tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-341128322024-03-07T11:03:27.544+01:00A View From Rural WalesA periodic commentary on my Westminster activities and a reflection on the issues which catch my attention.Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.comBlogger3026125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-46942028945857457022018-11-23T22:58:00.002+01:002018-11-23T22:58:49.452+01:00CT draft<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "helveticaneue" , serif;">Have not been on my blog for a while. Technical problems. Actually it was me who was the problem. Anyway James has fixed it. This was the last column I wrote for the local newspaper. It’s about the centenary of the Armistice, which seems years go. All this Brexit uncertainty drives every other issue into the shadows. Anyway, here’s the article. </span><br />
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: helveticaneue, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: helveticaneue, serif;">As
we approach the centenary of Armistice Day, I reflect that my generation has
been blessed with good fortune. I write this from a personal perspective, but
it applies to all of the generation into which I was born. I was a war
baby, conceived when Britain was at war with Germany, and born at Welshpool
Hospital just before atom bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which
effectively ended hostilities. Soon afterwards, the Second World War, which had
wrought utter devastation and cruelty on an epic scale was declared over. I
was just a one year old when the tyrants, Mussolini and Hitler perished. I was
just one when the world discovered the horrors visited on innocent Jews in the
Holocaust. It’s hard to believe such crimes against humanity actually happened
in my lifetime. </span><br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "helveticaneue" , serif;">But
such appalling events did happen and we British have not been involved in such
horrors since. Yes there have been wars and sadly they will continue. We must
not forget the awfulness, because we do not want to see the like again. There’s
been a Spanish Civil War, a war in Vietnam, the wars in Iraq. Today there’s the
awfulness of Syria, Afghanistan and the Yemen. But there has been nothing like
the devastation of the two World Wars centred on Europe. When millions of
mothers and fathers saw their sons leaving for unknown battlefields. When they
dreaded opening the door to a uniformed man bringing them the news that their
son (usually but sometimes daughters too) had been killed in action. How did
they all recover? Some didn’t of course. We have four children and five
grandchildren. It’s just not possible to bring such scenarios to front of
mind. </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "helveticaneue" , serif;">Over
the next few days, many of us will be joining in acts and services of
remembrance. Last Saturday I joined the British Legion and cadets as they sold
poppies in Newtown, raising money to help those injured in warfare. Today I
visited the new statue of the First World War poet, Wilfred Owen at Oswestry.
On Friday I look forward to the official opening of the Royal Welsh Fusiliers
Garden in Machynlleth and on Sunday I will join the Parade and Church Service
in Welshpool. There will be many other commemorations and much remembrance
across our County. And there will be hundreds, maybe thousands of
Montgomeryshire people turning out to acknowledge the commitment and sacrifice
of our young people who have joined the armed forces.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "helveticaneue" , serif;">Over
recent years, I’ve joined the parade at Welshpool and Newtown on alternate
years. This year, on Sunday I will be at Welshpool, and at the service at St
Mary’s Church. Many old friends will be there. I do hope Ted Jones and Jack
Ellis are well enough to be with us. Both are confined to a wheelchair and
elderly. Ted is almost 99 years old now. </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "helveticaneue" , serif;">One
old friend who will not be with us is John Gwilt, a long standing political
opponent and one of the nicest men I ever met. The word, Welshpool was printed
on his heart. John died recently. I hope I can attend his funeral. I will
forever associate him reciting the Kohima Epitaph before the Last Post:</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "helveticaneue" , serif;">“When
you go home, Tell them of us and say, For your tomorrows, We gave our
today” </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "helveticaneue" , serif;">And
the Exhortation after the Last Post</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "helveticaneue" , serif;">“They
shall not grow old, As we that are left grow old, Age shall not weary them, Nor
the years condemn, At the going down of the sun, And in the morning, We will
remember them.”</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-7093316699119921372018-10-07T20:06:00.001+01:002018-10-07T20:10:37.362+01:00Public Letter from Shrewsbury and Telford NHS ConsultantsOver recent weeks there has been a determined campaign by some Telford based politicians to undermine the Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Hospital Trust. Driving this campaign has been an attempt to stop a proposed and desperately needed reform of the hospital services based at the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital and the Princess Royal Hospital at Telford, because it was not the reform they wanted. In my view, this campaign has been a disgrace, which has caused real damage (through delay) to the interests and welfare of patients. I also think the way in which the BBC has allowed itself to perform the role of ‘useful idiot’ in this campaign is a disgrace as well.<br />
Today 37 consultants working at the two major hospitals have released the public statement below. I’ve not know anything like this to happen before. It’s clear the clinicians have had more than enough of political shenanigans. They have waited for NHS reform for many years and are asking that patient interests be given priority. I couldn’t agree more.<br />
<br />
TO THE PEOPLE OF SHROPSHIRE, TELFORD, WREKIN AND MID WALES.<br />
<br />
We would like to thank the local people of Telford, Wrekin, Shropshire and Mid Wales for the overwhelming support that they have given recently to our staff. Both our staff and the local public have been distressed and concerned by recent national headlines. We would like to reassure our patients that their safe care is our priority. We welcome the independent review of our maternity department which will help us to learn from past events. Our Accident and Emergency Depts are under enormous pressure, with doctors, nurses and all the staff doing their best despite overwhelming demand.<br />
We now have a clear vision for the future of our hospitals. This year we have appointed many new consultants to the Trust who want to make their home here and help us realise this vision.<br />
We will continue to work with and support our managers and members of the Board to bring this to fruition. Safe and effective care in Telford, Wrekin, Shropshire and Mid Wales requires stable leadership. Any major change in the leadership team would be a misguided and unnecessary distraction at this key time.<br />
Thank you for continuing to support your local hospitals.<br />
<br />
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-81260626919998058282018-10-02T21:27:00.001+01:002018-10-02T22:47:37.096+01:00Second EU Referendum. NO.NO. NOHaving a few emails and letters from constituents asking me to back a second EU Referendum. Most of them describe this second EU Referendum as a ‘People’s Vote’ as if this renaming would make it more acceptable. Not to me it won’t. I’m not just a bit against it. I am totally 100% against it. And it’s not going to happen anyway. It’s a very very unwise idea.<br />
I’m grateful to Lord (William) Hague for using his Telegraph column today to give order to the reasons that have underpinned my implacable opposition. I defy anyone to argue that this second EU Referendum is a ‘goer’ after reading my or Lord Hague’s laying out of the reasons why not.<br />
Firstly, it would take getting on for a year to arrange. A special EU Referendum Act would have to be passed by both Houses of Parliament. There would be unlimited potential for dispute over its terms. There would then have to be time allowed for campaigns. It would not happen until the autumn of 2019. And the ghost of UKIP would burst out from its grave like a mighty colossus.<br />
We have no idea what the question would be. Some want it be whether to accept whatever deal is agreed between the UK and the EU. Some want it only if we cannot agree a deal. And some want a straightforward re-run with a Remain option. And some even want a multiple choice. Unlimited potential for rows over this as well. Next autumn is ambitious!<br />
Thirdly, a second vote would not settle the matter. What would happen next. I have no idea, without knowing the new referendum question.<br />
Fourthly, the UK could well be torn asunder. The debates would be bitter. Far more bitter than last time. So bitter that Scotland and perhaps Northern Ireland would be estranged from England and Wales for ever. And London estranged from the rest of England and Wales.<br />
Fifthly, I cannot see the Conservative Government surviving the bitter warfare which would be involved. There would be chaos, probably leading to a Corbyn led Gov’t which would be an outcome so damaging to the future of Britain that I simply cannot find the words.<br />
And sixthly, a decision to hold a referendum would lead to the EU doing all it could to avoid a deal. We already have some who want to Leave, and most who want to remain doing all they can to undermine the Prime Minister’s negotiating strength. A decision to hold a second referendum would make further negotiation pointless. The interests of the EU would be for the negotiations to fail.<br />
At Saltzberg, a few days ago, the leaders of the EU27 set out to humiliate the Prime Minister and humiliate Britain. If we decided to hold a second referendum, we would be humiliating ourselves.<br />
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-16622490542313181652018-09-18T14:50:00.001+01:002018-09-18T22:41:01.011+01:00The Brexit Delivery Group (inspired by Simon Hart MP)<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
</div>
<div style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;">I voted Leave in the EU Referendum on June 23rd 2016, when a majority of those who voted agreed with me. I strongly believe that we must respect that referendum decision. I also accept that the 48% who </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">supported Remain must be given a voice. If we are to heal the deep divisions on this issue in British society, </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">we should do everything possible to deliver agreement on how we leave the EU, benefitting </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">both the UK and the EU as far as we possibly can. And I do think it’s possible. But I </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">am increasingly concerned that due to internal </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">wrangling,
leadership ambitions and wilful misrepresentation of the realities of
parliamentary arithmetic, the whole Brexit project is threatened. </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">The pursuit by some MPs of what is loosely described as a ‘Hard Brexit’ is making an achievable, </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">acceptable Brexit near unachievable.</span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;"><span class="paywall-eab47cfd"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><br /></span></span></span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Voters in the EU referendum opted for Leave for a range of reasons and with different levels
of enthusiasm. Some saw it as a ‘great release’ from external control, a massive financial saving, the freedom to control immigration, or the ability to trade with the world. Other Leave voters were unsure, hoping and believing that, on balance, they were
doing the right thing. I was one of those. Every one of the 17.4 million had their own personal reasons to vote Leave.</span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">At the same time we have the 48%, some of whom are committed to overturning the result of the referendum because they see it as damaging </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">the economy and impacting negatively on jobs. But there are many others </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">who accept that we are leaving. </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">So
there are pressures from both wings of the Brexit debate. Both sides battle to be heard on the airwaves and to be read in our newspapers. And through the cacophony, Theresa
May continues to negotiate a deal with the European Union. She has a majority of just 11, assuming the DUP all stay onside. Changing the Brexit secretary, the foreign secretary or even the Prime Minister </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">does
not change that simple fact. The majority will </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light", sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">still be 11.</span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;">The
challenges would be </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">still there, </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">perhaps even more difficult </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">as new personalities will have to
renegotiate a position internally as a party, externally with the country,
and in Brussels with the European Commission - and will have less than six weeks to do it</span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;">Some argue for “no deal” - a ‘false god’ in my opinion. Yes we must prepare for ‘no deal” but I judge this outcome would be a massive failure by both the EU and UK negotiating teams. And would Parliament vote for ‘no deal’ anyway. Is </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">it really likely that Parliament </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"> (exercising its
sovereignty in a very Brexit-like manner) will permit that? Where do we go then? How about a general election? Turkeys and Christmas come to mind. </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">We might as well have a second referendum
as that is what it would </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">become. The Conservatives would be punished for failure
and Labour probably elected. What price Brexit then dear hard Brexiteers? </span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;">The EU negotiators are watching these shenanigans. Quite a bit of head shaking going on. We
cannot simply issue orders to the commission and expect them to be obeyed any
more than we can</span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"> to our own party. We need to ‘get real’. I believe we should do what we promised, leaving the EU next March. We should do what we have to do to get this project “over the line”. It certainly won’t be all I wanted. There will be years more ‘negotiation’ during a ‘transition period’. That’s what every business has to do every day of its existence. It’s what </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">our
relationship with the EU has been for more than 40 years, including fundamental changes such as expansion, Maastricht, the Euro and the Lisbon Treaty.</span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;">I am not given to joining ‘groups’ at Westminster, but I have joined the Brexit
Delivery Group (BDG) established by Simon Hart MP, with whom I share an office. This post is based on an article he wrote for the Times. The BRG includes MPs who voted Leave and who voted Remain. Numbers </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">are already at nearly 60. That’s roughly 30
per cent of Conservative MPs and growing. There are</span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"> no red lines other than a determination not to trigger another referendum or bring about a general election. There is </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">no view on leadership contenders
but a resolute belief </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">in seeking a negotiated settlement and to provide the government with the space to achieve that.</span></div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">We need an agreement that stands
the best chance of getting through parliament. We cannot have the perfect deal for anyone. There are too many ideas of what a ‘perfect deal’ is. </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">In politics “perfection” rarely exists. </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">The lyrics of ‘The Perfect Deal’ is that</span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"> of a </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">siren calling </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "open sans light" , sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"> us on to the rocks.</span></div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-30939018131090753232018-09-17T22:11:00.001+01:002018-09-17T22:51:21.121+01:00Amazon’s Tax Bill<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Coverage
of politics at Westminster is obsessing about every minor detail of the Brexit
discussions, while very little attention is being paid to the Budget, only a
few weeks away. What taxation changes do we want to see from the Chancellor of the Exchequer?
