“Goldhill-Watch” returns shortly. Additional material has been circulated to the 21 Group regarding his management of CRASSH. Simon Goldhill seems to now have a low profile on the CRASSH website. Similarly the, Cambridge Traditional Jewish Congregation has removed all references to Simon Goldhill on its website and replaced him as Chair. Only King’s College has not realised the dangers.
Our correspondent “BreakerMorant” remains on watch at the Employment Tribunal in Bury St Edmunds concerning POLIS-related proceedings. The 21 Group knows of many POLIS scandals — there are so many ticking bombs there ready to blow up any time. It’s a department that has been comprehensively mismanaged.
If you have more information on CRASSH or POLIS, please send to [email protected]. Remember, nobody wanted our universities to end up like this, so please help the 21 Group clean the place up.
We update on two ongoing matters.
The Financial Times
The 21 Group has been engaging in correspondence with The Financial Times regarding their extraordinary Best Employer’s Survey which ranked Cambridge University as best in the country. Following the correspondence reported here, we followed up:
Dear Hugh Carnegy,
Thank you for your response. The University of Cambridge commissioned its own staff survey last year, and the results were not encouraging, as reported in The Guardian
Both the trade union (UCU) and pressure groups such as the 21 Group have sought to maintain scrutiny to ensure that systemic issues—particularly bullying, discrimination, victimization and harassment—are properly addressed.
Professor Kamal Munir, Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Community and Engagement, is now relying on your survey to suggest that all is well. The results have been presented to the University’s Board of Scrutiny and the Council, and widely promoted internally and on social media. This might be defensible if the Statista survey rested on a sound methodological foundation.
At a minimum, the FT/Statista should disclose key metrics underpinning the ranking: including sample size by employer, inclusion thresholds, weighting methodology and recruitment of respondents.
Statista surveys are conducted online. They are designed primarily for market research purposes. While the overall sample may be sufficient to estimate aggregate trends across the UK— or possibly broad sectors such as finance or consulting — it is plainly inadequate for robust inference at the level of individual employers, as the ranking purports to do.
You kindly suggested that we draft a Letter to the Editor for possible publication. We will do so shortly.
But — importantly — we urge that the FT should hold its partner Statista to account and make sure future surveys come with enough methodological data to interpret them.
Best Wishes 21 Group
No response.
Notice that what is being asked — the provision of the data — is central to the credibility of the claims. If Statista‘s work had been submitted as a paper, it would be rejected by any reputable journal if the accompanying data was not supplied.
Lucy Cavendish College
Ann Limb’s CV and official biographies stated that she held a PhD from the University of Liverpool and an MA with Distinction from the Institute of Linguists, and she was routinely addressed as “Dr Ann Limb” in formal settings and public engagements. Later media inquiries, however, determined that she had not completed a doctoral programme and that the Institute of Linguists does not confer MA degrees.
“Dr” Ann Limb is a Fellow Commoner of Lucy Cavendish College and appeared in The Reporter‘s Lists of the Fellows of the Colleges in full, but false, postgraduate dignity.
Well-publicised problems regarding Dr Ann Limb led to the 21 Group writing to Lucy Cavendish College on
Dear President
The listing of “Fellows of the Colleges” published in The Reporter on 19 January 2026 states
2017 LIMB Dame Ann Geraldine PHD CBE DBE DL FRSA
The same issue of the Reporter states that corrections should be addressed to the Senior Tutor of the College. I am sure you have seen the press reports by Gabriel Pogrund, Whitehall Editor of The Sunday Times from Deecember
It has been admitted that Ann Limb’s claims on her cv that she had a PhD were false. In light of this, I am writing formally to request that the record in The Reporter be reviewed and corrected.
Accuracy in the recording of academic qualifications is of fundamental importance to the integrity of educational institutions. I trust that the President and Fellows of Lucy Cavendish College will take any steps they consider necessary in this matter
Best Wishes 21 Group
There’s been some progress. Ann Limb does seem to have been removed from her position surreptitiously.
The list of Fellow Commoners of Lucy Cavendish College, searchable here, does not now contain her name.
So, it seems action has been taken … albeit silently.
If you want information on POLIS, ask The Guardian 😉
You can also ask their Head of Department, who incidentally is a Fellow of King’s and writes about “Injustice” and other interesting topics. If you do, mention my name and check her reaction if you ask in person. It will be priceless.
Mr Hugh Carnegy was one of the Editors of Financial Times who contacted me, but when I asked about some uncomfortable topics, I did not have follow up. I am waiting to hear about my “sanctions” and then will contact them again. Surely, they want to know how the “UK’s best employer” treats students too. Of course, I will not just contact the editors of Financial Times as I do not criticise people behind their back, and I do not have anything to hide. The Cambridge entourage responsible for scandals will be cced. MPs and the House of Lords will be contacted next.
