The year before last my then 11 year old stepson wrote to Loughton about the council taking his allotment from him. He was as polite and courteous in his letter, however when he received a response from a secretary, he asked if he could get a response from the then children's minister and not one of his "underlings".
Now we are talking about a kid here, his use of the word "underling" did not have the connotations attached that an adult would perceive, but simply an 11 year old, trying out some new bigger words.
He received this in response:
I
I have redacted anything that would identify the child concerned.
Loughton was then asked why he hadn't answered the question and if he was children's minister why was he ignoring a child, especially one with disabilities? I obviously don't want to distribute kids letters with personal thoughts included.
When I returned home and was shown these responses to a child from the childrens minister I was obviously a little unhappy to say the least.
So I called Loughton's office and asked if I could speak to him, I was told that I would receive a call back, this never happened, so I called again, and was told that I would not be receiving a response to any of the questions asked and when I asked if I could make an appointment at the next surgery, I was told that I wasn't allowed. That's democracy for you, apparently I upset his staff the last time I attended his surgery, even though there were no staff there, and I hadn't attended a surgery for more than 5 years, and on that one and only occasion I simply walked out while he was speaking as I had become bored with his standard non committal answers and sidestepping, I said very little, anyone who has met Loughton will know full well that you actually get to say hardly a word and he goes off on what appears to be a well rehearsed standard answer. In both situations I said no naughty words, and even pretended to respect his authoritaaah.
So I wrote to him expressing that I did not appreciate him reprimanding me to my stepson and involving a child in what appeared to be his dislike for me. I wrote this:
Now you can see all the rude words that he claims that I use, and that he was merely responding in the manner that I communicate with him, I didn't say bollocks even once. As there was a reporter interested in the allotment story from the eyes of a child, I copied them in on my email, this is the response.
Now a lot of this came as a bit of a surprise to me, considering that I was in a different town when the email was sent by the youngling. The self righteous idiot decides to claim that our parenting style is unacceptable, and worse than that would not accept that an 11 year old could possibly think for himself, and decide to write to his MP who just happened to be the minister for children and supporter of childrens charities and the Heart Foundation.
I have no ideas what he is imagining happening when I spoke to him or his staff, but judging by the clear hatred he harbours, if I had actually done any of these things, he would not have hesitated try and have me arrested for some kind of public order offence. The fact that these things did not happen doesn't seem to worry Little Timbo, he'll rant on about them anyway.
What is absolutely hilarious, is his claim that he does not enter into correspondence through the media, when he was pretty quick in getting on to the Tory filth rags to misrepresent the facts in order to portray myself as the offensive communicator and him as the victim.
Now you can see the last 7 years or so correspondence between myself and Loughton in full, yes that's it, there is no more. You can now make judgement on who exactly should be viewed as the aggressive emailer. I accept that my emails were quite firm and clearly not the work of a happy bunny, but to claim that his email in some way mimicked my style of writing is more offensive than his email itself, not to mention complete "bollocks" to use the kind of language favoured by Tim Loughton.
Have fun y'all
Kieran