The challenge he faces will not be easy. Actually, the overall financial position of the
Exchequer is rather better than we might have expected a year or two ago (despite the ubiquitous and
ridiculous ‘fear’ predictions emanating from the Treasury before the EU
Referendum in 2016). But the recently announced massive annual £20 billion
increase in NHS investment will have to be paid for. There is also a real need
to increase investment in social care and defence. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">So where is this extra money to come from? Over recent weeks I’ve received hundreds of
emails calling for an ‘Amazon Tax’, based on the belief </span>that this would make a significant difference. It will not. Because Amazon is such a massive worldwide business, with a market
capitalisation of over £1 trillion, there’s a widespread assumption that paying
just £4.6 million in Corporation Tax is in some way ‘cheating the system’. It so happens that I too hope that the
Chancellor will find a way of extracting more tax out of the several worldwide
companies who do not have a High Street presence, but, as always, these internet based campaigns are not what they seem.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Firstly,
it’s not Amazon (the worldwide monolith) which is based in the UK - it’s a
subsidiary (Amazon UK Services) and it’s run from about a dozen giant
warehouses. Its profits in the UK are actually well below £100 million, a lot of money but not a base to make any significant boost to Treasury income. Even so, its
tax bill still seems lower than it should be. But it’s important to understand why. In 2000 the then
Labour Government introduced a scheme to encourage companies wanting to create
schemes giving shares to employees. Any company which did this could set the
cost against its Corporation Tax liabilities. I approved of this scheme. I still do. Do we really want to stop
this scheme. Personally, I think it a great idea to give employees a real stake in the
success of the business they work </span>for.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Amazon
(and several others) are also said to have an unfair advantage over other more traditional retailers by
paying lower business rates. Now it’s true that Amazon has developed a business
model which is not based on the High Street, but is located in properties where business rates are
more affordable, enabling its prices to be more competitive. It is a very strange
campaign, supposedly acting in the interests of the people of the UK, </span>which calls for the cost of what we buy to be forced higher - deliberately hitting consumers pockets. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">And
finally, I cannot let this issue pass without a comment on the bizarre position adopted by the Archbishop of Canterbury, head of
the Church of England, publicly criticising Amazon for its business model - only for us to discover
that the Church itself has several millions of pounds invested in Amazon. And then criticising the employment practices of Amazon, which are replicated by the Church itself. This is as
blatant an example of hypocrisy as you’ll ever see! Yes, I hope the Chancellor
can find a way to raise more tax from the Amazon’s of our world. But let’s not
pretend it’s straightforward or would make any significant difference.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-268761970442594092018-09-11T10:45:00.001+01:002018-09-11T13:26:14.412+01:00Saving Montgomeryshire.This week, the 4 Boundary Commissions of the UK published their final proposals for the new UK map of Parliamentary constituencies. Montgomeryshire, as we know it disappears. My view is that the proposals are a total dog’s breakfast. And it’s not the fault of the Boundary Commissions. The blame lies squarely on the politicians who stitched up the commissioners so tightly that they had no real choice but deliver the dog’s breakfast.<br />
<br />
Let’s look back at how we reached this week’s deeply unwelcome position. It all began with the publication of expenses claimed by MPs before 2008, which became known as the “Expenses Scandal”. The public were rightly outraged by what had been going on. They were so angry that the leaders of political parties felt they had to do something to curry favour with voters. They responded by making what I thought were unwise and illogical promises. All we needed were clear rules that prevented abuse of the expenses system.<br />
<br />
In the run up to the 2010 General Election, both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrat’s said they would reduce substantially the number of MPs. They said this would “cut the cost of politics” (at the same time as increasing the size of the unelected House of Lords to 800!) It followed that after the election in 2010, the Coalition partners agreed to cut the number of MPs from 650 to 600. An Act of Parliament, the ‘Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act’ was passed in 2011, which included an instruction to the four Boundary Commissions to decide on the precise boundaries of the 600 new constituencies. In the event the Lib Dem’s later changed their minds, and no vote by MPs has ever been taken. But the plan has never gone away.<br />
<br />
These new constituency boundaries are being sold as being needed to equalise the size of constituencies. As populations move from poorer quality housing in cities to more desirable leafy suburbs, the size of constituencies do need to be adjusted accordingly. No-one will disagree with that. Everyone, including me accepts that. But there is absolutely no reason to cut the number of MPs by 50 to do it. The cut just makes the whole equalisation process much more disruptive and traumatic, hitting rural areas in particular.<br />
<br />
And then we are also told that every constituency must be of almost exactly the same size. Why on earth must every constituency population be within a 5% range of the average. Why not 10%, or 8%. Just a figure plucked out of thin air. What is the point of having Boundary Commissioner costing vast sums of money to come up with a sensible structure, and then to tie their hands so they cannot take into account geography, or history, or culture because of this 5% rule. My view has been that a tolerance of 8% would make the review much more acceptable.<br />
<br />
The new proposed constituency boundaries are particularly damaging to Wales. I accept that there must be some reduction because Wales currently sends 40 MPs to Westminster. The Wales population indicates there should be 34/35 Welsh MPs. But the reduction to 600 seats takes the 40down to 29, a sudden dramatic disruptive cut. And the second reason this is so damaging to Wales and that the Wales Boundary Commission has so little flexibility is that most constituencies have the immovable borders the sea and Offa’s Dyke. It makes reform of constituencies an impossible task.<br />
<br />
I am opposed to the reduction in Parliamentary constituencies and have been urging (and will continue to urge) the Government not to go ahead with this plan. I hope the anticipated vote on the new boundaries will not take place in October, as planned.Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-55932856841369140622018-09-09T22:13:00.002+01:002018-09-09T22:23:39.881+01:00Choosing the Leader of the Conservative Party<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">I am an enthusiastic supporter of Theresa May. I hope she remains as Conservative Leader and Prime Minister for the foreseeable future. Though I do accept that “foreseeable” could have a variety of interpretation</span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">s! Delivering a referendum result when many on the losing side refuse to accept the result is a near impossible task. It needs a high level resilience and bloodymindedness to lead in such circumstances, especially when the noises off are high volume. Our current Prime Minister is the best person to lead us through this challenge. Even though I might think it self defeating idiocy, I accept that there</span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> are others thinking about how to engineer a leadership contest, and thinking about how it should be organised.</span><br />
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">I’ve also read reports suggesting that Leave supporters are being encouraged to join the Conservative Party in preparation for such a leadership vote. Supposedly they are going to “flood” the party with new members. Some </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">MPs are concerned about this - mainly because of what happened to the Labour Party, bringing Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership. Personally, I’m keen to welcome anyone who wants to join our party - unless we know their main intention is to enter to spread poison. Let’s welcome them in. </span><br />
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif;"><span style="caret-color: rgb(51, 51, 51);">I just don’t see a problem. The Conservative Party has rules to make it difficult for a Trojan horse to succeed. Since the process was changed while William Hague was the leader, Party members choose between two MPs put forward by MPs themselves. Previously just MPs had chosen the Leader. I agreed with this process then, and do so now. There is some noise about changing the rules to make it easier for certain candidates. I do not agree with this. Changes should be considered only after very careful research and for a good reason - not just to help any individual.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">The Conservative Party does not have the mass membership that has been the case in the past. The official figures are said to be </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">not that much over 100,000. It’s important that those members, </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">without whom we would have no party at all, should </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;"> have a say in choosing the Leader. But I believe it’s also important that those who know the candidates well, having worked with them and watched them operate under pressure should also have a say. Leaving the choice of Leader to a comparatively </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">small membership would indeed open up the risk </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">of being
swamped by a sudden influx of new recruits – the very thing that happened in the Labour Party which brought Jeremy Corbyn to the Leadership. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">There is therefore a strong case to create the right </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">balance between representative and direct decision-making. MPs are elected to
make decisions on our behalf. Party members also have an important role, one of the most important of which is to have a
major say in choosing an individual who might be best placed to govern the
nation, based on long and personal acquaintance with the candidates as well as
knowing their views. As William Hague has said, “if </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">you remove the gatekeepers from a political system, you
have no idea what is going to come through the gate”.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">But the worst of all arguments is to change the </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">system by which we elect our leader </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">in order to favour a particular candidate or particular </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">outcome in the
short term. This will never turn out as expected. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">The more people who take part in choosing their representatives, the better across all tiers of government. </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">But those elected Leader will be </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">stronger and more effective if they have strong support from</span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12pt;"> those who know them best.7</span></div>
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-66855405856428344362018-08-24T15:13:00.000+01:002018-08-26T22:18:12.739+01:00Report from Rural Colombia<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now it’s on to the third leg of my three week Colombia
visit. First leg was the capital, Bogata where I had arranged lots of meetings
to get a feel for the politics and trade potential. Second leg was the city of
Medellin, learning about how city planning and people power has transformed the
most murderous city in the world into a modern, well connected economic powerhouse. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The third leg of my Colombia ‘familiarisation visit’ is to
rural Colombia.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This leg began in Boyaca, where I visited the magnificent
monuments marking two of the key battles in Colombia’s struggle to cast off the
imperial yoke of Spain - at Vargas Swamp near Paipa and at the battle of Boyaca
itself which prevented the Spanish forces reaching Santafe Bogata (at it was
then known). These two battles signalled the end of Spanish rule in South America.<br />
Was were very relaxed until reaching Tunja (pronounced toon-hah), when
our brilliant driver Tatiana jumped out at her house and handed me the keys for
the onward drive to Tuta. As darkness fell. Not sure I’ll ever completely
forgive her. Panicked when a police car appeared in my mirror with blue lights
flashing. What on earth had I done wrong now? Actually nothing. Hadn’t realised they always
have their blue lights flashing.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A lovely evening with my daughter-in-law, Zulma’s extended
family and their pet animals. Commitment to family is very strong in rural
Colombia. The landscape of Boyaca is not dissimilar to Wales, except more
mountainous and extensive with the Andes providing backdrop in the distance.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And then today we drove via Bogota to a small town called
Anapoima. What a drive. Seemed like it was over top of the Andes. The road was
being widened (well actually rebuilt). Maybe 30 miles of it. It’s the sort of
dramatic infrastructure development Colombians specialise in. In Medellin they
are building a tunnel through a mountain to create better access to the
airport. In Bogata, they are going to build an underground system - from
scratch. They would sort out the Third Runway at Heathrow in short order.
