I'm writing a letter, to whomever

[venta]

So, very shortly after the election I used the handy http://theyworkforyou.com mechanism to write to my MP.

She didn't answer, but I thought OK, fair enough, it's barely after the election, her mechanisms for these things probably aren't properly set up yet.

I wrote to her again today, asking her to sign EDM 210. The EDM is only relevant prior to the budget, and I realise I left it a bit late, but thought it was worth a shot - after all, she might get through her email to read mine in time to sign the EDM.

I've just received a reply from someone whom I infer to be a secretary, or similar, which has a twiddly graphic of the House of Commons portcullis and my MP's details on it, and says:

"If you are a constituent wishing to raise concerns or comments with me, please do so in writing (House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA). Please include your full postal address, telephone number and all relevant details."

So... er... my MP won't respond to email?

That's a bit rubbish.

Update I wrote to theyworkforyou, and they tell me that they were using a different email address for Angie Bray, and that they've updated their records now to use the one on her website.

Comments

[hoiho.livejournal.com]

Don't forget to feed this info back to http://theyworkforyou.com and also to your MP, so she knows you've done so!

[venta.livejournal.com]

Yes, I shall do.

I'm tempted to hand-write a letter in green ink and send it to her to complain about her lack of handling of email :)

[zotz]

I don't know who your MP is or what her own views on the subject are, but certainly my sister doesn't like sites like theyworkforyou forwarding messages - she'd rather get a direct email to her official email address, which she lists on her website. That would be far more likely to get a quick response. I think it turns up at her end looking a bit odd and harder to tell from the rest.

Actually, she has quite pronounced views on how poorly lobbying and lobbying campaigns can be. Sometimes it's clear that a number of people are against something, but it's not at all clear what it is, in detail, that they don't like about it.

[venta.livejournal.com]

CAMRA invited me to write to my MP about EDM 210, and provided me with a nice site where all I had to do was click buttons to send a pro forma mail. I've certainly heard that MPs don't like pro forma mails before, so wrote one myself instead.

I was under the impression that theyworkforyou used the official address, but just provided in addition a way to keep count of whether or not the MP replied to messages effectively. I wasn't aware that there was anything to dislike about it from an MP's point of view.

I wonder if I should resend the mail to her published email address, or whether that is more like harassment if I've already sent it to that address once...

(My MP is Angie Bray, member for Ealing Central and Acton.)

[phlebas.livejournal.com]

Angie thinks a good MP is an MP who listens as well as leads. This is why she would like to hear your views on a variety of issues that affect you and this constituency.

[venta.livejournal.com]

"Are you concerned that dangerous dogs are blighting our parks and open spaces?"

I presume next week she'll be asking whether her contituents have stopped beating their wives.

[venta.livejournal.com]

I wasn't aware that there was anything to dislike about it from an MP's point of view.

Other than, of course, it enables people to keep count of whether or not the MP replied to messages effectively.

[zotz]

I didn't ask in detail, but I got the impression that it's harder to know offhand how many people are in touch with you. I can ask her if you want.

[venta.livejournal.com]

As and when you're speaking to her, I would be curious to know (I assume she's an MP, from context ;)

As I say, the impression that theyworkforyou give is certainly that it's exactly equivalent to sending an email and it be nice to know if that's not the case.

[zotz]

North Ayrshire and Arran.

I can think of a few things that might be annoying - all coming from the same address at theyworkforyou.com might get them bundled together as one thread, they might be tagged TWFY at least as prominently as the constituent's name, or they might go to an otherwise long-defunct account.

[hoiho.livejournal.com]

My MP seems to have no trouble dealing with them, and is prompt in his replies. Anyway, it's not as if a Scottish MP has much to these days, anyway.

[alien8.livejournal.com]

it gets sent with my email address from theyworkforyou. My MP got my email address from it and added me to their mailing list!

then they replied to the theyworkforyou email/fax with a proper letter. shameful waste of paper to say 'sorry, no'.

[zotz]

Clearly those ones were going to a good email address, at least.

In general, it would pay to stick to the general principle that commmunication should be as accessible, understandable and informative to its recipient as possible. I have been told by one such recipient that it's suboptimal on cases one and three. They still get answers, according to the figures, but she'd rather get emails direct, as she finds them more useful.

[zotz]

Have you seen how they get displayed at the recipient's end? I haven't, but maybe you're better informed than me. Certainly I get mail from mailing lists with an interesting variety of formats.

[hoiho.livejournal.com]

On the other side, it should be easily accessible to the constituent. Indeed, I would argue more so, as it's not being done for the MPs benefit. And TWFY is more likely to have an up-to-date email address than a constituent, who would have to take steps to locate the MPs email address.

Easer of use, and accessibility for the constituent trumps any concerns of the MP, as far as I'm concerned.

The one place TWFY will wins over a random email is that TWFT insists on a full postal address on all communication.

[zotz]

I think that's rather missing the point. If you're going to the trouble of contacting someone, you maximise your chance of it being understood and acted on if you make it as user-friendly as possible. Refusing to on the grounds that it ought to be someone else's business would be rather perverse. It's presumably about getting results rather than about satisfying our ideas about who's in charge.

Yes, a constituent may have to go to more trouble to get an up-to-date address - I'm arguing that it's worth our time as constituents to do this as it's likely to increase our chances of getting noticed.

Incidentally, based as before on a sample of one, I would imagine that including a full postal address will ensure a postal reply rather than a return email.

[zotz]

. . . and, as before, in my sister's office there's a policy of sending a letter to anyone who includes a full postal address - presumably because constituents are believed to be likely to want a formal reply in those cases.

[venta.livejournal.com]

My previous MP replied to an email by asking for my full postal address so that he could reply by letter. Which seemed somewhat peverse, to me.

[venta.livejournal.com]

I had (formerly) assumed that writing via TWFY would ensure that the mail was as accessible, understandable and informative as possible. If I were an MP, I'd have thought receiving emails in a standard format that has all the relevant details in an expected place would actually have been useful rather than detrimental.

[zotz]

It's as much about meeting people's expectations as solving the problem. Sadly. And a lot of people expect to get a nice letter in the post.

[hoiho.livejournal.com]

I'm not refusing to, I'm just suggesting that just because one MP, to wit your sister, for whatever reason, prefers other types of communication does not mean that we should all have to find you our own MPs preferred form of communication, when a simple, centralised, well-known, and easily located, system exists. I don't like receiving HTML emails, but if my clients chose to send them, then it's my job to deal with them.

And including a full postal address will mean that the MP will not ignore the letter, as they will be able to verify that it is from a constituent of theirs. Without such reassurance, any MP will be loath to act, as Erskine May frowns on MPs dealing with cases of other MP's constituents.

[hoiho.livejournal.com]

My MP often telephones me. As did his predecessor.

[zotz]

I would have, too, and I really should have asked her for more detail at the time - I'm sure that TWFY would find even a single data point useful.

I may see her this week. I'll try to remember to ask.

[zotz]

People are free to do whatever they want, of course, but personally I suspect that TWFY is less useful than it appears at first sight, and therefore I wouldn't use it personally. Its ease of use doesn't really come into it if I'm not convinced it works. And as I've said already, it's not about anyone ignoring emails via TWFY, but rather that something about the process results in them giving a less clear picture of what the general public's view is.

If you were finding HTML emails slightly unclear or ambiguous, for some reason, I wouldn't be at all surprised if you advised people to use plain-text for best results.

You can't directly verify someone's address from an email. I could claim any name or address and it would probably go through fine.

[hoiho.livejournal.com]

If I'm sending an email, I'm not really concerned what the "general public's view is"; I'm writing on my own behalf. And I don't really see how TWFY clouds that.

HTML emails aren't unclear or ambiguous, I'd just [refer not to see them. And, no, one doesn't tell one's clients what to do. Not if one wishes to keep them. I'm sure your sister, as a lawyer, understands that!

Verification can easily be done from the electoral roll, when armed with a name and an address; it's not perfect, but it's better than a bald email (and it's as good as a letter, too). But it's an important point in a constituency-based system like ours, particularly so for ministers, who prefer other MPs constituents' letters to be vectored through the local MPs.

Just to be clear: I don't actually disagree with your points, but dealing with TWFY is a fairly small inconvenience for MPs; who do have to take into account that most of their constituents don't have the benefit of their education, position, and knowledge of the system.

[zotz]

It is not, as far as I can tell, about inconvenience. It is about knowing how many people have contacted her and what their views are - these presumably being at least partially representative of the general public's view and an indicator thereof. The impression I got from talking to her is that she doesn't feel she gets the same clarity as from individual emails and letters, which I would assume means they have less impact.

It is, as far as I can tell, about clarity. Not hassle. Abandon all talk of inconvenience - it's not the issue here.

And I don't know what about TWFY affects that. As I say, I should probably have asked at the time and may be able to this week.

Anybody can fake a valid name and address in any constituency - pick a surname and search in the phone book. The same is mostly true of physical letters, of course - to an extent it's done on trust, and the fact that it would backfire badly if one were to get caught.

[hoiho.livejournal.com]

Interesting; do you think perhaps she views TWFY as somehow being semi-automated, like an email campaign, and less worthy of attention, compared to individualy sent emails? I'd love to know.

Or does she value individual emails more highly as more deserving as having required more effort?

And I reckon address faking, in any medium, is unlikely; but spamming all 650 MPs' email addresses (without a local address) is a fairly simple matter (about 5 lines of Perl, I reckon). That's something TWFY doesn't allow.

[zotz]

Well, it'd be completely at odds with TWFY's goals. It's interesting that I've not heard of it happening somehow, though (including via paper letters) because it seems so straightforward.

I don't think it's to do with value. She needs to know how widespread support or opposition to various proposals is, and what people's reasons are for liking or not liking them. I don't think she thought she was getting that. I could be wrong - it could be something else - but that was the impression I got. As I say, I should ask her specifically.

[sea-of-flame.livejournal.com]

My mother once got a postal reply after emailing on behalf of her local Transition group to ask about various green issues...guess that answered any questions she had about unnecessary use of paper when electronic options were available ;)

[ringbark.livejournal.com]

If I send an email, I expect a reply by email.

If I send a letter, I expect a reply by letter.

If I telephone, I expect a telephone call response.

Ditto for Twitter, text messages, Facebook comments, faxes, messages in bottles etc.
If for any reason I need a reply by a different channel, I will make this clear in my original message.

[moomin-puffin.livejournal.com]

It does seem a bit rubbish to not use email. Having said that you are more likely to get a reasonable response if you send a postal letter. Much less stuff is done by snail mail now so when they receive a physical letter it registers on their radar to a greater extent (maybe not everyone but for a lot of these folks)

[ebee.livejournal.com]

My step mum is her constituancy sys admin. :-( no really. Do you need a better answer?!

[venta.livejournal.com]

Never mind that, go to bed! Go on! Off with you!

[condign.livejournal.com]

Hmm... when I worked in constituent mail (US, not UK), I dreaded the idea that congressmen would start "replying" to emails, simply because the volume was so high. I pity folks working nowadays, if they are replying.

Echoing zotz above, I can see why something like TWFY could cause annoyance for any kind of case-tracking.

[ar-boblad.livejournal.com]

I've used TWFY the once, and got a physical letter in reply (suprisingly quickly too). Because my experience was positive I'd now use TWFY again next time rather than considering looking for a different means of contact for my MP. If my MP in fact hates TWFY then he's scored an own goal I guess, but in his position I'd love getting the meta-information that comes from which communication channel the consituent in question is using. Plus having a bunch of stuff coming through the same channel in a somewhat standard format must make things easier for his office administration.

Still, an option on TWFY to say you'd rather get a email response (or not) would be a bonus.

[john-the-hat.livejournal.com]

Kirsty recently wrote to her MP complaining about the new equalities minister having a voting record which indicates she opposes any kind of equal rights.

She got a "we have noted your opinions" one line letter back from a secretary...