In the Westminster Hall debate on the 11th December 2007, it was stated plainly by the Minister replying for HMG said "I have been told that the committee does
not plan to reconsider the matter"......."The HD committees plans will ultimately be determined by Parliament" Right! Before their re-consideration of the November 2007, two current Ministers the Rt Hon Derek Twigg MP and the Rt Hon Ian McCartney wrote a joint letter to the HD Committee seeking a favourable
answer to their request for the PJM to be "formally worn"......."The committee's members, however, were not sufficiently exercised by that correspondence to change their minds". Parliamentary Democracy - where did that go? The Pingat Jasa Malaysia has been graciously accepted by Her Majesty. The caveat "permission to wear formally will not be given", I and I believe others feel was added in a fit of pique because we had the temerity to challenge the original rejection by Baroness Symonds in the House of Lords in February 2005, and when obliged by a review of the rules by the then Foreign Secretary Jack Straw,
they re-wrote the 1969 Foreign and Commonwealth Office
regulations, with Part C of the new, 2005 Regulations being, so it seems, written especially to preclude the formal wearing of the PJM, rules which together with the superceded and defucnt 1969 Rules are still being quoted to and by the Prime MInister, the Foreign Minister (Meg Munn), and the Ceremonial Departments of the FCO, Cabinet Office and the MoD DS Sec despite the fact the the Cabinet Office Ceremonial Officer, who, incidemtally is the Secretary of the HD committee, has informed our Secretary in writing that these rules have been superseded. Whenever our campaign seem to gain an advantage - The Goal Posts are MOVED (again).
The PJM is a different case to that of the 1992 Suez Medal campaign, and the Arctic Medal (which eventually became a badge) except for the fact that it was initially handled (mishandled?) by the same Senior Civil Servant who with his Senior was severley criticised by the newspaper, and described the then Current Minister as being a prisoner of his Civil Servants. Nothing changed then. It is possible that the Prime Minister and Ministers (but not all ex Ministers)find it difficult to disagree or censure their Civil Servants, which no doubt accounts to three years of waste of public money in trying to cover their backs (not forgeting the mess of other Ministries and MOD procurement services).
No this writer is not paranoid;just infuriated by the way Senior Civil Servants appear to break every rule in the Civil; Service Code and get away with it.
The question now is when are our Prime Minister and part time Defence Secretary, who has responsibility for the MOD per se, and the Foreign Minister going to practice the transparent processes of Government which is constantly trumpeted by the Government as a whole i.e.real Parliamentary Democracy or has the spin got out of control?
David Dilley
Posted on 14 Mar 2008 6:38 pm
In the Westminster Hall debate on the 11th December 2007, it was stated plainly by the Minister replying for HMG said "I have been told that the committee does
not plan to reconsider the matter"......."The HD committees plans will ultimately be determined by Parliament" Right! Before their re-consideration of the November 2007, two current Ministers the Rt Hon Derek Twigg MP and the Rt Hon Ian McCartney wrote a joint letter to the HD Committee seeking a favourable
answer to their request for the PJM to be "formally worn"......."The committee's members, however, were not sufficiently exercised by that correspondence to change their minds". Parliamentary Democracy - where did that go? The Pingat Jasa Malaysia has been graciously accepted by Her Majesty. The caveat "permission to wear formally will not be given", I and I believe others feel was added in a fit of pique because we had the temerity to challenge the original rejection by Baroness Symonds in the House of Lords in February 2005, and when obliged by a review of the rules by the then Foreign Secretary Jack Straw,
they re-wrote the 1969 Foreign and Commonwealth Office
regulations, with Part C of the new, 2005 Regulations being, so it seems, written especially to preclude the formal wearing of the PJM, rules which together with the superceded and defucnt 1969 Rules are still being quoted to and by the Prime MInister, the Foreign Minister (Meg Munn), and the Ceremonial Departments of the FCO, Cabinet Office and the MoD DS Sec despite the fact the the Cabinet Office Ceremonial Officer, who, incidemtally is the Secretary of the HD committee, has informed our Secretary in writing that these rules have been superseded. Whenever our campaign seem to gain an advantage - The Goal Posts are MOVED (again).
The PJM is a different case to that of the 1992 Suez Medal campaign, and the Arctic Medal (which eventually became a badge) except for the fact that it was initially handled (mishandled?) by the same Senior Civil Servant who with his Senior was severley criticised by the newspaper, and described the then Current Minister as being a prisoner of his Civil Servants. Nothing changed then. It is possible that the Prime Minister and Ministers (but not all ex Ministers)find it difficult to disagree or censure their Civil Servants, which no doubt accounts to three years of waste of public money in trying to cover their backs (not forgeting the mess of other Ministries and MOD procurement services).
No this writer is not paranoid;just infuriated by the way Senior Civil Servants appear to break every rule in the Civil; Service Code and get away with it.
The question now is when are our Prime Minister and part time Defence Secretary, who has responsibility for the MOD per se, and the Foreign Minister going to practice the transparent processes of Government which is constantly trumpeted by the Government as a whole i.e.real Parliamentary Democracy or has the spin got out of control?