I'm a fully PAID UP MBCS CITP, I don't know for how much longer. The CITP is supposed to represent myself as a "cut above" others in my profession related to responsible handling of data and people. No-one outside the BCS know about CITP, very few know what MBCS means. What's more, you find that within the BCS (typically the elbow padded members), there is a distinct feeling of derision offered with regards the CITP qualification. They disagree with it and don't value it as a qualification. I want to get a CEng, but the BCS don't recognise my university as contributing towards it. If only I had known this before accepting a place, there, huh? I am asking the tech journos I know of whether they have had any dealings with the BCS. I already know the answer that will come back. They are not lobbying government, they are not pushing themselves on our screens and into our papers (other than their column in Computing) and they do not practice what they preach regarding their web-site/social media engagement. I joined the BCS because I believed that as an IT professional, with access to sensitive personal data and many thousands or millions of pounds at your disposal, you HAVE to be accountable. There is no accountability within our profession. The BCS, for me, should be the same organisation that the BMA is. They should actively police and be seen to police the profession. They talk the talk, but if you spent as much as they do on their marketing revamps you could convince me you were Jesus Christ. In short, I value the local BCS events greatly, but the national organisation needs a damned good kicking.