Parliamentary Questions concerning Hercules Safety
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ullage Protection
There are many ways to protect the ullage.
Fuel Tank Ullage Protection
Passive (in-situ):
• Explosion Suppressant Foam (ESF) on P-3, C-130, F/A-18
• Aluminum mesh
Inerting:
• Halon 1301 was used on now-retired A-6 platform
• Alternative: On-Board Inert Gas Generation System (OBIGGS) - provides nitrogen-enriched air; maintain O2 concentration < 9% for military applications –Implemented on V-22, H-1Upgrades
Active Systems (within ullage, reacts to event):
Legislation by the FAA that would force airlines to retrofit their fleets appears to have stalled for now. From the research I have done inerting fuel tanks or fitting ESF is relatively straightforward. It is not so expensive but it is time consuming. I am aware of OBIGGS on C17 ac. Fuel tank protection can be fitted on anything from fast jets to C5. It is just a matter of political will.
Fuel Tank Ullage Protection
Passive (in-situ):
• Explosion Suppressant Foam (ESF) on P-3, C-130, F/A-18
• Aluminum mesh
Inerting:
• Halon 1301 was used on now-retired A-6 platform
• Alternative: On-Board Inert Gas Generation System (OBIGGS) - provides nitrogen-enriched air; maintain O2 concentration < 9% for military applications –Implemented on V-22, H-1Upgrades
Active Systems (within ullage, reacts to event):
Legislation by the FAA that would force airlines to retrofit their fleets appears to have stalled for now. From the research I have done inerting fuel tanks or fitting ESF is relatively straightforward. It is not so expensive but it is time consuming. I am aware of OBIGGS on C17 ac. Fuel tank protection can be fitted on anything from fast jets to C5. It is just a matter of political will.
Last edited by nigegilb; 25th Apr 2006 at 09:03.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: cambridge
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
get the message across
i just want to make myself clear. i was not saying that i was upset in an angry way as the photos were shown. i chose to look at them of my own free will and as a result accept the consequences. thankyou for those of you who have taken the time to offer explanations. it has been appreciated that you have tried to help. i know that those two crashes were two separate incidents. it is important though that we do take time to dwell on what might have been re: C5 and what was on XV179 despite the fact that the causes were different.
WE MUST HAVE SUPPRESSANT TECHNOLOGY ON ALL HERCULES.
the message is simple.
i have been approached by a news agency and given the opportunity to tell my story about why i'm taking part in this campaign. it is felt by the journalist that it will be most effective doing it woman to woman. i'm talking to other wives/mothers/sisters/daughters and the like. they will be made aware that all the protection that their countries afford their troops counts for nothing when they have the honour of being on a british albert as we don't have foam. the feature will go to the nationals overseas. i've been told that it will likely be US and australia. i will get this message across. my parents want all hercules protected. this may be idealistic but a few token planes lucky enough to win the lottery of funding is not sufficient .
please watch the news tomorrow. the military families who have lost their children in iraq will be lobbying MP's and delivering the petition to downing street. thankyou to those of you who have signed the petition. it will make a difference. thankyou for your support.
WE MUST HAVE SUPPRESSANT TECHNOLOGY ON ALL HERCULES.
the message is simple.
i have been approached by a news agency and given the opportunity to tell my story about why i'm taking part in this campaign. it is felt by the journalist that it will be most effective doing it woman to woman. i'm talking to other wives/mothers/sisters/daughters and the like. they will be made aware that all the protection that their countries afford their troops counts for nothing when they have the honour of being on a british albert as we don't have foam. the feature will go to the nationals overseas. i've been told that it will likely be US and australia. i will get this message across. my parents want all hercules protected. this may be idealistic but a few token planes lucky enough to win the lottery of funding is not sufficient .
