The Queen's Speech

I have set out below the main Bills heralded in the Queen's Speech and a short note on what they are intended to achieve. I have done so under the headings of values and aims established in Built to Last, a document which rank-and-file Conservative Party members voted on and approved and which sets out the values of the Conservative Party.

Our work to cut the deficit continues, with a long-overdue Public Service Pensions Bill. This guarantees a good pension for teachers, doctors and nurses while putting the whole system on a more affordable footing – and saving the taxpayer tens of billions over the coming years. We continue to push hard for more growth and jobs in our economy. An Enterprise Bill builds on the work we've already achieved – from corporation tax cuts to new incentives for investment – to make Britain a world-beating place to start a business. A Banking Reform Bill will clear up the regulatory mess left after the crash and protect consumers from risky activity. An Energy Bill will channel new investment into the growing industries that are going to create thousands of good jobs across our country – nuclear, renewables, new gas technologies. In addition a major Finance Bill had been carried forward from the previous session in order to implement the Budget and the programme for growth.

CONTENTS OF THE QUEEN'S SPEECH

To encourage enterprise in all its forms – in the economy and in the community – in order to raise living standards and the quality of life for all.

Banking Reform Bill: will create a ring-fence around vital banking services and introduce depositor preference, in line with the recommendations of the Independent Commission on Banking.

Groceries Code Adjudicator Bill: will establish an independent Groceries Code Adjudicator to ensure supermarkets deal fairly and lawfully with suppliers.Enterprise and Regulatory Bill: will promote enterprise and fair markets, including provisions on a Green Investment Bank, a new Competition and Markets Authority and reforming employment tribunals.

Finance Bill: bill carried forward from 2011/12 to implement the Budget and the programme for growth.

To fight social injustice and help the most disadvantaged by building a strong society.

Children and Families Bill: will improve the lives of children, young people and families, especially those coping with special educational needs. It will reform the assessment, planning and provision for children and young people with special educational needs and those who are disabled, reduce delay in the adoption system, introduce new arrangements for children of parents who apply to court and reform court processes for children in care so cases progress more rapidly. The Bill will also strengthen the role of the Children's Commissioner, enable both mothers and fathers to take flexible parental leave to share early years parenting and make it possible for all employees to balance their work and family commitments.

Care and Support draft Bill: will modernise adult care and support law in England and replace outdated legislation with a new single statute.

Pensions Bill: will reform the state pensions system, creating a fair, simple and sustainable foundation for private saving.

Public Service Pensions Bill: will reform public service pensions in line with the recommendations of the report prepared by the Independent Public Service Pensions Commission.

Small Donations Bill: will enable charities to claim top-up payments, similar to Gift Aid, on small donations they collect without the need to obtain a Gift Aid declaration.

To meet the great environmental threats of the age, to enhance the environment and to increase general well-being.

Energy Bill: will reform the electricity market. This will include powers to establish long-term contracts for low-carbon energy generation and to guarantee generating capacity, as well as other measures which together will deliver affordable electricity for consumers and help meet security of supply and decarbonisation goals. The Bill will also establish an independent nuclear regulator.

Water industry draft Bill: to reform the industry and allow consumers greater choice

To protect the country we love: proud of our past; confident in our future.

Crime and Courts Bill: will establish the National Crime Agency to tackle serious, organised and complex crime and strengthen border security. Measures will further reform and modernise the courts and tribunal service to increase efficiency, transparency and judicial diversity.

Defamation Bill: will reform the law of defamation. This will rebalance the law to give greater protection to free speech, while ensuring that people who have been defamed are able to protect their reputation.

Electoral Registration Bill: will introduce individual electoral registration and make improvements to other areas of electoral administration.Justice and Security Bill: will provide for strengthened oversight of the security and intelligence agencies; to provide for closed material procedures in certain civil proceedings; and to prevent disclosure contrary to the public interest of certain material in judicial proceedings, including material shared with us by our allies.

Communications Data draft Bill: will maintain the capability of intelligence and law enforcement agencies to acquire communications data to protect the public within a framework of strict safeguards.

Croatia Accession Bill – will seek the approval of Parliament on the anticipated accession of Croatia to the European Union.

European Union (Approval of Treaty Amendment Decision) Bill – will seek the approval of Parliament on an amendment to the European Union Treaties confirming the ability of euro area Member States to establish a financial stability mechanism within the euro area.

To give power to people and communities, and to recognise the limitations of government.

House of Lords reform Bill: to cut the size of the Lords and reform it to provide democratic legitimacy for those making laws.

Local Audit Bill: will set out measures to close the Audit Commission and to make new arrangements for the audit of local public bodies.

Ignorance and bigotry don't respond to reason

There seems to be an unusually large number of round-robbin e mails at the moment. Their purpose is to frighten the vulnerable and to increase racial and community tension. Before the internet, we would have called these 'chain letters' and disposed of them. Now, the fact that they are delivered electronically seems to prey on the gullibility of those who receive them and send them on.

Although some of these e mails may seem harmless they are at best misleading and at worse incite unrest. There is one that advocates a reduction in taxation. But the e mail misleads the public by pretending the taxes listed are UK taxes. They are not – it is a US list.

Many seem to originate with extremist groups. Their sole purpose is to foment racial unrest. One tries to compare the supposed anti-Muslim sentiment expressed by the Australian Prime Minister with the alleged attitude of the UK Government. Another seeks to try to compare the claimed treatment of British pensioners with that of illegal immigrants/asylum seekers. A third alleges that the arrest of a man said to have daubed a poppy on a mosque was disproportionate. Finally, one e mail claims to have details about the personal and financial lives of MPs.

None of these e mails are what they seem. According to the police there was no arrest for the painting of a poppy on a mosque – a mosque incidentally which celebrates Remembrance every year. The figures for pensioners are simply wrong and that e mail ignorantly makes no distinction between illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Nowhere is there any recognition of the Prime Minister's Munich speech declaring an end to "passive tolerance" of divided communities, and encouraging members of all faiths to integrate into wider society and accept our core values. As for the claims about MPs' private lives, the e mail merely cribs from one circulating in the US about Congress. It can't even get the number of MPs right..

The way these emails prey on the fears of people with the sole aim of increasing tension is despicable. The truth clearly matters not one jot. One even boasts at the end that it takes courage to forward these e mails. It's a strange use of the word 'courage'. See these e mails for what they are – malicious and often racist chain letters – and have the real courage to reach for the delete button. Don't bother replying to them. Ignorance and bigotry don't respond to reason.

Minister visits RAF Benson

It was a great pleasure to welcome my colleague, Defence Minister Peter Luff MP, to the constituency on 30 April and to RAF Benson. I was pleased he was able to take up my invitation and that of the Base Commander to visit us.

Together Peter and I were able to get a good understanding of some of the operational issues relating to the Merlin and Puma helicopters. Most importantly, we are able to talk to those of all ranks involved in operating and maintaining these aircraft and hear their experiences of active service in Afghanistan and Iraq. Although I know the Base well and am the first MP here to hold surgeries on the Base, the day gave me a very welcome added perspective. This was an important visit and I am glad that as part of the visit we were able to show our appreciation for the debt we owe our servicemen and women.

Fighting for aspiration and fairness

This article first appeared in the Thame Gazette on 27 April 2012

Next week marks the end of the first Session of this Parliament. There's a common theme running throughout the reforms the Government has introduced and that's aspiration and fairness.

Take my planning reforms. We have a housing crisis in this country - building the fewest number of houses in peace time since the 1920s; an average age of 37 to buy your first house. That's not fair on those who are struggling to find a decent place to live or get a first foot on the housing ladder. Of course any new development needs to get the balance right between the economic, social and environmental requirements of an area. That's why it's fair to give local communities and their elected councils the responsibility to decide themselves what that balance should be. Thame is a trailblazer on this for the country through its Neighbourhood Plan.