It is odd that CJTC is able to close ranks and protect its congregation from a problematic member, but for some reason, neither the university nor its colleges are capable of doing the same. Seems like we close ranks to protect bad sheep instead.
Seems like we close ranks to protect bad sheep instead.
This is an accurate description of what the University does. Why it does it remains completely mysterious
I fear it is not all that mysterious, it it simply a case of there being among us individuals who are more loyal to each other than to the university we jointly serve, or at least, are obliged to serve.
Well I rather doubt they have much loyalty to one another… Perhaps more a question of shared interests and past history?
ABL redux
Some people here may want to read the new Reporter, namely the sections “Office of Director of Finance,” “Delivery of the future development of the North West Cambridge site” and “Topic of concern to the University (support for the veterinary course): Notice in response to Discussion remarks.”
https://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2025-26/weekly/6821/?utm_campaign=newsletters&utm_medium=email&utm_source=2267544_Reporter%3A%202026-04-22&dm_i=6DCF,1CLNC,1G40YA,6BTYR,1,0,0,0
I hope that another Grace will be announced soon…
Seem to have moved from CFO to Director of finance, from a strategic financial visionary to a robust internal accountant focussed on day-to-day financial operations. This is certainly better than moving the other direction, without robust internal accounting & financial transparency in place in an organisation all an organisation is doing in hiring a CFO – strategic financial visionary – is setting a person up to have significant power in an organisation to drive high-level external financial interactions on behalf of the organisation that may or may not based on an accurate internal finances i.e. generating significant organisational financial risk.
Significant increase in dwellings in NW Cambridge site, not clear what is happening to the site – less green space, different type of dwellings, smaller dwellings. No secondary school linked to one of the biggest primary schools there, no doctor, no NHS dentist, no swimming pool – primary school there had to bring a portable swimming pool into the school to meet the requirement for swimming lessons.
Linking up with a partner : private company – which pays a land equalisation payment – and partnership can dispose of serviced land parcels to third-party developers. The university does’t have connections to third-party developers, it’s likely the partner does – high potential for abuse by a partner who lines up third-party developers after the partnership is formed and where the partner is in a position to put pressure on the university to influence disposal. All these partners will be under severe pressure, all these third-party developers will be under severe pressure. Even if they did care about higher education, doesn’t mean their finances will care about higher education or anything other than opportunities to increase profit.
“any procurement undertaken delivers value for money” – the problem with developers currently is that sub-contractors are cutting corners and that is tanking development progress with developers having to sue sub-contractors like in Darwin green – need to look at the whole chain linked to the partner, financial stability of the partner, financial stability of the banks lending to the partner, governance transparency – not just value for money that needs to be considered it’s avoidance of a major stressor i.e. having to deal with a dysfunctional partnership that can’t deliver on what’s promised & where there is a constant pressure from a private company to squeeze more profit from an educational charity it cares nothing for because it doesn’t value higher education & sees higher education as one more way to make a profit.
I think partnerships with private companies can work exceptionally well – potential for high reward – but the variation in private companies is very high – potential for high risk. I think some private companies have an accurate sense of public duty and public service whilst others don’t and that the ones that do function better and are of benefit to the public. I think some private companies have an accurate sense of the value of each part of society to society whilst others don’t and that the ones that do function better and play a more active role in building and maintaining a society. I think most private companies are run by people with high autonomy but some private companies are able to accurately manage shared interests when partnering with other organisations and thus support high autonomy of the organisations they partner and some are not. I think some private companies are better able to maintain themselves in a high autonomy state in tough environmental conditions – have better governance – than others and are a better partner for other organisations & more likely to bring organisations together in ways that benefit all the organisations and the public. I think a private company offering value for money when bidding for a partnership is very different to a private company continuously delivering value for money dynamically at every point in time during a partnership which depends on maintaining robust governance in tough environmental conditions. I think if an organisation finds the right private company to partner with this type of partnership can accelerate progress and enable an organisation to maintain itself in a high autonomy state and deliver on its commitments but if it doesn’t take the care to avoid the wrong private company then a partnership with a private company can do the opposite.
People are drawn to founding private companies and/or to working in private companies because it offers a way to maximise autonomy and/or to work in an autonomy maximising environment. Some people who found private companies are better than others at managing relationships with others in ways that allow others to also maximise autonomy. Some private companies are better than others at managing relationships with other organisations in ways that allow other organisations to also maximise autonomy. If you get the right people in a private company working in ways that allow each other to maximise autonomy that private company can advance at high pace. If the aim is clear to everyone and the drive is there that company will advance at high pace.
This is why is people working in experimental research groups in academia don’t typically have a problem making a transition to working in a private company if that is a transition they choose to make.