please watch the news tomorrow. the military families who have lost their children in iraq will be lobbying MP's and delivering the petition to downing street. thankyou to those of you who have signed the petition. it will make a difference. thankyou for your support.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Parliamentary answers
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make it his policy to advise relatives of deceased armed services personnel to seek independent legal advice before signing pensions contracts; and if he will make a statement. [64040]
20 Apr 2006 : Column 769W
Mr. Touhig: Dependants of deceased service personnel do not have to sign a pension contract to receive death benefits from the armed forces pension schemes. The benefits are paid in accordance with the terms of the appropriate pension scheme. The only requirement is for the dependant to confirm they are an eligible beneficiary and to sign a claim form to that effect. The Ministry of Defence already advises in its explanatory armed forces pension booklets that, if individuals require financial or legal advice regarding pension matters, they should seek independent advice.
DEFENCE
A400M Aircraft
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his counterparts in other countries on the merits of fitting a fuel tank inerting system to the A400M aircraft. [63224]
Mr. Ingram: The A400M does not come fitted with a fuel inerting system, although a portable removable on board inert gas generation system is available as an option. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence has not discussed the fitting of a fuel tank inerting system to the A400M with his counterparts in other countries. Officials have discussed the merits of fitting such a system with counterparts in other countries. The UK will make a decision in due course on whether to fit the system to our A400M aircraft.
Maybe if the MoD had discussed the merits of fitting foam to Hercules ac with our good friends the Americans we could have saved an ac. Seems the Flight International article was either wrong or the Govt is now back peddling. I have other info saying that we did reject fuel tank inerting. I also believe that widows and relatives should be provided with legal advice. I now wonder if the pensions clause is valid.
20 Apr 2006 : Column 769W
Mr. Touhig: Dependants of deceased service personnel do not have to sign a pension contract to receive death benefits from the armed forces pension schemes. The benefits are paid in accordance with the terms of the appropriate pension scheme. The only requirement is for the dependant to confirm they are an eligible beneficiary and to sign a claim form to that effect. The Ministry of Defence already advises in its explanatory armed forces pension booklets that, if individuals require financial or legal advice regarding pension matters, they should seek independent advice.
DEFENCE
A400M Aircraft
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his counterparts in other countries on the merits of fitting a fuel tank inerting system to the A400M aircraft. [63224]
Mr. Ingram: The A400M does not come fitted with a fuel inerting system, although a portable removable on board inert gas generation system is available as an option. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence has not discussed the fitting of a fuel tank inerting system to the A400M with his counterparts in other countries. Officials have discussed the merits of fitting such a system with counterparts in other countries. The UK will make a decision in due course on whether to fit the system to our A400M aircraft.
Maybe if the MoD had discussed the merits of fitting foam to Hercules ac with our good friends the Americans we could have saved an ac. Seems the Flight International article was either wrong or the Govt is now back peddling. I have other info saying that we did reject fuel tank inerting. I also believe that widows and relatives should be provided with legal advice. I now wonder if the pensions clause is valid.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pensions and A400M???
It seems that the answer to the PQ regarding pensions and clauses is confusing people. I have to admit I do not understand it either. Please seek clarification through your MP/Lawyer and/or if you wish PM me and I will compile a list of questions for HCDC to investigate. I have already requested legislation to remove the clause.
Regarding A400M. Here is an interesting timeline. Some dates approx
Jan 14 - No decision on Herc Foam
Jan 15 - MoS Article on Herc crash.
Jan 19 - Widows/relatives receive letter from RAF saying decision soon.
Jan 19/Mar7 -K to get foam. Not J. Initial no. airframes increases over time.
Jan 30 - 2nd MoS article. Foam costs £50,000
Mar 07- HCDC Meeting/Ingram Letters of evidence handed over
Mar 07/ April10- Decision reversed on J. J to get foam.
This is what I understand to have happened. Usual warnings apply. If you can help me to firm up dates please do.
Now expect a decision soon on the A400M. The MoD obviously did not consider the A400M to be vulnerable to small arms fire when every other European Nation buying it, did. I have no doubt that the MoD will suddenly see the light and agree to fit an inerting system. Thank you to everyone helping out there. We are winning small battles every day.