When I became an MP I spent a day working in a Job Centre. I know how the most vulnerable in our society need protecting. But this should be a far cry from the dependency culture and the 'something for nothing' mentality it has created. It is simply not fair that households on out of work benefits should have a greater income than a working household receives in wages. That's why I've supported a cap on the amount of benefits a household can receive. It's linked to average weekly earnings, and imposes a limit of £26,000 a year.

It's the same for education. I want all young people to have the chance of a good education; not the few or the rich. That's why I have visited almost every school in the constituency and why as well as supporting new Free Schools and Academies
I've also taken a zero tolerance approach to those that are failing.

In politics as in life the test is whether you have the courage to play the hand you're dealt however good or bad. This first Session has shown that this Government is.

Better off thanks to tax cut

People across the Henley constituency will be up to £220 better off next year thanks to the largest ever increase in the personal allowance announced by George Osborne in the Budget.  In his 2012 Budget the Chancellor announced that the income tax personal allowance will be increased from April 2013 by an additional £1,100 to £9,205.  This means that income tax has been cut by up to £546 for basic rate taxpayers since the Government came to power and 2 million of the lowest earners will have been taken out of tax altogether.

Thanks to this decision, an additional 1,169 people in this constituency will be taken out of tax. This means that 2,743 will have been lifted out of income tax altogether by this Government.  37,096 will benefit from the tax cut in April 2013 in this constituency alone.

Petrol, pies and pensions

I want to take this opportunity to set out the situation in relation to three issues which have recently made headlines. Hopefully, this will bring some commonsense to discussions about these issues.

PETROL

If Unite had not turned to negotiations over their threatened strike we would have been looking at a strike over Easter at a time deliberately chosen to maxmise the inconvenience to the general public. The threat of a strike has not gone away. The most constructive thing Unite could do now would be to call off the strike entirely rather than just postpone it.

If we had had a strike over Easter, motorists would have faced the prospect of long queues at petrol stations where, once all the fuel had been sold, refilling the petrol station reservoirs would have been difficult and would have had to have involved the army. As it was, the fuel companies worked flat-out and successfully to resupply petrol stations once motorists had filled their cars.

I understand that it is frustrating when petrol stations have queues. But it is quite right for the Government to put in place contingency plans for what would have been an unncessary and highly disruptive strike. The Government has learnt lessons from the past and stands ready to act to manage the impact of any strike, in particular, to our emergency and essential services.

Fuel tanker drivers are paid almost double what ordinary haulage drivers are paid. They are paid more than many public servants doing frontline jobs. For example, they are paid more than ambulance drivers and more than policemen. Even the Guardian has highlighted the difficulties being faced financially by distribution companies.

Let us be absolutely clear; the threat of a strike has not gone away and motorists should still take sensible precautions to maximise the use of the fuel they use over the next few weeks.

The accusation in some sections of the press and by the Labour Party that we are playing politics with fuel is utterly hypocritical. This is an irresponsible strike threat by the Labour Party's biggest paymaster which would disrupt families' lives, hurt businesses and damage our economy. Unite is Labour's paymaster and the Labour leader could have condemned this strike and helped nip it in the bud. He did not.

The Government is quite rightly saying that a strike is unnecessary and would be irresponsible. It would have been totally wrong if we had not put contingency plans in place to protect people and their jobs in these circumstances.

PASTIES AND PIES

VAT has been chargeable on hot takeaway food for 20 years but in that time a number of businesses have tried to find ways around the rule including bringing costly court cases. The changes announced in the Budget address the anomalies and loopholes in the VAT system in seeking to ensure that the rules are fairly applied across the board. For example, hot chickens and hot pies are taxable when they are sold in a fish and chip shop, but the big supermarkets can avoid charging VAT when selling fresh hot chicken. Small takeaways are already paying this tax while some big businesses are not. The new rules will deal with this anomaly so that there is no room for confusion or abuse.

PENSIONS

Last month's budget was the most pro-enterprise budget in a generation. Yet instead of celebrating this, the media has lingered on one measure: the so-called Granny Tax to describe the changes to Age Related Allowances. The evolution of this term in the media is a most misleading and frustrating development. I have supported pensioners; voting for measures (called the triple lock) which this month has seen a rise in the state pension of £5.30 per week – the largest cash rise ever. For thirteen years, Labour promised to restore the link between earnings and the state pension, but did nothing. This resulted in older people receiving paltry increases in their pension - as little as 75 pence one year.

One of the first things we set about doing when we formed the Coalition was to address this unfairness. We didn't just restore the earnings link; we went further, with our 'triple lock', which guarantees that the Basic State Pension will always increase either in line with earnings, inflation, or 2.5 per cent - whichever is the highest. It's worth £275 to pensioners this year. And the guarantee means that for the next three years, all of today's pensioners will be better off than they would have been under Labour.

Despite the economic mess we inherited, Winter Fuel Payments, free prescriptions and eye tests, free bus travel and free TV licences have all been protected. Councils have been helped to freeze council tax rises for two years. These are improvements which affect the incomes of all pensioners.

Age related allowance does not affect all pensioners; overall it affects less than a half. It does not affect the poorest 5 million pensioners. To receive the allowance in full you have to have taxable income currently of less than £24,000. More than that and you start to lose it. Sadly though, because it is so complicated to claim the allowance, many older people do not realise they are entitled to it and never claim it.

The Government has made good progress in its commitment to increase the personal allowance for everyone to £10,000. That's why we are able to simplify a very complex tax area and move towards one where everyone has the same, higher personal allowance.

So, under half of existing pensioners – those able to receive the age allowance – will see it frozen from 2013/14 as the general personal allowance catches up. As this happens, they will receive a dramatically increased state pension along with protected benefits. No cash loss; pensioners better off.

A Granny Tax???

Last week's budget was the most pro-enterprise, pro-growth budget in a generation. In the South East it also lifts 104,000 more people out of tax. 3.3 million people in our region benefit. Yet instead of celebrating this, the media has lingered on one measure: the so-called Granny Tax to describe the changes to Age Related Allowances. The evolution of this term in the media is a most misleading and frustrating development. I have supported pensioners; voting for measures (called the triple lock) which next month will see a rise in the state pension of £5.30 per week – the largest cash rise ever. The triple lock means that pensions will rise by the higher of inflation, average wages or 2.5%. In 2013-14 pensioners will receive £130 more than they would have done without the triple lock. Despite the economic mess we inherited from Labour, Winter Fuel Payments, free prescriptions and eye tests, free bus travel and free TV licences have all been protected. Councils have been helped to freeze council tax rises for two years. These are improvements which affect the incomes of all pensioners.

Age related allowance does not affect all pensioners; overall it affects less than a half. It does not affect the poorest 5 million pensioners. To receive the allowance in full you have to have taxable income currently of less than £24,000. More than that and you start to lose it. Sadly though, because it is so complicated to claim the allowance, many older people do not realise they are entitled to it and never claim it.

The Government has made good progress in its commitment to increase the personal allowance for everyone to £10,000. That's why we are able to simplify a very complex tax area and move towards one where everyone has the same, higher personal allowance.

So, under half of existing pensioners – those able to receive the age allowance – will see it frozen from 2013/14 as the general personal allowance catches up. As this happens, they will receive a dramatically increased state pension along with protected benefits. No cash loss; working hard to ensure pensioners are better off.

A blueprint for sustainable development

This article by Greg Clark MP and John Howell MP first appeared on ConservativeHome.com.  Greg Clark MP is Minister for Decentralisation and Cities and I am both his PPS and the principal author of Open Source Planning, the policy paper on which these reforms have been based.

