Monday, 6 April 2009

Number 10 E-Petition Rejected

Following receipt of a steaming pile of lying horseshit over a previous Number 10 e-petition, it seemed worth vainly trying to submit one myself. It went a bit like this:

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to:

cease the practice of e-petitions on the Number 10 web-site as they are wasteful of taxpayers' resources which provide no added value to the democratic process and raise vain hope of a solution.

Having received yet another number 10 response which ignores the valid grievance contained in the petition, it is quite clear that number 10 e-petitions are not fit for purpose, and that the entire futile exercise should be scrapped.

The e-petitions site wastes taxpayers' funds in two ways. 1) by the allocation of government money to those who administer them, which is exacerbated by 2) only agreeing with petitions which correspond with the government's own policy, thereby adding no value whatsoever to the democratic process.

Additionally, they are a drag on the productivity of the country as many man hours are spent vainly petitioning where there is no realistic chance of a positive response, whilst there are simultaneously many more productive ways of engaging with politicians which should be encouraged instead.

The petitions are censorial (requiring government approval first), and are certain not to influence government policy. The undersigned call on the government to either take these petitions seriously, or cease pretending that there is any possible meaningful result to be aspired to by becoming a signatory.

As expected, the rejection arrived today.


How very chatty.

I'm sorry to inform you that your petition has been rejected. Your petition was classed as being in the following categories:

* Issues for which an e-petition is not the appropriate channel

Which begs the question. Which is the appropriate channel? The rejected petition did touch on such with "there are simultaneously many more productive ways of engaging with politicians which should be encouraged instead."

Is this subtle confirmation that, as I espoused, if one wishes to influence the way Labour engage with the electorate, the Number 10 petitions site is not the place to do it?

One can only surmise that my original headline was entirely correct. "Time to consign Number 10 e-petitions to the nearest sewer".

They are, quite simply, donkey cock. A pointless use of your time. An exercise in futility. A waste of public money in order to fulfil one simple purpose, the furtherance of government propaganda.

Don't be taken in, the Number 10 e-petitions site is a con job.

UPDATE: I can't wait to read the rejection message for this petition on the National Speed Limit reduction. Over 20,000 sigs so far. Reckon Number 10 will listen? Pffft.


BTS said...

Be fair, at least a donkey cock is presumably of some use to a donkey..?

Fidothedog said...

Agree with you, done a few that have been rejected. Asking Gordon to jump off a cliff, suck off a horse etc etc.

They fail to engage with us so treat them with the same contempt.

That reminds me I must dig the mails out and publish them all at some point.

BTS said...

Nice idea on the horse there but if only you'd suggested sucking off a donkey it would have proved that both are in fact useless after all..

Am I fixating too much here..?

Anonymous said...

Is this a wind up? I haven't heard a thing about a proposed reduction. They can't possibly be serious...can they?


Dick Puddlecote said...

Yes Jay. The NSL everywhere but motorways is reducing from 60 to 50 - and this is being backed up by a network of average speed cameras. Stroy here