Readers will recall that on 15th August last I met with my Member of Parliament (and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom) and presented him with a ‘dossier‘ containing some specific questions and allegations. Just after noon today I received the following reply:

(click to enlarge)

(click to enlarge)

The following response has been sent:

Dear Mr. Cameron,

I am in receipt of your letter dated 6th inst., in response to our meeting on 15th August last at which time I handed you a dossier containing many questions and certain allegations.

It is with regret that I find you have ignored each and every one of the questions I raised and the allegations I levied against you; instead providing seven paragraphs repeating how you have a plan to renegotiate that which is not negotiable, coupled with your plea that I should vote for your party at the 2015 General Election.

It is necessary to immediately take issue with that which you have written:

You write that you cannot agree with a number of the points I raised; which immediately begs the question of which do you agree and of which do you dispute;

You write that I am one of those who argue for a referendum now; which begs the question when have I so done;

You write that such a referendum would be a ‘false choice’ between the status quo that is still changing – and leaving; and that we must wait until you are able to present a ‘new settlement’ thus enabling the people to make a decision. Come, come, Mr. Cameron; there is no ‘status quo’ as the European Union is constantly ‘changing’ and will so continue until it has achieved its aim of ‘ever closer union and thus created a United States of Europe.

You state that among the areas in which you wish to reclaim power is that of justice and home affairs; which immediately begs the question of just what is the point of ceding control – which you seem hell-bent on doing – of that which you now state you wish to reclaim. I of course refer to the EAW opt-ins that last night you felt it necessary to interrupt a banquet to achieve.

On the steps of Downing Street in May 2010 you famously said that you would never forget that you, as a politician, are a servant of the people, who you also acknowledged were the masters. I would be grateful if you could explain what is the point of any constituent questioning his servant when said servant refuses to answer – or evades – a question, or questions, from his master.

Needless to say, your letter and my response has been published on my blog for my readers to see – and for those that read it to also blog and use twitter to further spread your response.

For the avoidance of doubt, what in effect my dossier intimated was that you had lied to the British electorate; something which, in your response to my dossier, you have failed dismally to repudiate.

In conclusion, as there can be no greater civil crime than for a member of the public to call anyone – let alone a politician and a Member of Parliament – a liar, perhaps you would wish to instigate court action in order to retain your honour as a Member of Parliament and Prime Minister- and status as an Englishman; both of whom are supposedly renowned for their word and for speaking the truth?

With kindest of regards,

David Phipps

Now let us see what that produces!

(I, for one, am fed up with pussy-footing around, according respect and courtesy to those who don’t deserve it. Let us see how much my Member of Parliament – and Prime Minister of what was once a great nation – feels he deserves my respect).