Chinook - Still Hitting Back 3 (Merged)
A really irritating PPRuNer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Just popping my head back up above the parapet
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest whispers still aren't good.
Rumour is that the MoD will say that they heard nothing new from Their Lordships. Therefore, no change.
If this rumour is true the MoD has missed the point completely. Their Lordships state (along with most of the rest of the planet) that the evidence the MoD has, already falls significantly short of the burden of proof required. The Air Marshals were wrong
Don't forget, it's the MoD that decides what is, and what isn't of evidential value, and what is released to the public domain. Perhaps they could agree to make every single piece of information available for inspection.
This pressure must be kept up. Not only for Jon and Rick, but for every single current and future service aviator, who could also be so easily sacrificed.
Keep up the good work.
Regards as always
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Rumour is that the MoD will say that they heard nothing new from Their Lordships. Therefore, no change.
If this rumour is true the MoD has missed the point completely. Their Lordships state (along with most of the rest of the planet) that the evidence the MoD has, already falls significantly short of the burden of proof required. The Air Marshals were wrong
Don't forget, it's the MoD that decides what is, and what isn't of evidential value, and what is released to the public domain. Perhaps they could agree to make every single piece of information available for inspection.
This pressure must be kept up. Not only for Jon and Rick, but for every single current and future service aviator, who could also be so easily sacrificed.
Keep up the good work.
Regards as always
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
I note that David Cameron MP (Con) has still not signed the EDM. Neither has he replied to my e-mail - so I've e-mailed him again and have asked for an acknowledgement.
I wonder which party I'll be voting for in the next election?
I wonder which party I'll be voting for in the next election?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: World
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just e-mailed David Cameron as well. You would hope that with so many of us with homes in his constituency he would react.
If you can't get your MP contact his/her agent.
David Cameron's agent is Barry Norton 01993 881777 (home) or 770313 (work - West Oxfordshire Conservative Association).
If you can't get your MP contact his/her agent.
David Cameron's agent is Barry Norton 01993 881777 (home) or 770313 (work - West Oxfordshire Conservative Association).
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Europe
Age: 56
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just had a reply from my MP’s office that he has been given the email and they will get back to me.
Not bad considering I only sent it yesterday.
He seems to have signed 178 EDMs since 1997 so fingers crossed.
Not bad considering I only sent it yesterday.
He seems to have signed 178 EDMs since 1997 so fingers crossed.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Staffordshire, (UK).
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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)...
...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)...
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Col, whoever sent you the reply from the Tory Party is a dipstick and is talking s*ite.
Reply back to them and say if that is the case why has each and every member of the Shadow Cabinet (including Michael Ancram!!) signed EDMs in this session?
They are however correct in saying Ministers do not sign EDMs.
Reply back to them and say if that is the case why has each and every member of the Shadow Cabinet (including Michael Ancram!!) signed EDMs in this session?
They are however correct in saying Ministers do not sign EDMs.
Just a numbered other
I continue in my state of utter frustration at my MP's refusal to sign at the second request. Doesn't think EDMs are ever worth signing.
Although he 'broadly agrees with me' over the accident, he won't be helping the campaign.
Although he 'broadly agrees with me' over the accident, he won't be helping the campaign.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Staffordshire, (UK).
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great News...EDM 829 now a 113.
Ive asked Ian Philips, Corrispondance Sectrestary at Ian Duncan Smiths office, why Front benchers have signed yersterdays session, and well, lied direclty to some of you, including me...ON THE SAME DAY!!. Follow ups would be benificial:
https://www.conservatives.com/feedback.cfm
Write to Ian Duncan Smiths Office.
Could we have a fresh list of MP's contacted, that eiter a) have no replied, or b) have relpied with a non commited or reluctent reposnce...These can always be followed up.
Ive asked Ian Philips, Corrispondance Sectrestary at Ian Duncan Smiths office, why Front benchers have signed yersterdays session, and well, lied direclty to some of you, including me...ON THE SAME DAY!!. Follow ups would be benificial:
https://www.conservatives.com/feedback.cfm
Write to Ian Duncan Smiths Office.
Could we have a fresh list of MP's contacted, that eiter a) have no replied, or b) have relpied with a non commited or reluctent reposnce...These can always be followed up.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chinook
I've tried to absorb all of this long saga so forgive me if this has been answered before. I used to work with William Wratten, does anybody have his address - I wonder if he has been approached to reconsider his decision?
A really irritating PPRuNer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Just popping my head back up above the parapet
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There have been numerous opportunities, yet he remains adamant that he, above everyone else, knows best.
Must be his years of rotory experience. Oh, wait. Hang on .......?
I don't have his address, but hope that someone will mail it to you privately. If you do make contact, please try to point out the obvious to him. There will be many who would be eternally grateful to you!!
Regards
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Must be his years of rotory experience. Oh, wait. Hang on .......?