Today I travelled along a motorway being built over the Andes, which
makes M5 improvements seem a mini job. Anapoima is nearer to the Pacific coast
than where I’ve been so far. Hotter and more muggy. First encounter with a mosquito.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’ve learned so much about Colombia while during my visit. So much
more to learn. It’s a country of great contrasts and massive physical
differences. And I’ve not even mentioned the Amazon or the Pacific Coast. The whole country is
utterly breathtaking. And for someone who loves flowers, it’s a
dreamworld. <o:p></o:p></div>
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-52394137946155628402018-08-13T10:24:00.001+01:002018-08-14T09:05:28.625+01:00Report from Medellin <div class="MsoNormal">
Report
from Medellin.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Medellin
is the most stunning place I’ve ever been to. In the early 1990s, it was the
most murderous city in the world (over 27,000 murders in 1992 alone). Today
Medellin is mainly peaceful. This transformation has involved a truly astonishing
level of forgiveness. Equally astonishing is the speed at which the population
of Medellin has grown. In 1950 there were around 350,000 residents. By 1970,
the population had increased by a factor of 6, and today Medellin has 2.64
million residents - a truly dramatic urbanisation. It’s also become connected
to other adjacent settlements taking the total population to over 4
million. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This
population is crammed into a city with more defined dividing lines than
anywhere else I’ve known - leading to huge physical and social challenges
that ‘city planning’ has sought to counter. With outstanding success it seems
to me. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Firstly,
there is the ‘Rio’ area. The Medellin River runs through the length of the
city. The rapid urbanisations had destroyed its natural and ecological value to
the city. Today the river valley floor has been, and continues to be
transformed. There is more to do. There are impressive buildings, a striking
civic centre, and a brilliant botanical garden. All very impressive but it’s not
what’s most striking. That’s the connection of this job-creating river central
zone to the much poorer population which lives on the steep hillsides rising up
from the river. Probably over a million of mostly poor people live in what are
shanty developments. Very small self-built houses, with tin rooms, often
weighed down by rocks and pieces of wood. No way could this population walk to
where the jobs are. The most astonishing aspect of Medellin planning has been
the transportation system to connect these people with the more prosperous
parts of the city. A Metro, connected to a Metro cable car system, which brings
the houses on the hillside into contact with the work in the valley. It’s the
equivalent of the tube system in London. The end of the Metro line is at Santa
Domingo Cable Car Station high up the side of the Andes. Santa Domingo is also
the start Point for another cable car which travels miles through forest
treetops across the Andes heights. Hundreds of thousands of hectares of
wildness. A journey not to be missed.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The
basis of the city planning is transportation up the hillsides by several cable
car systems and escalators. And there are parks, offering education and other
services around every stop. Planning aimed to serve the poorest people. Farsighted.
Inspirational. There are parks all over, promoting environmental awareness and
connections across the city. The Parques del Rio Medellin involves recreating
the river environment that had been lost. So much I could write about. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Much
of the rest of the world think of Medellin as the home base of Pablo Escobar,
the most notorious drugs baron ever. It was in Medellin he based his evil
empire. He died in 1993, whether shot by the police or by his own hand we do
not know. Since his death Medellin has undergone a revolution - in a good way.
Led by the people of the city who turned away from violence. The world should
know about this remarkable turnaround. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
How
has all this been paid for? It’s another remarkable story. Much of it funded by
a publicly owned public services company, providing the water, energy, gas and
telecoms. The EPM (Empressas Publicas de Medellin) is a dream come reality for
Jeremy Corbyn, providing a huge annual payment to the city. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of
course there are still problems. So many people to be rehoused. I hope they are
not simply being piled high in tower blocks, creating ghettos of the future!
Hopefully the parks will help prevent this. And every Colombian city will have
to manage an influx of desperate Venezuelans escaping the economic disaster in
their country. The border is hundreds of miles away but they are to be seen
walking the roads or perched on the back of Lorries - mostly heading to Bogata.
And while Colombia is a country I could love, its cities are noisy, and over
dominated by the motor car, full of wannabe Lewis Hamilton’s in yellow
taxis. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
And
then there’s the flowers. Incredible flowers, and wonderful wildlife. Every
August there is the Medellin flower festival, the best flower carnival in the
world. Regrettably I missed it, having to move on to other parts of this
fascinating country. Next few days, before returning to Montgomeryshire, I will
be in what I’m promised is quieter countryside surrounded by exotic birds and
flowers. Next stop Boyaca. But be back home for Berriew Show.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-24548609910792634282018-08-08T15:32:00.000+01:002018-08-26T22:17:42.064+01:00Colombia - Report from Bogota.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">I
am spending the first weeks of August in Bogotá, capital city of Colombia in
South America. It’s a country not as well known within the UK as its size and
importance warrants. Colombia has a population of 50 million. It is bigger than
France and Germany combined. Bogotá itself has a similar population to Greater
London. It’s a safe developing city, transformed from the danger of attacks and
kidnapping that has been a feature of its past. Bogota is built on a high
plateau, surrounded by the mighty Andes mountain range providing a spectacular
backdrop to the city. Colombia is a fascinating and diverse modern
country with an equally fascinating, sometimes dark history. More British
people should visit.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">There
are two reasons for my being in South America for three weeks this August.
Firstly, I have a family interest in that two of our grandchildren are
half Welsh - half Colombian. </span><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">Although they live in the UK and spend much of their
time in Berriew, they will always have close family ties with Boyaca, a region
of Colombia north east of Bogotá. Family links are very strong throughout Latin
America. And secondly, as the UK leaves the EU, I think every politician has
some responsibility to use their own capabilities and contacts to help develop
diplomatic and trade links with nations of the world beyond Europe.</span><br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">Colombia,
like all of Latin America has a bloody and violent history, particularly as
independence was being won through brute force from the Spanish imperialists.
Internationally acclaimed author, Robert Harvey, who lives near Meifod has
written a book, the Romantic Revolutionary, based on the life of Simon Bolivar,
the Liberator of much of Latin America. If you want a flavour of the sheer
violence and brutality which has shaped modern South America, it’s a must read.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">It’s
been a historically important week to be in Bogotá. On Tuesday, Ivan Duque
was inaugurated as Colombia’s 60th President following a closely
fought election, when three men were involved in a bitterly fought contest. There
was no violence or corruption reported. Duque is a typically modern politician
- charming, engaging, can sing and play football, but with little political
experience. He is also closely linked to controversial and influential former
President, Alvaro Uribe. So he is an unknown quantity, and faces two huge
challenges. Plus several lesser challenges.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">Firstly
he has to consolidate and take forward the ‘peace process’ which ended a 50
year terrorist campaign by the FARC, (amongst other groups) following an
election campaign which has led to concerns about his commitment to it.
Hopefully, questioning of the peace accord and implementing adjustments to it does not lead to a resumption of
violence. And secondly, President Duque has to take on the drug cartels, and the
wanton murder of human rights defenders who challenge the drug cartel’s
activities. President Duque will have no choice but take a stronger role in
challenging these ‘sons of Escobar’ if his 4 year presidency is to be a
success. And on Monday, there was a ‘supposed’ assassination attempt on the
life of President Maduro next door in Venezuela, whose history is so
intertwined with Colombia. Venezuela is a political and economic disaster,
brought to its knees by the policies of Maduro and his predecessor, Hugo
Chavez. Huge numbers of desperate Venezuelans are crossing the border into
Colombia, bringing yet more challenge to Duque. </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">Over
the last few days I’ve met with politicians of the ‘left’ and ‘right’, the
British Embassy in Bogotá, and the important Bogotá Chamber of Commerce. Later
this week I will meet with Mayor of Medellin, Colombia’s second city, which is
bigger than any other city in the UK, and which this week hosts the week long
biggest flower festival in the world. Colombia is a truly amazing country, with
a history steeped in tragedy and a future steeped in promise. I believe the UK
is well placed to help it achieve its potential.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-41324034716610712552018-07-28T22:40:00.000+01:002018-07-28T22:40:55.620+01:00Latest from Cil Farm and Royal Welsh on Brexit. <br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Two days at the Royal Welsh Show at Llanelwedd this week
- the best agricultural show in the UK. This year, Montgomeryshire is the
host County, and lots us have helped raise money to make it a memorable year.
And thanks to wonderful weather it has been memorable. Our own Tom Tudor of
Llysun Farm, Llanerfyl is the President, just reward for a lifetime given to
farming and his local community. The Royal Welsh is a great place to meet old
friends and discuss matters of concern to all of Wales - the Politics of Powys,
Wales, the United Kingdom, Europe and the world. At the heart of all this
discussion are those issues that relate to the future of our countryside.
Was hoping to talk about something other than Brexit! My hopes were
disappointed.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
First event was a seminar in the NFU Cymru marquee. Strong
panel including Carwyn Jones, Welsh First Minister and presidents of NFU Cymru
and UK. And the issue was (you’ve guessed it) Brexit. There was widespread
concern about the future. Almost nil reference to the opportunities. After an
hour of relentless pessimism, even my natural optimism began to wane. It was
obvious to me that the leaders of the farming unions remain deeply opposed to
Brexit, as they were when the people of Britain voted Leave in 2016. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As I listened to the platform presentations (and most of the
contributions from the floor), my mind drifted back to the rancorous debate
before th e EU Referendum. After listening to the leaders of the farming unions
the, I discussed the issue with farmers selling their lambs in the local livestock
market. Surprisingly, they were mostly in favour of Leave, despite the
uncertainty. I suspect it’s the same now.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I voted Leave myself, despite being consumed by uncertainty.
I simply did not want my country to be subsumed in an “ever closer union”. I
still don’t. My hesitation in 2016 was because I thought disengaging from the
EU would be a very long and difficult process. Nothing since has lessened my
uncertainty. But we did hold a referendum, we did vote Leave, and we are going
to Leave. Anything else would be a constitutional outrage. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are many voices who are calling for a second
referendum. There are some in all political parties. I am not one of them. In
my view it would be the worst option of all and could well lead to civil
unrest. I would prefer to be honest with the people and tell them that
Parliament is not prepared to accept their judgement as expressed in the
referendum, as hold another one. In my view, the calls for another referendum
come from those who do not accept the result of the 2016 referendum. This
‘campaign’ must not be allowed to succeed. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I was very supportive of the agreement about a UK
negotiating position agreed by the Cabinet at Chequers two weeks ago. It wasn’t
exactly what I would have wanted personally. I was disappointed that MPs
amended the agreement, mainly because it made it less likely to be accepted. We
have reached the stage where the intransigence of the EU mean ‘No Deal’ is
become a likely option. No-one wants this, but I’ve always thought it a better
option than being bullied into submission by the EU. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Despite the confusion and uncertainty surrounding the EU/UK
negotiations, I still feel optimistic and would still vote Leave. The behaviour
of the EU negotiating team over the last two years has strengthened my resolve.
It may be my bloody-minded streak, or my continued belief in the can-do spirit
of the British people. And I think the silent majority feel the same.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-53371963102442951372018-06-25T21:38:00.001+01:002018-06-25T23:21:50.896+01:00Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon. So it’s a No to Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon from Secretary of State at BEIS, Greg Clark. Lots of opposition to this decision in Westminster and around Wales today. You really would think it’s a massively unpopular decision. I’m not so sure. The reason the project was refused was to protect consumer’s electricity bills. I suspect the hard working people of Wales, not linked to politics or the media might just take a different view.<br />
I’ve always supported the Government encouraging the private sector seeking new ways of generating renewable energy. But not at any cost - either financial or impact on our landscape. I’ve been really taken aback by the calls for the UK Govt to back the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon, no matter what it’s cost. I just cannot think like that. I do not think it’s the way a Conservative does think. Not this Conservative anyway.<br />
Personally, I’ve been hoping we could find a way of delivering this scheme, but a few months ago it became obvious to me that it wasn’t a goer. Despite being a supporter of searching for a way to harness the energy potential of the tide, and marine renewables in general, I’ve thought we should have withdrawn support months ago.<br />
Here’s a quote from today’s statement - “The inescapable conclusion of an extensive analysis is that however novel and appealing the proposal that has been made is, even with these factors taken into account, the costs which would be incurred by consumers and taxpayers would be so much higher than alternative sources of low carbon power that it would be irresponsible to enter into a contract with the promoter.<br />
Securing our energy needs into the future has to be done seriously and, when much cheaper alternatives exist, no individual project, and no particular technology can proceed at any price. That is true for all technologies.”<br />
Just do not understand how any Conservative can be in favour of it.Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-14360356621111366362018-06-22T22:29:00.000+01:002018-06-22T22:29:11.967+01:00Legalising Cannabis <span style="background-color: white;">There was much publicity about legalisation of Cannabis this last week. Two reasons. The Home Secretary signalled a changed approach from Government, introducing some flexibility into Cannabis use for medicinal purposes. And former Conservative Leader and recent Home Secretary, Lord (William) Hague called for Cannabis to be legalised for both medicinal and recreational use. That’s further than I’ve ever gone. William is always logical and worth listening to. On this he may be too far ahead of social change, and public opinion won’t be ready accept it. Personally, I’m open to a review of evidence, including from jurisdictions where marijuana use is already legal. And looking forwards to a discussion with William about this next week. Anyway, here is the column he wrote for the Telegraph last Tuesday, which I’ve just read again. It’s worth reading.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">“The </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;">case of </span><a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/17/pressure-mounts-grant-cannabis-oil-licence-mother-reveals-billy/" style="font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="border: none 1.0pt; color: #222222; padding: 0cm; text-decoration: none;">Billy Caldwell, the 12
year old with epilepsy</span></a><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> whose vital cannabis oil medication was
confiscated by Border Force officials to comply with UK drugs laws, provides
one of those illuminating moments when a longstanding policy is revealed to
be </span><a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/06/18/war-cannabis-has-lost-government-should-bold-legalise-lord-hague/" style="font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="border: none 1.0pt; color: #222222; padding: 0cm; text-decoration: none;">inappropriate,
ineffective and utterly out of date</span></a><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt;">.</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">That our border officials, with so much to deal
with to prevent the smuggling of arms, people, wildlife and much else, should
be expected to make off with a medicine that contains a tiny quantity of the
psychoactive element in marijuana but had clear benefits for a boy with severe
seizures, is beyond ridiculous. It suggests that official intransigence is now
at odds with common sense.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">Over the weekend, the Home Office sensibly backed
down and returned Billy’s medicine. By doing so, it implicitly conceded
that <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/16/medical-cannabis-ukbilly-caldwell-case-renews-debate-inhumane/"><span style="border: none 1.0pt; color: #222222; padding: 0cm; text-decoration: none;">the law has become
indefensible</span></a>. It must now be asked whether Britain should join the
many other countries that <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/15/medical-cannabis-should-legalised-says-royal-college-nursing/"><span style="border: none 1.0pt; color: #222222; padding: 0cm; text-decoration: none;">permit medical-grade
marijuana</span></a>, or indeed join Canada in preparing for a lawful,
regulated market in cannabis for recreational use as well.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">Under successive governments it has been assumed
that there has been little alternative to trying to win a war on drugs,
cannabis included. Medical advice to ministers has always stressed that limited
use of soft drugs can lead to harder drugs and addiction. It has also been one
of the taboo subjects of British politics at a senior level, on which taking an
alternative view has been regarded as indicating a tendency to weird,
irresponsible or crazily liberal opinions.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">It’s time to acknowledge facts, and to embrace a
decisive change that would be economically and socially beneficial, as well as
rather liberating for Conservatives in showing sensible new opinions are
welcome.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">First of all, as far as marijuana, or cannabis, is
concerned, any war has been comprehensively and irreversibly lost. The idea
that the drug can be driven off the streets and out of people’s lives by the
state is nothing short of deluded. Surveys of young people attest that they
find it easier to purchase cannabis than virtually anything else, including fast
food, cigarettes and alcohol. Everyone sitting in a Whitehall conference room
needs to recognise that, out there, cannabis is ubiquitous, and issuing orders
to the police to defeat its use is about as up to date and relevant as asking
the army to recover the Empire. This battle is effectively over.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">Some police forces, recognising this and focusing
their resources on more serious crimes, have stopped worrying about it. When a
law has ceased to be credible and worth enforcing to many police as well as the
public, respect for the law in general is damaged. We should have laws we
believe in and enforce or we should get rid of them.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">Just as bad is the next unavoidable fact, that
where prosecutions still take place they create burdens on the criminal justice
system for no appreciable gain. Tens of millions of pounds are still spent each
year in forensics, legal aid, courts, prisons and probation services. Estimates
of the savings involved from ending the prohibition on cannabis vary, but can
easily add up to about £300 million a year.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">In the meantime, something of decisive importance
has happened, which for me has tipped the balance of argument. The grey zone of
something being illegal but not effectively prevented has permitted the worst
of all worlds to arise. The potency of drugs available on the streets has <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/02/27/britain-flooded-super-strength-cannabis-could-driving-mental/"><span style="border: 1pt none; color: #222222; padding: 0cm;">risen sharply in recent
years</span></a>. This has led to an increase in dependency and health
problems, but of course people are reluctant to seek help for using drugs that
are still illegal. The overall result is the rise of a multi-billion pound
black market for an unregulated and increasingly potent product, creating more
addiction and mental health problems but without any enforceable policy to do
something about it. The only beneficiaries are organised crime gangs. It is
absolutely unacceptable to allow this situation to continue.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">A major change in policy is therefore
necessary. The licensing of medical products, such as Billy Caldwell’s oil, is
already allowed in Australia, Germany, Switzerland, Norway, the Netherlands and
most of the US. Adopting the same approach would be a step forward. But the
Canadian parliament is now on the verge of agreeing something much more
radical: a legal, regulated market for cannabis for recreational use.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">The proponents of this in Canada have been clear
from the outset that a legal market will involve licensed stores selling
cannabis of regulated strength, with a strict prohibition on sales to teenagers
and no relaxation of laws against other and more powerful drugs. The expected
benefits include reduced harm and addiction for users, a major reduction in the
black market, less pressure on police and courts and tax revenues running into
billions of dollars. If this works, it sounds more sensible than the current
position.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">Can British Conservatives be as bold as Canadian
Liberals? <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/12/lib-dems-pledge-legalise-cannabis-can-sold-high-street-shops/"><span style="border: none 1.0pt; color: #222222; padding: 0cm; text-decoration: none;">We ought to be</span></a>.
