A Week in the Life....

ONE OF the privileges of my work is the endless cast of characters I meet.

Looking through the diary covering the couple of weeks since my last column it has included a president, a prime minister, a member of the Royal family, senior people from the world of shipping, and of course scores of constituents all with their wide range of views.

If we begin two weeks ago on the Monday morning it was back to London after a weekend that included a constituency surgery, to Blundell Park to see Town lose to Nuneaton, time to reply to some more of the messages sent before and after the vote on Syria, and on Sunday it was the Mayor of North East Lincolnshire's Civic Service. These civic gatherings are an important part of the life of the Borough and a reminder of the many organisations and people who give so much to enrich the lives of us all.

For that afternoon's Question Time it was the team of Defence ministers answering and the main debates on rural postal services followed by cycling. With public attention focusing as it does on the Wednesday lunchtime gladiatorial contests between Messrs Cameron and Miliband it's often forgotten that each parliamentary day begins with ministers from one department or another facing questions.

Unusually I had to return to the constituency in mid-week as Shand Engineering at Stallingborough were being presented with their second Queen's Award for Industry – a remarkable achievement for one of our long-established local businesses. On this occasion it was the Duke of Kent who was representing the Queen.

I was back in London in good time for the vote at 7pm leaving plenty of time to catch up with the e-mails.

On the Thursday I met with a couple of visiting constituents who, like most visitors to the Palace of Westminster are amazed and taken aback. Later in the day I spoke in a debate on 'Councillors on the Front-line  and with 26 years behind me as a councillor I felt qualified to make a contribution. Many MPs have council experience and of the eight who delivered speeches that afternoon we had well over 100 years of council service.

The Friday and Saturday surgeries provided another opportunity of meeting constituents, some with problems they felt I could help with, others wanting to give me the benefit of their views or to lobby me to support or oppose some proposal or other. It was also my week for doing one of my supermarket surgeries.

Back in London last Monday – that was the day President Abbas of the Palestinian National Authority was in Westminster. Whatever side of dispute between Israel and Palestine you favour like all them this one will eventually be decided around a negotiating table and the President made clear his willingness to talk.

On Tuesday morning the Transport Select Committee held a session with the Shipping Minister.

One of my afternoon meetings was one organised by Dementia Friends which gave us the most fascinating explanation of Alzheimers I have seen.

Also on Wednesday Prime Minister David Cameron held one of his regular meetings with a group of backbench members and since I had been fortunate enough to catch the Speaker's eye during Prime Minister's Questions it provided an opportunity to discuss the delays in determining the Able UK planning application that is presently with the Department of Transport.

I also met with a representative of the Health Lottery – a much smaller operation than The National Lottery but importantly one that has supported a number good causes in my constituency.

Surely there's room for a little competition in the lottery market?

The important thing common to all those I meet is that they have had a story to tell president or pensioner and the more people we meet the more we understand the vast range of issues that face governments across the world and how to deal with the inherent contradiction that people don't like change but want improvements to our schools, the NHS and so much more and improvement means change.

Syria Intervention

LAST Thursday was one of those occasions when Parliament was unquestionably the main forum of the nation. The debate on Syria was passionate and well-informed with the outcome in doubt until the last vote was counted.

Not only was Parliament performing its historic role of holding Government to account but in doing so two important changes were taking place; our constitution was evolving and our foreign policy undergoing a major change.

Constitutionally, governments can authorise military action under the Royal Prerogative – the armed forces serve the Crown not Government. This is a right that must be maintained in that prime ministers must always be able to react to a sudden emergency but in circumstances such as Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan, Parliament will from now on have the final say over peace and war decisions, and rightly so.

Our post Second World War foreign policy, even after the Suez fiasco of 1956, has been dictated to a considerable extent by our role as an imperial power. That will now change: despite having some of the finest Forces in the world, our military is much reduced. We will remain influential, still punching above our weight as a permanent member of the security council, a nuclear power and member of the G8 and G20, but our capacity for military intervention will, in the main, be restricted to when there is a clear British national interest.

Another interesting point about the build-up to last Thursday was the emails I received from constituents. So much of the correspondence MPs receive are emails generated by lobbying organisations and special interest groups to which people attach their name and fire off to their MP. These have their place and I always to my best to respond to all of them, but ahead of the Syria debate all the messages were personalised; people had sat down and typed out their thoughts. Like the contributions to the parliamentary debate these were passionate and informed and all were opposed to military intervention. Of course, I'm always mindful that it is those who oppose things who are more likely to be motivated to make their views known, but even allowing for that it is unusual not to receive any messages or calls, as in this case, expressing the opposite point of view.

It's interesting to reflect that I received far more emails expressing opposition to the pilot badger culls than the use of chemical weapons though, as I mentioned above, this is because there were mass emails made available by campaign groups. I don't say this to be in anyway critical because it is right that, as a nation we should do all we can to maintain the highest standards of animal welfare, but to emphasise that smaller amounts of personal correspondence can be more effective.

My other observation on the debate is how members on all sides were agonising over their decision. MPs are often depicted as being lobby fodder blindly following the dictates of the whips, but on this occasion 39 coalition members voted against their Government and many others abstained. Of course, as a Conservative I wanted to support the Prime Minister and the Government, but on this occasion, even after a one-to-one discussion with David Cameron, felt unable to do so.

Last week's good news for our area was the Government decision to give the go-ahead for the Able UK development. Yes, there are still a couple of lose ends to tie up but after four years we are almost there. Four years is too long and we've got to further refine our planning system to speed up these major decisions but that's easier said than done as the interests of local residents and the impact on them must always be a major consideration.

What must be speeded up is the time that organisations such as Natural England take to work through these applications. We are in a competitive situation and investment can so easily be lost to our continental neighbours.

The final go-ahead will be yet another indication of the Government's support for the area, already the site is designated as the country's largest Enterprise Zone and, coupled with the improvements to the A160, the Immingham by-pass and the Humber Bridge toll reductions show real commitment to maximising the area's potential.