Dear Nick,
It isn’t a matter of what makes me
happy, you just haven’t given a definitive answer to the question of whether or
not Pertemps are meeting the terms of the contract that they share with
Jobcentreplus. The letter you wrote to me didn’t appear to be about that
subject.
If they are
not, Jobcentreplus are responsible for ensuring that they are, as it says in
the very same contract. If you are not, I would like to know why neither of you
are doing what you are contractually bound to do? How are these irregularities
in the use of public money going to be stopped? What are the consequences for Pertemps
for creating these irregularities and for Jobcentreplus for allowing them? How
can I accept a response which doesn’t address the issue? I believe that I am
explaining this to you in reasonably simple terms and can see no reason for the
avoidance of the topic that I have experienced.
I don’t
mind meeting you in person, providing you have the capabilities and willingness
to address my topic. However I insist on having a written, direct, no flannel,
objective, to the point response to the questions for the record, as I am sure
you are aware I am keeping documentary evidence for the whole world to see. If
during the meeting you don’t answer the questions and merely provide a verbal
version of your letter you will be wasting our time. I will once again be
unable to accept that as a conclusion.
Do you
understand the subject of any meeting we might have? Are these terms acceptable
to you? My quest for the information I seek will continue indefinitely until I
obtain it.
Yours
sincerely,