The number keeps growing..
...found out why Shadow MP's and Frontbenchers cannot sign EDMs..
Simple question asked to Ian Duncan-Smith...Why cant Shadow Cabinet MP's sign EDM's....(Regarding Micheal Ancrams reply above):
--------------------------------
....carefully noted your comments. Early Day Motions exist to allow
backbench MPs to express their opinions on issues of the day, free from the
influence of their party leadership. As such neither Government ministers
nor Opposition frontbench spokesmen sign EDMs.
In regard of the Chinook helicopter crash, in March we used an opposition
day debate to raise this subject with the Government. The debate can be read
online
http://www.parliament.the-stationery...cmhansrd/cm020
319/debtext/20319-24.htm#20319-24_head0
and I hope you will find it of
interest.
Thank you again for taking the trouble to write.
==================================
That link to the debate is very interesting. especially an inferrence in Dr Lewis's point below...and Sec of Def's reply of:
"Dr. Julian Lewis (New Forest, East): Has MOD policy changed in either of two respects? First, in future, would the MOD ever approve the concentration of such a large number of key intelligence personnel in a single aircraft? If not, that suggests a vested interest in blaming the pilots. Secondly, is it true that a decision has been made that, in future, in circumstances even of this sort, there would be no question of the MOD blaming deceased pilots? If the rules have been changed because of the case of these two pilots, is it not monstrously unjust that the two pilots themselves, who have led to the change in the rules, should nevertheless continue to carry the blame in perpetuity?
Mr. Hoon: Clearly it was not sensible for so many highly specialised people to be carried on a single aircraft, but I cannot accept the hon. Gentleman's implication that there is a deliberate conspiracy to cover up the details simply to protect those who were responsible for the decision in the first place. I am sure that if he thinks about that for a second, he will realise that that is not a proper imputation to make at this stage.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): Will my right hon. Friend give way?
Mr. Hoon: Perhaps my hon. Friend will allow me to respond to the hon. Gentleman's second point. The hon. Gentleman quite rightly mentioned the present rules, which certainly have changed. They have not necessarily changed as a result of this specific unfortunate incident, but they have changed"
====================================
So, the rules have changed...why?
I wonder if the MoD has released publically the results of
"It has also emerged that, at the time of the crash, the MOD was suing both Boeing and Textron Lycoming—the manufacturers of the Chinook and its engines, respectively—because of faulty test procedures and a design fault in the aircraft's FADEC software."
(sorry for the long post)...