The Good- The Bad and The Ugly!

DO WE need the wealthy and the privately educated? Former Prime Minister Sir John Major has burst back onto the political frontline over the past few weeks – first with his thoughts on energy prices and more recently his thoughts on social mobility and an expression of regret that there are too many rich privately educated among the ruling elite.

Taken as a whole, judiciary, business, politics, the civil service he's probably right but in politics things are changing and for the better, at least in the Conservative Party.

Of course there are still privately educated MPs but among those first elected in 2010 there are many representing the areas in which they grew up and who were educated in their local state school. On Wednesday evening I attended a meeting with four of my colleagues representing northern constituencies and all of them went to the local grammar or comprehensive. Does it matter?

Moving onto another group who we like to single out for special treatment – the rich. We tend not to like them; or is it just certain members of elite groups such as bankers and bosses of some businesses like the utilities? But what about footballers or movie stars? They don't attract as much hostility and most earn in days what the PM earns a year.

The reason I ask is that I read a newspaper piece last week that reminded me of the very significant contribution the well-paid make through their taxes. Apparently just one per cent of taxpayers – those earning more than £160,000 of which there are about 300,000 – will contribute just under 30 per cent of all income taxrevenues this year and that almost 59 per cent of all income tax comes from just 10 per cent of taxpayers. Should we be thankful?

On Friday I was among a group of MPs representing constituencies that could benefit enormously from investment in the off shore renewables sector. It gave me the opportunity of both supporting policies designed to secure the benefits that could be delivered to our area but also to emphasise that we must be mindful of the existing jobs that rely on competitive energy supplies and the need to ensure reasonable gas and electricity to domestic consumers. Much of the investment we are seeking to attract will come from the wealthy who may, perish the thought, be products of a private education. If that investment provides hundreds of jobs will that matter?

The PM has been heavily involved in the work to attract investment to our region and fully recognises the needs of existing industry and the importance of keeping domestic energy prices at acceptable levels.

So if we are to keep tax levels down we need the rich otherwise everyone else would be paying more. Have Ed Miliband and Ed Balls realised this?

So back to John Major: I fully endorse his wish to see people from a wider range of backgrounds reaching positions of influence as I'm sure will most readers of this column. If they become well-paid in the process and relieve your tax burden will you heave sigh of relief?

Read more: http://www.scunthorpetelegraph.co.uk/Barton-MP-asks-need-rich-tax-levels/story-20256051-detail/story.html#ixzz2mbashNQn

Parliament

MANY people form their view of what Parliament is like based on Prime Minister's Question Time but apart from that half-hour what goes on is serious, but often dull.

Every Bill after being debated goes to a Bill Committee where they are considered in detail and when it's a subject as dry as the accounting procedures of local councils, important though it is, is not something to get the adrenaline flowing. During the last week I've attended four sessions, with six more to come on the Local Audit & Accountability Bill. At one point a group of students arrived and stayed for 20 minutes. The same person was speaking for the whole time, not electrifying but it showed the grind of the process.

I have written before about what a pleasure it is to meet constituents who visit Westminster.

A couple of weeks ago I met Abigail Heywood, a Franklin College student who had been invited to become a Leader in the National Citizens Service (NCS) and attend a reception in the Houses of Parliament.

When Abigail wrote to me she said she went on NCS with Grimsby Town FC – a life changing social programme. She helped with maintenance and made up 'veg boxes', cleared a waste area in Cleethorpes, ran a sports and crafts workshop at Nunsthorpe School and helped out at the Firemens' Fete. It was a pleasure to meet her. Full details of the scheme are at https://www.gov.uk/government/get-involved/take-part/national-citizen- service

If any reader would like to take a Westminster tour all that is necessary is to contact your MP's office.

Despite the Election being 18 months away the rhythm of politics is now entering its pre-election phase.

The fixed-term Parliaments Act means we now know the date of the Election (May 7, 2015). It's interesting that the Labour Party has started to make some policy announcements. For the opposition party this is difficult – do you wait or show your hand early on? What's interesting is that Labour acknowledged there will be difficult spending decisions but still refuse to apologise for the mess they left behind.

