So I write a letter to my MP...

[Saracen]

Originally Posted by G4Z

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/daniel_...of_the_commons

hehe

So your MP is the "Coriolanus of the Commons".

He may have the arrogance, but the military credentials???

But in my view, it's an apt analogy nonetheless. Just remember what happened to Coriolanus!

[TheAnimus]

I wounder what, if any, his response to this will be.

If i where him i'd try and let it blow over say nothing at all.

But if i where him, i'd not be pro 42 day detention without trail. I wouldn't be a member of the labour party!

Can't help but wounder if his ades, or some generic higher upper ades in the labour Party have come accross this thread yet?

[SiM]

I do feel a bit sorry for the man now... this has blown a bit out of proportion...

Well enjoy you day of fame G4Z

[G4Z]

Maybe, I posted it all over the shop so people can see how 'abusive' my letter was if they feel inclined.

[finlay666]

I'm suprised you didn't get in touch with the Evening Chronicle or the Journal

Best of luck with it though, just had a chance to read the thread

[G4Z]

Its in the Journal!

[finlay666]

Well I'm in Reading starting my internship so I can't exactly pop to a newsagents in the toon and get one

[G4Z]

I just saw this on the local news on ITV, they interviewed Clelland (very briefly) where he said 'The guys has only been in Gateshead 5 minutes and he thinks he speaks for everyone'.

What a muppet, he is making stuff up now as he has no idea about my history or how long I have lived here. Its certainly longer than 5 minutes, I am a local lad who has lived within a few miles of this area all my life.

Not sure what difference that makes anyway, he is still my MP, and so he is still the one to write to when he sells my civil liberties down the river.

[chuckskull]

Sounds like he's in a hole and doesn't know when to stop digging. Though from his responses I'd be quite happy to borrow him a shovel tbh, that attitude does not belong in our government.

[badass]

Looking at the press coverage of this, I think G4Z is about to learn an important lesson in life.

The only people that are as bad as politicians for being manipulative, lying, self centered idiots are journalists. Watch them just report the bits that make this an interesting story, leaving out vital detail that effectively makes their stories a lie.

[Jeff I Am]

Well... just because he's your MP, why kick him when he's already down so far?

(thinking more clearly, putting steel-toed boots on)

Anybody know how to do that Russian trepak dance? :-)

[iranu]

BRILLIANT! I am loving every minute of this, well done G4Z. This serves the MP right. He has 23 years experience and if he responds to a letter that is no more than strong worded and critical (even if he feels it's a personal attack) then he gets all he deserves regardless of whether it's spun or manipulated by the media. Labour has been spinning for 11 years, now they can swallow some of their own medicine.

The fact of the matter is he could have simply said, "Thanks, your points are noted", and that would have been the end of it most likely, but he acted like a 5 year old in a play ground spat. If he's that ungracious over such a matter I wonder how vindictive he is when up against much better worded debate. People in public life should expect the odd bit of vitriol thrown their way just as coppers expect to encounter bad language in their job, it's part and parcel. I'm tempted to write a spoof letter with lots of invective and no point just to see the reaction!

It goes to show the poor calibre of people that we have in parliament. He could easily have put forward an argument without resorting to the "your letter was rude and abusive so stick your vote" nonsense and would most likely have come out of it with some grudging respect from G4Z. His attitude is appalling and what's worse is his arrogance is leading him to spout falsities.

However, isn't it great, the internet, forums and the age of the blog has enabled us mere plebs a far faster, efficient way of distributing information and that discussion can be picked up very quickly and make mainstream news. Policticos take note.

[Saracen]

Originally Posted by iranu

.....

However, isn't it great, the internet, forums and the age of the blog has enabled us mere plebs a far faster, efficient way of distributing information and that discussion can be picked up very quickly and make mainstream news. Policticos take note.

Interesting point .... and oh so true. It doesn't seem to have dawned on Mr Clelland yet, though. The old adage about the problems old dogs have with new tricks comes to mind.

This is the internet age, Mr Clelland, and it isn't just those that have traditionally had the power and the platform to attract the attention of the press that can now get their word out. And this is a classic case in point. A few years ago, what chance would an 'ordinary' member of the public have had to hold an MP up to the glare of public gaze over this? None at all. But now, copies of letters can whizz their way round the country (or indeed, the world) in minutes, and something can go from being a private letter to a constituent to being an exposé of political arrogance echoed by numerous national papers in an afternoon. Who'da thunk it?

