants to balance the books to save guernsey going into the red.

What we have employed is scarecrows to watch the birds take the picking.

Shame of you States of Guernsey



A very good analogy. Recruit and promote the right calibre of individuals in the first place, make them accountable and responsible, and THEN reward them well with bonuses well-earned.



Excellent post, it is quite obvious that "Managers" use consultants to avoid making decisions which may show just how useless a lot of them are (not all)

Somebody posted, very rcently, how much consultants cost this island of 63,000+ the figures were absolutely staggering.

If I was being paid 50-100k per annum as some of these managers are I would expect to be making decisions and getting results.


Accountability and responsibility. It MUST come.

Neil Forman


It HAS to come.

Neil Forman


The figure was £15,377,000 between 2007 & 2011.

The bit I found staggering was that savings made by FTP have already been spent.

I feel some pain coming for the taxpayer soon.


The savings were made but for some reason the pot of cash was then put up to fund different projects, these were debated in the States and the Deputies agreed them, so why some of those Deputies now are going who spent all the money are now moaning, look in the mirror!

Davey West

And the university educated, highly paid and trained civil servants are doing what exactly ?

Convincing Ministers and deputies who may not be as well educated to increase funding to their departments, to pay for so called expert consultants. Politicians should know better.

Name of the game by top civil servants, no responsibility, cushy life and if it goes pear shape there is someone else to blame, insurance policy to keep the job and pension.

On a related point it is incredible that the Guernsey States are seeking advice from Mr Terry Le Suer, GST architect and man keen to spend taxpayers money and come back for more see the Moot post below. He is on record saying we must pay top rates for top civil servants. He then employed two more three months before leaving office at £200K each.

Recently Senator Ozouf taking over from Mr Le Suer increased his own treasury budget, employing his own personal PR spin doctor £40k and continues to increase taxes while cutting front line services.

Below is proof of no economic vision in Jersey

We will weather the storm says Mr Le Suer upbeat speech January 2009 then February 2009 a complete U turn.

No problem he says, followed one month later by U turn and extensive use of savings in fund.

JERSEY has a ‘sound and stable economy’ and can face international scrutiny of its finance industry with confidence

Ministers revealed that they were now prepared to drain the Stabilisation Fund after the Economics Unit revised its forecast for the economy during the next two years


Moot says,

Spending on Chief Ministers department run by its head CM Terry Le Suer out of control.,1600.0.html

But Matthew Elliott, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: 'Lord Jones is right - there is serious overstaffing and woeful mismanagement in large tracts of the civil service. There is plenty of fat that could be trimmed.'

Plain mad and worse examples of Government administration at it's greedy best in Jersey and going down hill rapidly in Guernsey.

Sorry this is so long.




Yep, although I think you have a bar worse problem over there!


I heard that there are lots of extra staff in custard castle taken on to do the ftp and more this year - are these paid from the £3.8m?


"Capita also receive in accordance with the contract a total of payment of £1.8m over the five year period for establishing and running the Programme Management Office".

I take that this is addition to the 6.5% (702K to date) of savings made and the management expenses above?

The circa £590,000 figure for expenses reported above is for transport, accommodation and meals. With main expenses covered to such an extent the burden of risk on Capita is somewhat reduced.

I personally think its trying it on to charge for meals. The people working for Capita get paid a wage (probably a fairly decent one as business consultants) - they can feed themselves out of that surely instead of passing the bill onto us?

I would be curious as to what they do bill and whether the type of transport they take, accommodation they live in and meals they charge for are "reasonable".

When I think of the financial expertise we have on island I wonder why are even paying for accommodation and travel expenses. Could we have not just employed one of the big 4 - do they not have consultants? I guess not or we assumedly would have.

I also have heard the term "penalties" used for not meeting targets. I cannot see any other penalty beyond them not getting the 6.5% for savings when they have not made them. Is this correct?

What do the States employees working with Capita think of them?


If the average expense is under £145 per day then we're looking at the thick end of 2 man years taken so far to come up with ideas. That's an aweful lot of thinking time. So where are the ideas?

Seems like we should cut our losses and put em on a boat home.


The Policy Council need to employ a troubleshooter to visit every States Departments to investigate where the problems are and take unpopular actions to put right even if it means removal of senior officers post.

I cannot understand the huge amount of recruitment officers employed by the states of guernsey.

For example HSSD have an employment manager for nurse vancancies,one for clerical,one for catering,one for ward staff etc.

What is needed is a rewritten contract for senior officers[maximum contract 1 year]housing licence[1 year] public pension scheme-existing ones closed to new entrants.New pension scheme to be introduced to new recruits.

