text: The time now is Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:06 pm
  MyBikeFrancis
  Re: Scottish Parliament.
  I have just watched the Petition Hearing. What a breath of fresh air in that Scottish Parliament Petitions Committee room. Frank, non-combative, discussion. No arrogant patronizing. They were MSPs and so belonged to a range of British political parties. Yet they put aside party lines and listened to the Petition on a non-partisan basis. I thought that was brilliant.
  I was fascinated to hear how the Scottish Parliament will not take a simple acknowledgement of their questions as being a satisfactory response which is quite unlike just about every Commons MP's attitude because they assume that an acknowledgement is an explanation! In the Commons MPs also assume that whatever the civil servants say must be right!
  I am also impressed by the service and by the way they are trying to give you your day in court on a fair basis. You have received a letter that says that London civil servants will not have the last word. I am mightily impressed by that.
  All in all the Scottish Petition has resurrected in me some hope for the future, and a future not just for the PJM but for democracy.
  Please include me on your list of supporters.
  Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:51 am
  Welcome 'MyBikeFrancis' (there's a 'handle'!) to the Forum and thank you for your post.
  ...We are grateful for your participation and for your support.
  MyBikeFrancis wrote:
  Yes, you have got it right in one and that is how I felt with the Scottish Parliament. I am also told that soon they will implement their own Human Rights Committee so that anyone who has a Human Rights issue can firstly take it before the Scottish Parliament and if successful they, the Scottish Parliament, will take it to Brussels.
  The question I keep asking myself is 'why do the Westminster Parliament and the Whitehall Civil Serpents have to keep going down the bending, twisting road, when it is much easier and beneficial to go down the straight and shortest route'. Their attitude now is to lie and cheat and refuse to listen to anyone but themselves when it would be much easier, and save taxpayers hard earned cash, by just listening to reason and intelligent argument and once in a while reminding themselves that they have a code to comply with and their wages and adequatre perks (gold plated pension) are given to them by the people who are asking the questions and are only wanting a reasonable service. No chance of that with Emperor Aartone in charge of this discredited and dishonourable government though.
  Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:45 pm
  The difference between the approach from Scottish MSPs and our civil servants is stark. Those London civil servants seem to think that we should consider ourselves to be fortunate to have what they decide we should have. They have tried to get away with their traditional obfuscation but they have failed.
  When replying they only repeated their myths and , in so doing, they rammed down our throats that we have no right of appeal. Well, we do now.
  So … Think again, civil servants, and watch and learn from the Scottish Petition how it can be done - openly and even-handedly.
  All we have ever asked for is a fair hearing - and we have been pointedly refused that. Not only that, they have lied and cheated and have used their power throughout the world via their High Commissions to promulgate their myths. They failed, of course. And in failing they have made themselves look silly and antiquated. They made this country look arrogant and patronising. They have brought this country into disrepute.
  Sun Nov 26, 2006 2:36 pm
  Scottish Public Petitions Committee Minutes 20-3-07
  Herewith the minutes of the Scottish Public Petitions Committee meeting on 20-3-07 in connection with the PJM right to wear case - PE991.
  The Convener: PE991, by Andrew Nicoll, calls on the Scottish Parliament to support the right of Scottish veterans to wear the pingat jasa Malaysia medal.
  At its meeting on 15 November 2006, the committee agreed to seek views on the petition from the committee on the grant of honours, decorations and medals and the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, and to seek the petitioner's comments on the responses. Responses have been received and circulated to members. Further information has also been submitted by the committee on the grant of honours, decorations and medals and by the petitioner.
  Would Linda Fabiani like to comment? She has an interest in the matter.
  Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): I would like to hear what the committee has to say first.