After all, we believe in market forces and the responsible exercise of freedom,
regulated as necessary. We should prefer to provide for lawful taxes than
preside over increased profits from crime. And we are pragmatists, who change
with society and revise our opinions when the facts change. On this issue, the
facts have changed very seriously and clearly.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">For Tories who cannot quite bring themselves to
admit that this is all necessary, I leave you with the story of one of our
great heroes, William Wilberforce. One of the fascinating aspects of writing a
biography of him was the realisation that he was, for his whole life from his
late twenties onwards, a daily user of opium. He lived when the dangers of
addiction were only just becoming recognised, but finding that opium brought
reliable relief from debilitating digestive problems, he recommended it widely
while going on to achieve the abolition of the slave trade and become one of
the most universally admired figures in British history.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">I feel that Wilberforce would have spoken up very
quickly for the Billy Caldwells of today. And while not advocating the
recreational use of any drugs at all, I think it is right that people of all
persuasions should now focus on sorting out a failed policy and an
unsustainable law, and replacing both with new ideas that might just command
respect and success.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-58349533950447069832018-06-21T21:29:00.000+01:002018-06-21T21:41:28.190+01:00Tribute to Jane Harvey<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">Last week I went to the funeral of Jane Harvey in Meifod. For many years she suffered from the condition, Schizophrenia. I didn’t know Jane well, but her husband Robert has been a source of good political advice and support to me for many years. I was so moved by the tribute, written by Jane’s family that I asked if I could post it on my blog. Schizophrenia is a condition not much understood. Posting the tribute on A View for Rural Wales may extend knowledge and understanding of this cruel disease. With permission of the Harvey family, here is the Tribute. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: 14pt;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 14pt;">“Jane was an exceptionally beautiful woman,within and without.</span><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span><span style="font-size: 14pt;">She was famous for her smile, which could
light up a room or anyone she met, precisely because it reflected her inner
warmth. In her later years, on hospital admissions, every nurse that met her
would call her ‘a lovely lady’ and one even thought she could remember which
film she starred in.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">Her
beauty also reflected her happiness, joy, gaiety, free spirit, sweetness and
untameable personality, also her exceptional gentleness and humility. She was
completely unpretentious, uninterested in the superficial things of life; there
are innumerable stories of her kindness to children and vulnerable people, even
when she herself was highly vulnerable.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">When
well, she never had a cross word to say to anyone. She was, in Winston
Churchill’s phrase about his own wife Clementine, ‘a being without an ignoble
thought’. Her interests were simple: children, cats, other animals, birds,
flowers and trees, which meant that her quarter of a century in the Meifod countryside
were a paradise to her; she was utterly happy here. Her nature was pure,
innocent and without guile.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">The
fact that she had a very serious chronic condition, ultimately bringing on
three more, did not make her house a place of sadness. The exuberance of her
nature and her determination to conquer her disabilities meant she would still
walk when she could barely do so and feed her cats when she could hardly bend
down. She loved being taken for drives around the Meifod hills, when she would
exclaim, ‘who couldn’t believe in God on a lovely day like this?’ as she did on
the day before she passed away. She was quietly and devoutly religious. She was
also still active in the anti-pylon campaign a couple of years ago. She was
irrepressible.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">Jane
came from Devon, another very beautiful part of the country and was educated at
the Sherborne school in Dorset before she met Robert at Oxford where they both
studied. Jane was also a talented pianist and singer, performing in a choir in
the Albert Hall in London. She was a highly intelligent person with a high IQ but
was uninterested in academic work and joined the Foreign Office - in fact the
security service, MI6 - as a secretary (a Miss Moneypenny!). She went on to a
job as PA to the head of an oil company based in London and then as PA to a
famous, but hard-driving industrialist, the then chairman of BOC. She had a
wonderful, full young life going to parties, plays, concerts and holidaying all
over the world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>She then devoted herself
to campaigning and the often difficult and exhausting role of being an MP’s
wife, where her natural warmth and approachability made her many friends, both
among the constituents and her husband’s political supporters.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">But
soon afterwards she began to suffer from the symptoms of Schizophrenia - one of
the most devastating and life-changing of all mental illnesses. We now know it is
not caused by some lurid experience in life, it is simply a malfunction of one
of the transmitters in the brain. The illness was diagnosed at one of the most
advanced psychiatric hospitals in the world - the Bethlem and its sister
hospital, the Maudsley, in London. The illness involved periods of huge
fluctuations in her emotions, from over happy to very angry, to crying
miserably, plus sometimes paranoia and delusions, but, as was to be the pattern
for the rest of her life, after a few months, she recovered to being exactly
the same rational, happy, person she was before. The joyous event that most
fulfilled her soon afterwards was the birth of her son, Oliver.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">Shortly
afterwards Jane, Robert and Oliver moved to Montgomeryshire, where Robert
hailed from, on his grandmother’s side, and the stresses of life in a big city
were lifted from Jane’s shoulders, while Robert continued to commute weekly,
then monthly to London. Meifod in history was famous as a place of healing. It
is also, as is Montgomeryshire and indeed of Wales, a place of great welcome.
Jane was as happy as a lark, although her condition could not be cured and
recurred with regularity. The people of Meifod and its surroundings were always
understanding and embraced her as one of their own. The family extends its
heartfelt thanks to them all.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">Even
more unexpected was the small army of helpers that emerged from the hills here
and the plains of Shropshire. When Jane was first hospitalised in Wales, she
entered the then Shelton Hospital in Shrewsbury, then the famous Housman Ward
in the grounds and recently the modern Redwoods Centre. The patience, love and
care of all the doctors and nurses involved in her care was overwhelming. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">Jane’s
happiness derived from the happiness of other people and nowhere was this truer
than on special occasions like birthdays and Christmases. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">On
one occasion, Jane was in hospital at the Redwoods Centre on her son's
birthday. It was a Friday, and Oliver had travelled up from London to
Shrewsbury, and had said he would try to stop by and see her.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">Although
it was very late at night and well past visiting hours, the wonderful staff at
the Redwoods Centre allowed him to come onto the ward. He had hoped to spend
just a few minutes with her and was quite tired from his journey.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">When
he arrived on the ward, mum appeared from behind a corner with a cake and
candles, which somehow herself and her fellow patients on the ward had managed,
perhaps illicitly, to procure, a signed card from the nurses and all patients,
and some party hats.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">In
spite of her and her fellow patients’ difficult illnesses, they had evidently
spent much time and planning preparing this late-night party on the ward and
carried it off with aplomb. It was also the most enjoyable Oliver had ever had,
with much cake and laughter had by all.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">When
Jane returned home, she was not left to her own devices: a pioneering and
wonderful outreach and support centre, called Bryntirion, in Welshpool,
carefully monitored her condition and supported her for some 20 years under a
succession of dedicated, conscientious and hugely competent community
psychiatric nurses who became firm friends and should be a model for the rest
of the country. We are very touched to see some of them here today.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>More recently this was added to by the Crisis
Team from Newtown. There were also many dedicated social workers.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">In
addition, the doctors’ surgery at Llanfyllin was unbelievably sympathetic and
professional and again we are delighted to see them represented here. Finally,
there were the emergency services. The police were considerate, gentle and
utterly professional on the very many times she would call them with her concerns.
The Fire Service, on the fewer times they were called, were sympathetic and
very cheerful. And finally, the Ambulance Service was beyond praise on every
occasion in rushing her to Shrewsbury as her condition deteriorated in recent
years.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">It
did so because of a breathing condition, now known as COPD, but many recognise
it as Emphysema, as result of her chain smoking during periods of acute mental
illness, despite all the attempts of her family and the nurses to control it.
This also weakened her and finally her valiant heart, which had fought and
survived four critical hospital admissions in recent years, gave out. But she
consciously died at home, not in hospital, as she had always wished, went out
like a light, with no pain and was brave, active and happy to the very end.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">There
are some 600,000 people, one in 100 of the British population who suffer from
Schizophrenia. Most are sweet, mild, gentle and intelligent and are only a
problem, often a difficult one, for their own families and, as in Jane’s case,
can live full, if restricted lives and can enormously enhance those of their
families. Too often Schizophrenics are ignored, treated as lepers or regarded
as dangerous, although the incidence of violence among them is less than that
of the general population.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">Jane’s
life was cut short before her time but was certainly not in vain either for her
family or if it helps to serve to raise the profile of her fellow sufferers and
destroy the stigma of Schizophrenia.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">Robert
and Oliver and all her many dedicated carers were privileged to know her; to
love and be loved by her and to care for her, for chronic illness and
disability brings out the best in people in the fullest expression of the real
love described in St Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians, read earlier. The
more limited life Jane had to live in the past 10 years simply increased the
intensity of love she gave out to the small circle fortunate to receive it.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-51367346781676344552018-06-12T20:43:00.001+01:002018-06-12T20:43:51.121+01:00David Davis writes to MPs. <br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
Dear Colleagues, <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">EUROPEAN UNION (WITHDRAWAL) BILL: COMMONS CONSIDERATION OF LORDS
AMENDMENTS <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
On Tuesday the EU (Withdrawal) Bill
will return to the Commons to take its final steps through our Parliament. It
is worth reflecting on the fundamental purpose of this Bill. The Withdrawal
Bill is not about influencing the policy choices we make as we leave the EU. It
is, instead, simply about ensuring the entire United Kingdom has a functioning
statute book on the day we leave. That is an aim on which I am sure we can all
agree. Our constituents – whether they voted leave or remain – will rightly
expect the Government to provide continuity, certainty and clarity as we leave
the EU. And that is exactly what this Bill will deliver. <br />
<br />
We have already had over 250 hours of debate in both Houses and reviewed over
1,000 non-Government amendments, and hundreds of Government amendments. <br />
<br />
Throughout, we have listened carefully to those who have sought to test,
scrutinise and improve this vital piece of legislation. We have already made a
significant number of amendments to address the fair concerns which have been raised.
