Image of the PJM Medal
Banner Text = Fight For the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal
Reply to topic Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Complaint against the Cabinet Office
Author Message
Reply with quote
Post Complaint against the Cabinet Office 
Howell James
Permanent Secretary
Government Communications
70 Whitehall
London
SW1A 2AS

8th March 2009

Dear Sir;
I wish to make a complaint against the following three people

Mr Denis Brennan of the Cabinet Office,
Ms Eleri Pengelly formally of the Cabinet Office
Ms Abby Oshodi of the Cabinet Office

These three Civil Servants have individually and collectively over a number of years issued statements in order to mislead British Veterans and Ministers and they have done this in order to cover up their errors over the handling of the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal (PJM).

The PJM was first awarded in July 2004 and finally accepted by the British in March 2005.

On the 21st December 2005 Sir Robin Janvrin Private Secretary to The Queen signed a letter (see1) stating that PJM could be accepted but not worn. It is worth mentioning here, that it took a complaint lodge with the ICO, in order to obtain a copy of this letter because these three Civil Servants kept on stating that the Queen had signed a document that the PJM could not be worn.
This was and is incorrect.

As you can see, in this letter Sir Robin’s name is spelt incorrectly. Surely Sir Robin knows how to spell his own name? I must ask the question is this letter genuine?


The HD Committee in making this recommendation had in my opinion had, forgotten about the 3rd May 1968 London Gazette Notice 5057
(see 2).

The LG Statement clearly states that as long as you are not in Crown Service when the Medal is conferred and as long as the Medal has been accepted you automatically have permission to wear.

In order to discredit this notice the Cabinet Office issued a letter dated 29 June 2007 signed by Eleri Pengelly containing two paragraphs taken from two different FCO Files and taken out of context. (see 3).
Later in July 2007 Abby Oshodi claimed that these two statements came from a file called Ceremonial Office H31 (see 4). This is incorrect, these statements may have been placed in this file but they originate from;

Statement one

“These regulations do not relate to awards of campaign or commemorative war medals.”

This statement comes from FCO 57 106-1968-69 (file No TXH 1/5) and is not from the London Gazette file.
See Disc 1 IMG 8766

Statement two

“It is well understood that offers by commonwealth and foreign countries of general service or campaign medals are not considered under the terms of the Foreign and Commonwealth Orders Regulations but are dealt with separately by the H.D. Committee by submission of separate Reports to the Queen.”

This Statement comes from FCO 57/15-1967-68 (file No TPD1/13/2) and is from the file concerning the London Gazette Notice, but has been taken out of context.
See Disc 2 IMG 8829

I have placed copies of these two files on CD for your convenience.

Mr Denis Brennan sent a letter dated 11 April 2007 to my MP Geoffrey Robinson stating that the LG Notice does not apply to Campaign or Commemorative War Medals (see8) by doing so Mr Brennan is implying that the PJM is a Campaign or a Commemorative War Medal. The PJM is neither of these.
The PJM is a Service Medal.
In an email from Tanya Collingridge she stated it is up to the Malaysians to classify the PJM as it is their medal, so Mr Brennan has no right to imply otherwise.

Pingat means Medal, Jasa means Service. So it is a Service to Malaysia Medal.

The FCO have confirmed in writing dated 11 February 2009 that these two statements indeed do come from FCO Files (see9) and it is not until I received this confirmation that I could pursue my complaint against these three Civil Servants. Every obstacle and delaying tactic has been placed in my way. It took 40 working days to obtain this letter from submitting an FOI request to the FCO as all other FOI requests to the Cabinet Office had been turned down as being vexatious or they hid behind rules.

Cabinet Office too has continually been obstructive in their dealings with Veterans by hiding behind rules that are not designed or intended to be used to withhold information from the public (see5) as just one example.

Further, when I requested a copy of the rules governing the acceptance of foreign awards I was sent a one page document with more than half the page blanked out (see6)

I persevered in my quest for a copy of this document and obtained a complete copy from the House of Commons Library (see7) you will see by the attached note that this document had been misfiled after the Cabinet Office had released the one page (see5)

We British Veterans who served in Malaysia between 1957 and 1966 have been honoured by the Malaysians and dishonoured by our own Civil Servants who are supposed to act impartially and with honour; they have failed to do so.