I don't have his address, but hope that someone will mail it to you privately. If you do make contact, please try to point out the obvious to him. There will be many who would be eternally grateful to you!!
Regards
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Brian - if you go back through your archives, you'll find that this Knight of the Realm used his personal address in Cheltenham in his letter to the media..............
Join Date: May 2000
Location: World
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
David Cameron, Witney (BZN), is away until 3rd July.
I am assured that he will read my e-mail at that time. Presumably he will read those of others on the same subject so BZN people should go to Parliament website, e-mail him and ask politely that he sign the EDM.
I am assured that he will read my e-mail at that time. Presumably he will read those of others on the same subject so BZN people should go to Parliament website, e-mail him and ask politely that he sign the EDM.
A really irritating PPRuNer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Just popping my head back up above the parapet
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Beags,
I remember his letter to The Times where he published his home address. I can't find the cutting and I think I lost the address in computer crash number two! Not to worry, I have no great desire to write to him!
That said, despite of everything, I personally wouldn't feel happy in posting his full address without consent anyway. Hopefully someone will be able to help rhajaramjet with their request.
Colin,
I've also asked David Davis to look into the EDM requests. Not only is he Tory Chair, he's an extremely active supporter.
Ark,
funny how your guy seems to have penned his name to 17 EDMs this year!!
Nil Nos,
Great stuff, thank you.
And thanks to everyone who is keeping this issue to the fore. Don't be suprised at the possible 'hit and run' tactic just prior to the Summer Recess. Quite staggering that the Department for Defence has no stomach for a fight.
Regards as always
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
I remember his letter to The Times where he published his home address. I can't find the cutting and I think I lost the address in computer crash number two! Not to worry, I have no great desire to write to him!
That said, despite of everything, I personally wouldn't feel happy in posting his full address without consent anyway. Hopefully someone will be able to help rhajaramjet with their request.
Colin,
I've also asked David Davis to look into the EDM requests. Not only is he Tory Chair, he's an extremely active supporter.
Ark,
funny how your guy seems to have penned his name to 17 EDMs this year!!
Nil Nos,
Great stuff, thank you.
And thanks to everyone who is keeping this issue to the fore. Don't be suprised at the possible 'hit and run' tactic just prior to the Summer Recess. Quite staggering that the Department for Defence has no stomach for a fight.
Regards as always
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Post to 'Sir John'
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the Big Smoke
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this right?
Just received this from my MP...
Thank you for your recent letter correspondence regarding EDM 829.
You may be aware that I am a Whip and therefore part of the Her Majesty's
Government. As such, parliamentary protocol prevents me from signing Early
Day Motions because if I did it might appear that the EDM had Governmental
support.
However, I will monitor the progress of this EDM with interest.
Thank you for taking the trouble to write to me about this matter.
Yours sincerely,
Jim Fitzpatrick MP
I'm too ignorant to know whether he is making excuses or if he is being straight with me
Thank you for your recent letter correspondence regarding EDM 829.
You may be aware that I am a Whip and therefore part of the Her Majesty's
Government. As such, parliamentary protocol prevents me from signing Early
Day Motions because if I did it might appear that the EDM had Governmental
support.
However, I will monitor the progress of this EDM with interest.
Thank you for taking the trouble to write to me about this matter.
Yours sincerely,
Jim Fitzpatrick MP
I'm too ignorant to know whether he is making excuses or if he is being straight with me
Chalkstripe,
he is being straight with you. The Parliamentary guide says:
Ministers and Whips do not normally sign EDMs. Under the Ministerial Code Parliamentary Private secretaries “must not associate themselves with particular groups advocating special
policies”, and they do not normally sign controversial
EDMs. Neither the Speaker nor Deputy Speakers will sign
EDMs. The internal Standing Orders of the Parliamentary
Labour Party require Labour Members to consult the Chief
Whip before tabling an EDM, and to delay the tabling of an
EDM for one sitting day at the Chief Whip’s request.
Since there appear to have been some queries about EDMs, for those seeking more info, can I suggest:
http://edm.ais.co.uk/
While the factsheet itself is at:
http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/fs30.pdf
he is being straight with you. The Parliamentary guide says:
Ministers and Whips do not normally sign EDMs. Under the Ministerial Code Parliamentary Private secretaries “must not associate themselves with particular groups advocating special
policies”, and they do not normally sign controversial
EDMs. Neither the Speaker nor Deputy Speakers will sign
EDMs. The internal Standing Orders of the Parliamentary
Labour Party require Labour Members to consult the Chief
Whip before tabling an EDM, and to delay the tabling of an
EDM for one sitting day at the Chief Whip’s request.
Since there appear to have been some queries about EDMs, for those seeking more info, can I suggest:
http://edm.ais.co.uk/
While the factsheet itself is at:
http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/fs30.pdf