Bob Piper has been a Labour Councillor for the Abbey
Ward in Sandwell, West Midlands, for 10 years. He is a lifelong supporter of Aston Villa Football Club and a follower of Yorkshire County Cricket Club.
The views expressed here are mine in a personal capacity, not those of the Labour Party, Sandwell MBC, Aston Villa or Yorkshire County Cricket Club. Get it! Mine... just mine!
Promoted by Bob Piper of 115 Barclay Rd, B67 5JZ on behalf of the Labour Party, care of 39 Victoria Street London, SW1H 0HA . Hosted (printed) by Swaithe Internet Solutions who are not responsible for any of the contents of these posts.
Please note however, that The Labour Party is not responsible for the content of this website or individual posts as, unless specifically stated, I am writing solely in a personal and individual capacity.
Promoted by Bob Piper of 115 Barclay Rd, B67 5JZ on behalf of the Labour Party, care of 39 Victoria Street London, SW1H 0HA . Hosted (printed) by Swaithe Internet Solutions who are not responsible for any of the contents of these posts.
Please note however, that The Labour Party is not responsible for the content of this website or individual posts as, unless specifically stated, I am writing solely in a personal and individual capacity.
I am grateful to the Army Rumour Service (ARSE) for this copy of a message that was dispatched by a War Office telegram to the relatives of those who fell in the First World War. Thank heavens we have moved on from that sort of standardised form. Perhaps Army For B. 104-82 is the sort of letter the Murdoch press would like to see return.
Of course, back in the day, the notion of the Prime Minister writing individual letters to relatives of the fallen was just not practical. Asquith, in 1916 for instance, would have had to write nearly 20,000 letters to the relatives of those who died on the first day of the battle of the Somme.
Jules Wright said:
November 10, 2009 12:33 PM | permalink
granted, naturally. but it's a specious point. to compare official protocols nearly 100 years apart is not to compare apples and pears. and it is a self-evident truth that hand-written letters of condolence from the PM would not have been possible during the world wars. however, do remember that commanding officers would often send personal letters of condolence in addition to the official war department notification and this etiquette was de rigeur by world war two.
sadly, this episode begs answers to some wider questions:
how many times has gordon brown sent a hand-written letter to bereaved relatives - with typos, crossings-out and errors? this is unlikely to be the only such example - just the first one that's boomeranged back at him publicly because a tabloid is out for blood.
knowing he has poor written presentation - for whatever reason - why doesn't he use the services of a secretary to ensure sensitive personal communications are well-presented and accurate as befits the office he holds? a typed, personal letter with a hand-written "Dear Mrs Janes", "Yours sincerely" and a signature would have been fine. and no, there would have been no faux outrage at this approach either.
why is the PM so obsessed with micro-management that he allows himself to take care of such communications - even when clearly dog-tired and probably rushed between meetings or otherwise at 3am - with the result they are are error-strewn and open to misinterpretation?
this affair - like his failure to bow his head at the cenotaph as a mark of respect - simply smacks of more demonstrable reasons why gordon brown is the wrong man, with the wrong skills, in the wrong job at the wrong time.
gordon has made his own bed. and it's one of nails.
Bob Piper said:
November 10, 2009 1:06 PM | permalink
I'm not his agent, and I'm not defending him either. But I do think the letters are a show of decency and respect, and those who try to make cheap political points out of it demean themselves in the process.
iain ker said:
November 10, 2009 9:45 PM | permalink
104-82 is the sort of letter the Murdoch press would like to see return.
*********************************************
Yeah, Rupert, the devil incarnate.
Have you cancelled your Sky subscription, Bob, and campaigned against 'your' team for accepting Murdoch's money thought not.
As you were.
Blah blah wayne ker blah blah tory troll blah blah.
Yeah, great put-down, Bob.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Stevie H. said:
November 10, 2009 10:03 PM | permalink
What a troll, why on earth do you publish this idiots comments Bob? Spare us his childish nonsense until he grows up for goodness sake.
iain ker said:
November 11, 2009 11:08 AM | permalink
Stevie H. said:
November 10, 2009 10:03 PM | permalink
What a troll
***********************************************
What, you don't see the rank hypocrisy among the (pretend) left for forever whingeing about Rupert Murdoch on the one one hand while accepting his gelt and his product on the other hand?
Wyrdtimes, I agree with some of that, although sending people on a stupid mission with proper equipment and decent air support doesn't make much sense either. I find quite a few contradictions in what people say over Afghanistan though - those who complain we haven't got sufficient helicopters to protect the troops who are there, also demanding more troops be sent doesn't quite square the circle.
Of course, the Soviets were driven out of Afghanistan by a mujahideen equipped with SAM's (provided by our cousins across the Atlantic) which kept shooting down their helicopters.
The Soviets lost, despite killing up to 5 million mujahideen and Afghan people, and sustaining around 15,000 deaths themselves. The equipment is an issue, I'm sure, but the sad fact is we have picked a fight we cannot win, no matter how brave the troops are. I suspect the existing futile attempt to turn Afghanistan into a modern democracy will take a far higher toll, whichever party is in power, before the US realises it has bitten off more than it can chew... again.
Robert said:
November 12, 2009 9:24 AM | permalink
But for god sake have somebody check the Lads name, getting his name wrong is sadly the worse thing that can be done. He has the whole of Parliament, all he has to do is pick up the phone speak to the lads commanding officer or speak to the minister of F*ck up.
November 10, 2009 12:33 PM | permalink
granted, naturally. but it's a specious point. to compare official protocols nearly 100 years apart is not to compare apples and pears. and it is a self-evident truth that hand-written letters of condolence from the PM would not have been possible during the world wars. however, do remember that commanding officers would often send personal letters of condolence in addition to the official war department notification and this etiquette was de rigeur by world war two.
sadly, this episode begs answers to some wider questions:
how many times has gordon brown sent a hand-written letter to bereaved relatives - with typos, crossings-out and errors? this is unlikely to be the only such example - just the first one that's boomeranged back at him publicly because a tabloid is out for blood.
knowing he has poor written presentation - for whatever reason - why doesn't he use the services of a secretary to ensure sensitive personal communications are well-presented and accurate as befits the office he holds? a typed, personal letter with a hand-written "Dear Mrs Janes", "Yours sincerely" and a signature would have been fine. and no, there would have been no faux outrage at this approach either.
why is the PM so obsessed with micro-management that he allows himself to take care of such communications - even when clearly dog-tired and probably rushed between meetings or otherwise at 3am - with the result they are are error-strewn and open to misinterpretation?
this affair - like his failure to bow his head at the cenotaph as a mark of respect - simply smacks of more demonstrable reasons why gordon brown is the wrong man, with the wrong skills, in the wrong job at the wrong time.
gordon has made his own bed. and it's one of nails.