The Official Communique from 10, Downing Street.
On August 17, I wrote to the Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury, Mr. David Call-Me-Dave, apropos his thoughts on what should be an appropriate custodial tariff for an individual who had indulged in multiple, wilful breaches of privacy laws and the Data Protection act, the corruption of serving police officers, the perverting the course of justice and the obstruction the police in the course of their duties by hampering a murder investigation. This missive was prompted by Mr. Call-Me-Dave's tacit endorsement of the sentence of four years apiece for two young gentlemen who had had the temerity to say "let's have a riot" on the "Facebook" social networking strand. A riot which, lest we forget, did not actually take place.
Having promised to keep such denizens of the internet who can be bothered to inhabit this corner of cyberspace appraised as to any response from Mr. David Call-Me-Dave, I am pleased to say that the dynamic, no-nonsense office of Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury has seen fit to reply thus, just an month and a half after my initial enquiry:
10 DOWNING STREET
LONDON SW1A 1AA
I am writing to acknowledge your recent correspondence.
The Prime Minister appreciates you taking the time to write.
Your correspondence has been forwarded to the relevant Government department so that they may reply to you, in detail, on the matters you raise.
Kind regards
Correspondence Officer
The Direct Communications Unit
The communication came in the form of a stiff card, rather than the letter which I was expecting; when it arrived, I at first mistook it for an invitation to one of Mr. Call-Me-Dave's ripping garden party soirees, in order for him to explain his stance personally, in his wonderfully, erm, "erudite" manner, over a large Gordon's and Tonic and some canapes. Sadly not. Obviously the austerity measures are hitting hard, and we really are "all in it together". Ahem.
I find it interesting that Mr. David Call-Me-Dave requires a "relevant Government department" to delegate his personal opinions to, as I had initially requested his personal opinion on the matter (underlined by the closing phrase, "What do you think?"). Perhaps if he is committed to cutting expensive, unwarranted bureaucracy in Government, he should start by speaking for himself rather than have some junior Whitehall flunky speak for him.
I find it interesting that Mr. David Call-Me-Dave requires a "relevant Government department" to delegate his personal opinions to, as I had initially requested his personal opinion on the matter (underlined by the closing phrase, "What do you think?"). Perhaps if he is committed to cutting expensive, unwarranted bureaucracy in Government, he should start by speaking for himself rather than have some junior Whitehall flunky speak for him.
I do hope said flunky responds with such words of wisdom as "fuck off, Tampon". I should feel cheated otherwise.
Do others concur?
No comments:
Post a Comment