Island Wide Voting

...and the winner of the troubleshooter award for 2012 is .....


Neil Forman

Island Wide Voting

You are awful, funny, but awful;-))

Cannot wait for the response to that one.

Tim South

Islander is right on the button, the bigger question is why are States members allowing such over employment without time and motion being carried out. Worse why are chief executives not giving value for money as part of their contracts.

Thats right human resources are all part of the same civil service.


Neil Forman

Tim South

The answer to your question is that there is little or no accountability. The taxpayer just foots the bill.

Neil Forman


Excellent post! Totally agree.


Neil.... I hate to say it cos I don't really like getting personal on TIG, but a couple of these posts are probably demonstrating why you were unsuccessful in the 2012 elections.

Have you any idea how much compensation would have to rise if Senior Officers were restricted to a one year contract only. No job certainty at all. And think how much recruitment costs would be. Far better to have performance related pay.

Yet another crazy idea.



When in most jobs that you apply for you go on 3 months probation.If you prove that your successful in the post and can handle finance,man management and most of all be answerable to the Deputy elected President of that department.

The salary will be accessed by performance related.

On Contracts the states of Guernsey are advertising on 6 months contracts on many departments

If senior officers call in consultants then it proves that they and their presidents cannot agree with their allocated budgets.

Monthly meetings with the policy council can determine any shortfalls in each departments budgets and take action without consulting outside expensive consultants.

This being the reasons for employing senior officers on contracts

Guernsey employ staff who teach advance courses from clerial to senior management.


Sorry, that's a) moving the goalposts from the original silly idea and b) shows a lack of understanding on how things work.

Firstly, the CS do have probation periods ranging from 3 to 6 months, depending on the job.

A few of your paragraphs make no sense at all, but I'm pretty sure most consultants' contracts have penalty/severance clauses and certainly should!!

If you're thinking about departmental budgets as a whole rather than consultants' budgets, then there are mechanisms that are used to report both bad and good news. Why these appear to have failed in one Department I don't know, but that is a system weakness not lack of a system.

The only thing I think you're right about is a lack of performance related pay....

So, to conclude, I stand by my earlier comment. Employing Senior officer grades on only one year contracts would be utter madness. If you think we have the dregs of the island workforce now, you try that and see what calibre of applicant is willing to accept such uncertainty?!!

a voter

I think that any consultant companies should be named and a list of their claims for expenses and fees published, after all it is tax payer`s money paying them. Does anyone actually check that expenses claimed are true before paying them out?

Do the consultants pay local income tax on their expenses and fees or does all this money leave the island?


Definitely agree there needs to be scrutiny of the expenses they charge us.


Don't waste your time on here. Why would self important, decision avoiding, over paid, over safe employees want to change.

I casually look at the states job vacancies and I am truly staggered by the wages on offer which to me dwarf the private sector! Yes there are some incredibly wealthy people in the private sector however most people are not!


I joined the CS from the private sector. I do pretty much the same job with the same responsibilities. In the private sector I had loads of benefits inc non-contrib pension and a salary about 20% more than I get now. Don't get me wrong I don't expect to keep the "gold plated" pension and I think the pay is fair but I'm just saying this to give some balance to your anecdotal comment.


So the CS is worse.....which begs the guestion why you changed job!


I don't see what that's got to do with it. We're discussing pay not career motivation. I just wanted to balance out great's comment by showing not all CS pay dwarfs the private sector and not all CS staff expect to keep the pension at all costs. Why I chose to move is my business suffice it to say money isn't everything and I don't expect to be a CS for the rest of my life anyway.



If it's so cushy in the Civil Service, why don't you apply for one of those well paid jobs?


I couldn't do my job in the civil service and my friends who have worked in the CS have painted a picture (maybe falsely) of a very unproductive place.

Hmmmm i'm confused as to why on a totally anonymous forum Guern does not feel it appropriate to say why she was attracted to the CS! Seems a bit strange unless there is something to hide


If you want change you can either sit and moan about it like you are doing or try to make a difference. Of course if you find the system is too broken you can always leave knowing you tried your best. CS staff are taxpayers too so what happens to public spending affects us as well.


So you joined the CS to try and change the system, that is admirable. Do you mind sharing what department you work in and what you see as needing change?


That wasn't the main motivation for joining but now I'm here there's no harm in trying!

Great're being very coy about your motivations. They can't be that bad can they?


Guern. You didn't say why you changed your job.Yes ,I know everyone is free to change if they so wish/can, but in your case. Why?