Common Purpose is a company limited by guarantee in the United Kingdom, which claimed to be a charity some time in advance of having a valid charity number. It does now appear to have a charitable registration, mainly in response to accusations from its opponents, that it was a bogus charity.
However, it is a training organization, being paid almost entirely by public sector organizations to train their personnel. It is also a highly political organization, arguably unsuitable either to train public servants, who ought to be professionally impartial, or to receive public monies, or to hold charitable status.
The political orientation of "Common Purpose" is communitarianism. American readers will doubtless read this as communism, but in fact communitarians could be mistaken for Mussolini just as easily as they might be mistaken for Lenin.
One of the important skills which taxpayer's money allows Common Purpose to impart to its "graduates" (it doesn't allow anyone to be called a member, because that would force it to comply with any laws pertaining to a membership organization!) is known as "Leading Beyond Authority". Lawyers amongst the readership would probably recognize this as "acting ultra vires".
Basically, any CP graduate holding a public post (and nearly all of the 80,000+ "graduates and trainees" do hold posts in government, local government, government quangos or agencies, charities or public interest corporations such as the BBC) is encouraged to use to use that position to implement changes that go beyond their remit, job description or any expectation of those who appointed them.
Since this is almost a dictionary definition of subversive behaviour, Medawar would welcome comments describing any CP graduate or trainee who has joined an obvious pressure group, such as an animal rights group or even an opposing group supporting scientific research or country sports.
Only identify them if they already have some measure of public prominence (likely, as they all seem to get important jobs in public service!) but Medawar's main interest is in what they are doing by joining pressure groups or political organizations.
Did the group start to feel different after the CP person joined?
Did its objectives or methods change?
As a non CP member of that group, did this feel good or bad?
Does the CP person try and determine the outcome of meetings, or attempt to sum up what other people have said, in a way that twists what they meant or puts words in their mouth?
Has anyone left a pressure group or political organization because they didn't like what happened after CP appeared?
Do readers working in public services recognize colleagues as possible CP graduates, based on the above? Are they good to work with, or could staff do a better job if the CP people went away, never to return? Do CP people cause resources to be wasted or misdirected to improper purposes?
Since Common Purpose reportedly acts as a contact and favours network as well as a political training cadre, would comment posters please ensure that their web identity does not lead back directly to them, and that they do not use their web ID from any work computer if they work in public service in any form. Post anonymously if you cannot meet these precautions.
However, it is a training organization, being paid almost entirely by public sector organizations to train their personnel. It is also a highly political organization, arguably unsuitable either to train public servants, who ought to be professionally impartial, or to receive public monies, or to hold charitable status.
The political orientation of "Common Purpose" is communitarianism. American readers will doubtless read this as communism, but in fact communitarians could be mistaken for Mussolini just as easily as they might be mistaken for Lenin.
One of the important skills which taxpayer's money allows Common Purpose to impart to its "graduates" (it doesn't allow anyone to be called a member, because that would force it to comply with any laws pertaining to a membership organization!) is known as "Leading Beyond Authority". Lawyers amongst the readership would probably recognize this as "acting ultra vires".
Basically, any CP graduate holding a public post (and nearly all of the 80,000+ "graduates and trainees" do hold posts in government, local government, government quangos or agencies, charities or public interest corporations such as the BBC) is encouraged to use to use that position to implement changes that go beyond their remit, job description or any expectation of those who appointed them.
Since this is almost a dictionary definition of subversive behaviour, Medawar would welcome comments describing any CP graduate or trainee who has joined an obvious pressure group, such as an animal rights group or even an opposing group supporting scientific research or country sports.
Only identify them if they already have some measure of public prominence (likely, as they all seem to get important jobs in public service!) but Medawar's main interest is in what they are doing by joining pressure groups or political organizations.
Did the group start to feel different after the CP person joined?
Did its objectives or methods change?
As a non CP member of that group, did this feel good or bad?
Does the CP person try and determine the outcome of meetings, or attempt to sum up what other people have said, in a way that twists what they meant or puts words in their mouth?
Has anyone left a pressure group or political organization because they didn't like what happened after CP appeared?
Do readers working in public services recognize colleagues as possible CP graduates, based on the above? Are they good to work with, or could staff do a better job if the CP people went away, never to return? Do CP people cause resources to be wasted or misdirected to improper purposes?
Since Common Purpose reportedly acts as a contact and favours network as well as a political training cadre, would comment posters please ensure that their web identity does not lead back directly to them, and that they do not use their web ID from any work computer if they work in public service in any form. Post anonymously if you cannot meet these precautions.
No comments:
Post a Comment