Letter to Cabinet Office, 7th January 2009
Propriety & Ethics Team
We last wrote 8/12/08, sending copy letter (27/10/08) supposedly sent to you by MOJ of which you did not receive. It is now coming up to 6 years since we were first corruptly handled by a civil servant, yet the public sectors 'old pals act' machinery still operates in protective mode. We are still awaiting some coherent report from the Cabinet Office regarding the Prime Ministers letter dated 7/9/08 sent to the Cabinet Office by the MOJ? This PM letter had many queries regarding corruption re civil servants and government departments.
How is it that corrupt civil servants are awarded undemocratic costly protection? The enormous cost in protecting this HMRevenue miscreant is not just financial - it also discloses the undemocratic industrious closing of ranks, where everyone involved within the complaint procedure seems willing to take part in protecting a corrupt civil servant at the expense of a member of the electorate. This deformed civil service cover-up culture has been taken to ridiculous lengths in covering up for an Inland Revenue misfit.
We are astounded at
'the slowness and uncertainty of justice, the
impunity of resourceful and clandestine governmental crime and the
unjust power of the public sector'.
It has been said that there is a general cultural malaise that lets
everyone 'off the hook', that public sector integrity has largely
been lost. Too many within the public sector use their privileged
position to cheat and lie, if they get caught they can plead
'extreme pressure' when in reality they are cushioned by the 'old
pals act'! Much of this institutionalised dishonesty has become the
norm.
We are also pushing for 'open courts' for victims of corrupt public
sector complaint procedure as run by civil servants. It would give
the victim the opportunity to face civil service corruptors face to
face, and not have to deal with dodgy departmental lawyers!
One can see from recent correspondence how we have been 'hung out to
dry' again.
(1) The PMs Office indicated it had sent our letter (7/9/08) re
departmental and civil service fraud corruption and theft, to the
MOJ 'so that they may reply to you direct'?
(2) Instead of the MOJ replying to us direct, by some unfathomable
design, the MOJ sent our PMs letter to the Cabinet Office, claiming
the subject matter ie fraud and corruption and theft, was the
concern of the Civil Service Constitution?
The electorate will fail to see how the darkened machinery within
the Civil Service Constitution would be interested in taking part in
'open courts'! The civil service would suffer from such
transparency!
(3) Having been sent our PMs letter by the MOJ, the Cabinet Office
sent us a dismissive reply re our claims for 'open courts' and
corrupt acts by government depts and civil servants!
(4) Because of the Cabinet Office dismissive letter, we wrote to the
MOJ, that the CO had ignored our claims for 'open courts' and public
sector corruption. We claimed that the MOJ, having previously failed
to off-load our case to the Treasury Dept, was now trying its luck
with the Cabinet Office? We also claimed that government depts and
civil servants were in dire need of regular external, independent
scrutiny.
(5) We wrote to the Cabinet Office that the electorate's honest
criticisms are purposely put into 'intensive care' then neglected.
(6) 26/11/08 a letter from the Cabinet Office, still evasive re
civil service corruption and theft or 'open courts' etc.
When one considers the amount of correspondence since the PM sent
our letter 7/9/08 to the MOJ, who then sent it on to the Cabinet
Office, the questions re corrupt acts etc went back and forth
without any mention of public sector fraud etc?
One has to assume the Prime Minister wanted our letter re public
sector corruption looked at? Surely the Prime Minister did not
intend that our claims should become involved in a Ministry of
Justice and Cabinet Office version of 'hanging out to dry' musical
chairs?
A cover-up culture of deceit has emerged within the public sector
where it has become easier for staff to evade all answers relating
to Ministerial, departmental or civil service fraud etc!
There is ample evidence that Whitehall is short on honest appraisal
and accountability, this is what happens when the public sectors
'old pals act' takes on a positive role in the running of
departments.
Our case has been a continuous struggle against entrenched state
machinery, where civil servants have a pathetic record in dealing
with the electorates criticisms, the public sector cover-up culture
has become corrosive!
It is being thrown around by senior politicians within parliament
that parts of the civil service 'had collapsed into a level of
incompetence which we didn't previously have?' Out of politeness the
MPs forgot to mention the ever increasing theft, the fraud and the
corruption?
Amongst Whitehall's dodgy dealings it emerges that public sector
employees have been paid too much pension for decades. It has been
claimed that there was no single cause for the fiasco. Does this
point to collusion to defraud the taxpayer? It appears this
self-anointed gravy train resulted from a series of miraculous
administrative errors that cumulatively all pointed in the same
direction - bloated civil service pensions? What a public sector
coup, on par with the trousering of millions by fraudulent MOD civil
servants?
It is also reported from Whitehall that Ministers and officers have
known for some years that many houses were on the wrong level of
banding but kept it secret?
It has been erroneously claimed by Ministers, backed up by false
police information, that knife crime is going down - the electorate
know different!
Everyone is aware that the electorate is seriously losing interested
in corrupt politics. Many of the electorate are unconvinced that
Whitehall and Local
Governments are on their side? For instance:
One reads that a council Housing Official evicts OAPs from their
bungalows, then moves in with her partner, another housing official?
She owned a 3-storey house. The bungalow rents were then reduced
from £70pw to £47. The £120,000 pa Chief Executive said she knew
nothing about it. That's the sort of 'blind eye' corruption
taxpayers are used to. These abominations are due to the continuing
lack of public sector accountability.
We are all too aware of the seriously incompetent regulators in the
Haringey case, where Haringey were awarded '3 stars' for competence?
How Ofsted destroyed vital papers? How Local Government Ombudsman
continually supports corrupt council officials - neglecting the
welfare of children? The electorate now have a problem re standards
in council childcare?
In relation to the welfare of children; a social worker who on her
own admission had problems with reading, writing, spelling and
grammar; could not concentrate for long periods, had a poor memory,
lacked self-esteem and confidence. She successfully sued her
employees for bringing all this information to the attention of
potential future employees?
She alleged discrimination for her failure to land a £30,000 a year
job? It was observed at the time I quote: 'How can anyone with such
far reaching problems ever have got a job as a social worker?
Apparently it's easy!
Remember the not too bright social worker that frighteningly took
away the wrong child from school for supposed protection? It appears
there was a mistake over first names? The child must still have
nightmares?
I see the ex Social Worker boss of Haringey is to appeal! Public
sector integrity has been lost within council political dogma that
allows the inept to be given unjustifiable job security! One hopes
the gravy train is not going to be milked?
In an age where quango politics is taking more control of our lives,
there is an enormous amount of apathy because so much hidden public
sector incompetence is constantly running the democratic machinery
into the ground.
Our 6-year quest has been 'hung out' for quite some time. In the
last 3 months it has been shunted from the Prime Ministers Office to
the Ministry of Justice, then on to the Cabinet Office. The Cabinet
Office reply contained no answers to our serious questions relating
to 'open courts' or miscreant civil servants or the consequential
'unfit for purpose' depts. WHY WAS IT SENT THERE? We can only assume
we are being 'hung out to dry' by civil servants?
We leave you with the Cabinet Office's Propriety & Ethical promise
of 'Excellence & Fairness achieving World Class Public Services.' It
sounds very much like 'Orwellian' propaganda.
Yours sincerely
AW & I Tanner cc to all interested in public sector corruption of
duty