Image of the PJM Medal
Banner Text = Fight For the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal
Reply to topic Page 3 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
The 'Queen' signed the Non Wearing Document
Author Message
Reply with quote
Post  
John Cooper wrote:
You could not make this up, in answer to my original question






..........and the envelope was endorsed FIRST CLASS POST


Awaiting the 'incoming' on this by FRIDAY 15th December, could be signifcant regarding recent events or the timing of the announcement, this has always been my own firm date of 'review', but don't hold your breath!


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post FOI Act. 
John,

I have been keeping quiet on this matter as you know that I am also expecting a reply to my FOI request for sight of the minutes of the meeting of the HD Committee on 7th. December, 2005. Edgey Chris also quoted Section 37(1)(b) of the FOI Act as being an exemption to my case but he deliberately misquoted the act exemption by stating 'conferring of an honour or dignity' when in fact it states that 'conferring by the Crown of any honour or dignity'. The words 'by the crown' means that the PJM does not enter into this exemption and 37(1)(b) of the Act does not apply to it because the PJM was not conferred by the crown. The other exemption they quoted to try and stop me having sight of those minutes also does not apply but I will keep my powder dry and not show my full hand at this time as my request has gone to another Civil Serpent who will not doubt tell me that I cannot see these minutes.

Wouldn't it be just as easy to let us see them, unless of course, they are hiding something. If so we will get the truth someday and these people who are being deceitful and obstructive just now will be found out.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
I know it is hard to believe but this is the third time that I have asked this question of the Cabinet Office Did the Queen Sign the the (PJM) Document YES/NO, yesterday was the deadline for the reply here it is............................

Dear Mr Cooper,


Thank you for your e-mail of 21 October to Ceremonial Secretariat requesting further clarification regarding our original response to FOI245648. In the e-mail you asked ‘Did Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II actually sign this document in her own hand? Yes or No?’ This refers to Her Majesty’s approval of the recommendations of the HD Committee on the acceptance and wear of the Pingat Jasa Malaysia. You also ask, ‘If Her Majesty did sign this document could I have a copy please, if I am not permitted to view this document under The Freedom of Information Act 2000 will you advise me as to my statutory rights in advising Why Not and what appeal procedures are in place.’

Your request for information has been handled under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2000.

I am writing to confirm that the Cabinet Office has now completed its search for the information which you requested and can confirm that the Cabinet Office does hold information falling within the terms of your request.

The information you requested is being withheld under the FOIA. The exemptions that apply to this information are section 37(1)(a) (communications with Her Majesty, with other members of the Royal Family or with the Royal Household) and section 37(1)(b) (the conferring by the Crown of any honour or dignity).

Section 37(1)(a) and section 37(1)(b) are qualified exemptions and in applying these exemptions we have had to balance the public interest in maintaining the exemption against the public interest in disclosing the information.

In favour of disclosure there is a general public interest in The Royal Family and its communications with Government. In favour of withholding the information there is a strong public interest that communications between officials and The Sovereign should remain confidential to ensure that business can be conducted in a spirit of openness and trust. The existence of section 37(1)(a) and section 37(1)(b) of the FOIA highlights this public interest. We believe that on balance the public interest lies in withholding the information.

Notwithstanding the above, you are, I know, fully aware that the decision on the acceptance and wear of the Pingat Jasa Malaysia was approved by Her Majesty. We do not believe that it would be in the public interest to disclose any further information on this aspect of that case.

If you are unhappy with the decisions made in relation to your request from the Cabinet Office you may ask for an internal review. If you wish to complain you should contact:

Howell James
Permanent Secretary, Government Communication
70 Whitehall
London
SW1A 2AS

Howell.James@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk

You should note that the Cabinet Office will not normally accept an application for internal review if it is received more than two months after the date that the reply was issued.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.


Yours sincerely,




Eleri Pengelly
Deputy Ceremonial Officer



_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
John Cooper wrote:
I know it is hard to believe but this is the third time that I have asked this question of the Cabinet Office Did the Queen Sign the the (PJM) Document YES/NO, yesterday was the deadline for the reply here it is............................



And as far as I can see John, you still haven't got an answer.

The word, "Information", is not the answer.

A "Yes" or "No" was the answer.

Or did I get that wrong?

OBFUSCATION in capitals.


_________________
Merdeka, Merdeka, Merdeka,
from the HD Committee and its decision.
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
I shall be replying late tonight/early tomorrow, any suggestions welcome but be constructive please.................... Wink


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post FOI Act. 




This is the answer to my request under the Freedom of Information Act, 2000, for an Internal Review following the refusal by Christopher J. Edge, FCO, to allow me to see the minutes of the meeting of the HD Committee on 7th. December, 2005.

The whole world knows about the PJM but they just refuse to co-operate at all times so I now have to send a report to the Information Commissioner, after that it will have to go to a Tribunal, and after that, if possible, to the High Court. They can be very proud of themselves that they are destroying open and transparent government for the people of this country. Oh, and YES!! they have something to hide in connection with the decision not to allow the PJM to be worn by British Citizens.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Missing Files. 
Have just received a letter from my MP, Danny Alexander, re a letter he wrote to the Foreign & Commonwealth Office when I wrote to him about the "missing files" in October. Attached is a reply from the Rt Hon Ian McCartney MP, Minister For Trade, Investment and Foreign Affairs. The letter contains several refs to the PJM that we are already aware of, including that the HD Committee hoped that we would know our fate by the end of November. Therefore I cut to the chase and transcribe the first and final paragraphs.

It is dated 28th Nov but has a stamped date of 30th Nov when presumably it was posted.

Dear Danny

Thank you for your letter of 6 November on behalf of your constituent Mr Michael Barton, about the Pingat Jasa Malaya (PJM). I am replying as Minister responsible for our relations with Malaysia. (end para 1)

With regard to the files mentioned in Mr Barton's letter; two of the files FO 372/9059 and FO 372/8060, were held by the FCO, and have now been returned to the National Archives at Kew. As far as we can ascertain, the third file, FO 372/8053, has not been requested by the FCO.

The letter was approved by the Minister and signed in his absense. MB.


_________________
Mike Barton
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Missing Files. 
MB wrote:
Have just received a letter from my MP, Danny Alexander, re a letter he wrote to the Foreign & Commonwealth Office when I wrote to him about the "missing files" in October. Attached is a reply from the Rt Hon Ian McCartney MP, Minister For Trade, Investment and Foreign Affairs. The letter contains several refs to the PJM that we are already aware of, including that the HD Committee hoped that we would know our fate by the end of November. Therefore I cut to the chase and transcribe the first and final paragraphs.

It is dated 28th Nov but has a stamped date of 30th Nov when presumably it was posted.


Great stuff, Mike!

It is of interest to we twitchers (we specialise in the observing of twits!) that the letter was dated two days before the end of the month in which an HD response was anticipated .. and posted on the last day of that month.

Thanks for your continuing lobbying and support at this crucial time.

Fight4thePJM Team


_________________
BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
There are several members that are trying to get this FoIA document sighted by someone, it is very hard to understand why Whitehall are being so obstructive in our requests, my opinon FWIW is that no such document exists however I have involved my MP, this is my request to Sir Micheal Lord:

Wednesday 10 January 2007

Dear Sir Michael,

Subject Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal

Firstly may I wish you and your staff a Happy and Healthy 2007 and
thank you for your continuing support regarding The PJM medal for which
I note that The Conservative Party will take issue with The Grant of
Honours and Decorations when there is a change of Government.

I am writing to you on this occasion for someone, like your goodself,
to have sight of a document that has been refused my perusal under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 reference Section 37(1)(b) and
35(1)(b). On three separate occasions I have requested sight of this
document which is held in The Cabinet Office and three times this
permission has been refused.

All I am wanting to find out is if Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II has
signed by her own hand an order barring 35000 ex Malayan/Malaysian
Emergency/Confrontation UK service personnel the right to wear the PJM
Medal.

The question I require answering from The Cabinet Office is a straight
forward YES or NO, I have not been given either answer, therefore could
you ask that question on my behalf and preferably for you to have sight
of the document to confirm to me whether the Queen’s signature is
appended to or not.

Thank you in anticipation

Yours sincerely

John Cooper


.........and within 3 days Sir Michael responds with this letter:







_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
I trust that the 'suits will learn and profit by the following preamble.

Honours in confidence, only applies to British Honours and decorations, as conferred by Her Majesty the Queen.

It is the 'in camera' discussions regarding the suitability of recipients, to go to the Palace and pick up these awards.

Foreign awards, do not come under that heading, because Her Majesty, or the Government are not conferring it on anyone.

Therefore to suggest that the Pingat Jasa Malaysia comes under that category, is not only a false premise, but is downright illegal in it's application.

If they try to invoke the 50 year rule, it would be like applying it, to the line up of the Australian cricket team in the next 'Ashes' test series. Totally and utterly incorrect.

Unfortunately for us, and them, when they applied to becoming Civil serpents, they obviously checked their brains in at the door, when they entered.

So! Don't worry 'suits', we will do the thinking for you, lest your 'brains' overheat and go into meltdown. That's if they haven't done so already.
Yours Aye

Arthur

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Further to the preamble, regarding the Honours and Decorations Committee's discussions with Her Majesty the Queen. Yes! It should be private and confidential. Nobody denies that fact.

What we do take grave offence at is, that those discussions, regarding the suitability of names submitted for awards and decorations, are British, and for British awards only. This is a foreign award, albeit a Commonwealth award.

We have already, by dint of service been cleared to receive this award, so discussions should never be entered into. What exactly were the Civil Serpents and Honours and Decorations Committee thinking of, when they applied the wrong criteria.

My question is, by broaching the subject, (albeit erroneously), did it then become subject to the rule 37 (1) matters in confidence. If that is the case, then it was a neat move on behalf of the Committee, in order to justify their warped criteria.
Don't you worry my old darlin's we are on to you for your shameless acts.

Next time the Civil serpents want to shoot themselves in their respective, reptilian feet, don't for God's sake use currently issued ammunition. The chances of it going off are low indeed, as is our perception of the Civil Serpents abilities.

Any thoughts on that one, esteemed colleagues?

Yours Aye

Arthur

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post No need for thought. 
What you say, Arthur, is tranparent enough for me...at almost 70...to understand and agree with without cogitation. Thing is we are trying to get the civil serpents to think. Should they ever be urged to do so by by the guys in the Saville Row suits the whole can of worms could bust open. Banging heads and brick walls come to mind but not THINKING, leastways not while the present incumbents can afford a decent tailor. MB


_________________
Mike Barton
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Hello Mike,

We are old enough and ugly enough to know that to get a Civil Serpent to think, much less act rationally, would be the equivalent of pushing a Conquorer tank up a mountain...sideways.

Yours Aye

Arthur

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
...............and on and on and on and on, tick tock, tick bloody tock, what are these people trying to prove, I asked my MP on January 11th if he could have sight of HMQs signature (he replied he had 'some doubt') well this has just come in from The Bren Gun, I really cannot believe that someone cannot answer a very simple question................
Rolling Eyes Evil or Very Mad





_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Cabinet Office Review 
John, when did you request a review ? In the light of a reply I received from Neena Thandaseree on 3rd January 2007, I requested a review of the Cabinet Office's decision not to allow me a view of the letter signed by The Queen. I received a reply - see below on 9th January - but have heard nothing since.
How long did you have to wait before receiving your coppy of the letter to Sir Michael Lord MP ?

"Thank you for your Internal Review request dated 9 January. This is receiving attention.

Kind Regards,

Andrew Collingwood

FOI Team,
CabinetOffice

T: 020 72762473 F: 020 72762495
E: Andrew.collingwood@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk




The Cabinet Office computer systems may be monitored and communications carried on them recorded, to secure the effective operation of the system and for other lawful purposes."

Thanks - Tony

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:
Reply to topic Page 3 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum