MY RESPONSE TO TONY BLAIR'S DEFENSIVE LETTER - NO RESPONSE RECIEVED AS YET.

4 June 2006

Prime Minister

I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 31 May 2006. I note your comments regarding the efforts made to minimise risks on routine patrols and the lengths that are gone to, to make our service men and women sufficiently well equipped and protected. Without wishing to repeat myself as to the contents of my previous letter dated 1.03.06, would you please clarify for me as to why my son's regiment were denied the basic provision of adequate boots and armoured Land Rovers. Prior to Christian's death, a request had been made by my son's commanding officer for armoured Land Rovers as essential equipment, the request was denied, the vehicles were subsequently given for use by the Iraqi Police.

I would like to quote to you statistics from the M.O.D. The revelations list 2.581 Equipment Failure Reports (E.F.R's) in Iraq and Kuwait between 21 March and December 2005. A further 90 incidents, involving equipment including Challenger 2 Main Battle Tanks, Land Rovers, rifles and machine guns are listed as 'serious equipment failures'. (S.E.F's)

Michael Moore, the Liberal Democrat defence spokesman advised 'There are ongoing doubts about the quality of the equipment out troops are given, and this is a time for the government to reassure us that they are providing the best' He goes on to say 'At a time of huge concern about our troops being sent into an incredibly hostile environment, it is deeply worrying that we find we cannot always rely on the equipment that they have been given to protect them'

Does this suggest a well equipped army to you?

I certainly know who's version I would believe, and it would not be yours Mr Blair.

The evening of my son's death (18.10.05), it has been extremely difficult to ascertain exactly what happened, when he left his 'snatch' fibre glass vehicle. We know that a vehicle containing several Iraqi Police were watching the patrol when the I.E.D. was detonated. We have been refused a Board of Inquiry, which is difficult to challenge as it involves the army looking into it's own practices, and whether lessons can be learnt. I have questioned whether the army adheres to The Human Rights Act, as I feel it is not acceptable practice to go searching for I.E.D's on foot with no equipment other than a rifle. We have been denied access to the soldiers who were with my son on that night, and no inquest date has been set. We actually learned more about our son's death in an article in The Times newspaper several months later, than from the M.O.D.

Can you, as a parent understand the reality and distress caused of reading details of your son's death in a newspaper article?

In your letter to me, you speak about not putting too much faith in media reporting. I find that with the Freedom of Information Act in place, there is a lot more credibility to what is now written, and one can always check out the facts for oneself. You comment of some of my previous points in the previous letter to you, been drawn on distorted accounts.

*You say Maya Evans was not arrested for reading out the names the 97 fallen soldiers at the Cenotaph.

It is my understanding that her actions could be seen by some, as breaching 132 of The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act. However, I ask you is this what the act was intended for, for people not to be able to speak freely without fear of prosecution. Is this the form of democracy you intend enforcing upon us, as well as in Iraq and Afghanistan?

*You comment about no one seeking to prevent publicity of the death of the 100th soldier in Iraq.

During a television interview on 31 January 2006, on Sky News it was stated clearly instruction had come from you 'not to hype up the significance of the number'

*You state your wife Cherie Blair does not have a amoured car.

If I recall, I believe I said she had a bullet proof vehicle. Five days following my son's death. there was an article in The Times, stating that the Government had disclosed information following a freedom of information request. A Cabinet Office spokesman confirmed Mrs Blair had use of a bullet proof Vauxhall Omega that is estimated to be costing the British taxpayers more that £50.000 per year. She also has the use of a Ford Galaxy people carrier as backup.

Is this report not accurate Mr Blair?

You do not mention anything about my request to meet with you to discuss your reasons and decision to invade Iraq, and the war I believe to have been illegal. I am realistic enough to understand your reluctance to agree to such a discussion, as several other families have been making the same request for up to 3 years with no response from you. I have therefore taken the opportunity to write an open letter to you and the general public, on The Military Families Against the War site, with the questions I feel need to be asked. I am sure history will indeed reveal the truth as to the deceit, deliberate omissions and liberal considerations given to the facts during the period you decided to invade Iraq. I would have however thought your conscience as a practising Christian, would have been troubling you considerable.

I would finally like to comment briefly on the present situation in Iraq, which is verging on civil war. With around 1000 Iraqi civilians dying each month and more British troops losing their lives and many injuries, both physical and emotional, I would question what we are still doing there? We are not able to resolve the situation, and the troops should be pulled out immediately, and let the people of Iraq decide their own future. It is my understanding that Britain has been recently asked to leave Iraq by the leader it helped to install. The British public are now of the opinion the troops should come home.

Do you listen to anyone other than George Bush?

I await your response with interest

Pauline Hickey

From Tony Blair to Pauline Hickey 31/5/06