| Dear Sir Alistair (Graham)
First of all we
apologise for previously misspelling your name.
We have
communicated with you previously regarding the corrupt actions of the Valuation
Office Agency aided and abetted by the Parliamentary Ombudsman.
Since then our
case has been closed down by both the Ombudsman and the Information
Commissioners Office, we had in fact been disenfranchised by Parliamentary
officials
We have written to
the PM, Right Hon Gordon Brown, the Lord Chancellor, and other Parliamentary
Committees and MP's. As victims of public sector corruption we seem to be
treated with contempt by all and sundry. There seems to be a plague-like
acquiescence - a parliamentary selective amnesia towards public sector fraud
and corruption. We, as victims of such corruption make complaints, these are
then shunted around from one parliamentary department to another - in what can
only be described as an undemocratic Whitehall farce!
(See our "Mother of Parliament" on the Internet)
We are appalled by
the way parliamentarians have cold-shouldered our claims regarding public
sector and ombudsman corruption. For instance it is difficult for us to
understand how the STANDARDS IN PUBLIC LIFE COMMITTEE did not, on our
behalf as citizens, show interest our case.
Yet it was able
to put, without any open investigation taking place, the committees friendly
spin on the fraudulent Ombudsman’s actions by claiming in a letter to us that;
“WE ARE
UNABLE TO OVERTURN THE OMBUDSMAN'S DECISION REGARDING YOUR CASE,
AS THE
OMBUDSMAN WILL HAVE JUDGED YOUR
CASE ON THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED. ??? (our question marks)
We ask; Is
this committee unaware that public sector complaints procedures can be corrupt,
can be fraudulent and/or overtly self-protective and completely undemocratic?
We were
shocked at the committees 'old pals' acquiescence in this matter of
parliamentary corruption, this committee statement indicates that the
Parliamentary Ombudsman's proceedings against us were democratic and conducted
in a proper judicial manner.
This
indicates that the Committee on Standards in Public Life naively believes the
Ombudsman had acted in an honest manner when attending to our case?
We did not expect your committee to side with the Ombudsman's connivance
without some sort of inquiry as to the facts. That's why we were shocked at
your claim that the Ombudsman "will have judged your case on the evidence presented" We are aware that
the Ombudsman has powerful friends, we did not however expect the Standards in Public Life Committee to give her such
unwarranted protection!
There was no
obvious transparency or recognition from your committee that the Parliamentary
Ombudsman might have, or could have produced fabrications against us, or indeed
that the office could be fraudulent? One must ask, is the Standards of Public
Life Committee really unaware of Ombudsman fraudulence in general?
It occurs to
us, that this friendly gesture to the Parliamentary Ombudsman is part/parcel
of the 'old pals act', and that you are giving the impression that the
Parliamentary Ombudsman is incapable of being corrupt. We ask this question
because with the Parliamentary Ombudsman closing down our case, we have hit an injudicious
parliamentary brick wall - a buffer - we can not proceed further?
Surely the
democratic principle was never meant to be like this - surely the office of
Parliamentary Ombudsman was not meant to have such omnipotence bestowed upon
it? So much so that parliamentary bodies would give this wayward, powerful
political office such blind obedience/protection without question?
It needs to be
remembered that no one is above the law, and Westminster needs to remember this applies to civil servants
also!
Because we have written to many
parliamentarians and have had no democratic/transparent response, we have now
been forced to make our own inquiry as to just how much protection this corrupt
Parliamentary Ombudsman is receiving from within Westminster! Hence this letter to you.
It is fairly
evident we have been swamped by a public sector cover-up culture and, because
the Ombudsman seems to be untouchable within our Mother of Parliament, we have
had to join the Internet in order to get our case some public recognition.
There are just too
many fraudulent actions by ombudsman that are given the 'blind eye' by various
bodies, such treatment is an affront to democratic government.
We are puzzled how
the Committee on Standards in Public Life comes to its decisions as when
confronted by charges of Ombudsman corruption? Is it always jaundiced? Its not
as though charges relating to ombudsman fraudulence is a new phenomena - its
not as though such disclosures would have come as a shock to your committee -
it's a deep rooted abomination that has not been dealt with by Westminster in a proper judicious manner.
It would appear
from our case and others that the fraudulent public sector's cover-up
complaints industry is thriving - with much help from its friends! Amen?
Yours sincerely
AW & I Tanner
[Back to the top] |