Chappie, will be thinking about you and the Boys at 1400 today. Good luck.
NG
Regarding A400M. Here is an interesting timeline. Some dates approx
Jan 14 - No decision on Herc Foam
Jan 15 - MoS Article on Herc crash.
Jan 19 - Widows/relatives receive letter from RAF saying decision soon.
Jan 19/Mar7 -K to get foam. Not J. Initial no. airframes increases over time.
Jan 30 - 2nd MoS article. Foam costs £50,000
Mar 07- HCDC Meeting/Ingram Letters of evidence handed over
Mar 07/ April10- Decision reversed on J. J to get foam.
This is what I understand to have happened. Usual warnings apply. If you can help me to firm up dates please do.
Now expect a decision soon on the A400M. The MoD obviously did not consider the A400M to be vulnerable to small arms fire when every other European Nation buying it, did. I have no doubt that the MoD will suddenly see the light and agree to fit an inerting system. Thank you to everyone helping out there. We are winning small battles every day.
Chappie, will be thinking about you and the Boys at 1400 today. Good luck.
NG
Hellbound
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Blighty
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BBC website today reported the MoD's intention to fit some Hercs with additional safety equipment.
...A statement from the ministry said: "The safety of our armed forces personnel is of paramount importance.
"Only Hercules with appropriate defensive countermeasures are deployed to operational theatres. "Furthermore, we have decided to fit Explosion Suppressant Foam (ESF) to some of our aircraft; concentrating on the aircraft that operate in the highest threat environment."
Would feel better if the decision read 'we have decided to fit ESF to all our aircraft operating in a threat environment, with priority being given to those operating in the highest threat...'
...A statement from the ministry said: "The safety of our armed forces personnel is of paramount importance.
"Only Hercules with appropriate defensive countermeasures are deployed to operational theatres. "Furthermore, we have decided to fit Explosion Suppressant Foam (ESF) to some of our aircraft; concentrating on the aircraft that operate in the highest threat environment."
Would feel better if the decision read 'we have decided to fit ESF to all our aircraft operating in a threat environment, with priority being given to those operating in the highest threat...'
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nige et al
Have been unable to post for a while, due sick IT! So FWIW I thought I'd add my pennyworth.
Well done Nige - great result on the foam - shame about the limited numbers tho' - what about other (AT) assets in theatre?! Sadly, them with egg on their hats ( + faces) will keep denying everything until someone tracks the advice given from below. Surely, that is what all that filing was for!? Have you tried the FOI route? If you'd rather not say, PM!
Chappie - keep going, we're right with you!
Rude kid - I'm also with you and find it hard to believe that night ops aren't de rigeur!
Mike J - spot on!
V (distasteful) Rot - I don't agree with your points, Queen's shilling or not! Nige, FA and RK have covered the glaring holes in your argument.
Nonetheless, as Voltaire said
"I disapprove of what you say but will defend to the death, your right to say it!"
Just have a little more empathy with those who read this thread, please.
Flipster
Have been unable to post for a while, due sick IT! So FWIW I thought I'd add my pennyworth.
Well done Nige - great result on the foam - shame about the limited numbers tho' - what about other (AT) assets in theatre?! Sadly, them with egg on their hats ( + faces) will keep denying everything until someone tracks the advice given from below. Surely, that is what all that filing was for!? Have you tried the FOI route? If you'd rather not say, PM!
Chappie - keep going, we're right with you!
Rude kid - I'm also with you and find it hard to believe that night ops aren't de rigeur!
Mike J - spot on!
V (distasteful) Rot - I don't agree with your points, Queen's shilling or not! Nige, FA and RK have covered the glaring holes in your argument.
Nonetheless, as Voltaire said
"I disapprove of what you say but will defend to the death, your right to say it!"
Just have a little more empathy with those who read this thread, please.
