LETTER Gus Leonisly wrote in 2003 soon after the Second Gulf War "Victory" speech by Dubya-the-Warprez WMDs Yes, the coalition forces will find weapons of mass destruction... but not the ones they’re looking for. They’ll find oxidized, dispersed and airborne “depleted

A few monthes back I emailed Townsville Liberal MP Peter Lindsay about concerns I had with Australia's purchase of second-hand MIAI Abrams tanks from the US.

As Abrams tanks are constructed using depleted uranium armour (DU encased in steel) - I asked him for an assurance that DU would not be used in the armour of the Abrams tanks we bought from the US and that our forces would also not use DU munitions such as the M829 APFSDS-T PENETRATOR round in the tanks.

Mr Lindsay assured me that DU munitions would not be used and that the armour used in the tanks would not be DU. Mr Lindsay couldn't tell me what armour would be used in place of the DU however as that was "top secret".

To me this is all just a bit too much! Are we expected to trust the Howard government to tell us the truth this time? John Howard's track record doesn't fill me with any confidence when it comes to trusting anything he says.

I'd encourage anyone with similar concerns to mine to contact John Howard or their local MP and demand an explanation.

Hey John, your letters to the PM and Foreign Minister certainly capture the outrage all Australians SHOULD feel at out governments actions in recent years. I feel the same as you about most of the issues you have raised.

Could I ask though if you have had any responses from these MP's? If so, are you able to publish them here? I would be most interested to read any response they have.

If they have failed to respond maybe we should publish that info here to demonstrate their attitude to a member of the public.

Hi Pegasus.

I’ve learned the following in corresponding with our elected political ‘leaders’:

 

1.                 John Howard never responds to correspondence, even where it concerns statements or issues that he has directly made or publicly involved himself in. The best you’ll get is an acknowledgement from his Department, telling you how busy he is & that he has referred your correspondence to the ‘responsible Minister’. (Such correspondence never carries the name of the person whose unintelligible signature appears at its foot.)

 

To then elicit a response from the particular Minister, you need to prompt them & it helps to give them a copy of your original correspondence. Howard just keeps ‘moving on’;

 

2.                  Federal Ministers vary in the way they respond to correspondence:

·         if it’s Lord Downer, you’ll invariable receive letters from an official in foreign affairs;

·         if it’s Defence Minister Hill, chances are you’ll receive a sarcastic note from his chief political minder, Chief of Staff, Matt Brown. Brown is a hoot: loses correspondence; duplicates responses & generally just creates mayhem & confusion (it’s sometimes hard to know if it’s deliberate or not);

·         Phillip Ruddock is a different kettle of fish altogether. Whilst he’s certainly not fast to respond, he invariably signs all his own correspondence & is always courteous;

·         the one thing they all have in common is that they will not address correspondence in email format: it must be a ‘proper’ letter, otherwise you’ll hear nothing back. On this note, Howard has an email message facility that you can use on his Prime Ministerial website, but the restriction placed on the length of any communication is such that it isn’t worth using, save for the shortest & bluntest of messages. Downer has a parliamentary email address, as does Hill, but not Ruddock;

·         be prepared to wait anything from 6 to 12 weeks for a written response to any correspondence & be prepared for all responses to address anything & everything – at length – other than the specific issues or questions you raised.

 

3.                 Interestingly, email correspondence addressed to parliamentarians on national issues will sometimes result in a polite request for you to cease & desist, unless you are a member of their constituency. There are a few notable exceptions, where parliamentarians actually read emails & respond (Senator Tchen & Senator Ellison, along with Simon Crean).

 

In the main however, email correspondence to at least 50% of parliamentarians is unread by anybody, with the level of disinterest being highest among Labour Senators.

 

4.                 The funniest piece of correspondence I’ve received came from the Department of Foreign Affairs in response to my campaign on behalf of Mamdouh Habib (prior to his release from Guantanamo Bay), wherein the official concerned informed me that the Department was unable to answer any of my questions because it was bound by the confidentiality provisions of federal privacy laws. This same cute approach was recently used by the Bush administration in denying an FOI application re one Usama bin Laden (I can send you the details if you find this hard to believe).

 

5.                 My overall impression gathered from corresponding with politicians is that they are surprised & annoyed that anyone would have the temerity to even write to them.

 

I’m more than happy to post future responses to my correspondence.

 

Cheers,

 

John.

Hey John, as the title says, what an excellent summary of how the public is treated, both by email and letter. I think you may have saved many here hours and more of frustration, anger and sheer amazement at the arrogant way requests, questions etc are really treated.

As I've said elsewhere I have tried contacting pollies via all methods and have really had no actual responses to what I have asked. Email gets treated as offal, phone calls or personal visits usually get you a junior staffer who is still recovering from their night out and letters, whilst usually getting a response (in time) frequently involve that same junior staffer cutting and pasting from the Party policy journal, or similar irrelevant responses.

The only times I have had a real response from a pollie is when I have become angry and abusive in writing at having my question treated like an exercise in avoiding the point.

Nevertheless, you have encouraged me to try again and I have emailed a couple of monsters about a Budget issue. Another post will appear on this site soon with that data on it.

I think, like was the case in the Public Services when computers first appeared, MP's of the older category probably don't know what the keyboard is for and couldn't actually read an email on their own. There are several senior MP's that have no email address. Costello and Howard are two of them. Sounds like Downer is another.

Thanks for your effort John. Keep hammering away, it all does help I know. Just gets bloody frustrating writing to brick walls.

Thanks for a most informative piece John. Interestingly, if you look at the MoveOn site, you'll see that they have by far the most success with single issue campaigns conducted by getting their members to telephone the various politicians' offices. I have no idea whether this would be as successful here, but it is worth bearing in mind for the future.