Academia is also an autonomy maximising environment and an effective experimental research group in academia operates like an effective private company would.
In an effective experimental research group people work in ways that allow each other to maximise autonomy and if the research aim is clear and the drive is there then experimental research groups can advance at high pace on exceptionally difficult research problems.
Given the amount of one-year masters courses that have started in UK universities it’s unclear why each UK university doesn’t already have a set of course opening and course closing procedures in place, that would give regulatory oversight information on course dynamics in the HE system in the UK and more advanced warning of any potential oversupply of a particular type of course.
Closing the veterinary course in Cambridge would have made very little sense:
it’s a course training critical workers impacting multiple critical national systems
it’s an entry point for people to go on to do internationally competitive research and in this case that research is linked to multiple critical national & international systems
there is national demand for every student trained on the course
student demand for the course is high, completion rates for the course are high and students who complete the course place a high value on the course after having taken the course.
the course has a history of high performance and/or is currently in a state of high performance building that history
the course is embedded in a department with a long history of high performance and of successfully adapting to changing times and/or is currently in a state of high performance building that history
the course is in a university with a long history of high performance and of successfully adapting to changing times and/or is currently in a state of high performance building that history
there is no other higher performing university and/or university department in the UK offering this same course
it is one of the longest and most rigorous courses offered by any university – educationally intense and mentally transformative for those who take to it – and sets a person up to have a wide range of skills and a wide range of further options – e.g. scientific careers – including a linked professional pathway. Employment rate after course is high, also high : course is necessary for employment enter after course & people get employment type they choose to pursue for themselves after course.
it would take less effort & make more sense to evolve a course of this length – one of the longest in any university – than to develop a long course like this from scratch in another university to replace it which is what would be required since the demand for veterinary graduates nationally has not dropped and this course has a large cohort.The course relies on course physical location specific placement partnerships that will have grown and evolved over long timescale & cannot necessarily be easily replicated elsewhere.
the course, department & university all have a strong will to find the strongest learners capable of becoming exceptional veterinarians wherever and in whatever circumstances those learners happen to have made a start in life.
Thank you for all that you do. The university needs people who are not afraid to ask the difficult questions and hold power to account.
I can assure you that many people in Cambridge disagree with you, namely in OSCCA and HR, but also those who protect them 😉
Whilst an Institute administrator across the ten years of the 1990’s at the University, I did not witness or come into contact with students or staff who found themselves in quite the same position as those writing on this website. Despite frustrations and disagreements over policy and practice, as is usual between departments and the centre, and occasionally between staff within the same department, I enjoyed my time and interactions with the academic and central university offices staff, including the General Board and HR staff. However, it is clear that some of the negative aspects of external university pressures and business management ideas have been translated into very poor people-management practices over the intervening years and I witnessed some of this in more recent roles. It is also clear that if I or my colleagues in so-called ‘middle-management’, in any of my roles, had treated any of the staff for whom we had direct or shared responsibility, in the way the individuals reporting their stories here, or elsewhere, in the many reports I have read, have been treated, we would have been sacked. For more senior university and NHS staff, the outcome seems to be different, due to their perceived university and/or research standing. The effects on staff, however, as many experts, including those from academic, general HR and business sectors (plus legal services – see below), have noted, are devastating and long-lasting.
Paul Gilbert’s advice (‘Chief Executive at LBC Wise Counsel, a business he founded in 2000 working predominantly with in-house legal teams and General Counsel around the world’ and who runs an annual conference at Queens College, Cambridge) for legal company clients, is also pertinent for the legal advisors within universities. In fact a conference for university legal services general counsel on current issues within HE might be a good idea if it is not already an organised event.
‘Sadly, however, it seems to me that we too often put kindness on the shelf labelled “nice to do when all is well” and some leaders have conflated kindness with indulgence and lax standards. I’d like to smash that notion too. Do we get anywhere worthwhile, sustainably and joyfully by being unkind? Leadership can sometimes be really tough, and hard decisions make for hard choices which are not always good news for everyone; but kindness should still guide us to make those decisions the best they can be, and their consequences should always be considered, thought-through and caring. Leadership is the best vehicle we have for showing the power of kindness. Unkindness is to trash that potential and diminish everything and everyone around its insidious impact. Unkindness therefore will always be in my rage room.’ [Paul Gilbert, The Mentor Ch. 21]
A person can predict with certainty will be put through a substantive & procedural unfair dismissal three years in advance of it happening.
The HE sector didn’t get into a state like that overnight, it took decades for the HE sector to get into a state like that.
“Do I dare
Disturb the universe?
In a minute there is time
For decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse.”