And I firmly believe that the Bill is better for it. So, while the fundamental
goal of the Bill has remained unchanged, it now rightly reflects the knowledge
and expertise of both Houses in that respect. <br />
<br />
As the Bill returns to the Commons, it is worth having at the forefront of our
minds the state in which it was sent to the Lords. A clean and correctly
focused Bill, aimed solely at ensuring that our laws continue to function
seamlessly on the day we leave the EU. The Bill that has been returned to us
has, in some aspects, been strengthened. But in others, it has become less
focused and, therefore, less clear in the goals which it is trying to achieve. <br />
<br />
The amendments from the Lords fall into four broad categories. First, there are
those which are constructive and genuinely seek to address concerns about
certain aspects of the legislation. Second, there are some which seek to
address issues which the Commons has already considered. Third, there are
certain amendments, while possibly well intentioned, which may hamper our
attempts to provide continuity, certainty and clarity via the Bill. And <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
fourth, there are some changes
which simply risk undermining our approach in our negotiations with the EU
altogether. <br />
<br />
Let me start with this fourth category. The amendments which seek to force the
UK to re-join the European Economic Area (EEA) after we leave would involve
continuing the free movement of people with the EU and would mean accepting a
huge swathe of EU rules without a say on them. That amounts to less control,
not more. We have been clear since day one that such an approach is not the
right path for the UK to take after we leave the EU. Pursuing it would fail the
fundamental tests we have set for our future relationship with the EU – to
return control to the UK over our money, our borders and our laws. <br />
<br />
Similarly, amendments which seek to encourage us to stay in a customs union are
not compatible with our desire to take the opportunity to build deeper links
with old friends and new allies across the globe. Nor are they compatible with
the manifesto on which the Government was elected last year. We want to ensure
that our new customs arrangements with the EU can allow for trade which is as
frictionless as possible, while ensuring we can tap into fast growing markets
elsewhere and that there is no hard border around Northern Ireland, either
between it and the rest of the United Kingdom or North-South. We recognise
however that Parliament will want to be kept updated and as such will give our
support to the amendment tabled by Oliver Letwin and supported by colleagues
from across the Party including Nicky Morgan and Theresa Villiers.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
Of course, in any case, this Bill
is not the right vehicle for debating these policy choices. Such discussions
can and will be had during the passage of other bills. This Bill is simply
about making sure that our statute book continues to function after we leave. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
<br />
One of the most important issues raised by the Lords is the process by which
the outcome of the negotiations will be considered by Parliament. While we
agree with the spirit of parts of the Lords amendment – much of it mirrors
commitments we have already given – there are other parts which risk
fundamentally undermining our negotiations with the EU. It would be impossible
for negotiators to demonstrate the flexibility necessary for an effective
negotiation if they are stripped of their authority to make decisions. That
will do nothing but guarantee a bad deal for our country. In its current form
the amendment would set a range of arbitrary deadlines and milestones after
which Parliament may give binding directions to the Government - up to and
including an attempt to overturn the referendum result. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
Fundamentally, the British people
voted to leave the EU and the Government is delivering on that. Since the
referendum, there has been a general election in which both of the major
parties committed to deliver the result of the referendum. It is simply not
right that Parliament could overturn this. That is why we have tabled our own
version of the amendment, which respects the commitments we have made, ensures
Parliament can have its say on the final deal, but that we also that we respect
the result of the referendum. <br />
<br />
On the second category - most notably on the Charter of Fundamental Rights and
General <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
Principles of EU law -<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the House of Lords has amended the Bill on
issues that the Commons has already considered in detail. We have been clear
throughout this process that the removal of the Charter from UK law will not
substantially affect the substantive rights that individuals already benefit
from in the UK, as the Charter was never the source of those rights.<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b>And on General Principles, we have now
tabled a further amendment to protect the rights of challenge accrued before we
have left the EU for 3 years after exit.<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
There are also amendments which
seem purely technical but which risk significantly constraining the
Government's ability to deliver a functioning statute. For example, the
amendment on 'enhanced protection' will mean the Government is prevented from
acting quickly to update environmental regulations. Throughout this process we
have listened to concerns regarding the delegated powers in this Bill, not
least on the scrutiny of their use, and we tabled further amendments in the
Lords to this end. But we cannot allow for the fundamental aim of this Bill to
be put at risk.<br />
<br />
The final category of amendments are those that the Government can agree or at
least agree in principle. For example, the Lords have flagged important issues
regarding family reunification. While we agree with the spirit of these
amendments, they required further clarification. Therefore, the Government has
brought forward its own amendments to make the amendments more accurate and to
enable the Government to deliver the intended outcome in a far more effective
manner.<br />
<br />
The process around this Bill has been thorough, and inclusive. I have always
said that I will listen to members of all sides of our House to ensure we get
it right. As it re-enters the Commons we must work together to consider the
various amendments constructively but we must also work together to ensure its
fundamental purpose is not undermined. I look forward to working closely with
you all over the coming days to ensure the UK has a functioning legal order on
the day we deliver what people voted for in the referendum and leave the
European Union.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">RT HON DAVID DAVIS MP</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-68455723889068971492018-06-11T21:32:00.002+01:002018-06-11T21:32:22.778+01:00The Brexit Week to Come, and the Brexit week that was. <br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
I write this column on Monday morning, before driving down
to the House of Commons for a very important week, which could have major
implications for our Government and our country. Yet again this week the dominating
issue will be Brexit, and in particular, the EU Withdrawal Bill. When this article
appears, MPs will have voted anything up to 20 times on amendments to this Bill
by the House of Lords. At the risk of leaving myself looking silly, I believe
the Government will win every vote, sending the EU Withdrawal Bill back to
their Lordships to reconsider their position. I’m deeply disappointed that some of my colleagues are telling the media they are considering voting against the Gov’t. I know loyalty is becoming a devalued commodity in today’s politics, but I find it hard to understand what might drive a Conservative MP to so undermine our Prime Minister, and give succour to those sitting opposite her at the negotiating table. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What has driven and guided me as I’ve considered the future
status of the United Kingdom in Europe has been the aim of making a success of
Brexit. I realise there are UK citizens who have differing views on our future
in Europe. But in the EU Referendum in 2016, 48% of voters favoured remaining in
the EU while 52% of voters backed Leave. So the UK will be leaving in March
2019. Sometimes, I think this stark reality is being overlooked. There are some
who have not accepted the public vote in the referendum, either wanting it to
be ignored by the Government, or another referendum held in an attempt to reverse it. This is not
going to happen. The UK is leaving the EU. We must try to arrange our leaving on the best possible terms, which suit the UK and the EU as far as possible. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But of course, the UK is not ‘leaving Europe’. All that is happening is
that the UK is recovering our ability to control who moves to our country to
study, work and to live; to control our own laws, and to stop handing over
billions of pounds for the European Commission to spend as it chooses. The UK
will remain a part of Europe - we will want to work as closely and positively
as possible with our neighbouring countries. We will need migrants from across
the world including from Europe to work in our NHS and Social Care services. We will want to trade with the EU.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even though I hope that this week MPs will have reversed all
of the House of Lords amendments, there will be more important debates and
votes to come over the next 2/3 years. This week has been about giving some
legal certainty to the ‘Leaving’ process. It is, in most part a technical bill,
which the House of Lords has used as an attempt to overturn the EU Referendum
result. Personally, I think their Lordships were out of order. Their job is to
put forward reasoned amendments to improve Government legislation, without
challenging the primacy of the elected House of Commons. It cannot be
otherwise. For that reason alone, I hope all the Lords amendments to the EU
Withdrawal Bill will have been defeated by the time this column is published.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-64323756691235998822018-06-08T22:57:00.003+01:002018-06-08T22:57:49.281+01:00Disgraceful behaviour at Shropshire Hospitals reform meetings.<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Not time to blog for a while. But was so utterly disgusted that two public consultation meeting about hospital reconfiguration in Shropshire had to be abandoned to protect the staff manning the exhibitions that I’m forced from my hibernation. The joint Chief Executives on the Clinical Commissioning Groups have written a public response. I can only imagine how angry they were. The culprits should be ashamed of themselves. I decided to reprint the letter here.<br />
<br />
“We write in relation to your letter concerning the proposed Future Fit programme and the current public consultation which commenced on 30 May 2018.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
The Future Fit Programme has been developed by over 300 clinicians, endorsed by a wide range of stakeholder organisations through the Future Fit Programme Board, subject to an independent process review by KMPG and endorsed and agreed by the West Midlands Clinical Senate.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
It was also agreed unanimously through the two CCG Boards and assured as fit for consultation by NHS England demonstrably offering a sustainable future for health services for Shropshire Telford, Wrekin & Powys providing a long term vision for hospital based services.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Your contention that the capital funding for the scheme will require cuts in services is demonstrably not true.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
The £312m of capital to be provided to the health community will be funded in part by de-duplication of services, the ability to better recruit and retain clinical staff and so reduce significant over reliance on costly interim staffing at our two hospitals.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
The business case available on the Future Fit website clearly demonstrates that the hospital will not require income over existing tariff to fund the development.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
What is more, both options provide for better outcomes for both planned and emergency care over the current configuration of services. Put simply the plan, and this is true for both options being consulted on, provides for a future that is BETTER for patients, BETTER for outcomes, provides BETTER facilities for staff to work and BETTER facilities for patients to be treated in.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
If the proposals did not provide those better outcomes it would not be supported by clinicians, who in their day to day work know what better could look like.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
As regards the Princess Royal Hospital site in Telford it is true, should the preferred option be selected, that some emergency patients treated formerly at Telford will now be treated at Shrewsbury, but a significant majority of patients under either model will continue to be treated at the site at which they currently attend.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Obviously if option 2 is selected then the reverse will be true with some emergency patients having to travel from Shrewsbury to Telford.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
As regards the Women & Children’s centre at Princess Royal Hospital, the majority of services currently undertaken there will remain there under the preferred option, only consultant-led obstetrics and in-patient paediatrics will be undertaken at the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital site.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Obviously if option 2 is selected then the Women & Children’s centre at Telford would be unchanged.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
The rural maternity units are not part of this consultation, but any recommendation to amend the maternity delivery model will be subject to public consultation in due course.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
This is not expected to commence prior to the closure of the Future Fit consultation on 5 September.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
You say that you are ‘open to any set of proposals which will improve the level and quality of care for our patients and communities’.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
The Future Fit programme evidentially provides just that.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
If you believe otherwise then this should form part of a formal consultation response.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