Yesterday the Government published the final version of the National Planning Policy Framework following last year's public consultation. Taken together with the important changes introduced in the Localism Act, this amounts to a fundamental reform of the planning system. Our intention to undertake these reforms was clearly set out before the General Election in a Conservative policy paper entitled 'Open Source Planning'. In it we set out a clear statement of why we were going to make these changes and who we were making these changes for. What we said was:

"Rather than have one planning structure determined centrally and then applied unvaryingly across the country, we want to create a planning system where there is a basic national framework of planning priorities and policies, within which local people and their accountable local governments can produce their own distinctive local policies to create communities which are sustainable, attractive and good to live in."

We recognised that the planning system was vital for a strong economy, for an attractive and sustainable environment and for a successful democracy. We recognised too that the planning system in England achieved none of these goals.

The changes we have made have been designed to achieve three things:

First, they have been designed to restore democratic and local control over the planning system. Secondly, they have been designed to produce a simpler, quicker, cheaper, less confrontational and less bureaucratic planning system, and Thirdly, they have been designed to rebalance the system in favour of sustainable development.

The Localism Act has substantially addressed the first of these goals through neighbourhood planning. There is great enthusiasm amongst communities for neighbourhood planning and the opportunity it gives for local people to help shape the places in which they live and to share in the benefits of development. There are 233 Neighbourhood Plans being put together under our' frontrunners' scheme. What they show is that we were right to give local people the opportunity to shape the places in which they live and they are rising to the challenge of doing so with confidence and with a positive eye on the future needs of their communities. They are showing that planning is a collective enterprise and one which should free up creativity not stifle it.

The National Planning Policy Framework, which the Government published yesterday, contributes particularly to the second and third of these goals. By reducing over 1,000 pages of national guidance to around 50 pages we are continuing the simplification of the planning system which we started with our promise to end Labour's hated, bureaucratic, and top-down Regional Spatial Strategies. By producing a national planning policy framework in clear English we have made sure that, for the first time, national planning policy is accessible to the very people it most affects – the people who live in our cities, towns, villages and countryside.

This Framework particularly empowers local councillors to plan positively when they put their local plans together ensuring that they can achieve the balance which is appropriate for their area between its economic, environmental, and social requirements. We must, of course, accommodate the new ways in which we must earn our living and contribute to the growth that our economy needs after the disastrous years of Labour's term in office. We must also make sure we house a rising population which is living longer and do so in houses of which we can be proud. Planning alone cannot solve the crisis in housing we face, and which has resulted in the country building the fewest number of houses in peace time since the 1920s. However, it can underpin and significantly contribute to the Government's housing strategy and the need to build more houses.

This framework recognises too that our natural and historic environment is essential to us all and it gives us a chance to ensure that it is better looked after than it has been to date. There is no contradiction between the need for economic growth and the protection of our environment. It is precisely what planning is there to ensure as this Framework makes clear.

The Framework makes explicit that a presumption in favour of sustainable development is at the heart of the planning system. What this does not do is change the importance and primacy of a local authority's Local Plan; in fact it reinforces it. What it does do is to make explicit that sustainable development which is reflected in the Local Development Plan should be approved without delay and that which is not should be refused, subject to any relevant material considerations. It also makes it clear that the presumption does not 'trump' the other policies in the Framework and which help set out what would or would not be sustainable development.

For too long the planning system has been confrontational. In many cases the development industry and communities have tried to overcome this confrontation through quality engagement. The Framework builds on this good practice to encourage communities and developers to see themselves as on the same side in delivering what people need, where they need it and that it reflects the quality design standards in which we can all take pleasure.

As a result of this Framework and the changes we have made to the planning system there are already signs of a renaissance of interest in planning from both communities and from those developers which recognise that co-operation and engagement are in the common interest.

As Open Source Planning said: "the planning system can play a major role in decentralising power and strengthening society – bringing communities together, as they formulate a shared vision of sustainable development."

This Framework is a major step to achieving that.

Mentoring prisoners

I visited the constituency's only prison (HMP Huntercombe) on Friday 2 March to see a project (the Buck Project) which encourages prisoners to be trained as mentors to help other prisoners focus on acquiring the necessary skills to sustain a job when their sentence finishes.  The Buck Project is a peer mentoring project currently being operated in several prisons and young offender institutions in the South of England. Its objective is to encourage and foster Prisoner to Prisoner mentoring across the prison population of England and Wales and by doing so improve education, vocational and employment opportunities for prisoners and ex-offenders, as well as reducing re-offending levels.

During the visit, I was introduced to six prisoners who had been trained as mentors. They told me how they helped other prisoners form realistic goals about what sort of job they might apply for when they left prison and how they went about helping them get the right skills and experience to achieve this.  What was clear to me was how being a Mentor as part of this project had made a big difference to their own lives as well as those they were mentoring. We had a good conversation about how the Mentors went about tackling their role and how much they got out of it. The stories they were able to tell of how they had helped a range of prisoners were quite frankly inspirational. This is a credit to the rehabilitation work going on in the prison.

The Buck Project now has good evidence that prisoners who have been through the Mentoring programme are at less risk of offending when they leave prison.

Karyn Buck, founder of the project said:

"I was delighted to be able to share the work with John Howell and to introduce him to some of our mentors at Huntercombe. His visit was a great encouragement to them in their work. These are people who are working hard to turn their lives around and to help others do the same. It means a lot that people take an interested in what they are doing."

Boost to rural business

The Government has announced a new £60m grant scheme for rural entrepreneurs. Under the scheme, rural businesses can apply for individual grants which could range from £25,000 to more than £1m each. The objective is to support the businesses in increasing competitiveness and profits.

Successful applicants will receive up to 40% of the cost of projects. There are five areas it is anticipated the scheme will support which are farm competitiveness; agri-food; tourism; forestry and micro enterprises such as digital media technology and small scale, high value manufacturing.

Applications for grants are now being accepted and further information is available at: http://rdpenetwork.defra.gov.uk/funding-sources/rural-economy-grant  This announcement is part of a broader £165m Government package to unlock the economic potential of our rural areas.

This is a rural constituency. There are approximately four times as many people living in small and medium sized rural villages here than in towns. So I welcome this appreciation that we need to foster a growing and robust rural economy. So often in my constituency surgeries I have small rural businesses asking where they can go to get additional funding.

This is a new and welcome avenue I can now suggest to them. It is further proof of how the Government is investing in our rural economy, supporting our countryside and driving growth in rural businesses.

Standing up for our NHS

The NHS is one of the things that makes this country great: healthcare for all, free at the point of use, unrelated to the ability to pay. And that's the way it should stay. Like so many in this country, I have family and friends who would not be with us today if it had not been for the quality of the medical and nursing care they received and the dedication of the doctors and staff. So my commitment to the NHS is personal and deep-seated.

But let's not look at the NHS through rose-tinted glasses. Although the NHS has been brilliant at so many things, we could still do better. If the NHS was performing at world class levels we could save an extra 5,000 lives from cancer every year.

It's no use claiming to stand up for the values that underpin the NHS unless they can be made a reality. He may have been a Labour Minister; but Lord Darzi, himself an eminent surgeon, got it right. He said: "to believe in the NHS is to believe in its reform." I agree.

The NHS needs reform because people are living longer and have the right to more complex new treatment and more choices about where to receive it. However, the cost of medicines has been rising by £600 million per year. Continuing as we are will put at risk the chances of our children inheriting an NHS which has in so many ways stood us in good stead. Despite the abysmal economic situation we inherited from Labour, we are investing £12.5 billion in the NHS over the next four years – that's the equivalent of one in every seven pounds of public money. But, simply putting in more money without reform won't meet the healthcare needs of this and subsequent generations.

So we are undertaking these reforms to make the NHS better and more sustainable so that we can ensure that it survives. And, we are also doing it so that, as a result, patients will have the best possible treatment and care for the long-term benefit of their health. So what are we doing? It boils down to four things.

First, we are making sure that patients get the best possible treatment. We are doing this by putting doctors and nurses, the people who best understand their patients, in charge of the NHS and by allowing patients to make informed choices about when and how they are treated. The new head of Oxfordshire's new GP Clinical Commissioning group, Dr Stephen Richards (a GP from the Goring and Woodcote practice), has said: "through clinician-led commissioning we can champion the needs of the people of Oxfordshire and develop quality health services fit for the future." He's not alone. From Barnet to Wigan there are already good examples of doctors in clinical commissioning groups delivering better care for their patients in the community.

Secondly, we are getting more money to the front line. One way we are doing that is by cutting bureaucracy. The reforms take out over 160 PCTs and Strategic Health Authorities and half of the statutory health quangos. Already we have over 15,000 fewer administrators and managers in the NHS than when we were elected. On the other side of the scales we have over 4,000 more doctors and the highest ever number of midwives. We're taking power away from bureaucrats and putting it in the hands of the people best placed to use it – GPs.

Another way of doing this is by cutting waste. We will save some £5 billion being wasted in current administration budgets in this parliament. The NHS hasn't just emerged from a golden age. Under the previous Government the private sector was paid £250 million for operations that never happened. Between 2008-2009 the number of NHS managers increased six times as fast as the number of nurses. £6.4 billion was wasted on the NHS supercomputer. And in a parody of a bad joke, under a Labour PFI contract it cost £333 to change a light switch.

Thirdly, we are making sure that there's a better fit between health and social care bringing together health, hospitals, housing and social services care. We are doing this not by imposing a top-down diktat but by giving power to local boards focused on local health and well-being.

Let's not be frightened of using competition to help achieve all this. It's not a race to the bottom over price. It's a race to the top on quality. It's a means of giving greater choice to patients to get the high quality care they require.

Let's not pretend either that the private sector and the NHS have to date simply passed each other by on the opposite sides of the street. Private companies and the NHS have worked hand-in-hand since 1948. Privatisation? Hardly. The Health Bill for the first time ever outlaws favouring the private sector over existing state health providers.

The Government, through these reforms, is committed to more money for the NHS, more freedoms for the NHS and a better future for the NHS. These commitments have my full support and I am proud to have been one of 40 Conservative MPs to have made this support public in a letter to the Sunday Telegraph this weekend. By supporting these reforms I am standing up for our NHS not just for you and me but for our children and the future.

Clarity on Huntercombe role

I have sought to allay fears about another change to HMP Huntercombe. Huntercombe is the only prison in the Henley constituency. The prison was for many years a youth offending institution but in 2010 it was converted into a prison housing adult male category C prisoners. The Ministry of Justice has recently announced (February 2012) that the prison will go through a further change and will now be used to hold Foreign National Offenders prior to being removed, where appropriate, from the country.

This Government believes that foreign criminals should be returned to their home country at the earliest opportunity. Last year we removed more than 5,000 foreign criminals, 43 per cent by the end of their prison sentence. It make sense to bring these prisoners into one prison so that the UK Borders Agency can deal with individual cases more effectively and remove those that can be removed more quickly. Huntercombe is strategically placed near, for example, to Heathrow to help facilitate this. However, local residents have quite rightly, been keen to understand just what the implications will be for them and whether there will be any change in the level of security required around the prison. I have, therefore, sought assurance from the Ministry of Justice on these and related issues.

The Ministry of Justice has now confirmed that although the nationality of the prisoners housed at Huntercombe will change "there will be no change to the security classification of the establishment or the security categorisation of its prisoner population."

HMP Huntercombe is a Category C prison and will remain so. As such it will only be able to hold prisoners "who cannot be trusted in open conditions but who do not have the resources and will to make a determined escape attempt". There is no intention to house more prisoners there who have committed more serious crimes such as terrorism.

It is right that we should seek to deport foreign criminals as quickly as possible towards the end of their sentences. The system was so chaotic under the last Government that over 1,000 foreign national offenders were released without being considered for deportation. It makes sense to use Huntercombe for this purpose. However, I am pleases to have received the reassurance I asked for that this will not affect issues of security for those who live near the prison.

New Initiative for Local Business

I have launched a new initiative aimed at ensuring that local businesses have the skills for growth and a strong economic future. The initiative, which is supported by The Henley College and the Oxfordshire Local Economic Partnership (LEP) will start with a major event to be held at The Henley College on the evening of Thursday 3 May 2012.

The purpose of this event will be to help identify the skills businesses see themselves as needing and showing them where and how they can get them.  At the height of the recession I organised a number of events in Henley and across the constituency aimed at helping our local businesses survive. What we now need is to help our businesses prepare for growth. At the heart of this is ensuring that they have or know how to get the right skills.

The Government has made considerable amounts of money available, for example, to support apprenticeships. It has also taken significant steps to help cut red tape, reduce corporation tax, expand loan guarantees and provide cash incentives to take on apprentices. However, we want to hear from business whether there is more that can be done. For example, running a small business is like being head cook and bottle-washer. What sort of apprenticeships would best prepare someone for this sort of business?

The Minister for Skills, Rt Hon John Hayes MP, said:

"I warmly welcome John Howell's initiative in the Henley constituency to help ensure local businesses have the skills for growth and a strong economic future. We have to ensure that the sorts of small and medium sized businesses which characterise this constituency can enjoy the benefits that apprentices can offer– including improved productivity and the chance to build a better-skilled workforce. I commend John's initiative in recognising the special needs of small businesses and in getting them to talk to us about how we can help.

This initiative complements my appointment of social entrepreneur and jeweller Jason Holt to head-up an employer-led review to encourage small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) to hire an apprentice. It is vital that we make the apprenticeship route as accessible as possible for SMEs."

The picture of the skills training available is often complex. Tom Espley, principal of The Henley College, commented:

"We can add real value to this initiative as the leading local provider of skills training by providing a route map for businesses as to what is already available and helping to put shape to what might be required for the future."

Feedback from business will be a major feature of the event. This will complement the work already being undertaken by the Oxfordshire Local Economic Partnership (LEP) to find out what are the barriers to growth and what are the issues around skills and recruitment. Martin Dare-Edwards, Chairman of the LEP, said:

"Through the LEP we are helping businesses to flourish and to deliver the entrepreneurs of tomorrow. I am delighted to support John's initiative and to hear from business itself in and around Henley what it wants for the future."

I want to encourage our local businesses to take up the opportunity of apprenticeships and skills training. These opportunities are there no matter the size of the business. Apprenticeships are about giving individuals the skills they need for the future and about giving business the skilled workforce it needs to support success. I hope that this initiative will help our local businesses prepare for growth.

The Best of Henley are supporting the event and will help to organise communication about the event to local business. Phil Chappell of ther Best of Henley said he supported the initiative because

"As the economy begins to recover, and grow again, it is imperative that SME business owners have the skills and knowledge to enable them to take advantage of the opportunities that will arise"

Details of the event and how to book a place will be made available in the middle of March.

Coming to your doorstep

Following the success of my tour of 80 villages in the constituency in just 8 days last year, I have announced plans for a series of tours within some of the larger communities of the constituency. The first of these tours will be in Henley itself.

On 30 March, I will be visiting seven locations in Henley to conduct a series of local drop-in sessions at which local residents can come simply to meet their MP or take up issues with me whether international, national or local. Like the village tour in 2011, the programme of visits will be branded under the title "On Your Doorstep". That tour was the largest programme of face-to-face meetings with constituents ever organised by an MP in the constituency.

Full details will be provided nearer the time but the programme will include at least the following areas of the town, each location taking in a wide number of streets around it: the area of streets around Friday and Queeen Street; the area around Gillotts School; the central area around Henley College; the area to the south of the town around the YMCA; the area around
Brunner Hall (e.g. Greys Road) and the town centre.

This is a vast constituency stretching from the edge of Bicester to the edge of Reading. Although I have a full programme of
traditional surgeries which are held all around the constituency, they only allow me to meet a few people at a time. 'On Your Doorstep' allows me to come to local residents and  meet them where they live.