And for an MP that's a member of an already embattled party that's currently pretty much at the pits in the polls, is showing all the signs of ineffectual leadership, continuous u-turns, repeated scandals, resignation of cabinet members and the Scottish leader, moral bankruptcy and a dire lack of understanding of public concerns (whether it be 42 days, ID cards, the position over the Lisbon 'treaty', or what now, this afternoon, looks to be MPs burying their heads in the sand over public attitudes towards their snout-in-trough expenses) it's an amazing display of arrogance and complacency from a public servant.

Moreover, it seems that "23 years" as an MP hasn't equipped him with sufficient life skills to have worked out the first rule of being in a hole - stop digging. Five minutes indeed!

You'd think he'd have worked out that if this story hit the media in a hurry yesterday, there was a more than decent chance that an unchecked and demonstrably incorrect statement of spin like that could backfire, and merely serve to keep the story alive, when otherwise it probably would have died.

Muppet.

[Saracen]

Oh, and G4z ..... me hat's off to you, dude.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of your particular points or Mr Clelland's actions in Parliament or response in that letter, we ALL ought to hold our representatives to account far more often and far more effectively than we do. If we did, maybe, just maybe, we'd have a political class in this country that listened to us instead of patronisingly telling us that they know best what's best for us.

And if that happened, maybe we'd wind up with far less cynicism about politicians and disinterest in politics. After all, the root cause of that cynicism and disinterest, the reason for low turnouts and the general contempt in which many politicians are held by so much of the public is the antics of those politicians, and the patronising way they dismiss us ..... except in the few weeks before the election. And with that letter, Mr Clelland has simply managed to add one more straw to the camel's back. It won't be the one that breaks it, but it helps get us there.

So well done, G4z. Regardless of the reaction from Clelland, his response or any media flurry in caused, all of which are entertaining and informative but, in the scheme of things, irrelevant, taking the time to express your opinion to your representative is precisely what we all ought to be doing, and is a perfect example of civic responsibility. Clelland can ignore one letter from a constituent, but if he got 100 all saying the same thing, I suspect even he would take notice - because anyone with any common sense knows that for every one person that thinks that and takes the trouble to write, there'll likely be a large number that think it and can't be bothered to write. One such letter he can dismiss as an anomaly, but a dozen or a hundred? Not so easy to contemptuously dismiss, are they?

So well done for bothering to write at all. If we all did likewise, maybe our representatives might start to think about doing what we want, not telling us what we want but that we aren't bright enough to know we want it.

[G4Z]

Well, apparently he was on BBC radio Newcastle this morning insinuating that I am pro child porn because of my stance on the extreme porn law. I am trying to get a day off work tomorrow so I can call them up and properly pwn him (once again).

[Saracen]

Originally Posted by G4Z

Well, apparently he was on BBC radio Newcastle this morning insinuating that I am pro child porn because of my stance on the extreme porn law. I am trying to get a day off work tomorrow so I can call them up and properly pwn him (once again).

Seems that far from deciding to stop digging, he's employing industrial mining techniques.

If, repeat IF it is the case that he's been insinuating that, then it's a serious matter. It is potentially defamatory, though that's an expensive route to go down. It also seems to me that it may well be a breach of the Code of Conduct for MPs, and if so, is something that could be the cause for a formal (written) complaint to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. After all, para 15 of that Code of Conduct says :-

Members shall at all times conduct themselves in a manner which will tend to maintain and strengthen the public's trust and confidence in the integrity of Parliament and never undertake any action which would bring the House of Commons, or it's members generally, into disrepute.

That, of course, is very vague and wide-open to interpretation, but if we have a member than not only dismisses a constituent's concerns and tells him to "stick" his vote, but then (if it is indeed the case) insinuates allegations about child porn, I'd say it at least has the potential to be covered by that ..... unless he's right, of course. I assume he isn't.

It also makes clear that among the fundamental guiding principles of that Code is accountability and openness are :-

Accountability

Holders of public office are accountable for their decisions and actions to the public and must submit themselves to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office.

Openness

Holders of public office should be as open as possible about all the decisions and actions that they take. They should give reasons for their decisions and restrict information only when the wider public interests demands.

It's hard to see, given that, how an MP explaining himself to a constituent is not covered. He does, after all, work for his constituents, and that means ALL of them, not just those he likes or is voted for by.


So .... if he did insinuate what you suggest he did, it might be reason to have a chat with your solicitor with a view to a written request that he at least clarify what he meant and if he did suggest that, either back it up or apologise. Of course, to do that requires that you are sure that that is what he did, and I've no idea, not having heard the transmission.

But, after his response to your letter, you may have grounds for a complaint to the Commissioner on that basis alone, let alone anything that may or may not result from that radio interview.