The main announcement was the energy price freeze. The natural inclination is to take it; but would you if it meant higher increases before and after? And what if the freeze is introduced when prices are falling? The allegation is that the "Big 6" are manipulating the market. All of us may be inclined to that view but before any government can act they must have evidence. The Energy Bill gives Ofgem greater powers to investigate.

Out on Patrol

Many of you will have read last Monday’s Telegraph report of my night out on patrol in Cleethorpes with the Humberside Police Commissioner, Matthew Grove, the police and our magnificent ‘Street Angels.’

The role of Police Commissioner was the subject of much debate when the legislation was passing through Parliament a couple of years ago but most of the commissioners are settling into their roles and providing both real accountability and developing links with the local communities throughout the Force area. I can see their role extending over coming years perhaps incorporating responsibility for the other emergency services.

After last week when the three Police Federation officers appeared before Parliament’s Home Affairs Select Committee to be questioned about their part in the downfall of former Cabinet Minister, Andrew Mitchell who can doubt that the police must be democratically accountable.

But I digress; the officers I meet as I go about the constituency are dedicated to serving the public and we owe them our thanks and appreciation. Certainly those I saw in action on the streets of Cleethorpes were able to diffuse some rather tense encounters using a mix of humour, firmness and authority.

Turning to the ‘Street Angels:’ they are a dedicated group of individuals who give up many of their Saturday nights to walk the streets until 2.30 a.m. keeping an eye out for anyone in distress or perhaps a little worse for drink. Organised by Churches Together in North East Lincolnshire they are people of faith who are genuinely concerned about their local community.

Similar groups operate in towns and cities up and down the country. They are admirable in every way.     

As well as the police there was a representative from the Fire and Rescue Service and North East Lincolnshire Council. All of these people on the streets at vast expense to the taxpayer so that people can, in some cases, drink too much.

I’m no killjoy nor do I want to do anything to harm the night-time economy since lots of local people work in the clubs and bars and I supported the introduction of 24 hour licensing in the hope that it would bring about a culture change but, like other north European nations such as Germany and Holland we seem unable to adopt the drinking habits of the more southern European countries and perhaps that means we need to restore a little more regulation.

One culture change that does seem to have taken place is that many of our younger people seem to go out with the intention of getting drunk, something that was very much less prevalent until more recent years. The availability of cheap alcohol from supermarkets seems to be the reason. In years gone by people went to the pub and moved onto a club around 11 o’clock where they were able to enjoy themselves until around 2 a.m.

I’m opposed to minimum unit pricing because it penalises the responsible drinker who wants to enjoy a few beers a bottle of wine at home but I do think there is a case for preventing the supermarkets from selling booze at below cost. Perhaps this coupled with returning to a slightly more regulated system of licensing hours might mean we make life a little less fraught for the taxi operators we spoke to, the police, the staff at A & E, the staff at the Takeaways and as I mentioned earlier ease the burden on the taxpayer. What do you think? Please let me know at martin.vickers.mp@parliament.uk

One rather surreal moment occurred around midnight when we decided to have a bite to eat. On our travels around Cleethorpes we were accompanied by Adrian Gill the feature writer and restaurant critic for the Sunday Times who writes under the name of A.A. Gill. As we took our place in Valentinos Italian restaurant in the Market Place I mused on how often a London restaurant critic turns up unannounced at a Cleethorpes eatery. My pizza was first-rate; will we ever know what Adrian thought of his steak? Check out the Sunday Times for the next few weeks, that’s if it wasn’t in yesterday.   

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.

Trains & Boats and Planes

It’s just turned 10 o'clock on Wednesday evening and I've just arrived at Doncaster bus station to be told the next bus that will get me to Scunthorpe before rejoining the train isn't for another hour.

I’m returning twenty-four hours earlier than usual so as to visit the Lincolnshire Show and in doing so show my support for our farming community and all of those who work in the rural economy that is still an important part of the business and social part of the community in my constituency.

But I can’t help reflecting on a certain irony; this afternoon I met with the Transport Secretary Patrick McLaughlin as part of my campaign to restore a direct train service between London and Grimsby/Cleethorpes and after our 7 o'clock vote and a quick dash to King’s Cross I find my planned 19.52 service is cancelled but I have three minutes to catch the 19.33 and be in Doncaster in time for the bus and train that will get me home soon after eleven. As we pull out the guard tells us that all trains are subject to delay because of an attempted suicide at Peterborough.

I and my fellow-passengers will never know what drove this man to attempt to take his own life but it puts things into perspective; what’s an hour’s delay in comparison?

My meeting with the minister went well – there are no promises of course and we must remember that there is always a Plan B. If the main East Coast franchise doesn’t include a service to Cleethorpes there is an Open-Access Operator currently discussing providing services on the route via Scunthorpe and Doncaster with a view to starting the services during 2016.

There can be no doubt that a direct train service to London will provide a considerable boost to our local economy.

Talking of the local economy and the link with train services it’s good to note that the Hatfield landslip is well on the way to being cleared and the line between Scunthorpe and Doncaster re-opened ensuring that our main route to South Yorkshire and beyond is back in action before the school holidays allowing visitors from what has always been the main Cleethorpes market for visitors to the resort ready access.

On Wednesday the Prime Minister reported back following the G8 summit and had some positive news in respect of ensuring that multi-national companies pay their fair share of tax but the subject that generated far more questions and showed what widespread concern exists in Parliament was the potentially extremely dangerous policy of arming the Syrian rebels. As the Government has made very clear they have made no decision to do so and their aim in suggesting it as a real possibility is to bring pressure to bear, and as such to do anything other than make clear it is a possibility would undermine the threat.

It’s a perfectly logical position to take though I have to say not one that I’m persuaded by. I am one of the 81 Tory members to have signed a letter to the Prime Minister urging that whatever decision the Government come to it must be put to the vote in the House of Commons. I will certainly need a lot of convincing that we should pour yet more arms into an already highly volatile country. Indeed I find it hard to believe I could be persuaded at all.

Next week will be dominated by the Spending Review for the year 2015-16. Clearly there will have to be a further cuts, and we now know that a future Labour government would stand by the spending plans of the Coalition government. This at least is a belated recognition of reality by Labour but much too late. The economy, as always, will be the determining factor at the General Election; there are beginning to be signs of the economy picking up as indicated by many of the underlying facts and figures. The Conservatives are way ahead of Labour in the polls on their ability to manage the economy so why would anyone vote for the two Eds to become the next occupiers of 10 and 11 Downing Street? Surely the real thing is always better.              

Conservative Home article:

Turning the clock back to October 2011 when I was one of the 81 rebels who voted for an In–Out EU referendum I referred during the debate to having attended a Civic Service the previous day and, even for me, as a confirmed Euro-sceptic who voted to leave in 1975, being surprised at what I described as ‘the real people of England’ when every person I spoke to was urging me to vote for the referendum; I never had any doubts that I would do so but their support and encouragement spurred me on.

The weekend after the recent county elections I read and listened to more reports and analysis on them than is good for anyone. Then later, in need of some light relief, I settled down to watch the ‘Antiques Road Show  and couldn't help thinking that here again were gathered the ‘real people of England’ – loyal, hard-working and, whatever their voting habits, conservative by nature; many of them would have voted for UKIP – for most of them that would be a first – the challenge for the Conservative Party is to make sure it’s the last but with the European elections coming next year that is going to be extremely difficult. Vote for the same party twice running and it can easily become habit-forming.

My constituency takes in part of North & North East Lincolnshire Unitary Councils who had no elections this year, though in April UKIP secured their second seat in a North East Lincolnshire by-election – both in seats that more often than not return a Tory so on 2nd May my centre of attention focussed on the neighbouring Lincolnshire County Council area where UKIP scored spectacular, but, in the main, predictable gains.

The area around Boston was where the most spectacular gains came. These were the predictable ones; with immigration at the levels they have experienced in recent years. Large cities can absorb immigrants in a way that small provincial towns can’t. Local public services struggle, resentment grows.

The public look and see a link between ‘Europe’ and immigration, ‘Europe’ and the inability to deport known terrorists and criminals, the link between ‘Europe’ and an obligation to pay benefits to those who have not contributed. Whether these links are real or perceived matters not; they are deeply ingrained in the public consciousness.

The Prime Minister has set out a perfectly logical, sensible way forward, and with an in/out referendum guaranteed by a future majority Conservative government it should be a good package to sell to the electorate. The problem is that the public are ahead of the game and won’t wait for four years. They've been let down once too often.

Leaders of all parties have got to appreciate that millions of the British people regard our membership of the EU as being under sufferance with even many of those old enough to have voted in 1975 feeling resentful that they were deceived into believing it was a trading arrangement rather than a political project.

The project has developed and moved on without the people giving their consent; after every new treaty there should have been a referendum. I rather suspect that we would still be where we are now but without the widespread resentment that exists.

At the moment the political momentum is with those who identify with the public, share their frustrations and identify with so much of what they perceive to be wrong rather than those seeking to manage the realities of a complex world. In the battle between charisma and competence charisma is in the lead.

If we are to return David Cameron to Downing Street in 2015 we need to deliver a referendum or at the very least set the arrangements into statute. Elvis would say ‘It’s Now or Never’ perhaps we can’t deliver that but it certainly needs to be sooner rather than later.

Renewable Energy

With much attention focused on the potential for development of the renewable energy sector on our area it is understandable that there has been much comment locally about last week’s debate and vote in the House of Commons on the Energy Bill and MPs In-boxes have been filling up with ‘round-robin’ emails prepared by various campaign groups asking us to support a formal de-carbonisation target.

Though there were some longer versions most of these messages just asked that the Government set this target and all would be well. No thought seems to have been given to the impact on existing jobs or the inevitable increase in already high household and business energy bills. Like most issues this one is complex; not one that can be summed up in a couple of sentences.

Adopting the Target would have increased costs to every consumer in the country including the intensive energy users which is of particular importance here in northern Lincolnshire where, for example, Tata steel and the oil and petro-chemicals plants based along the Humber Bank employ thousands of people as well as hundreds working in power stations and the associated transport sector. Governments across the developed world are wrestling with the joint challenges of delivering energy security in a low carbon and affordable way. To deliver on those aims, we have to rebuild our energy infrastructure, making up for a dismal failure over past years to secure the necessary levels of investment. The Energy Bill that was approved last week is a vital instrument in securing that investment. Opposing a formal de-carbonisation target and supporting a low-carbon economy are not mutually exclusive. The case for the target is less about new low-carbon electricity generating plant - as there are other specific contractual measures in the Bill to deliver this - and more about the vital need to secure industrial jobs in the UK to build that infrastructure.

It is good for Ministers to challenge people to raise their aspirations and ambitions, and targets are part of that process, but they can only be relevant if we know how to meet them. The challenge with a de-carbonisation target for 2030 or any other date is that we cannot yet know how it can be met - or indeed, if it can be met. Nuclear may not happen on the scale hoped for - and it is hard to see how we can meet a de-carbonisation target without new nuclear. Many supporters of the target also oppose nuclear; the reality is that without nuclear the target, even if it could be achieved would be unimaginably expensive. Some of the emerging renewable technologies, such as offshore wind and tidal, may remain too expensive, and we don't yet know if their costs will come down to make them affordable for consumers. Carbon Capture and Storage, which could give a low-carbon future for coal and gas, has yet to be proven commercially. Unabated gas is relatively plentiful and is certainly lower in its carbon intensity than coal, but on its own would not enable us to reach the low level of emissions which the 2030 target would be likely to require. My difficulty with the target, therefore, is that we would be requiring it to be set without knowing that it can be met, and that cannot be a responsible decision for government to make, when the costs of getting it wrong would have to be picked up by consumers for decades to come. On the other hand, a target could clearly help secure the industrial renaissance a low-carbon economy could deliver. We all want to see jobs in the construction and the supply chain come to the UK, but companies are unlikely to invest unless they can see an order-book going well beyond 2020 and out to 2030.

Yet the de-carbonisation target does not deliver that certainty. Certainly, it says there needs to be new plant built, but no one can know which technology would deliver it. Investors will still require a clearer understanding of the likely market in the 2020s if they are to proceed, and so a clear agenda is more important than a general amorphous target. Moving on, I note that North East Lincolnshire Council is to reduce the number of council meetings and cost saving is given as one of the reasons. Sounds reasonable doesn't it? Or does it? Governments and councils don’t like scrutiny it shows up inefficiencies, is inconvenient, time-consuming and, if it exposes mistakes can be embarrassing.

When I was first elected a councillor in 1980, with the exception of some planning decisions almost every decision taken by a committee had to be approved or, equally important, rejected by the Full Council which met every month and meant that all councillors were involved in decision-making. During my time on the Council I always objected to more powers being delegated to committees or officers. When we elect our local councillor we hope and expect that he or she have some input into decision-making and preferably a vote on matters. Sadly accountability and democracy are being further eroded in North East Lincolnshire and that should worry us all

Achievements

It’s so easy to miss what governments and councils are actually achieving in their day-to-day delivery of services when the political headlines are dominated by who has rebelled on this or that issue or some piece of trivia picked up from someone’s Twitter account.

So here’s a list of some of the Government’s achievements that you may have missed:

·         The Deficit down by a third.

·         Net immigration cut by a third.

·         Crime down by a third.

·         Benefits capped so that no out-of-work household can claim more than the average working family earns.

·         1.25 million new jobs in the private sector.

·         A quarter of a million new small businesses created.

·         A record number of apprentices – half a million in the last year alone.

·         Tax cut by £600 for 24 million people and over two million taken out of income tax altogether.

·         Government funding to freeze Council Tax three years running.

·         Energy customers being forced to put customers on the lowest tariff.

·         A cut in the EU budget and a treaty that wasn’t in the UK’s interests vetoed.

·         6000 more doctors employed in the NHS and 6000 fewer managers

It’s quite an impressive list, particularly for a coalition. Coaltions by their very nature are always more difficult to manage than single party administrations – and they’re difficult enough! If you add the Europe Bill which guarantees a referendum if a new treaty that moves more power from Whitehall to Brussels it becomes even more impressive. There’s also the Academy and Free School programme being driven on by Michael Gove; on the whole pretty good going.

Something else you may have missed was a House of Commons debate last Tuesday about the ‘High Street’ and the impact of changing consumer habits – internet shopping, out-of-town developments etc.

It gave an opportunity for speakers to sing the glories of their own High Street. Here’s part of my contribution; “There is a danger that such debates can turn into a round of “knock the supermarkets,” but let us not forget that, as we heard earlier, supermarkets such as Marks and Spencer and Tesco actually grew from market stalls. Meeting the demands of the consumer is the key here. The hon. Member for Scunthorpe mentioned the Co-op, and I can remember being dragged down Grimsby’s Freeman Street by my mother to the Co-op, which was an enormous department store in those days. It dominated the whole shopping centre and was the Tesco of its day. So there has always been a department store, as it were, with everything under one roof, but the independent retailers must be able to compete with that.

Let me turn to Cleethorpes, the pre-eminent resort on the east coast. It has a very successful high street, St Peter’s Avenue, which is only a mile and a half from Tesco’s out-of-town development. However, having a mix of shops, including independent shops, that meet consumer demand is the key. Those shops in Cleethorpes are thriving and successful, even in these difficult times.”

Of course there will be casualties and every town has more retail units than modern shopping habits demand but there will always be a place for the independent providing of course we – the consumers – use them.

Councils have a big part to play as planning policies must be used both to protect our town centres and recognise that most consumers want the benefits of both the traditional high street and those of out-of-town developments. As often in politics achieving a balance is difficult, sometimes even elusive.

The reason of course that most of what has been going on in parliament this last week has passed unnoticed is that the same-sex marriage bill has dominated the headlines and, despite it being a free-vote, it has been reported as a Tory rebellion. The great thing about these un-whipped votes is that you find yourself walking through the voting lobby with members of all parties and on these moral and ethical issues it’s usually the same group – sadly though we usually find ourselves in a minority.

Whatever side of the argument you were on – and I opposed the changes – it is these debates that often provide the best debates with passionate contributions from both sides.