I am pleased that in 2012 we are starting off in Henley. It already accounts for 25% of my surgeries. However, going out 'on tour' in the town gives me another and more informal opportunity to meet people, to hear their views on a range of things,
to answer questions or simply to say 'hello'.

Ending lazy stereotypes

A version of this article first appeared on ConservativeHome on 10 February 2012

If you want an idea of what the concerns of Conservative MPs are there is no better snap-shot than the nature of the questions raised each Thursday in response to the statement by the Leader of the House on what the business in Parliament will be for the next week or so.

On the back of the statement, MPs are able to ask that the business just announced be replaced by a debate or statement on an issue of concern to them. In justifying these requests, its gives MPs the opportunity to raise a wide range of topics whether international, national or local about which they feel strongly.

The range of issues raised breaks the old stereotypes and shows the level of engagement Conservative MPs have with issues of fairness and social justice. It is a good example of how Conservative MPs are on the side of aspiration: people who want to get on and who want their families to get ahead. The spread of questions shows the strong recognition that, in this tough economic climate, help should go to those most in need of it, and that we are on the side of those basic rate tax-payers who struggle to make ends meet.

To illustrate this, take the 225 questions that were raised by Conservative MPs from September to December 2011. My analysis of the questions shows a heavy emphasis on a wide range of social antd economic issues. The pie chart below sets out the broad themes into which the questions fell. Unsurprisingly, the largest covers business, finance and the economy. Many of the questions related to small and medium sized businesses and pointed to the positive announcements made by the Chancellor in the Autumn Statement designed to help them. Two examples give a good picture. In mid December, Sarah Newton (Truro & Falmouth) welcomed the £20 billion national loan guarantee scheme. In mid November, Andrew Stephenson (Pendle) asked for a debate on small business rate relief. Both spoke from the perspective of the benefits of such schemes on the ground in their constituencies.

Inevitably, given the nature of Business Questions, one frequent theme related to the working of Parliament and issues relating to MPs. This could easily have become a case of navel-gazing. However, the questions more often related to how MPs and Parliament could better serve the interests of constituents and how democracy could be improved. An example of this
was concern about how the e–petitions system could be made to work.

Another prominent theme revolved around a group of issues relating to equalities, women, families and children. In late October Charlie Elphicke (Dover) asked for a debate to highlight the work the Government was doing to increase the number of health visitors and support childcare. A number of Conservative MPs picked up on the Government's policies to help women and families including specific situations such as the importance of foundation years and early intervention for families struggling to bond with new babies. In December, Guy Opperman (Hexham) asked for a debate on equal pay for women in the context of his support for women in Northumberland who were fighting for equal pay with their local council whilst Karen Bradley (Staffordshire Moorlands) in December again returned to the importance of the Government's commitment to health visitors.

Education and health have also been prominent themes. A consistent request has been for a debate on the success of the Academies programme and Michael Gove's education reforms. These requests have been backed up by strong evidence from constituencies of how the reforms are working. Gavin Barwell (Croydon Central) at the end of October summed it up in a request for a debate on how the Government's education reforms are transforming the life chances of deprived children in his
constituency pointing to the improved results of local schools. Similarly, there has been genuine concern to welcome the increased investment in the NHS and to evidence the impact that is having on the ground with local GP support.

Business Questions may not normally have the media coverage of PMQs but its scope is just as broad. That makes it a telling pointer to where the heart of Conservative MPs really lies.

Helping small and medium-sized businesses

I set up my first small business after having been a partner in a major firm of accountants and consultants for a number of years. One day I was surrounded by sophisticated accounting and expenses systems, secretaries and administrative support; the next I had to do it all myself. I remember my then business partner and I going to our first sales pitch and ending up afterwards in a rural post office in Kent where the manager kindly let us have a table on which to stuff envelopes with our first mail shot and post them. Setting up your own business can be a lonely affair and it is nice when someone's on your side.

As this was the dark days of the last Labour Government, I knew that the then Government was not on my side. How much easier life would have been, for example, if the previous Government had been as serious about cutting red tape as is our current Government. The article by Business Minister, Mark Prisk, on Conservative Home pushes home this point http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2012/02/mark-prisk-mp.html Red tape not only costs cash; it costs time. That is something you do not have lots of when you are setting up your own business and when you need to keep your focus on winning new work.

For all businesses, of course, cash is king. Having experience of international trade, I set out to ensure that each year at least half our income was generated in foreign markets with which we were familiar, including the Middle East. Good prices; but perhaps with more difficult cash flow implications! To be fair, our bank was reasonably understanding at the time but something like the National Loan Guarantee Scheme would have helped. Under this scheme, the Government will allow participating banks to raise up to £20 billion of cheaper funding over the next two years under a Government guarantee provided that the lower cost of funding is passed on to small businesses.

Finding funding other than from the banks has always been a problem for small businesses. Schemes like the Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme which provides tax breaks on investments in early stage start-ups would have been something we would have seriously looked at to encourage venture capital and diversify rather than rely purely on bank loans.

If Government measures to help get money in to the business would have helped us, so would measures to limit the money going out. For many small businesses, business rates make up a significant chunk of expenditure. Doubling small business rate relief for two and a half years is a measure which I know from small businesses in my own constituency has brought real help. And when it comes to tax, a combination of the corporation tax cut for small businesses to 20%, the doubling of tax relief for entrepreneurs and the simplification of the tax system are all most welcome.

Whether you set up your own company or you chose the route of self-employment, this is not just about the Government encouraging growth and business for their own sake and that of the economy, important though they are. This is also about encouraging aspiration and helping those that wish the exciting challenge of living their dream through business to do so in the knowledge both that Government is on your side and that the Conservative Party has MPs who understand what you are going through because they have been there and done it.

Hosting Housing Association report launch

I hosted a reception in Parliament yesterday (31st January) to launch a report on the performance and efficiency of housing associations in England. The report, produced by the Chartered Institute of Housing, looks at how well-equipped the sector is to respond to change and how Housing Associations can deliver value for money.  South Oxfordshire's leading player in this field, SOHA, was a major contributor to the report. In 2009, SOHA was the first housing association to achieve a 3 star equivalent rating for Value for Money and Resident Involvement.

The regulator for social housing will shortly be producing a new regulatory standards framework for this sector and one result will be that there will be less monitoring from the centre and more powers given to tenants and their representatives to hold landlords to account. This mean there will more emphasis on value for money and the challenge of doing more for less.

I welcome the initiative of the Chartered Institute of Housing and all three providers involved in carrying out this study. Affordable Housing is a key issue for this constituency and I was glad to see this constructive approach to ensuring they deliver value for money. I am pleased that the new regulatory standards framework will give more power to tenants.

I was particularly pleased to be able to welcome SOHA to Parliament including the chairman of its Board, Carole Burchett, who is also a tenant. I have been pleased that SOHA has invested so much time in establishing good relations with its tenants and I have also been pleased to have been asked to be involved on a number of occasions.  What this report shows is that to get the best economies of scale you do not need to be a big, national housing association and that associations with the geographic concentratioin of SOHA can have an advantage in their closeness to their tenants."

In addition to changes in social housing regulation, the Government is committed to bringing about greater transparency within the Housing Association sector as a driver of efficiency and accountability.

Richard Peacock, SOHA's Chief Executive, commenting on the event said: "I was delighted that John hosted the launch of this important report. The government is right to challenge all housing providers to deliver value for money. Tenants expect high quality services and clear accountability. I'm pleased the report shows that Soha is delivering value for residents and that we are a good size to continue to remain an effective housing organisation based in the Oxfordshire community."

Engagements in 2011

As in the past, I have prepared an analysis of the engagements and activities I have undertaken in support of the constituency for the past year. In 2011 I undertook 254 engagements. These included almost 30 visits to schools or other educational organisations, over 20 visits to businesses or meetings with businesses, and over 20 meetings with charities and local councils.

MPs are based in Westminster Monday to Thursday. These types of activities are generally undertaken on constituency Fridays, and over weekends (especially for surgeries) as well as in the parliamentary recesses. The variety of these activities was wide in 2011 but a key compenent was my visit to 80 villages in the late summer in the course of 8 days – the most direct face-to-face engagement programme conducted by an MP in this constituency.

Trailblazing Thame

When I was wriritng Open Source Planning, the paper on which the Government's planning reforms are based, I had a firm belief that given the opportunity to shape where they live, local people would want to participate with confidence and would do so positively. What I heard on Wednesday when the planning minister, Rt Hon Greg Clark MP, and I came to listen to feedback in Thame on how its Neigbourhood Plan was coming together showed just how positive people were finding the whole experience.

Neighbourhood Plans are a key component of restoring local control over the planning process. They can make a big contribution to shaping the future of a local community and in Thame's case that means not losing its market-town character. Unlike the old-style parish and town plans Neighbourhood Plans become a formal part of the planning system.

Local residents who had been involved so far recognised the need to plan for the future of the town and they were setting about doing it with enthusiasm and with a long-term view. My experience has been that the fears from some developers that such plans would be NIMBY charters and used to frustrate development are being shown to be misplaced.

My congratulations to the Town Council for organising the feedback session. I believe that all of us who were there found the experience of great assistance. Thame is amongst the first in the process of putting a Neighbourhood Plan together – what the Government calls a frontrunner. After what I heard, the town's own description of themselves as a 'trailblazer' seemed perfectly appropriate.

Fears for local oak trees

Fears have been raised that oak woodland in the Henley constituency could soon be attacked by the Oak Processionary Moth. Its caterpillar attacks the leaves of oak trees and is a major source of leaf loss. The pest has spread widely in London, where it was only recently first discovered in the UK, and has proved difficult to control.  The moth is native to central and souhthern Europe but has spread north as far as Sweden arguably as a result of global warming. The caterpillars of the moth are covered with irritating hairs which contain toxins which can lead to skin irritation and allergic reactions in humans including respiratory problems.

The moth has already reached Pangbourne and has spread over an area of a kilometre around the village. Local MP, Alok Sharma, (Reading West) took up the challenge of dealing with this problem and sought my support and other local MPs in raising this issue with DEFRA Minister, Jim Paice and the Forestry Commission.

I am grateful to Alok Sharma for alerting us all to the problems this moth causes. The area in this constituency which is currently most at risk is Whitchurch due to its proximity to Pangbourne. A key priority therefore was to make sure that a large area centred on Whitchurch was properly surveyed to identify if the moth is present and where. I am pleased that the Whitchurch area will now as a result be included in the survey work being undertaken by the Forestry Commission in June this year.

The meeting with the Minister reviewed the spread of the pest and its impact, including the financial impact on property owners. Property owners will still be responsible for treating infected trees in 2012 – and possibly neighbouring trees if these are considered at risk. It also reviewed plans to eradicate the pest with further treatment of infected trees in spring 2012.

A key part of the programme of eradication is to understand which trees are infected and how extensive the spread of the moth has become. Although Whitchurch was not originally a priority for the Forestry Commission's programme because it was considered to be too far from the Pangbourne outbreak, as a result of our lobbying the area will now be surveyed. It is essential to me to ensure that this pest does not cross the river. I am glad that the Forestry Commission has accepted that Whitchurch should be comprehensively surveyed as early as possible.

Picture provided courtesy of the Forestry Commission

SODC and the planning inspectorate

A number of constituents who live in my constituency but near Wallingford have written to me to question the powers of the planning inspector appointed to examine SODC's Core Strategy simply to change the plan.  Under the existing law introduced by the last Government that is exactly the power planning inspectors have and it is yet another good example of why the previous planning system was broken.

Constituents have rightly asked where does such a power leave localism. Such a power does not fit with localism which is why the Government has abolished it in the Localism Act.

Under the old legislation, the inspector produced a report determining whether or not the plan was suitable for adoption i.e. to use the technical jargon was it 'sound'. The inspector was able to recommend modifications to the draft document. The local planning authority was bound to implement the inspector's recommendations.

Under the new legislation, there will still be a public examination of a local plan under a planning inspector to ensure that it is sound (but using different tests) e.g. does the plan comply with national planning policy. A Council will not be able to adopt an unsound plan.  However, the local council alone will have the power to ask the inspector for recommendations as to how the plan may be changed if he or she thinks it might be found unsound and which would make the document suitable for adoption. If the local council does not make this request, the inspector will be unable to recommend any changes.

In addition, local councils do not have to implement inspectors' recommendations. Where the inspector thinks the plan is unsound, the council will be able to make its own modifications and re-submit the draft document to the inspector for examination.

Although the Localism Act has now received Royal Assent, its provisions come into force at different times. This reform came into effect during January 2012.

Capping benefits

The New Year has started with a row in the House of Lords over the Government's Welfare Reform Bill and changes to the benefits system. This is a subject on which I get a steady flow of e mails from local residents. There is a genuine sense of unfairness that the welfare system has been left in such a mess by Labour, with too many people better off out of work and on benefits than if they entered the world of work. This area itself does not have large numbers on out of work benefits. The percentage on these benefits in South Oxfordshire is half the average for the South East. However, nationally, 5 million are on such benefits and almost 2 million children live in homes where nobody works.

People see it as not fair that benefit claimants can receive higher incomes than families who are in work. I agree. That's why the Government wants to introduce a cap on benefits – so that no family can get more on benefits than the average family does by going out to work. That average and the amount of the cap is £26,000 per household per year.

It is important that in fixing this broken system we look after the really needy and vulnerable. The benefit cap will not affect the disabled or those who work and receive working tax credits. There is no reason for anyone to be made homeless by these reforms when they can still receive the equivalent in benefits that someone in work would have to earn £35,000 a year to make.

The Government's reforms are popular because they are right. One poll showed 76% approval for a cap. Even the Independent newspaper agreed. It asked why the people can recognise fairness when they see it, but those who oppose the cap cannot.  Former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, is quoted as saying that the current welfare system encourages fecklessness and irresponsibility.  In a national newspaper he is quoted as saying that Britian's public debt was the greatest moral scandal we face and that unless we get the defcit under control and start paying back the debt we would be mortgaging the future of our children and grandchildren.

There has to be a limit on the amount of money benefit claimants can receive. I think that limit is set at a fair rate of £26,000 – the equivalent to someone earning £35,000 before tax, a salary that many working families would be happy to receive.

Ed Miliband has fallen at the first hurdle and failed this key test of leadership and credibility. He promised to 'take the tough decisions' on reforming welfare and claimed that he supported the cap. But his party in the Lords backed an amendment that would wreck the cap. His tough words have been exposed as just posturing from a weak leader.

New Year Message

This message first appeared in the Oxfordshire Guardian in January 2012

Let me start by wishing everyone a peaceful and prosperous 2012. I also want especially to thank all those who have worked so hard for the many charities and voluntary organisations which make Oxfordshire such a good place to live and work. It has been a great pleasure to meet so many of you and to share a little in the work you do.

Whether you are sportingly inclined or not, the Olympics this year will be a major focus of attention and one which I hope we can all enjoy. I hope too that we will enjoy the benefits of the tourism the games will undoubtedly bring. It's also the Queens Jubilee – a key national celebration and a chance to celebrate a monarch who has given so much to this country. So, Britain will be on show to the world with a great opportunity to say 'come and invest here'.

Many of last year's issues remain and the continuing crisis in the Eurozone continues to exercise a big influence. These are and will remain difficult times with real fears and apprehension for the future. But it is worth remembering five important facts. First, in the first nine months of last year, the UK economy grew faster than the US economy. Second, since the general election, the private sector has created over half a million extra jobs. Thirdly, over the past year businesses have invested £119 billion across the economy, up £3 billion on the year before. Fourthly, our borrowing costs have fallen to record lows, and, lastly, Britain's credit rating has been restored to its previous highest possible level. Closer to home, in my own constituency, unemployment fell during the year including youth unemployment which benefitted from some of the 442,700 apprenticeship starts over the course of the 2011 academic year.

