There are moments when, as an officer of the Party, albeit a Regional one, that even I become irritated by the actions of someone who should know better. And so I dedicate this to someone called X (Ros thinks that she should be allowed anonymity, she's polite and well brought up like that) - I know no more than that about the woman who tried to ring me today.
I have decided, as regular readers will recall, not to go to Federal Conference. My heart isn't in it, it's expensive and, well, isn't that enough? Therefore, I haven't sent my photograph to Conference Office so that I can be vetted for an event I'm not going to. I've had the e-mails reminding me and studiously ignored them. Because I'm not going, right? (And yes, I know that I should just in case I change my mind, but I do have a life...)
However, the telephone rang at home today. I wasn't there - it's a Thursday and I was at work. However, (un)fortunately for the caller, Ros was at home, and answered the phone as would any polite, well brought up person (apart from my kid brother, but that's a lovable quirk of his personality...). The person at the other end of the telephone asked if she could speak to me, and Ros very courteously (because she's polite and well brought up) explained that I was at work and couldn't come to the telephone, but asked whether she could help (she's my wife - I trust her with this stuff. Besides, I trust her to run the country, so a phone call is clearly within the compass of her skill set).
X - for it was her - seemed surprised that I wasn't about (I've got a job, and whilst I note that there are 2.5 million unemployed in this country, I'm not that unusual, am I?), but explained that I had not sent my photograph in and that, if I didn't, they would cancel my registration.
So Ros courteously explained that I wasn't planning to come to conference, and therefore probably wouldn't be sending in a photograph (Ros has sent hers in, just in case - she's organised like that, as well as being polite and well brought up...). She was therefore somewhat surprised to be told that I should have told Conference Office that I wasn't coming.
And you know something? I'm not surprised. I'm annoyed. I'm still vaguely irritated that I have to go through a police check in order to attend my own Party's conference (I grudgingly accept that it has to be done but...). And now, apparently, I have to tell them whether or not I can be bothered to turn up, even though I've paid for both conferences and have the right to turn up if I feel like it.
So, X, I'm minded to submit my photograph, not because I intend to come, but because I don't particularly like to have someone talk to my wife, a former Party President no less, as though she, and I, are obstacles to the smooth running of Federal Conference.
Rant over.
We got a phone call from the rozzers for the accreditation check that I absolutely do not accept is necessary; mainly because it's so clearly security theatre. Mat answered the phone because I was at work, and they just accepted everything he said. I have now, apparently, passed accreditation.
ReplyDeleteJennie,
ReplyDeleteGood news that you are officially approved by the powers that be, even though it is a bit of a blow in terms of credibility as a member of the rebel army (Jennie, use the force...).
I just wonder if it would have run as smoothly had they been checking on Mat and found you in. Why would they accept at face value the comments of someone they can't actually identify? Or was it just, he's a bloke, he must know what he's talking about...
Because it's unnecessary security theatre? The hoops have been jumped through, it doesn't really matter who jumps as long as somebody does. This accreditation scheme was never about increasiung ACTUAL security, it was about data collection and retention and I am hopping mad about it, which is why I am going, so I can vote on the sunday morning motion about it.
ReplyDeleteSadly, I must agree with you. Unannounced, unverified pursuit of information must undermine the credibility of this accreditation scheme as a 'security' measure. I can almost hear the box ticking from here. The West Midlands Police must be chortling away having realised what a soft touch we've become...
ReplyDeleteAnd all but one of FCC nodded it through. I don't object to physical security measures in the slightest, but this is just silly.
ReplyDeleteI suppose that I respect their right to take a decision but abhor their tendency to draw a veil over the subject and hope that we'll leave them alone.
ReplyDeleteWhen they seek my vote next time, I'll be asking some tough questions about accountability. I recommend such a strategy to every other Federal Conference delegate...
I'm from Australia, but I see that bureaucracy doesn't change from country to country.
ReplyDeleteHi Mark,
ReplyDeleteTrying to get in touch with bloggers for interviews for WinkBall.com's political coverage. Would be interested in speaking to you if possible?
Catch me on my e-mail - chris.henry@winkball.com for more info.
Cheers
Chris