I sent this off on August 17th:-
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 20:32:48 +0100 (BST)
From: "JOHN COOPER"
Subject: FAO Neena Thandasseri
To:
ceremonial@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk
ceremonial@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk
FAO Neena Thandasseri
Policy Officer
Ceremonial Secretariat
Cabinet Office
SW1P 3BQ
Dear Neena
Thank you for your letter of 16th August in reply to my two emails to Mr Denis Brennan of 6th and 14th August 2006 re an appeal on an unjust decision by The HD Committee to advise Her Majesty to accept the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal but for those 35000 recipients not to be able to OFFICIALLY wear the medal.
Would the Cabinet Office explain under which section of the Royal Prerogative does the non wearing of the PJM medal come under and further I cannot seem to find this statement by Mr Ian Pearson on the award announcement of 31st January 2006? Did The Queen use this Royal Prerogative to disallow Her own British Subjects wearing The PJM against those of our Commonwealth Cousins in Australia and New Zealand. Once you find these dates would you kindly copy these to me.
Although there appears to be different signals coming out of different departments of The FCO/Cabinet Office/MoD, the latter of course having no truck with the PJM but do seem to want to join in unofficially, why I wonder have comments such as 'the wearing of medal by civilians is not policed' come from, now that is one statement you are all in step with, but once again was not mentioned by Ian Pearson on 31st January 2006.
So my question to you Neena is 'are the rules being made up as you go along' as I have no redress on 'The Queens Prerogative', I cannot appeal, I have no statutory rights. I have further been quoted in the past on The Five Year Rule and Double Medalling Rule which do not aparently exist. The latter two is being asked officially of you by Sir Michael Lord MP, The Deputy Speaker of The House of Commons who is also my MP for Central Suffolk.
Perhaps you would be so kind as to give me your expert opinions on the above, failing which of course you may pass this back to Mr Brennan for his reasoning.
Again thank you for your response and time
Yours sincerely
John Cooper
In reply to above
Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:01:08 +0100 (BST)
From: "JOHN COOPER"
Subject: Re: FAO Neena Thandasseri
To: "JOHN COOPER" Dear Neena
Thank you for your letter of the 19th September in response to my email shown below.
What is it Neena that you do not understand about my email below? You have not answered one of my questions or, in my opinion given a satisfactory answer, your letter does not address anything I have mentioned below. Could you therefore do so, if you can't can you pass it on to someone that can answer it.
The Departments within Whitehall such as yours just give so much spiel about nothing that I can see why you are all overworked, your last sentence to me in your latest letter epitomises the wanton waste of gobbledegook emanating from someone who clearly does not understand the problem.
The HD Committee made the decision on the non right to wear, if they had made the correct decision in the first place, you would not receive 'a large amount of correspondence on peripheral issues'.
I wish my letter of the 17th August 2006 to be dissected and to be answered fully, it would appear to me you are but a cog in an ever increasing Jurassic Monster of an organisation.
Yours sincerely
John Cooper
_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------