  Ms White: I am just reading the papers, as we got them only today, although the follow-up response was due in early March. I cannot follow the logic of the Cabinet Office ceremonial secretariat, which continues to say that, although we can allow the veterans to accept the medal, they have no official permission to wear it. When the men came to the committee to give evidence they were asked about the fact that they could wear the medal. They said, "Yes, we could, but we want that to be officially recognised." The correspondence suggests that although the Government turns a blind eye and no prosecutions have taken place of people who wear the medal ceremonially, they still do not have permission to wear it. As the men said, they fought and received a medal; they want the honour of wearing it without fear of being prosecuted. I cannot understand why the Cabinet Office will not give the veterans permission to wear the medal. I do not know what the committee can do about the issue, but I wanted to make that point anyway.
  Helen Eadie: Given that the documentation has been tabled only this morning, it is difficult to know exactly how to respond. It is clear that there is concern out there, but the Cabinet Office's letter seems to suggest that there may be misinterpretation and misunderstanding.
  I suggest that we send all the correspondence to the petitioner—I do not think that he has received it yet. We should get a response from the petitioner and keep the petition open in the meantime. That gives us all a chance to read the documentation more fully—we have not had the chance to read it as, regrettably, it was tabled only this morning. That is the only way forward on the petition.
  The Convener: The Cabinet Office is due to report in March. It would be worth the committee's while to keep the petition open at least until we see that report. We can look at whatever dialogue there is between the petitioner and the organisations involved, but we must await the Cabinet Office's decision.
  Jackie Baillie: The Cabinet Office has made a decision. That information is contained in its letter to us of 12 March. It is basically sticking to its original decision. I also note that it looked over all the rules on acceptance and award of not only the PJM but all foreign medals. I have to say that, although the petitioners have had the opportunity to respond, there is a great deal of detail that we have not had an opportunity to read because it has been presented to us only this morning. It would be in everybody's interests to carry the matter forward.
  Linda Fabiani: Unlike the committee, I have not had the benefit of seeing all the papers, but I would like to add a couple of points.
  I have stayed in touch with a couple of the veterans, and I would like to relay to the committee the upset and hurt that those men feel. While they can be honoured by an overseas Government for the work that they did in the Malay emergency, they feel that they are being slighted and not honoured by their own Government. They have been treated contemptibly. For example, Mr Nicoll told me that he received a phone call from someone in the Ministry of Defence about a letter that he sent. The conversation was like something out of "Yes, Minister". The chap told him that the Queen has not refused permission for the PJM to be worn; she has just not given her permission for it to be worn. In other words, veterans are still not allowed to wear the medal with the honour that is due to them.
  I am delighted that members seem to want to keep the petition open. Another matter might be worthy of exploration. The London Gazette of 3 May 1968 has been drawn to my attention. It says:
  "The QUEEN has been graciously pleased to approve that Orders, Decorations and Medals conferred with Her Majesty's permission upon United Kingdom citizens not being servants of the Crown by the Heads or Governments of Commonwealth countries as defined above, or of foreign States, may in all cases be worn by the recipients without restriction".
  I did not bring a copy of the item, because I could not print it, but I am glad to see that members have a copy. Perhaps the committee could ask what happened to nullify that order, regulation or rule—or whatever the formal term is. I feel strongly that veterans of a war—although it was not called a war, for reasons that we cannot go into—are not being honoured by their country, despite being accorded great respect by the country that they helped.
  The response from the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association was a wee bit off. We are not talking about
  "a matter impacting on two Commonwealth countries";
  we are talking about this country's failure to give veterans the honour and respect that they are due from all of us. If the committee's decision is to keep the petition open and consider the matter further, I thank you.
  The Convener: I think that our decision has been made. Are members happy to keep the petition open, so that our successor committee after May can consider it and correspond with the petitioner about how to take matters forward?
  Helen Eadie: Linda Fabiani drew our attention to a fascinating matter. Can we extract her evidence from the Official Report, send a copy to the Cabinet Office and ask it to respond to the point that she made? The question needs to be answered.
  Jackie Baillie: Before we do that, members should take the opportunity to read the papers, which contain the answer. The petitioner provided the item in the London Gazette, but the papers include a response from the Cabinet Office ceremonial secretariat. Given the detail of the matter, if we are to do the petitioner justice we should reflect further before writing to the Cabinet Office.
  The Convener: We will have to keep the petition open.
  Ms White: We will have to do that, to be fair to the veterans. Linda Fabiani talked about Cabinetspeak. We have just received the papers and are looking through them as we go along, but I noticed a comment that, although no official permission has been given for the wearing of the medal,
  "the wearing of awards by civilians is not policed".
  Such language is just not right.
  The Convener: We will keep the petition open, to allow proper consideration of new information. I thank Linda Fabiani for her evidence.
  Thu Mar 22, 2007 3:22 pm
  Re: Scottish Public Petitions Committee Minutes 20-3-07
  This is very good news, Andy.
  The Scottish MSPs are showing the suits in London how democracy can work. They are giving us a fair hearing and that's all we ask.
  Thu Mar 22, 2007 3:48 pm
  This is brilliant Andy...we have a true friend in Scottish MP Linda Fabiani!
  Such language is just not right.The Convener: We will keep the petition open, to allow proper consideration of new information. I thank Linda Fabiani for her evidence.[/quote]
  What an absolute Brahma!
  Yes Jock and I will write and thank her on behalf of us all. Seems like Bren-gun and his gang may rule Whitehall but it aint the case in Scotland. I look forward to the next Committee after the elections here in Scotland on 3rd. May, 2007, and no Tony, we do not believe your spin and lies about a certain political party. We will make up our own minds, thank you very much! Andy.
  Thu Mar 22, 2007 7:24 pm
  For example, Mr Nicoll told me that he received a phone call from someone in the Ministry of Defence about a letter that he sent. The conversation was like something out of "Yes, Minister". The chap told him that the Queen has not refused permission for the PJM to be worn; she has just not given her permission for it to be worn In other words, veterans are still not allowed to wear the medal with the honour that is due to them.
  "the wearing of awards by civilians is not policed". Such language is just not right.
  Congrats to Andy and Linda Fabiani for keeping the pressure on the Cabinet Office.
  No its not right, and it is time this condecending language from Britian's emperial past is challenged. So much for Mr Bliar and his political cronies great speeches at the Fabian Society about promoting egalitarianism. The cabinetspeak used by suits at Whitehall want us all to go back to feudalism.
  During the reign of Tudor Queen Elizabeth 1 it has been said that When Sir Nicholas Clifford came home with a foreign decoration bestowed upon him in France, The Queen cursed and raved at him, telling him, "My dogs wear my collars."
  Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:28 am
  Ah yes the good old Fabian society, full of rhetoric and misguided idealism. Its favourite son Harold Wilson is largely resonsible for the sorrowful state of Zimbabwe today. A once very prosperous nation for all its people is now a disaster. Nothing has really changed, the current UK Government has also lost the plot on its unworkable human rights approach. The PJM issue is just one of many issues that history will show as one of its multitude of failures.
  Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:33 am
  All those years ago I campaigned in support of Ian Smith.
  I'm sorry to say that what I said would happen HAS.
  Yes Paul, and I was actually there supporting him. Met him and shook his hand. Andy.
  Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:25 pm
  Wrong place for this, Tom. We've exchanged messages before about the relevance of posts. If you're intent on sending 'personal' messages, use the Private Message system.
  As a courtesy, we shall leave the message on the Forum until this evening.
  Sat Mar 24, 2007 2:31 pm
  [quote="mcdangle"][quote="Paul Alders"]All those years ago I campaigned in support of Ian Smith.
  I'm sorry to say that what I said would happen HAS.[/quote]
  Yes Paul, and I was actually there supporting him. Met him and shook his hand. Andy.[/quote]
  HISTORY HAD ME SENT BY HAROLD WILSON,TO ENFORCE ECONOMIC SANCTIONS ON THE REGIME BY THE R.N.s BIERA PATROL,BUT I WAS ONLY ONLY FOLLOWING ORDERS.DIDN'T MAKE SENSE THEN, AND LESS NOW.