Due to gross corruption within our security services, an innocent woman is now on death's door in a foreign hell hole, but that's obviously not important to the CMC. They're busy, they have "More important" stuff to deal with . . . Hardly surprising for our Government lapdog, whoops, typo there - shouldn't that be "Watchdog"? It took them six years to investigate a shocking death, what's a year or two (or even 20), in hell for an innocent woman? Trifling.
This morning, I rang the CMC to speak to "John I-refuse-to-give-you-my-second-name," who was the officer I spoke to yesterday, or at least anyone else there who could give some feedback on the next step in this investigation, now that the CMC has all the formal written details.
I was told that John was unavailable, and everyone else was unavailable too, because they were "In a meeting," but that someone should be free by around 2pm. So I duly rang back at 2pm, and was told that John was still "Unavailable." When I tried to get some further details, like WHEN "John" would be available, and WHEN "John" would return my call, the woman on reception refused to help me with that information, and put the phone down on me. This happened several times, as I rang back in astonishment, merely trying to ascertain some perfectly reasonable information.
So in frustration, I noted that the CMC had a separate number for "Media," and I decided to call that, to see if I could speak to someone more reasonable. I was successful. I spoke to a perfectly wonderful lady, who listened very attentively, and noted my concerns (thank you). I told her that I merely wanted to know when I could speak to "John," and that if I didn't hear back from him by close of business to-day, I would physically turn up at the CMC tomorrow, and sit in the foyer until I got some feedback on my complaint. The really nice lady didn't have any idea who "John" was, but I told her the woman on reception obviously knew, and that if she asked her, I felt sure the message would be relayed.
That appeared to work. Shortly afterwards, I got a call back from the lady on reception, saying that "John" had tried to call me a couple of times, but that my phone had gone to voicemail (I was probably on another call). OK, that was reasonable, but when I (again), tried to ask WHEN "John" would call me again, or WHY he wouldn't take my call NOW (given that I was already on the phone), I was told he didn't have "Time" and he was "Busy," and she refused to give me any firm slot when it would be convenient for me to call back, or any firm time when "John" would call again. This situation is completely unacceptable, and completely unprofessional.
So here's a message to you "John," I will call you again some time tomorrow morning (Thursday 20th May 2010), if you haven't called me by then. If you are not available when I phone, I expect to be given either a time when it would be convenient for me to call back, or a firm time to expect your call. If these perfectly reasonable and civilised actions result in further stonewalling, as a next step I will physically turn up at the CMC, and sit in the foyer, until I get a response from someone. If I have to sit there all day without speaking to someone, I'll simply do that - and then blog about it.