Article by Joanne Birtwistle apparently comparing CP to the Freemasons. The whole feel of this article suggests CP are defending themselves by trying to say they are not like the Freemasons, yet their mode of operation is very similar. You enter a room and the CP know how to identify each other but the rest of the public don't. CP graduates help each other win business and push through organisational and public authority agendas for CHANGE. They gang up against people who don't like their style. Ken Pye CP Programme Director fails to mention that people are SELECTED to become an elitest CP leader. Far from overflowing with graduates evidence is growing that CP is having to shut offices because it can't recruit the constant stream of candidates it needs to pay its bills. That is when they actually pay for offices of course. Peter Wheatley, the Senior Programme Manager from Greater Manchester is quite right when he says CP is not a membership organisation. If it were, they would have to declare themselves in public bodies. Instead they remain hidden from colleagues and the general public, and hold meetings under the secretive Chatham House rule. The network of graduates was not set up "as an extra service", it was there and encouraged from the start. As CP says "our networks will soon be very important". But CP is too secretive on public money to say why. "The trust is they will go and use it (CP) for good", says Wheatley. Afraid not Mr Wheatley the secretive network breeds corruption and favours.