Flipster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4948080.stm
Link to today at the cenotaph.
Powerful stuff Chappie. You are a strong one...
Link to today at the cenotaph.
Powerful stuff Chappie. You are a strong one...
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: somewhere, under the rainbow
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
foam
sorry to be a couple of days behind in the argument but .....
""If foam counters small arms" etc...
Yes it does counter the effects of small arms, but not just small arms. Many big arms work by producing lots of bullet sized bits of metal, the effect of which is remarkably like, well, bullets!
""If foam counters small arms" etc...
Yes it does counter the effects of small arms, but not just small arms. Many big arms work by producing lots of bullet sized bits of metal, the effect of which is remarkably like, well, bullets!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: cambridge
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
try again
i have tried to post a reply....it was removed i will try this version!
today i think i managed to get my point across. i have got a standing ovation from families and politicians alike with my facts......and tears. i'm ashamed to say that i cried but that only served to emphasize that i'm one of the realities of war and the effects of loss.
we have got politicians on side and i will PM anyone who wants names. they now know that you are flying without defensive aids in some planes, you are flying in them without the protection of foam. we are in this partly, some would say to support the americans, yet we are unable to work as an equal as we have not got the same basic equipment that they have on all their hercs. while they are offered protection from their own aircraft when they have the priviledge of being on our hercs they are not. reid speaks of lucky shots. as i said previously this is not about luck. it is a lottery as to which planes can offer the defensive aids system and if the MOD statement are to be believed in time which plane has got EST.
these politicans now know that the americans have foam in all their ac and there are no complaints about manouvreability. i told them about the off the record MOD comment that they are keen to fit foam but the pilots are the obstructive ones as there are complaints that the manouvreability is affected by this technology. i also highlighted that there are the comments made by the MOD that they were not aware that there were vunerability risks on this plane. i told the politicans that the risks were pointed out shown costed and promptly ignored, there are very raised eyebrow in parliament tonight. they know that i want foam for all planes.
i just hope i did you proud.
today i think i managed to get my point across. i have got a standing ovation from families and politicians alike with my facts......and tears. i'm ashamed to say that i cried but that only served to emphasize that i'm one of the realities of war and the effects of loss.
we have got politicians on side and i will PM anyone who wants names. they now know that you are flying without defensive aids in some planes, you are flying in them without the protection of foam. we are in this partly, some would say to support the americans, yet we are unable to work as an equal as we have not got the same basic equipment that they have on all their hercs. while they are offered protection from their own aircraft when they have the priviledge of being on our hercs they are not. reid speaks of lucky shots. as i said previously this is not about luck. it is a lottery as to which planes can offer the defensive aids system and if the MOD statement are to be believed in time which plane has got EST.
these politicans now know that the americans have foam in all their ac and there are no complaints about manouvreability. i told them about the off the record MOD comment that they are keen to fit foam but the pilots are the obstructive ones as there are complaints that the manouvreability is affected by this technology. i also highlighted that there are the comments made by the MOD that they were not aware that there were vunerability risks on this plane. i told the politicans that the risks were pointed out shown costed and promptly ignored, there are very raised eyebrow in parliament tonight. they know that i want foam for all planes.
i just hope i did you proud.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chappie you surely did. Point West led the program on the Hercules tonight. It was another powerful piece on TV and you were at the centre of it. There is a feeling that something changed today. The MoD has nowhere to hide now. Do not worry, still got plenty of stones to throw. I am very much looking forward to meeting AOC 2GP on May 04. Let's hope he has some good news.
NG
NG
Last edited by nigegilb; 27th Apr 2006 at 05:48.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Parliamentary answers
Trial Bishop Report
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make the Trial Bishop report available to members of the Defence Select Committee; if he will place a copy of the report in the Library; and if he will make a statement. [65099]
Mr. Ingram: The Trial Bishop report contains information that if released could prejudice the safety and security of UK armed forces. Therefore it would not be in the public interest for a copy of the report to be placed in the Library of the House at this time. I will consider a separate request from the Defence Committee in the usual way.
He didn't say no then......
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make the Trial Bishop report available to members of the Defence Select Committee; if he will place a copy of the report in the Library; and if he will make a statement. [65099]
Mr. Ingram: The Trial Bishop report contains information that if released could prejudice the safety and security of UK armed forces. Therefore it would not be in the public interest for a copy of the report to be placed in the Library of the House at this time. I will consider a separate request from the Defence Committee in the usual way.
He didn't say no then......
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nige
Trial Bishop is obviously very sensitive and, certainly, should not be open to the public (and the enemy). Nonetheless, the limitations of our 'old kit' have been known about for some time and, to a major degree, these probs have been rectified by getting 'new kit'. However, there are threats out there that are very hard to defend against - I won't mention what they are, though it is fairly obvious to those whom know. Furthermore, it will be nigh on impossible to defend against them - unless of course, every ac is weighed down by lots of expensive gear in an effort to produce the proverbial 'deflector shield'. I'm sure the AWC are working on this, however!
What worries me is how far does this 'action' against the politicians go? I believe that if foam is to be fitted urgently, then we have helped this happen - well done. The 'other kit' must be next and equally as urgently acheived, as it should have been done years ago. But what next?
I don't think the corporate manslaughter route is one we should get involved with. Obviously, I don't know for sure but I don't think the families would really want that either - it would take yonks and loads of everyone's valuable time and money, all the while raking over old ground, when what people need to do is get on with rebuilding their lives. The only winners will be the lawyers. Maybe what everyone needs is for someone in the gov't to put up their hand, just take responsibility and say sorry?
For sure, I think it would be most apt if Mr Reid and the Gov't would admit that
"Yes, we got it wrong. Yes, we should have listened and the funds should have been made available - but now its being sorted. Yes, we will pay some compensation to families.....Sorry."
Maybe Tony B should meet the families and say the same, while giving his personal assurances that this should not happen again?
Perhaps honesty is the best and only course for the gov't - it might even prevent anyone bringing corporate manslaughter charges against Hoon and Tony. Sadly, I believe the gov't accepting such responsibility would be highly unlikely. It is also likely that they would wriggle out of any charges, while putting put the blame on Their Airships, who are guilty of only failing to listen to advice from their own experts (it might be good CRM if Their Airships admitted as much?).
If nothing else, this episode should then serve as a reminder that:
a. Our Armed Forces need the proper kit to go to war.
b. They need to be more fully supported and listened to by their chain of command.
c. The families of the fallen are not to be overlooked nor 'avoided'.
d. The threat of corporate manslaughter to the politicians is very high if they don't comply and act in good faith.
e. The legal bandwagon is wrong to always search for someone to label as 'culpably negligent' because we are all human and, as a result, occasionally make mistakes!
Whilst I live in hope, I have also bought a ticket to cloudcuckooland!
Flip
Trial Bishop is obviously very sensitive and, certainly, should not be open to the public (and the enemy). Nonetheless, the limitations of our 'old kit' have been known about for some time and, to a major degree, these probs have been rectified by getting 'new kit'. However, there are threats out there that are very hard to defend against - I won't mention what they are, though it is fairly obvious to those whom know. Furthermore, it will be nigh on impossible to defend against them - unless of course, every ac is weighed down by lots of expensive gear in an effort to produce the proverbial 'deflector shield'. I'm sure the AWC are working on this, however!
What worries me is how far does this 'action' against the politicians go? I believe that if foam is to be fitted urgently, then we have helped this happen - well done. The 'other kit' must be next and equally as urgently acheived, as it should have been done years ago. But what next?
I don't think the corporate manslaughter route is one we should get involved with. Obviously, I don't know for sure but I don't think the families would really want that either - it would take yonks and loads of everyone's valuable time and money, all the while raking over old ground, when what people need to do is get on with rebuilding their lives. The only winners will be the lawyers. Maybe what everyone needs is for someone in the gov't to put up their hand, just take responsibility and say sorry?