“The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” T S Eliot
At some point it is necessary for people in the HE sector to recognise the overall state of the HE sector and to do coordinated work to reverse the overall decline in function of the HE sector rather than continuing to do the same or higher amounts of uncoordinated work the impact of which could be to keep the HE sector on its current trajectory & result in a further overall decline in function.
Otherwise it will reach a point where the HE sector won’t have the resources to meet the demands that will be being placed on its resources – time, energy, money – just to compensate people in it for it continuously being in a state of poor overall function.
Legal battles rapidly drain HE sector resources & resource reserves. Eventually the HE sector will run out of the resources for legal battles. At that point people will have to start talking to each other again to solve problems because that will be the only option left. It is far easier to start talking to people before attempting a legal battle there are no resources for than it is to start talking to people after attempting a legal battle there are no resources for.
Hypothetical Question: when the University settles an Employment Tribunal case, where does this appear in the accounts? Where are the payouts and legal costs buried?
“Cannot confirm or deny”
How embarrassing is that?!?!?? Please, make sure this is widely published. They do not assume what they did, cannot defend themselves and do not even answer questions in tribunal, but then dare to say that they “cannot confirm or deny”!?!?!? If they cannot “cannot confirm or deny” why do they insist in enforced confidentiality and gaging orders?!?!? Wow, really disappointing. This behaviour clearly shows they are not willing to change, they will continue to cover up, cover up and cover up.
“when the University settles an Employment Tribunal case, where does this appear in the accounts? Where are the payouts and legal costs buried?”
Burp (and burp again)
The rest is redacted. Like this goat.
Legal privilege…
“Professor Kamal Munir, Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Community and Engagement, is now relying on your survey to suggest that all is well. The results have been presented to the University’s Board of Scrutiny and the Council, and widely promoted internally and on social media.”
21 Group, can you please clarify how exactly “results have been presented to the University’s Board of Scrutiny and the Council” and if this was published somewhere? I would like to know exactly what was said, and if it was Kamal Munir in particular who said it. He seems to have a selective memory as bad as the Redacted Goat, also known as the Most Discussed Lead HR Business Partner in the 21 Group, or even worse than her. Kamal Munir knows very well what he did to me and others but dares to spread this misleading information from Financial Times. If the Council and the Board of Scrutiny believe in what he says is because they want. Tell them to ask Munir if he has been following the Whistleblowing Policy lately and mention my name to see his reaction.
@ Dunbar
Would love to hear more about your analysis of where and how things went wrong. I suspect that there is a very Foucaudian process at work within the university whereby the burgeoning discursive “apparatus of care” (dignity at work documents, shiny videos, loud proclamations of caring for staff) in fact masks the total hollowing out of care via empty bureaucratization. When people cared in fact, they did not need to be told to care, and noone felt the need to pretend to care or secure public praise for care-work. There were no documents or procedures, but people simply knew they had to do the right and decent thing. The discourse of care varies inversely to its underlying reality.
1. It is hilarious they are called CRASHH. I know one should not be superstitious but that does seem like tempting fate
2. It’s a really nice building they have… maybe a new home for the Vet school?
How to find current and forthcoming Employment Tribunals
Go to courtserve
https://courtserve.net/
Create an account (it’s free). Log in and click on Employment Tribunals You will then see the next 3 weeks Tribunals grouped according to region.
Go to Watford, this includes Oxford & Cambridge. Pick a file and the Tribunals are all listed. So in Watford Area, we see
S. Bi versus University of Oxford is listed starting 5 May 2026
R. Foa versus University of Cambridge is listed starting 20 Apr 2026
E. Canozzi versus University of Hertfordshire is listed starting 24 Apr 2026
As you trawl through the various regions, you’ll be surprised at how often universities come up (though not as much as NHS Hospitals). Clearly, universities are mistreating a lot of staff 😉
Only a small fraction of Employment Tribunals actually get to be listed, as many cases are settled before listing — the university realises it’s hopeless.
You are missing the supernova in June 😉
I think many people in Cambridge know about that event. I am pretty sure that even the University Council and the General Board know that there will be something important happening in June, and that it is unlikely that, for example, [REDACTED] will continue working in Cambridge after that. Unless, of course, [REDACTED] does not show up to the cross-examination and claims that “cannot confirm or deny.”
REDACTION by 21 GROUP. As believers in free speech, we apologise for the redaction. We request that all comments on the event in June must avoid direct naming of individuals for the moment. We anticipate that all names will become public in due course in the interests of open justice.
Someone involved in the June case? I suppose we will have to wait and see…
Ssssssssssssh!
As if people did not know who we are talking about…
Some news on Simon Goldhill’s case in Varsity and in The Times…
https://www.varsity.co.uk/news/31560
The Times from yesterday says… “Two more women allege harassment by Cambridge professor”