Conference Season

SO THE Party Conference season is over and though many of the themes in the key speeches will form the backdrop to the political scene through to the General Election the individual speeches will soon be forgotten.

Inevitably after a period of recession 'cost of living' issues figure large; recessions result in declining living standards so now that the economic indicators are looking up, we all want to feel the benefits. That's why the Chancellor made clear in his speech that petrol duty will be frozen and as the deputy-chairman of Parliament's All-Party Group for Fair Fuel I find this particularly welcome.

The petrol duty freeze is just one policy that is putting money back into people's pockets, another is the big increase in the amount that can be earned before being taxed.

Whether it's the oil companies, the energy utilities or indeed services provided by local councils, if they seek to exploit their customers it should be no part of Conservative policy to support them. Conservatives should always be on the side of the consumer.

Free markets deliver better services, but as Adam Smith said in his famous work The Wealth of Nations: "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices … But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies, much less to render them necessary."

Strip away the 18th century language, and what it amounts to is that you need a certain level of regulation otherwise the temptation of suppliers to form a cartel could prove irresistible. A completely free market is not suitable; it needs some constraints and who better than a Conservative government to recognise that requirement?

One of the more interesting meetings I went to at the Party Conference was entitled 'Do Tories get the North?' It's simply a statement of fact to state that in some of our northern cities there are very few Tory councillors. Labour, of course, have their own black spots where support is low and in a few cases almost non-existent. The answer to the question posed by the Conference meeting is yes – a subject I'll return to next time.

Fuel Duty Frozen

 So the Party Conference season came and went and though many of the themes that figured high in the key speeches will form the backdrop to the political scene from now through the nineteen months up to the General Election the individual speeches will soon be forgotten by all but the political classes.

Inevitably after a period of recession ‘cost of living’ issues figure large; recessions result in declining living standards so now that the economic indicators are looking up we all want to feel the benefits as soon as possible. That’s why the Chancellor made clear in his speech that petrol duty will now be frozen for the rest of this parliament and as the Deputy-Chairman of Parliament’s All-Party Group for Fair Fuel I find this particularly welcome. Our Group was just limbering up for a campaign to remind George Osborne of the arguments for again freezing the duty but, thankfully, he didn’t need any reminders! At long last we have rid ourselves of the duty escalator introduced by Gordon Brown.

He petrol duty freeze is just one policy that is putting money back into people’s pockets another is the big increase in the amount that can be earned before being taxed.

Whether it’s the oil companies, the energy utilities or indeed services provided by local councils if they seek to exploit their customers either because they have got a monopoly or due to weak regulation then it should be no part of Conservative policy to support them. Conservatives should always be on the side of the consumer. Free markets deliver better services and usually at a cheaper price but as Adam Smith said in his famous work The Wealth of Nations:

‘People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices…. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies, much less to render them necessary.’

Strip away the 18^th century language and what it amounts to is that you need a certain level of regulation otherwise the temptation of suppliers to form a cartel could prove irresistible. A completely free market is not suitable for today’s economy; it needs some constraints and who better than a Conservative government to recognise that requirement.

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.

The Media and News Reporting

ARE your main political concerns governed by what issues are in the headlines?

In other words, does the media contribute, or perhaps even dictate, what political issues worry you?

I ask because at my street surgery in Cleethorpes' St Peter's Avenue last week, the issues were markedly different from the previous month.

A few weeks ago Europe, in all its forms, was clearly at the forefront of people's minds. That was understandable since Parliament had been discussing the Bill to authorise an IN/OUT referendum and I was asking them to sign up to support the Conservative campaign to legislate for that referendum before the next election; a proposal being opposed by Labour and the Lib-Dems.

Last week I was again asking them to sign up to supporting the 'Let's Decide' campaign as it's called but hardly anyone wanted to talk about Europe. There had been no bad headlines about 'Europe' pushing us around – Abu Qatada is in Jordan, UKIP are down in the polls, the economy is recovering and the sun is shining. Certainly Cleethorpes has had a good few weeks; not just the weather but the fantastic success of the Air Show, the Carnival and Armed Forces Day which all brought thousands into the town.

So what did people want to talk about last week? Well, since our Police and Crime Commissioner, Matthew Grove, was with me it's understandable that policing issues were to the fore; but even that, in one sense, is a good news story since crime is at a 30 year low.

Matthew is proving the case that the introduction of Police Commissioners was a good policy, of course there will be some commissioners who fail, but we can all pass judgement and choose not to re-elect them. That's something that could not be said about the anonymous police authorities that preceded the commissioners. Matthew is providing a real opportunity for the public to engage with him and express their concerns about policing in their own area. He is constantly attending residents meetings, parish councils and similar gatherings – if you belong to one of these groups and haven't had him along, invite him, he'll be delighted to meet with you.

There's no doubting the economy is on the up and as the Telegraph reported on July 25, there is growing confidence among local businesses. As Ian Kelly, Chief Executive of the Hull and Humber Chamber of Commerce stated in the article their own economic survey reflected the national picture with 'sales orders, training, turnover the profit expectations all showing sharp increases' and that 68 per cent of firms said they were planning to recruit new staff.

Certainly there was a buzz down the Avenue and much more of the elusive 'feel-good' factor than only a month ago.

If you rummage around in the recycling box and find a newspaper from a month ago it can often feel like another country. Read some of the articles and you think "I wonder what happened to that story?"

But, back to my original question, ask yourself what the first three concerns are today and I suspect you would, off the top of your head, say the economy – you want to know if you'll be better off next year than this – immigration and either policing or the NHS might be next. I say this because these are almost always at the top of the list. I challenge you to ask yourselves in a month's time and see what you come up with.

Interestingly, welfare abuse, which was a big issue until recently, has slipped down the list, perhaps because people can now see how hard the Government are clamping down on it.

After these issues, people will almost always complain about local services, such as the state of footpaths, dog-fouling and street cleaning.

Finally, I can't let pass without comment last week's visit by the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and Energy Secretary Ed Davey. It's very rare for two cabinet ministers to visit any constituency on the same day and it shows how committed to developing the area the Government is. They can see the prospects and have shown commitment by investing in improvement to our infrastructure and approving Growth Fund bids and now we can all see the result of both Government support and private investment – regeneration and real jobs.

Policies & Promises

“You say one thing and then do something else, never keep your promises”

As a politician I have, of course, heard that many times – sometimes justifiably, sometimes not. We are also told that, as seems to be the case at last week’s county council elections, politicians aren’t listening to the voters.

For the politician there’s a problem here; if a particular issue climbs up the list of concerns of voters should politicians listen and change their policies accordingly or should they say “we can’t change our policies because we promised something different?”

Then there’s the question of how much difference policies make to voters when they decide who to support? I ask this because so often there appears to be a conflict between votes cast and the policies being pursued.

Take last week’s results in the Lincolnshire County area; in Boston and the south of the county immigration, quite understandably, was the key issue but if we look at a couple of other UKIP policies – they want to see the return of grammar schools – but in Lincolnshire they never went away; Conservatives on the county council fought tooth and nail in the seventies and eighties to retain them and succeeded. On-shore wind turbines are almost always opposed by local communities and the county council has the most robust policies the law allows but it didn’t stop UKIP campaigning on these matters as if the exact opposite was the case. Just as an aside it must be noted that here, as we await the decision on the Able UK planning application for their South Humber Energy Park to abandon wind energy which promises so much for the local economy would be disastrous.

Another strange result was in Gainsborough where a long-standing LibDem councillor lost his seat to UKIP. LibDems are the most pro-European of the three main parties so why would anyone swop their vote from them to UKIP? I pose these questions not to criticise how the electorate cast their votes – they are the masters – but to highlight how difficult it is for politicians and parties to cope with the criticism that ‘they aren’t listening’. Actually political parties spend enormous amounts of money in trying to ‘listen’ and to find out what voters think; surveys, polls and so on; personally I prefer the supermarket queue.

Another mystery is why Nigel Farage, formerly of the City of London and public school educated, or Eton educated Boris Johnson seem immune from the ‘out-of touch, public school boy’ label that the Labour Party do their best to stick on David Cameron and George Osborne. Is it just that both Nigel & Boris are engaging characters – which they are – or is there more to it? When the General Election comes will it be charisma or competence that triumphs? At a local level will the fact that both I and Austin Mitchell oppose our membership of the EU lose votes from pro-European supporters in our respective parties? Or will it be that the only way to secure an IN/OUT referendum will be to elect a Conservative Government that makes the difference?

Westminster has, of course, been dominated by the Queen’s Speech which, after all the splendour, is followed by six days of debate on its contents. Some have criticised it for being light on legislation – which seems to assume that all legislation is good; which is certainly not the case. Undoubtedly the Immigration Bill will attract much attention. It deals with many of the issues that those voters in Boston were expressing their concerns about, such as limiting access to public services only to those who have contributed through their taxes and making it easier to remove people from the UK who abuse the ‘right to a family life’ section of the Human Rights Act.

There are Bills dealing with pensions, a new Energy Bill aimed at ensuring prices are fair; others dealing with consumer rights, adult social care costs, law and order matters child care and much more. But the focus is still on stabilising our economy and encouraging growth as it should be and it is the economy that, despite my earlier comments about Europe, grammar schools and the like, that will determine whether or not the Government retains the confidence of the electorate in just two years time.

Perhaps it will be the Party that sets out a programme for dealing with the multitude of issues that face the country rather than parties that outline the problems but offer no solutions.

Sunshine & Spending

THE sun has been shining on Cleethorpes in more ways than one; last Saturday we celebrated Armed Forces Day by cutting the ribbon on the magnificent new memorial. Thousands lined the streets in tribute to our Forces and at the same time gave a boost to the local economy. To have the Royal Marines Band, added greatly to the occasion. I particularly enjoyed the sunset ceremony, which is always moving and has enormous dignity.

The day emphasised that despite the difficulties caused by the Hatfield landslip blocking the rail line between Scunthorpe and Doncaster, Cleethorpes is very much open for business and later in the week we heard the good news that the line would be open for business again from the start of this week. Great news; since it means normal business by the time of the school holidays.

The main events at Westminster since my last column have been the Spending Review and the Government's plans for major investment in our infrastructure. Though more is needed we should not forget that we've already benefited from the Humber Bridge tolls reduction, upgrading the A160 access into Immingham Docks, enterprise zones and successful bids into the Regional Growth Fund.

None of us like austerity but the overwhelming majority acknowledge the reality that no individual, business or country can go on living beyond its means year after year.

The scale of our problem can be seen just by looking at the level of government spending. When the Labour Party came to power in 1997, total spending was well below £500 billion a year and it increased modestly for three years. That's because, as you may remember, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown made much of the fact that they would stick to the spending plans adopted by the outgoing Tory government.

Then Gordon Brown took the brakes off and spending began to rise. If the economy continues to grow all's well but economies don't always grow; there are economic cycles and despite Mr Brown's misguided belief that he had conquered boom and bust I suspect that deep down very few really believed him. Of course, we wanted to, but by the time the downturn came spending had hit £700 billion and still rising.

One of the other significant debates from last week focused on High Speed 2 – the proposed new rail line from London to the Midlands and North.

Opposition comes in two forms: those living along the route fear loss of value to their property and those who oppose the cost. Then there are those who say why spend all this money to knock half an hour off an already pretty quick journey time. Though speed is a factor the proposal that this Government inherited from the previous Labour administration is about capacity; our rail network is full and demand goes on rising.

At the time the railways were privatised in the mid-90s there were 750 million passenger journeys per year; now there are 1.5 billion and freight is also on the up.

So why should I, as an MP in this area, support it?

Unless the new line is built, the chances of northern Lincolnshire and other areas off the main lines getting improved services is very limited.

Also remember that, measured by tonnage, 25 per cent of all the freight moved in the UK starts or ends in Immingham. So many jobs here depend on it.

Then, of course, there is the potential for Tata Steel in Scunthorpe. Already the production of rail is a major part of its operations. I'm constantly pressing ministers to ensure that everything possible is done to make sure that British-based businesses get the benefit of the enormous orders that will come forward as a result of the project.

The other big news is that on Friday, despite opposition from Labour and the Lib-Dems, the Bill to enshrine in law that there must be an In-Out Euro referendum before the 2017 deadline passed its first hurdle. Great news; whichever side of the argument you are on, it's only right that the people should determine whether or not we have ever closer union and for the avoidance of doubt I will vote the same way as in 1975 – NO – the sooner we leave the better.