An exercise in damage limitation

World Health Organization

Yesterday evening I emailed "full members" of the European Network of Cancer Registries – the ENCR was established in 1989 within the framework of the Europe Against Cancer programme of the European Commission. And because the ENCR Secretariat is hosted at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which is part of the World Health Organization, I reckoned that perhaps there might be some chance that my emails to scientists and academics inviting them to sign Declan's petition to the UN would arrive in their proper place: in inbox and not in spam (see previous blog). But I was wrong: of the 80 emails I sent, I only received four out-of-office autoreplies (from 2nd, 26th, 68th and 79th emails).

Also yesterday, I kept emailing the University of Oxford Medical Sciences Division: 47 emails to the Department of Paediatrics (from where we have a very distinguished signatory) – it was when I was checking the email address of one of the group directors that I discovered the pdf containing the names and email addresses of the full members of the ENCR. But no luck either: of the 47 emails I sent, all I received were two autoreplies (31st and 39th emails). On Sunday, the computers in our local council's Idea Store Whitechapel library were down for the day (as they were on Saturday), so virtually no emailing: only 20 investigators from the Jenner Institute. I received six autoreplies; three in each batch of ten emails. And there was a bit of coincidence: four of the autoreplies came from the 1st and 2nd emails of each batch.

Surely what Declan and I are dealing with can only be described as an exercise in damage limitation: sending Declan’s emails into spam (or even cyberspace) rather than have scientists and academics sign his petition to the UN, which would take us off the street. An exercise in damage limitation is what British MPs were accused of only last weekend. The Mail of Sunday reveals in an article dated 17 August (“The great expenses cover-up: Now MPs quietly change the FOI act to keep details secret”) that MPs have been accused of mounting a shameless cover-up operation to prevent voters from discovering the full truth about their lavish expenses. Following a series of legal battles by Freedom of Information campaigners, MPs will this autumn be forced to disclose expenses claims dating back five years. But in a little-spotted move before the summer recess, Parliament passed a clause meaning the location of MPs’ taxpayer-funded second homes will be deleted, along with details of regular travel expenses and suppliers of goods and services, saving them from potential embarrassment.