None of this is a reason for complacency but it is a reason for sticking to the path of restoring the economy and for focusing on those most in need of help and on helping working families make ends meet.

Local unemployment figures

The number of unemployed in the Henley constituency has fallen.

Figures released this month for October 2011 show that the number of unemployed claimants has fallen by 55 and now stands at 660. That is 55 lower than September 2011 and 68 lower than this time last year.There are only three other constituencies in the country which have performed better.

Throughout the year, there has been a downward trend in the number unemployed within the constituency. The figures show that unemployment in the constituency increased from 2006 to 2010 but has fallen back since the general election.

I welcome the fall in unemployment within the constituency. Some 80% of our local economy comes from the private sector. We need to make sure therefore that we continue to support and encourage our local businesses to help deliver the growth the economy needs.

Although this area has one of the highest proportions of degree educated people in the country, there is of course no reason for complacency here. We need to recognise the impact that unemployment has on individuals and their families. However, it is particularly encouraging to see that youth unemployment (those under 24) has fallen by 17% over the year in this constituency.

The role of an MP and Europe postscript

In a representative democracy the purpose of government and of an MP is to serve the best interests of the nation and of constituents based on judgement not on ephemeral opinion polls.  His or her role is not to represent constituents' views since there are always mutually contradictory views on any one issue.  However much we may all be disillusioined with the EU, the confused, ill-considered and opportunistic proposal for an EU referendum cannot be described as in the nation's best interests.

Opinion polls cannot tell us whether those who answer the question have given the issue any serious thought before the question was put. In addition, answers are often led by the nature of the question itself. Change the wording of the question and you get a different answer. Most importantly, opinion polls do not provide any context for how strongly an answer is felt or what priority the respondent gives to it.

Recent on-line campaigns are no better. Modern technology makes it all too easy to send an e mail at the press of a button with little thought given to the issue. How seriously for example am I to take campaign e mails which begin with the salutation "Dear [INSERT THE NAME OF YOUR MP]" and end with "Regards [INSERT YOUR OWN NAME]". Either way, this does not suggest a lot of thought was given to the subject or to the e mail before the button was pressed.

It's not just electronic communications. My office recently received complaints from constituents that I had written to them about an issue on which there had been a major campaign. They claimed not to have asked me for a response. As we had to point out, the petition they had signed clearly asked for just that in black and white.

It is only a year and a half since I and my party stood for election on a credible and achievable European policy which we have been successfully implementing to stop any more powers going to Brussels without the agreement of the British people and to bring existing powers back. This policy was set out in a manifesto for which 11 million people voted and which did not include an in-out referendum.

Europe is of course an important issue. Some, however, see it as the all-defining issue of our age. I do not; the defining issue is restoring the health of our economy. Those in the former group often seem to be unable to recognise that their view is not widely shared. So, they instead resort to threats or seek to question the motivation for an MP's voting record. One constituent even threatened to have me guillotined publicly – a threat in which the irony of a Eurosceptic recommending a European means of execution seemed totally to have escaped him

I am always interested in my constituents' opinions even when I do not agree with them. They can help me in forming a judgement. However, representing people does not mean simply doing what they say. An MP is not a mere delegate to be mandated by them to vote in a particular way. As Edmund Burke established as long ago as 1774 an MP is there to use his or her own judgement.

And who are the 'they' anyway? Are those who wrote to  me really suggesting that I should rely on guidance solely from the 0.1% of voters who contacted me about Europe? This is a difficult proposition anyway since many of that 0.1% were against a referendum, not for it. In addition, what weight am I to give to the views of the 99.9% who did not feel the urge to write or e mail?

I do not wish to belittle the strongly held views of extreme Eurosceptics. I share many of their frustrations with Europe. But one needs too to retain some perspective. Constituents here are not shy in contacting me; they do so by the many thousands each year. Yet I had over twice as many e mails about the fate of Anne the Circus Elephant and the conditions in which hens and cows are kept than I did on Europe.

An EU referendum

A small number of constituents have contacted me regarding today's vote on whether we should hold a referendum to decide if we stay in or leave the European Union. Let me set out my position.

It is less than a year and a half since I stood for election on a manifesto which set out a very clear policy on Europe and which we have been implementing. It did not include an in/out referendum.

Some people believe that the party committed itself to a referendum in the last Parliament. All three parties said, in the 2005 Election, that there should be a referendum before the Lisbon Treaty was ratified. Sadly, that commitment was not honoured by Labour, despite the Conservative Party voting for it. The Treaty was ratified by the last Government and a referendum on it now would serve no purpose.

That is why we said in our manifesto that "Labour's ratification of the Lisbon Treaty without the consent of the British people has been a betrayal of this country's democratic traditions. In government, we will put in place a number of measures to make sure this shameful episode can never happen again." That is what we have been doing.

We have also begun the task of repatriating powers back to the UK; for example, withdrawing from participation in the bail-out mechanism. And, we have introduced a referendum lock on any more powers being transferred to Brussels.

I and other Conservative MPs were elected on the basis of that manifesto which was supported by almost 11 million people across the UK. It would be grossly undemocratic to simply rip up those manifesto pledges in pursuit of an opportunistic referendum. Whilst Europe and our membership of it is an important issue, I see no logical case as to why membership of the EU should be singled out at this time over other policy issues of equal and greater weight for an exclusive referendum.

The national interest is for Britain to be in Europe, not run by Europe. That is why Conservatives want to get more powers back from Brussels to Britain, particularly over social and employment legislation.

There is no doubt that the EU needs reform; I have been arguing that for 20 years. But, I firmly believe that the benefits of UK membership outweigh the costs, and that our prosperity and standing in the world would be seriously damaged if we were to leave, particularly given the current state of the world economy.

An estimated forty per cent of our exports are to other countries within the EU. If we left, while we could still trade, we would have no influence over the rules governing our largest overseas markets. There is also no doubt that, where EU states can agree to work together, we become a far more powerful force diplomatically in a world which is getting more dangerous, not less. Above all right now, UK businesses need certainty so they can invest to generate growth in our economy and the financial markets need confidence in our future – the potential that we might have to leave the EU as a result of a referendum could have a disastrous impact on jobs and interest rates.

Having said this, we do need to ensure that we curtail, and in some cases, reverse the movement of power from Westminster to Brussels. In its first year of office, the Coalition Government passed an extremely important law to prevent any further transfer of powers to Brussels without a referendum. This was a major milestone in our relationship with the EU, ending once and for all the creeping powers of Brussels. The Foreign Secretary, William Hague, who was himself at the heart of the campaign to keep the pound and prevent the UK joining the single currency, has already said that we will look for opportunities to repatriate powers as part of any substantive change to the EU treaty. We are also working hard to ensure that regulations emanating from Brussels are implemented minimally without being gold-plated by government departments.

I recognise that a number of people feel very strongly about the EU and I understand the views of those who may believe we should leave. But, after careful consideration of what is in the best interests of the British people, in my judgement, now is not the time for the uncertainty, cost and disruption of such a referendum. This is consistent with the position I took at the last general Election, when neither I nor my Party made a commitment to an "In or Out" referendum.

Nor is it clear what the three-way proposed referendum would achieve - 40% could vote to come out, 30% to stay in and 30% to renegotiate. What would that mean?

For the first time this Government has introduced a referendum lock which means that any transfer of powers from Britain to Brussels would require the approval of the British people in a referendum. This is a deliverable step forward in a new relationship with Europe.

Village Tour Success

My tour of 80 of the smaller villages in the constituency which finished on Friday 30 September was a great success. The tour, which was branded under the title of 'On Your Doorstep' took me from one end of the constituency on the edge of Bicester to the other where it borders Reading. The tour allowed residents in each of the villages at which I stopped the chance to raise local and national concerns face-to-face and provided an innovatory way of allowing access to me not previously seen in the constituency.