There is absolutely no evidence that these procedures place either patients, or staff, at risk and we are concerned that this may be communicated to the public without any clinical or other evidence to support that statement.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
As regards capital funding and viability we would comment as follows.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
The pre-consultation Business Case was subject to rigorous assurance through NHS England as to affordability.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
This is important as CCGs cannot legally consult on options, or service changes, that are not demonstrably affordable.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
As with any major capital scheme, the precise funding nature of the £312m will not be finalised until the Final Business Case.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
What we are aware of at this time is that up to £200m will come from Public Dividend Capital, the remainder will come from the Trust’s own capital resources, or land sales, and at least one tranche will come from private finance.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Such mixed capital funding solutions are stated NHS and Department of Health policy.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Lastly we have developed these plans over a number of years precisely as the current state of play of split services across the Princess Royal Hospital and the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital site are neither financially, or clinically sustainable.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Put simply we cannot afford them within allocations, and we cannot staff them.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
That is why the Future Fit plan provides for a strategic plan that is funded to meet the needs of all the communities of Shropshire, Telford & Wrekin and mid-Wales for now and the future.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
We appreciate how much you care for and support the NHS. Its continued existence depends on the backing of people who are passionate about its future.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
This is never more so than in the year in which it celebrates its 70th birthday.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Please, though, acknowledge that the NHS clinicians, health experts, managers and staff that have worked so hard on these models for change, care just as passionately as you do.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
We do not embark on this difficult case for change because it is easy - it is not - we do so because it is essential.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
We have a once in a generation opportunity to transform health care for the people of Shropshire, Telford and Wrekin.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
There is a fantastic prize in the hands of the communities we all want the best for.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
To run it down now and not seize it, will not just be a matter of an opportunity lost, it will be to condemn local people to a struggling service, in decaying buildings making the recruitment and retention of essential staff all the more difficult.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Objecting to the Future Fit programme thinking something better will turn up is to live more in hope than the reality of what we have before us.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
We ask you to re-consider your opposition for the sake of everyone in our county and beyond.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Kind regards.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Yours sincerely</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
Dr Simon Freeman, Accountable Officer, Shropshire CCG</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;">
David Evans, Chief Officer, Telford and Wrekin CCG</div>
Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-87375261467488089672018-04-29T23:04:00.001+01:002018-04-30T09:49:03.060+01:00Alfie Evans. Last week, those of us who try to follow the news agenda had a confusing few days. There were the usual mixture of misleading and simply untrue ‘news’ stories about Brexit. We’re used to that, and have learned to largely ignore it. But in Wales, we did have an astonishingly good news Brexit story. It was really big breakthrough news. After predictions of constitutional chaos and multiple headlines about a “Power Grab” by the UK Parliament, and a bizarre ‘Continuity Bill’ passed in the Welsh Parliament, which led to the UK Govt taking the Welsh Government to the Supreme Court, the Wales Office and the Welsh Gov’t agreed post-Brexit arrangements in relation to devolved powers. Just like that! Defied all the predictions. Until now the devolved Governments in Wales and Scotland had worked together. Wales has now left the Scottish National Party to carry on its anti-Brexit campaigning on its own. In Wales, we have agreed a pragmatic way forward, trying to deliver the best way future for Wales, rather than play politics games. And as is usual with very complex issues, the Welsh media largely ignored this most significant news story of the week.<br />
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We also had the hugely worrying story about how immigrants who moved to Britain in the 1960s on the Windrush and other ships have been shockingly let down by our immigration system. No-one emerges from this scandal, (because that’s what it is) with any credit. Although it’s impossible to know exactly where ‘blame’ lies, it is clear that managing the UKs immigration system has been a challenge too far for the Home Office. I write this as Amber Rudd resigns over the issue. Personally I am sorry about this. I thought she was the right person to sort out the problem. The position today is just not acceptable. Of course, the UK Government must control ‘illegal’ immigration, but must also do whatever it takes to ensure those immigrants who are today in Britain entirely legally are not in any way disadvantaged. </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But the news story last week which impacted on me most was the circumstances surrounding the death of Alfie Evans, a 23 month old little boy at Alder Hey Hospital who died from an untreatable neurological condition, after his life support was turned off. Everyone sympathised with Alfie’s parents, who must have gone through the most traumatic of experiences. Its very difficult to disentangle the clinical and ethical issues. Increasingly, developing science means we are going to confront more decisions about when to end a life that is being maintained only by a machine, when there is no hope of recovery. While I do not approve of the behaviour of some of those who protested outside Alder Hey Hospital, I find myself, yet again, conflicted by the proper responsibilities of the family and the state in life and death issues.</div>
Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-54047517194409055012018-04-15T23:08:00.001+01:002018-04-15T23:31:36.259+01:00‘Limited, targeted and effective’.Last week, three of the five permanent members of the Security Council joined forces to conduct coordinated targeted military strikes to degrade the Syrian Regime’s chemical weapons capability, and deter their use. The principle partner, delivering about 90% of the bombardment was the US. Britain and France played smaller roles, but their involvement was crucial to reinforce the message the use of chemical weapons is contrary to Chemical Weapons Convention and not acceptable in today’s world. The action was supported by a wide range of countries, including all NATO members plus Australia plus Turkey and others. The military strike was in response to a despicable and barbaric act by the Syrian Regime in Douma, killing innocent people who were seeking shelter from bombardment in underground basements.<br />
There is little doubt that the Syrian Regime led by Bashar al-Ashad was responsible. It has an utterly abhorrent record of using poison gas against its own people. Over recent years there have been numerous examples of chemical weapon use by the forces of the Syrian Dictator, Bashar al-Assad. For a century, use of chemical weapons has been banned as a crime against humanity. Assad is in flagrant breach of international law. The use of Chemical Weapons must be stopped. Every reform in the Security Council has failed, thwarted by the Russian veto. The leaders of the US, France and the UK have done what they had to do.<br />
Before acting, the UK Prime Minister and Cabinet considered advice from the Attorney General, the National Security Advisor and Chief of Staff and received a full intelligence briefing. Theresa May decided to act in order to alleviate humanitarian suffering by degrading the Syrian Regime’s Chemical Weapons capability. There is no desire to intervene in a civil war. There is no desire or intention to deliver regime change. It was a ‘Limited, Targeted and Effective’ strike with clear boundaries designed to avoid escalation and civilian casualties. The aim is to prevent future use of chemical weapons.<br />
In 2013, David Cameron sought support from MPs to launch a military strike against Damascus in response to Assad’s use of poison gas. MPs refused to agree. I thought that a mistake, which led to<br />
President Obama cancelling any action at all. Last year the US did respond to another poison gas attack with a limited military response. It did not stop Assad. We must hope that last weekend’s military strike will have more effect.<br />
I hope there will also be a new diplomatic effort as well. We cannot allow chemical weapons to become ‘normalised’ as a method of war. Britain has always taken a stance to defend global rules and standards. That’s what we did last weekend.Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-18687931676021507362018-04-12T22:21:00.000+01:002018-04-13T09:41:13.712+01:00More on Poison Gas issuesToday’s news reports are still focussing on two events involving the use of poison gas, and how we should respond - take action or just wring our hands.<br />
Firstly, there’s the attempted assassination of the Russians, Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia on the streets of Britain. Today the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which so many had called on to make a definitive judgement, backed the conclusions drawn by the Prime Minister and Boris Johnson. I am not sure what we should do about it, except hit the wealthy Russian friends of Putin who operate in the UK. And hit them so hard, they understand the damage that Putin is causing them. I sense that may well happen.<br />
And then we have the use of poison gas against innocent citizens in Douma by Bashar al-Assad. It’s crucial that the response be carefully planned, targeted and effective. Personally, I cannot see any alternative but to strike militarily against Assad and his military capability. He is a monster.<br />
I have been quite shocked by those who seem to take the side of the Russian backed Syrian Dictator. I suppose there always have been a few British citizens who seem to prefer to side with Britain’s enemies. For 100 years Chemical warfare has been unacceptable under international law. Yet there are some who accept that Assad should face no consequence for what he has done. This is normalising the use of chemical weapons in modern warfare. It would be disastrous for our world - a green light to the barbarians to do their worst, if it’s thought the world will just stand by and shake heads disapprovingly when weapons of mass destruction are deployed - and leave it at that.<br />
Normally, we would be arguing for the Security Council to take action, but it cannot because the Russians veto any such action. They are Assad’s protective shield. So the United Nations is rendered impotent.<br />
Many MPs are calling for Parliament to be asked to vote on any decision to join a US led military strike. I am not one of them. Any decision must be based on a careful assessment of intelligence. The Prime Minister cannot share such intelligence publically. She might as well just authorises MI6 to send our intelligence direct to Damascus, the Kremlin and Tehran.<br />
I fully expect the US to launch a military strike against Bashar al-Assad’s forces. I also expect the UK and France to participate. And even though I would wish it otherwise, I will support our Prime Minister in that action if she and her Cabinet decide it should be. Most other MPs will do the same, all of us with heavy hearts.<br />
I realise there will be many who disagree. There are many who think we should “just let them get on with it”. We should not be dragged in no matter what. As if we can isolate ourselves from what happens overseas. There will be many with pacifist principles. I do not criticise their stance. The stance I do question is that of those who insist that chemical warfare must not become common in modern warfare while refusing to support action to support that position. This is a total cop-out. My job as an MP is to face up to choices. And sometimes those choices are bloody tough. They don’t come any tougher than this one.Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-8574783225735221532018-04-10T22:26:00.002+01:002018-04-10T22:26:58.441+01:00Syria. What now?Am inspired to comment on what’s happening in Syria by William Hague’s column in today’s Telegraph. Takes me back to the events of 2013, which was the most shocking of my 8 yrs as an MP. It’s the context in which I have to contemplate the current position.<br />
In 2013, Bashar al-Assad had used chemical weapons against his own people and Prime Minister, David Cameron was considering a military strike against Damascus. He was supported by William Hague. Before that summer recess, MPs had insisted that a vote would be needed to authorise such a strike. Parliament was indeed recalled during summer recess. I returned to London, anticipating voting against my Govt for the first time. I informed my whips that I could not vote for action without more clarity about how it would improve the position. I think other MPs must have taken a similar line because when the motion to be debated was tabled the night before the debate, I was satisfied. The motion supported military action against Assad, but crucially, required the Prime Minister to return to the Parliament with more clarity and to seek another vote before military action could be taken. I thought that was acceptable, and voted for it. But (shamefully in my view) MPs voted this motion down. I felt ashamed that some Conservatives had completely undermined the Prime Minisister. The Labour Leader at the time, Ed Miliband had decided to play politics with an issue that should have been above politics and put forward his alternative motion, which was not far from the Prime Minister’s motion. That was defeated as well. I felt deeply ashamed of Labour. I suspect a few Labour MPs did as well. Anyway, Obama and Putin were watching. The former reneged on his ‘red lines’ and decided to do nothing, while the latter realised that Assad backed by Russia could do whatever he wanted. That’s just what he did. The chemical attacks on innocents over the last few days is an inevitable consequence of 2013.<br />