I thank you for your time and look forward to your reply.

Kind Regards




Paul Alders

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Complaint against the Cabinet Office 
Terrific Paul.

Determined and tenacious. You have clearly put many many hours into preparing this complaint.

It is also a great boost to know the Fight for the Right continues apace. Not that we ever doubted it.

Thanks and appreciation, and good luck.

(You have sent it Recorded Delivery I hope.) Wink Wink Wink


_________________
Pingat Kami - Hak Kami
651 Signal Troop,
Semengo Camp,
Kuching.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
WOW !!

Determined, Truthfull, Hard Hitting and to the point and as Semengo says, many hours of hard work and preperation.

Thanks Paul.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Wonderful stuff, Paul. 'Thank you' from me too. It looks like the restored site is once again up for the fight....until it is finished.


_________________
Mike Barton
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Thank you all for your kind words and yes it was sent recorded delivery.
Also your thanks must also go to the rest of the team who added and subtracted were required.
This fight is a team effort that includes ALL PJMers and our supporters.
Paul

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
There are a few other complaints in along with the one Paul has highlighted. Mine have been in with the FCO/CO since April 2008 they have been with the Information Commissioners Office, they have told me that due to the backlog of complaints it will be several months before decisions can be made.

You will all note that several staff members within Whitehall get moved on, awarded CBE's and offered early retirement, this is a known fact with some that we have been dealing with, undaunted, not us, dedicated to the core! There are many other irons in the fire too, stay tuned.............


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Excellent letter, Paul. It is high time that these people were brought to book for the way in which they have dealt with the PJM.

Your efforts, as always, are much appreciated.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Well done to all. I wonder what rubbish they will come up with in their reply.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Well done Paul, Thats what they call leading from the front, terrific stuff....Rob

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
Well done Paul and the team.Whenever it goes quiet you know something is afoot.I wasn't disappointed.Thanks again for all of your hardwork and effort.PJMers are very fortunate to have you guys doing battle for us

Rgds Ray

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Paul’s perspicacity and tenacity are of legendary proportions amongst all those who are campaigning for justice and honour for the PJM against a group of public employees who believe that moral fibre is a breakfast cereal.
I am really glad that he is on our side.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Paul,

First, congratulations on a well thought out and researched written piece.

My own views are given below:

"I do not believe that this is the time for cynicism or gloating (not, of course by you). Yes I have read two replies from Howell James (others may have received or read more). Yes, they were disappointing.


However the important thing to me is that Howell James support was based on the Cabinet Offices’ case posited by the Cabinet Office civil servants above which used the misinterpretation of their own rules, the submission as evidence of rules that did not previously exist before 2005, obfuscation and delaying tactics, even to the extent of misquoting The London Gazette regarding eligibility, claiming that we were still Crown Servants when we were not , implying that we were, therefore, ineligible to wear the medal although it was authorised for acceptance by Her Majesty and was authorised for wear by the terms of the London Gazette (5057), 3 May 1968.

Ministers, MP's, retired Cs' and, indeed, the Prime Minister himself, accepted the Cabinet Office/ HDC ruling, based, I believe, purely on the assumption that the position held as CS's in the Cabinet Office, would preclude any notion other than that the information provided was unbiased, correct in substance and would no way include selectivity of evidence.

The opposite was the case in which these three CS', in the evidence produced by Paul, showed scant regard for the truth; their actions were in defiance of the meaning and spirit of the Civil Service Code of Conduct introduced by the Cabinet Secretary who is also Head of the Civil Service and Chairman of the HD Committee (when it actually meets); indeed, MoD, The Foreign Office as well as the Cabinet Office have all at some time engaged in the same activities, counter to the CS Code.

It seemed to me from the start that the Cabinet Office actually orchestrated the efforts of the Foreign Office, MoD DS Sec and some input from the Home Office of the whole PJM saga, first covertly, and when they all got themselves into a mess, overtly.

It would be quite wrong to guess the outcome at this stage. Having said that, if I had been presented with a document for my signature, which supported a certain case, to find later, that I had been bamboozled I would be a Most Unhappy Bunny.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
In addition to the above, of course, there is the moral question of senior civil servants expecting their juniors to continue the 'party' line.

I am not alleging that pressure was put on the juniors by their seniors or that they were under threat in any way.

