Sir,

I recently enjoyed perusing your recent article regarding my role in the Classical Liberal Party. By enjoyed, I mean I found it awfully amusing. Like when a small child makes an ill-fated attempt to pronounce the word pomegranate. I guess what I'm trying to convey is that you tried.

Perhaps the end result of the paper's attempt shall survive as a testament to the Monolith's editorial staff that they achieve far greater results when focusing on the muddy footprints of the Government (and not to mention the Official Opposition!) rather than the odd piece of dust floating around the edges of the Classical Liberals.

I gave, what was in my opinion, a rather marvelous example of this to one of your reporters when asked for a comment on your article. Sadly, it did not make it to print. Netherless, minus some editorial legerdemain I have the opportunity to have it printed here.

To your reporter, I commented on the absurdity that the Monolith was dedicating resources to cover this antiquated story, which was a simple common-sense move of a small part of a wider portfolio to ensure the party's position was best represented in Parliamentary discourse, in particular Ministerial Questions (side note: you might want to write an article about the Prime Minister's poor performance in his own question session on Wednesday, and ask him why he had better things to do than answer my perfectly reasonable questions, but I digress).

Afterall, I'm sure your readers would scoff at the absurdity of someone commanding a frontbench brief containing policies that they fundamentally disagree with.

As part of my role as Foreign Affairs Spokesperson, I shadow the International Development Secretary. This is a job made much more difficult than it need be by two core deficiencies within the department. Firstly, the Secretary of State understands his brief about as well as my pet dog George understands how upsetting it is to the neighbours when he barks in the early hours of the morning. That is, not at all. The last time I had the pleasure of facing him in the House of Commons, he believed the responsibility for the rebuilding of British territories in the Caribbean following Storm Irma fell on the United States, praised the strategic importance of the Tristan Da Cunha and was non-committal on the importance of tackling killer diseases. More importantly, the Secretary of State responsible for administering British foreign aid doesn't believe in British foreign aid.

Luckily for me, that's where my interaction with some of the duller instruments in the government's knife draw ends (largely, in part, due to the Foreign Secretary's particular penchant for delivering statements of foreign policy through the press rather than in scurantisable statements to the House - but, again, I digress).

Sadly, however, my colleagues face similar struggles. In health, the Classical Liberal Spokesperson has to deal with a Secretary of State who doesn't believe in abortion, transgender people or that the NHS should fund potentially lifesaving diseases. As someone who helped author the equalities section of the Conservative Party manifesto, I would find it extremely queer if the ministers opposition to gender reassignment surgery made it into the next Queen's speech. I was, after all, rather proud of the fact the Conservatives presented the only manifesto which significantly furthered the rights of non-binary and genderqueer individuals. It would be quite a u-turn for the Prime Minister to oscillate from running proudly on that manifesto to embracing the bigotry of a1970s London Cabbie. The only logical conclusion is that the Government has yet another Minister who thinks the portfolio he is paid to preside over isn't quite to his taste.

But alas, at least we can all count our blessings that we are not TwistedNuke, who has the misfortune of taking on Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Business, Industry and Trade. What a torrid job it must be - attempting to understand a mess of a department spearheaded by a poundshop Vox Day. One isn't privy to the inner workings of the department, but given recent experiences in the House of Commons one can safely assume that TwistedNuke is tasked with facing a minister who throws darts at maps of the world to see which ally he can insult at the dispatch box on that particular day. Rumour has it that SpAds at the department play a game of alt-right buzzword bingo to pass the time before placing the phone on the hook and taking no responsibility for the Department's actions. I must stress, however, that this is only rumour - but judging the standards of truth deployed in your paper recently, I'm sure it'll have no problem making it to print.

I famously oppose my party's position on membership of the Single Market. However, if the Prime Minister fails to show basic leadership and move the responsibility for negotiating bilateral agreements away from Unownuzer717, I may be compelled by a basic love for this country to change my mind. Perhaps I'll even get the Brexit brief back. I, of course, expect you to report on that development if it happens with the same pace and eye for a breaking story as you did on reporting it's transfer to the Classical Liberal Constitutional Affairs brief. I believe the record you have to break is around ten days...

My inane verbal diarrhea on future referendums aside, I should probably start moving on to the conclusion of this letter. Why is it that the common-sense principle that someone representing a party or coalition policy should believe in said policy is chastised in your newspaper, when the opposite should be the case. Someone representing a policy they don't believe in, especially in government, should be the story. Not some week old limp biscuit of a story whipped up to try and draw some equivalence between good natured disagreements in the Classical Liberals and the worst week of DrCaeserMD's premiership to date. Let's have some honesty in politics, and let's have some honesty in the press. Embrace those principles, and neither of us will have to spend our time writing tomorrow's fish and chip wrappers and we can instead focus on doing our jobs: holding those in power to account - intensely and honestly.

Your paper, and our country, will be all the better for it.

Yours lovingly,

/u/wtench MP

Classical Liberal Frontbench Spokesperson

Member of Parliament for London

PS: Oh, and in future do please use photos taken from the right side of my face. For some biological-confounding reason, the left side makes me look like a woman ten years my senior.