« Home | Surgeries III » | Abuse of the open comments system » | Another ringer - Richard Gates » | Surgeries II » | Surgery details » | Ring any bells? » | Princess Pushy in Parliament » | It was the blog what done it » | Milton makes local paper » | Oi! Milton! Clean up your act! » 

Wednesday, August 03, 2005 

Surgeries IV

And there you have it, ladies and gentlemen. This poster appears on a local council noticeboard and in the local public library. It's a fair bet that this action has been taken throughout the constituency...

Shamed into action yet again



That's twice now that an issue has been raised by this weblog, shaming Anne Milton into action.

That's twice now that such an issue has been raised by this weblog and subsequently - belatedly - acted upon by Anne Milton's office... when they have yet to show the courage or courtesy required to acknowledge the role this weblog has played and/or reply to my emails.

It's also interesting to note how many anonymous 'impartial' contributors have come charging in demanding to know what the big deal is... when all the while it was treated as a bloody big deal by Anne Milton and/or those at her office.

She was clearly in the wrong and she knew it... otherwise the response would not have been so immediate.

Also, the following has not changed:

1. Anne Milton had a 'no appointments' policy before the election, and has an 'appointments only' policy now.

2. There are still no dates or locations listed. Anywhere. This is an important accessibility issue.

3. Despite promoting her pseudo-surgeries heavily before the election, upon becoming an MP, Anne Milton did not go anywhere near the lengths Sue Doughty once went to to publicise her now-official surgeries. Until she was shamed into doing so. (Sorry, but she cannot undo this without a time machine.)

4. Tories got first dibs on surgeries following the election.

That last bit may not have been deliberate, just a 'happy accident' involving (scant) surgery details included - perhaps even as an afterthought - in a local Tory newsletter when they were not being publicised properly (or at all) elsewhere.

See also:
It was the blog what done it
Surgery details
Surgeries II
Surgeries III

(Oh, and I'd just like to mention that - were this website simply a personal attack by an unstable hate-filled individual - then this issue would not have been resolved in this way. Instead, the campaign would have begun with graffiti in local public toilets reading; For a good time call 01483 300330...)

Labels:

Tim, haven't you got a proper job to go to?!!

PS. If I want a problem solved properly, I'd see a solicitor!

- | -

Happily, I work freelance.

:O)

- | -

The final point of somebody who has lost the argument... turn the debate onto somebody's job. And they were accusing us of going off on a tangent and missing the point.

- | -

I don't think you can group gasbill with the 'impartial' crowd (as most of the time he or she does attempt to see both sides).

In fact, I didn't take this question entirely seriously, as it's out of character for him/her to play games at this level. I pictured a tongue planted firmly in cheek. But you can corect me if I'm wrong, gasbill.

- | -

If that's the case, I do apologise.

If of course, it was tongue in cheek. ;)

- | -

I do wonder who Anne Milton will be supporting for Tory leader... perhaps we could ask her?

I'm betting David Davis... but I may be wrong.

- | -

What an interesting developement!! I would have expected the headline (again) 'It's the blog what done it!', i dont mind being disappointed though.
Setting aside the timing of this, just to challenge some of the 1,2,3,4 points 'Tim' makes, perhaps clarification counld be made on the follwoing points:

1, Did the previous incumbent, have a appointment system, or not?

1 & 3, When you say Anne Milton 'promoted her psuedo-sugeries heavily before the election', with a no-appointment policy. I take it you mean she heavily promoted psudo-surgeries just before the election, in perhaps early 2005? Or do you mean late 2004? or early 2004? or late 2003? or early 2003? or maybe even autumn 2002? (nearly 3 years ago) Perhaps you could just clarify, what you mean by 'promoted heavily before the election', just so that we are all clear about the statement. I assume you mean she was mentioning these pseudo surgies in all of her literature since she first came on the scene right up to the election?

4, Are you sure that happenened 'Tim'? Are you really sure? Perhpas you could just clarify how you know this to be true?

On a final note, are you sure that these posters weren't under way before your post?

ps...she does like that red jacket!

- | -

1, Did the previous incumbent, have a appointment system, or not?

The previous *MP* did, yes. But in Milton's case, one level of service was promised or inferred... and something different delivered. And, if you'll excuse me for saying so,; 'what other MPs do is their business'.

;oP

1 & 3, When you say Anne Milton 'promoted her psuedo-sugeries heavily before the election', with a no-appointment policy. I take it you mean she heavily promoted psudo-surgeries just before the election, in perhaps early 2005?

No, much earlier than this and not just in campaign literature.

4, Are you sure that happenened 'Tim'? Are you really sure? Perhpas you could just clarify how you know this to be true?

Did you dodge the question on how exactly you received surgery details time and again? Did you really? Members of Guildford Conservatives received surgery details in their newsletter. Other constituents had to rely mostly on luck. It happened.

On a final note, are you sure that these posters weren't under way before your post?

Ahahahahahahahahahaha! You're much closer to Anne's office than I am. Why don't you tell me?

- | -

Chris, lighten up! I am horrid to people only to their faces, not in some anonymous posting in a blog!

tomtom, Tim is plain Tim. This 'Tim' business is becoming ever so slightly irritating. And what is so difficult about admitting that you are a Tory supporter?

- | -

Thank you for half clarifying this Tim. I accept your point that what other MP's do is their business. But it is interesting that Anne Milton is doing exactly the same as the previous MP - in terms of appointments.

Again thank you for clarifying what you mean by 'promoted her psuedo-sugeries heavily before the election'
.
I can now see that what you mean is she didn’t heavily promote pseudo -surgeries before the election. In fact she didn’t promote them in 2005,(just before the election) or in 2004 (a year and half before the election), or even 2003 (2 and a half years before the election!!!).

Finally no i don't believe i did dodge the question of how i received surgeries details, i received thorugha newsletter pushed through my door. There were on the front page.

Again, just to clarify and reiterate, are you sure point 4 of your post was correct, and how do you know this to be true? (i'm thinkning of evidence, which your so keen on??) If it's possible Tim, try not to dodge the question.

Just to clarify, what i mean by the 'am i sure these posters weren't under way before your post', is you previously mention that the Bramley Parish Council meeting on the 28th July carried an item about Anne Milton having surgery details on their website. Presumably some days (if not weeks) before this meeting, Anne's office was doing something about surgeries!!

- | -

You're all over the shop here, tomtom, but I'll do my best to adress any 'points' you raise:

In Milton's case, one level of service was promised or inferred... and something different delivered. No appoinmtments before, appointments after.

Anne Milton promoted and held pseudo-surgeries in 2003, 2004 and 2005.

i received thorugha newsletter pushed through my door.

And why did you receive that newsletter?

You yourself have asserted that some - but not all - constituents received surgery details in this way. The only constituents who were assured of surgery details in the near-to-3-months following the election were members of Guildford Conservatives. Ipso facto, courtesy of the muppet show.

Re: meeting on the 28th July

The first post on this subject was made 25th July. Certainly, Anne Milton's office could have been planning this for weeks in advance and just happened to make requests and take action in the days following that post, but - even *if* this were the case - all it would show is that they took nearly 3 months to address the issue, when the previous MP had it sorted within weeks.

- | -

Ah, but I did apologise though Gasbill. Although you obviously haven't noted my answer to your request on my blog... shame... I go to all that effort... ;)

tomtom, it's getting to the stage where people are just willing to let you rant on as much as you like, simply because you have been feeding suspicions that you are a Tory. Maybe you should just sit back, relax, and enjoy the 80 days of summer holiday. ;)

- | -

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link

About me

    Hi. I'm Tim. I live in Guildford. I've built a few political weblogs here and there. If you're wondering why I decided to start this particular blog, click here.

Pluggage

    Save the Royal Surrey

Reference

Blogroll

Archives

Powered by Blogger
and Blogger Templates