sandy428 wrote:
On the 25th June of this year I sent the attached e.mail to my MP at last I have received an answer also attached.
Sandy,
It may be worthwhile asking your MP to obtain Kim's definition of'confer'. I think he has been misled. Here is a response I posted to a similar Kim's Game:
"Regarding that last sentence about us not being eligible because it is our Crown Service status at the time of service and not now that is relevant. Yet again the suits have misled a Minister. The actual words used by those formulating the policy and who also drafted the London Gazette Notice in 1968 are:
“Crown servants who have retired may not take advantage of the new policy in regard to awards conferred upon them during their official life time.” My PJM was not conferred on me during my official lifetime. It wasn't even thought of in 1966.
In addition, do you remember what Brennan (who is ultimately responsible for misleading everyone) said in his 'full and final' statement when wriggling out of the Dual Nationality issue? He confirmed that it was one's current status that mattered and so those with Dual nationality should follow the rules of the country where they now reside.
He can't have it both ways.
Actually, he's messed up and so doesn't have it either way.
Barry"
_________________
BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
