• The post you are reporting:
   
  Ah - so you say £3m of the £19m that was lost was because a junior clerk did not do her job properly, who was not even in the right department.
  
  A different situation to suggesting the Treasury Department not investing properly and itself being negligent with the whole £500m or so portfolio. Losses of the £19m represent less than 5% of what was invested and under a year's interest. I am quite sure that the additional returns achieved by active management and diverifying the porfolio to A and even BBB rated stocks and institutions would have more than made up the loss in a couple of years, let alone the many years of activity. It really would not pay to restrict the investment assets in the manner suggested by Peter. (That £19m figure also assumes that none of the money was actually got back of course)
  
  A few days I can agree with as a feasable warning time, it is rare for matters to move so swiftly and dramatically and normally a few days would not make a difference, not that this should be an excuse for the clerk.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason