Much of my correspondence from constituents comes in the form of standardised campaign emails about a given topic. I have in the past sent letters back in reply, once I have obtained the government’s formal response on the issue.
Given the big increase in postage charges, I have decided that it would be lighter on the taxpayer if I normally replied to these by email only. In future where there is a high volume campaign email, and I have been contacted by email, I will only reply with emails. Currently the cut Air Passenger Duty is a high volume campaign, with some support for the campaign to keep petrol and diesel duty down.
If any constituent would like a letter by reply I would be grateful if they would say so in their original email.
August 23, 2012
John,
I’m surprised, given your grasp of modern communications, that you’ve persisted with ‘snail mail’ for so long.
S.S.
August 23, 2012
Yet a “snail mail” reply seems, in my eyes, to be worth more. Email is quicker for informing, but a letter shows care.
John – I would have thought a reply in the same manner as the original would be the best option. So if someone cares enough to send you a letter, reply by letter. If all they want is info and send an email, reply via email. If they comment on your blog, a reply.
That would be my way of dealing with it.
Reply: I am only substituting email replies for incoming campaign emails, which is now the largest category by a big margin.
August 24, 2012
A sensible measure – I tend to support the rule of thumb to reply in the same manner, so phone back about a phone call, reply to a letter by letter, unless asked otherwise. (If I were a constituent emailing John, I could well be emailing from somewhere else and may not even see a postal reply for weeks or months – or indeed have a disability which makes email much more suited, for example a blind person using a Braille terminal for email.)
The strangest one must be a letter I received from my new MP, in response to an email I’d sent his predecessor several years earlier. It didn’t actually address or even mention the original issue, just acknowledged that I was a constituent who had previously contacted my MP. Come to think of it, he did reply by letter to a subsequent email from another constituent, which seemed a little odd to me at the time – though far better than receiving no response at all.
August 24, 2012
John, Why bother, you will be part of a tiny group soon. Just blag your salary and pension mate, the Conservatives are dead in the water.