However one must question the psychological effect on the Juniors and their careers when considering their reactions, almost certainly, I believe, knowing that the information they were giving was false and in line with the set party line; perhaps it was merely the thought of their annual assessment which gave them the incentive to continue with the farce, despite the large amouint of correspondence arriving on their desks, sent by our team leaders and others. This could also apply to the staff of DS Sec and the Foreign Office.

"Behfel ist Behfel" (orders are orders) which was not allowed in the defence of those alleged to have committed war crimes and the idea that "orders are orders", for any reason, especially to compound misconduct by Senior CS', should be ignored by Junior Staff.

Part of the Civil Service Code of Conduct, is given to the way in which the misconduct of, particularly, seniors can be reported: the "Whistle-Blowers" Charter.

I would suggest, at this stage, perhaps, this provision should be taken advantage of; the alternative, eventually, could be oblivion with the others.

I apologise to our team in the event that "The" Computer mysteriously crashes again.



Last edited by GLOman on Sat Mar 14, 2009 11:35 am; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Unlawful Rules. 
HD Committee.

From the Secretary of the Cabinet and Head of the Home Civil Service, Sir Richard Wilson KCB, dated 21st June, 1999 -

‘In 1939 a Committee on the grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals, chaired by the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury (Head of the Civil Service), was set up at the request of King George VI to secure proper co-ordination in the advice given directly to him on the grant of medals and associated awards, both military and civil, in time of war. At the request of the Sovereign the Committee has continued to this day, covering awards in time of war or peace, and its current terms of reference are To consider general questions relative to the grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals; to review the scales of award, both civil and military, from time to time; and to consider questions of new awards and changes in the conditions governing existing awards’.

Letter from Sir Richard Wilson to Sir Robin Janvrin dated 22nd. February, 2001 –

‘I attach for submission to The Queen for Her Majesty’s gracious approval the 1218th Report of the Committee on the Grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals, relating to the revision of the rules on the acceptance and wear of foreign awards’.

In two years the Committee on the grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals has gone from giving advice to the Sovereign to making rules which revise Regulations made in 1969 under the Royal Sign Manual. These rules change the terms of the previous regulations which stated that
‘It is The Queen’s wish that Her Majesty’s subjects should not accept and wear the insignia of any such order or decoration without Her Majesty’s permission’
to

‘No UK citizen* may accept and wear a foreign award without the Sovereign’s permission. Such permission must be sought as soon as there is an indication that an award may be offered (this includes British subjects and British-protected persons. BPP’s may accept awards conferred by their rulers).

Sir Richard Wilson KCB (he may have been given more honours but I have not been inclined to check) and his HD Committee have gone from giving advice to the Sovereign to giving advice to the Sovereign’s Private Secretary, to making rules affecting British citizens and British subjects.

So where do Senior Civil Servants get the authority to makes rules specifically against British citizens and British subjects.
Where does the Common Law Royal Prerogative give authority to the Sovereign to authorise despotic rules against British citizens and British subjects
Where was the involvement of elected Ministers of Parliament when these civil servants convinced the Sovereign (who is reported to take advice from Her Ministers) to sign off on these rules, if in fact this did actually take place.

It is a mess of their own making and it should be up to them to sort it out but the arrogance of these people does not permit them the normal human attributes of honour and integrity. No matter what government is in power, they must get a grip of this out of control group of civil servants who have embarrassed the Sovereign and made our country the laughing stock of the world. There is no real reason for the PJM to be refused permission to wear, only pure pig ignorant pettiness. As I said before, they think moral fibre is a breakfast cereal.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
McDangle says,

Quote:
It is a mess of their own making and it should be up to them to sort it out but the arrogance of these people does not permit them the normal human attributes of honour and integrity. No matter what government is in power, they must get a grip of this out of control group of civil servants who have embarrassed the Sovereign and made our country the laughing stock of the world. There is no real reason for the PJM to be refused permission to wear, only pure pig ignorant pettiness. As I said before, they think moral fibre is a breakfast cereal.



Come on McD....................stop beating about the bush and say what you mean. Wink Wink Wink

Joking apart, well said.

Best wishes,

John


_________________
Pingat Kami - Hak Kami
651 Signal Troop,
Semengo Camp,
Kuching.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:
Reply to topic Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  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