What has happened to our local MP?
Earlier this year I first wrote to Francis Maude MP as my local MP and Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General.
I had concerns over how one section of the Civil Service seemed to completely have missed the point of the Government ‘s Comprehensive Spending Review and other issues.
If the following timeframe is anything to go by, I think the Government has also lost the plot...
My first letter to FM. 10th May 2012
My second letter to FM (with more details). 29th May 2012
Chased FM for a reply. 16th July 2012
Reply from FM saying they had lost my letters. 25th July 2012
My response to above. 25th July 2012
Chased FM for reply. 3rd August 2012
Reply from FM saying I will get a response soon. 3rd August 2012
Chased FM for reply. 10th August 2012
Chased FM for reply. 22nd August 2012
Reply from FM saying I will get a reply next week. 22nd August 2012
Chased FM for reply. 12th September 2012
Received a reply from FM. 21st September 2012
My reply about unanswered questions. 26th September 2012
Chased FM for a reply. 21st October 2012
Chased FM for a reply. 2nd November 2012
Still no reply as at the date of writing. (12th November 2012)
It really would be nice to get a sensible reply before the next election, to help me decide how to vote.
Or am I being unreasonable that six months is too long for a full reply ?
Nymans Close, Horsham
Editor’s note: a spokesperson for Horsham MP Francis Maude has responded as follows -
Mr Spencer’s letters of 10 and 26 May raised substantive questions regarding the operation of the Office for National Statistics.
As a result they were referred from Francis’ House of Commons office to the Cabinet Office. In general letters sent to the Cabinet Office regarding the ONS are answered directly by officials.
However as Mr Spencer is a constituent, Francis wanted to respond directly to him. The points raised by Mr Spencer were addressed in a letter from Francis on 21 September.
In that letter Francis apologised for the delay in responding which in part resulted from the need to investigate the points raised by Mr Spencer.
On the 26 September Mr Spencer wrote again reiterating some of his earlier concerns.
A reply, with apologies for the further delay, will be sent shortly.
As a result of the unacceptable delays in answering Mr Spencer’s correspondence, Francis has asked for a full review of the process for handling correspondence in his department.