I know there will be many who think the UK (and everyone else except Russia and Iran) should stay out of it. Several of my constituents informedit was their opinion in 2013. Suspect some might feel the same today. I don’t. Non-action can have terrible consequences, as well as action. We cannot wait for the UN to back action because Russia will veto any military response. We cannot allow chemical warfare to become an accepted form of attack, which it will. Of course we cannot be 100% certain that military action will achieve its objective in the short term. If certainty of victory was a requirement of action, military powers who care not about deaths of casualties would always win.<br />
We know that a President Obama would not act. There would just be empty threats. But I do think<br />
Resident Trump may well act. He may well call the Assad-Putin bluff. This is a very hard sentence for me to write, because I know many of my friends and supporters will disagree. But I believe Britain and France should support action led by the US, and be active participants.Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-30116870675549956612018-04-02T20:14:00.000+01:002018-04-02T21:56:40.282+01:00How do we power the UK?Written quite a lot about NHS reform of secondary care for Shropshire and mid-Wales recently. So a change of subject - temporarily at least. Feel a need to return to a subject I used to write about quite a lot. Energy, and where we source it. And ask whether the ‘Russia’ issue make any difference.<br />
When I was young, energy used to be a major part of the UK’s GDP (maybe 10%) - principally coal, oil, gas and nuclear. Today it’s fallen to relative insignificance (maybe 2%). This is largely down to much reduced use of coal and near disappearance of North Sea oil. And our commitment to Paris Agreement on climate change means we’re not going back there. This post is about where (and whether) we should look to re-establish energy as a significant UK industry. I’m thinking next 15/20 years. Even that’s too long a time scale to predict with any certainty. It’s probable that this post would have to be completely rewritten in 10yrs, or even sooner.<br />
In my view, we cannot but go for Shale Gas as a big player. I accept there is uncertainty about this industry, and much opposition, but nevertheless it looks more than promising. I’ve never quite understood the antipathy to shale gas extraction. We know that the initial process of hydraulic fracturing is undoubtedly noisy for a period of around 3 weeks, and generates a fair bit of traffic. No major job creating industry is without some disturbance. The potential is massive - game changing. At worst, there’s enough Shale Gas in the Bowland Basin alone to provide for decades of UK needs. And there are private operators who will put their money in. Are doing so already. We know (even the Climate Change Committee agrees) that there’s a need for gas as a transition fuel from coal to renewables (where we want to end up) and Shale Gas has far less impact on carbon emissions than LNG, which is the main alternative. And anyway, all the LNG we were banking on is being bought up by the Chinese. But since the demise of the Energy and Climate Change Select Committee I have no involvement in this debate. Just a residual interest.<br />
I also think offshore wind looks to have a more than promising future. Always used to be too costly, but scale and technology are changing the balance. Almost reached the stage when no subsidy is needed, which is a dramatic turnaround in a year. There is some antipathy to offshore wind but nothing like the intense opposition to onshore wind, which is even cheaper. I’ve always thought (without actual evidence) that if and when floating turbines become realalistic and economic, the potential of offshore wind is limitless. Another advantage of offshore wind (and shale gas) is that the economic benefit will accrue to the North of England, contributing to reducing the North-South divide.<br />
And the there is Russia. While we might not import much directly from Russia now, we are part of a European energy network which is more linked to Russia. We should not be giving the Russians any leverage over us. It’s not just energy, but security.<br />
There are of course many other possibilities as well. Nuclear may well be a big player, especially if Small Modular Reacters prove viable. Trawsfynnydd could be a real possibility here. Solar will always be a small scale player, made slightly more viable as storage technology develops. Then there’s hydrogen, which could develop as a fuel for cars and trains. That’s enough for this quick blog post, but open to suggestions to amend it.Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-91850623768989618292018-03-24T19:17:00.000+01:002018-03-28T08:05:52.287+01:00Shropshire and Mid Wales A&E Reform. ‘Hot’ new Hospital at ShrewsburyWas expecting news of an announcement tomorrow. But it’s in the Times today. So updated my post<br />
<br />
Over the last ten years ( at least) I have been involved in active discussion about what has to be done to deliver a sustainable hospital structure to serve Shropshire and Mid Wales. In fact, I have known roughly what was needed to be done for over 40 yrs ago. A squash playing team colleague, who was also a brilliant Shropshire consultant used to berate me between games about the strategic madness of building a new hospital in Telford to serve Shropshire and Mid Wales in the first place. The area simply did not have the population to sustain two comprehensive District General Hospitals in the long term. He knew I was involved in local public affairs and wanted me to become involved. Paul died young. I hope he’d be pleased with the effort I’ve put in. It is an irony that there’s a Paul Brown Ward at the Princess Royal in memory of the great man.<br />
The population of Shropshire and Mid Wales is about 500,000 and will sustain only one major secondary care hospital. Because of the historic and unwise decision to build the Princess Royal, the only feasible way forward today is to accept the current position and run the two hospitals as one unit operating on two sites, with ‘emergency care’ at one and ‘planned care’ at the other. A new hospital to replace both (which most of us would really prefer) is off the wall expensive. We have known all this for years. Our hospital services have suffered because we have not faced up to the difficult ‘political’ decisions needed. Millions of precious NHS resources have been squandered as a consequence of ‘political posturing’, sometimes blindly refusing to accept reality. But at long long last, the end is in sight. It’s taken a lot of lobbying and argument to reach today’s position. It’s also been frustrating enough to test the patience of a saint.<br />
The UK Government has now decided that NHS England will allocate the around £300 million needed to transform one hospital (recommended to be the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital) into a centre for Emergency Care (a’hot’ emergency care hospital) and Theo<br />
Other (recommended to be Telford’s Princess Royal Hospital) into a centre for planned care. This will be the biggest investment by NHS England this year. It will be a massive Gov’t commitment to Shropshire and Mid Wales. Everyone who has been involved and stuck with it will be hugely satisfied. After the announcement of the funding, , there will be an implementation process. The first step will be for the local Clinical Commissioning Groups to go out to a 12 week public consultation from about early May - with the above arrangement as their ‘preferred option’. If the public support the ‘preferred option’ (and it would be unthinkable not to) the project design and tendering processes will begin. I can see no reason why we cannot anticipate “diggers in the ground” early next year.<br />
This is what should happen, and what I expect to happen.. Over the 12 week consultation period I will be arranging public meetings around Montgomeryshire to explain what has been a quite incredible journey, over many years, to reach the current position. And how important it is that all of us who want to see a sustainable NHS in Shropshire and Mid Wales actually turn out to vote.Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-59982561428616428162018-03-20T19:26:00.000+01:002018-03-20T19:26:38.496+01:00The real story of our economy.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">So many try to talk down the UK economy, that I’m using my column
to redress the balance. Personally, I believe the UK is in a far better place
than the Jeremiah’s so often portray. Wrote this for Oswestry and Borders Chronicle this week.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">“The UK economy has grown every year since 2010. It now has a
manufacturing sector enjoying its longest unbroken run of growth for 50 years.
It has added 3 million jobs since 2010 and seen every single region of the UK
with higher employment and lower unemployment than in 2010. It has seen the
wages of the lowest-paid rise by almost 7% above inflation since April 2015. It
has seen income inequality lower than at any time under the last Labour
Government.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Britain faces the future with
unique strengths. The English language is the global language of business. The
British legal system is the jurisdiction of choice for commerce. London is the
world’s most global city and capital of international finance and professional
services. British companies are in the vanguard of the technological
revolution, while our world-class universities are delivering the breakthrough
discoveries and inventions that are powering it. British culture and talent
reaches huge audiences across the globe; and our tech sector is attracting
skills and capital from the four corners of world. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Open Sans"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">The Office for Budget Responsibility forecasts more jobs, rising
real wages, declining inflation, a falling deficit and a shrinking debt. The
economy grew by 1.7% in 2017, compared with the 1.5% forecast at the Budget,
and the OBR has revised up its forecast for 2018 from 1.4% to 1.5%. Forecast
growth is then unchanged <span class="column-number"></span>at 1.3% in 2019
and 2020, before picking up to 1.4% in 2021 and 1.5% in 2022.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Open Sans"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Our remarkable jobs story is set to continue, with the OBR
forecasting more jobs in every year of this Parliament and over 500,000 more
people enjoying the security of a regular pay packet. The OBR expects inflation
to fall back to the 2% target over the next 12 months, meaning real wage growth is
expected to be positive from first quarter of 2018-19 and to increase steadily
thereafter. Annual inflation statistics </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;">fell 0.3% to 2.7% yesterday. There are more falls to come. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Open Sans"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Borrowing is now forecast to be £45.2 billion this year. That is
£4.7 billion lower than forecast in November and £108 billion lower than in
2010.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Debt is being reduced not for
some ideological reason, but to secure an economy strong enough to cope with future setbacks.
Taxpayer’s money is needed to support our public services and defence, not to be
wasted on debt interest. So not all will be used to reduce debt. Since
the autumn 2016, </span><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;">£60 billion has been earmarked for new spending,
shared between long-term investment in Britain’s future and support for public
services. Almost £9 billion extra has been invested in our NHS and our social
care system. There is £4 billion going into the NHS in 2018-19 alone.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Open Sans"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Taxes have been cut for 31 million working people by raising the
personal allowance. 4 million people have been taken out of tax altogether
since 2010. Fuel duty has been frozen for an eighth successive year, taking the
saving for a typical car driver to £850 when compared with Labour’s plans. The
national living wage has been raised to £7.83 from next month, giving the
lowest paid in our society a well-deserved pay rise of more than £2,000 for a
full-time worker since 2015.</span></div>
<br />
So to the doom mongerers I proffer the old saying “Put that in your pipe and smoke it.”Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34112832.post-77369714452990774122018-03-18T17:52:00.001+01:002018-03-18T18:12:15.913+01:00Votes for ExpatsOver the next few months, A View from Rural Wales will be commenting from time to time on the contentious issue of votes for British citizens living abroad. This is because I am sponsoring a Private Member’s Bill, and trying to put on the Statute Book the right for any British citizen living overseas to vote in a British General Election. On Feb 23rd, MPs agreed a Second Reading of my bill and it will go into Committee for detailed debate - probably after the summer recess. I’ve never had as much grateful support for something I’ve done as an MP.<br />
Reason I’m commenting today is that as working my way through stacks of mail (always overwhelmed and usual Sunday/late night work) I came upon a copy of The Times Leading Article of 28th April 2016, giving 100% support to my case. At the time, The Times wanted ex-pats to be given the right to vote in the EU Referendum. I agreed with The Times and others who were calling for that. I think the Govt might have also liked that but it was said to be logistically not possible. The arguments are just as valid today. Here are a few extracts from The Times Leader;<br />
“The 15-year cut-off is arbitrary. The Govt has admitted as much and has committed itself to repealing it.”<br />
“There is a moral duty to repeal it too. The first law granting voting rights to non-resident Britons, passed in 1995, applied only to those who had been abroad for five years or fewer. Margaret increased it to 20 years in 1989. Tony Blair cut it back to 15 years in 2000. Parliament was never able to settle on a natural cut-off date because none existed......the appropriate basis for voting rights is citizenship.”<br />
“Harry Shindler agrees. Now 95, he fought to liberate Italy from fascism. He has lived there since 1982, and has been fighting for the right to vote since 2011.”<br />
“There is no suggestion that those in Mr Shindler’s position have ceased to be British citizens. Britain is their country and they clearly have a right to a say in its future.”<br />
The Govt may fear a Commons vote that would split the Tory Party but that is no reason not to do the right thing.”<br />
When we discussed my Overseas Voters Bill at Second Reading, a handful of Labour MPs tried to kill it off. I don’t really know why. Luckily for me, I think the entire Conservative and Liberal Democrat voice was supportive. We are all on Harry Shindler’s side. He came over from Italy to meet me before the debate. An irony is that Harry is probably the oldest longest serving Labour supporter in the world.Glyn Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442114752573417252noreply@blogger.com0