Reporting a comment

Here's the annotation you're reporting. Please enter a brief reason why you think it should be deleted in the form beneath. Thanks for your help!

David Dilley
Posted on 2 May 2008 7:46 pm

Oh dear! 1. The HD Committee recommended in 2006 that veterans should allowed to accept but not wear the Pingat Jassa Medal. Recommended to whom? Who signed the 'Official Letter' to the then Foreign Secretary?
Was it her Majesty? We have evidence that it was signed by another (also a member of the HD Committee)rather than Her Majesty in what was more of a 'departmental note/memo' which stated "The Queen had approved the HD Committee's recommendation that the PJM could be accepted but not worn, rather than the official letter from the Palace which one might have expected. The information we sought for three years, was finally obtained under the Freedom of Information Action, an application which incidentally had been vigourously opposed by the FCO and Cabinet Office. It has always been stated by the many official correspondents that the decision was Her Majesty's, impying that she had signed the decree. We have also been informed that Her Majesty's signature or initials are not to be found on any document the precludes the PJM from being worn.

2. ...."There may be further examples over the last thirty years, but the HD Committee's usual practice is not to recommend acceptance of foreign medals". A Russian medal was accepted after 40years, presumably because it was the politically correct thing to do as they were no longer regarded as enemies; and there were others. Moreover F4the PJM campaigners hold a list, including recent medals, totalling over forty, which have been accepted with no restrictions on wearing which puts paid to the oft submitted claim regarding Double Medalling and the Long Standing 5 Year rule under which medals are not considered by the HD Committee.

Why should this annotation be deleted?
Check our House Rules and tell us why the annotation breaks them.