For sure, I think it would be most apt if Mr Reid and the Gov't would admit that
"Yes, we got it wrong. Yes, we should have listened and the funds should have been made available - but now its being sorted. Yes, we will pay some compensation to families.....Sorry."
Maybe Tony B should meet the families and say the same, while giving his personal assurances that this should not happen again?
Perhaps honesty is the best and only course for the gov't - it might even prevent anyone bringing corporate manslaughter charges against Hoon and Tony. Sadly, I believe the gov't accepting such responsibility would be highly unlikely. It is also likely that they would wriggle out of any charges, while putting put the blame on Their Airships, who are guilty of only failing to listen to advice from their own experts (it might be good CRM if Their Airships admitted as much?).
If nothing else, this episode should then serve as a reminder that:
a. Our Armed Forces need the proper kit to go to war.
b. They need to be more fully supported and listened to by their chain of command.
c. The families of the fallen are not to be overlooked nor 'avoided'.
d. The threat of corporate manslaughter to the politicians is very high if they don't comply and act in good faith.
e. The legal bandwagon is wrong to always search for someone to label as 'culpably negligent' because we are all human and, as a result, occasionally make mistakes!
Whilst I live in hope, I have also bought a ticket to cloudcuckooland!
Flip
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Mostly gardening
Age: 64
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't been following this all that closely; has anyone drawn a parallel with the following?
http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2000/aar0003.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800
http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/systems/fueltank/intro.stm
http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2000/aar0003.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800
http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/systems/fueltank/intro.stm
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not strictly the same, as the ignition sources are different but the end result definitely was. Foams and other inerting systems prevent/retard the explosive advancement through the ullage of the flame-front from the ignition source (ie spark). In some cases, fire will still occur but there should be less of a bang!
Just yet another possible threat to ac - but little legislation has been produced.
It is intersting to note that the C17 has on board inert gas generating system or OBIGGS, I think?
Just yet another possible threat to ac - but little legislation has been produced.
It is intersting to note that the C17 has on board inert gas generating system or OBIGGS, I think?
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In British Columbia they are introducing legislation to allow government to apologise to families without automatically screwing themselves in court actions, which will hopefully allow a bit more humanity into the government-citizen relationship.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: cambridge
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cloud cuckoo land
dear guys, it's very commendable that you wish the government would claim responsibility but i'm afraid that you are in cloud cuckoo land. as i was in parliament yesterday i was sat next to the guy who had been sent to report back to the prime minister. he said to tony that when there is a death in the armed forces you place a note of sympathy in the despatsch box. now is the real chance to offer your sympathies in person to the families. 5 minutes of your time will show goodwill. tony's response was a long winded blustered response. he was then asked is that a yes or no? the more tony blair refuses the more he looks as though he has got something to hide. what is the lure of parkinson versus face to face with grief. it does not make you more of a peoples person because you are on a chatshow.
i did not have the ability not to cry when i was putting across my arguement and saying the name of the dead in parliament. i wanted those names to be talked about in those walls. i want them to talk about my name as well. why do we have to fight for compensation? why is there resistance. i hope i did not let anyone down because i ended up crying. this would not have made my arguement very profesional. i am sure they heard what i had to say.there are politicians who i are aware of all the facts that i managed to say. they willbe given the facts as i email them then sit back and see what happens.....or am i living in cloud cuckoo land?
i did not have the ability not to cry when i was putting across my arguement and saying the name of the dead in parliament. i wanted those names to be talked about in those walls. i want them to talk about my name as well. why do we have to fight for compensation? why is there resistance. i hope i did not let anyone down because i ended up crying. this would not have made my arguement very profesional. i am sure they heard what i had to say.there are politicians who i are aware of all the facts that i managed to say. they willbe given the facts as i email them then sit back and see what happens.....or am i living in cloud cuckoo land?