There were many reasons for putting this tour together. It was a way of trying to rebuild trust in politics by coming to discuss issues directly with local people where they lived. It was also a way of getting to know people in some of the smaller villages in the constituency where there often isn't an opportunity in the rest of the year to join in local village events. It was also a chance for people to put a face to a name.

I was immensely pleased that so many people come out to meet me. Sometimes we stood around under a shady tree to discuss issues on other occasions we were able to make use of tables outside the local village pub. The informal and relaxed nature of the meetings meant that we were able to have a constructive and friendly dicussion even where we might sometimes take differing views on a topic. This was the first time an MP had tried such a tour in this constituency. It was very worthwhile and I will certainly look to repeat this next year.

The tour covered almost 350 miles. It visited 80 villages spread over 8 days At each village the MP had up to 15 minutes to meet local residents and discuss issues. Residents had been notified in advance either through local district or parish councillors or by local leafleting. The numbers at each stop varyed between 1 or 2 to as many as 15.

Amongst the issues raised were access to broadband, affordable housing, neighbourhood plans, traffic claming, immigration, the European Union, pubs, daylight saving and travellers.

To find out which villages I visited, go to the map page on this web-site and click on the red marker pins.

Political resolve

At the beginning of the week, the Chancellor and the Communities Secretary set out clearly the Government's commitment to planning reform. In an article in the Financial Times they said: "No one should underestimate our determination to win this battle. We will fight for jobs, prosperity and the right protection for our countryside."

They went on to say that "sticking with the old failed system puts at risk young people's future prosperity and quality of life" reminding us that the debate over planning is much more than a technical one; it is at the heart of delivering the prosperity the country needs. The notion that this represents growth at all costs is wrong. There is no contradiction between increased levels of development and protecting and enhancing the environment, as long as development is planned and undertaken responsibly. That is after all what planning is all about. The planning system must play an active role in guiding development to sustainable solutions.

Our approach to planning is straightforward. It is based squarely on giving local people a greater say over future development and putting sustainability at the heart of the planning system. Our reforms are neither a NIMBY charter nor a green light for all development.

This simple message has been well understood by those developers who have recognised that the old ways of taking forward a development project will need to be replaced by collaboration with local communities. Communities understand this message too as is shown by their enthusiasm for producing neighbourhood plans to help shape the areas in which they live.

We need to plan positively for the future and in a way which encourages growth. At the same time we need to preserve our heritage and to protect Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, National Parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest and the Green Belt. That is what the proposed National Planning Policy Framework with its presumption in favour of sustainable development does.

We will get nowhere by pretending that the current planning system is neither broken nor an impediment to enterprise. It is self-evident to those who have recently tried to use the system. Reforming a slow, inefficient, costly and confrontational system is good news for us all and it is why the Government remains committed to reform.

The presumption in favour of sustainable development

This article first appeared on ConservativeHome on 4 September 2011

There is no necessary contradiction between increased levels of development and protecting and enhancing the environment, as long as development is planned and undertaken responsibly. Providing for the future needs of our communities is, after all, what planning is all about. The planning system must play an active role in guiding development to sustainable solutions. Our approach to planning is based squarely on giving local people a greater say over future development and putting sustainability at the heart of the planning system.

Planning positively for the future and in a way which encourages growth is essential if we are to deal with the economic mess left behind by Labour. At the same time, we need to preserve our heritage and to protect Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, National Parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest and the Green Belt. One of the key ways of doing this is by including within the new National Planning Policy Framework a presumption in favour of sustainable development. So what does the presumption do?

First, the presumption is a tool for helping put sustainable plans together; not for determining each and every application. In practical terms the presumption means that where a proposal does not give rise to problems it should be approved promptly. The local plan sets out what is and is not acceptable and remains at the heart of the planning system. The new rules do not shift power to developers; they shift power to local people.

Local planning committees will therefore still be able to reject applications which are not in accordance with their local plan, and local plans will not be able to provide for development which would significantly and demonstrably cause harm. Local councils will still be able to prioritise the use of brownfield sites. Indeed the Framework already encourages them to produce plans by using natural resources prudently and enabling the re-use of existing resources.

Secondly, the presumption puts sustainability at the heart of planning policy. That means that plans should ensure that they promote development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Many will recognise that these words reflect those of the Bruntland Commission's internationally recognised definition of sustainability.

Putting flesh on this definition is achieved by ensuring that plans are based on a solid evidence base and that they consciously reflect an appropriate local balance between environmental, social and economic needs. Organisations that recognise this have already volunteered to help shape appropriate best practice to help councils use the evidence base in this way.

However, it is clear that for some environmentalists and countryside organisations the problem is not the Framework but their lack of faith in being able to make the Brundtland definition of sustainabiity practical. This is an astonishing counsel of despair and is one which surely undermines the very purpose of why these organisations exist.

The many organisations which support the Framework and those neighbourhoods which have enthusiastically come forward to be front runners in putting Neighbourhood Plans together clearly do not share this pessimism. They recognise that we need to encourage the economic growth and private sector job creation on which our prosperity depends. They recognise too that the Framework continues protection for heritage and for the environment but that, in other areas, it is right that local councils decide where to locate development when they draw up their plans – subject to meeting environmental safeguards.

The current planning system is not just cumbersome and confrontational; it is broken. That is what well over 100 organisations (including environmentalists) told me when I was writing Open Source Planning, the paper on which our reforms are based. We are fixing this broken system by simplifying planning in a way that promotes sustainable growth, protects the environment and places local people back in charge of their own communities

Travellers

The issue of travellers and Dale Farm in Essex has once again raised the treatment of the travelling community. The following article was submitted to the Oxford Mail for 3 September 2011.

We all recognise that there is concern over the current planning rules for traveller sites. As part of our commitment to sustainable development it remains very important that local authorities continue to plan for the future of their communities including travellers. Local authorities are best placed to determine how to meet their housing needs, including traveller site provision, and it is for local councils to determine the level, location and type of provision in their areas.

Local authorities need to provide appropriate sites for travellers in consultation with local communities. What we want to see are appropriate sites in appropriate places. To that end the Government published draft new planning policy for traveller sites for consultation last April. The consultation closed last month and a new policy is expected shortly.

Councils will be given incentives through the New Homes Bonus scheme to deliver new housing, including traveller sites. We have secured £60m funding to help councils and other registered providers build new traveller sites. But private provision is a key element of supply.

Although local authorities have a range of powers to tackle unauthorised developments we recognise enforcement remains a problem. That is why we have brought forward a range of measures in the Localism Bill to increase the powers that local authorities have to enforce against breaches of planning control and to limit the opportunities for retrospective planning applications in relation to any form of unauthorised development.

Like the rest of the population, the majority of travellers are law-abiding citizens and they should have the same chance of having a safe place to live and bring up their children. But we should not tolerate unauthorised development by anyone.

Why fame is not a good thing.

Thame's fame has recently reached the pages of national newspapers. It is sad that the reason for this is a muddled attempt to stir up renewed trouble over planning just at a time when we are reaching a solution as to how development in the town is going to be tackled and what the input of local residents should be.

Ending Labur's top-down planning system

The issues over development which Thame currently faces stem directly from Labour's system of top-down targets and which our planning reforms remove. Local residents and the council are still prisoners of John Prescott's old regional stratgies and housing numbers. It is taking an Act of Parliament finally to kill off these targets but that is exactly what the Localism Bill, nearing the end of its passage through Parliament, does.

The power of localism is on its way to Thame and the town has an opportunity to play an unprecedented role in shaping its future through neighbourhood planning. Far from taking a disdainful approach to our reforms, Thame is grabbing this opportunity with both hands and has applied to be a frontrunner in producing a Neighbourhood Plan, a move which as its MP I fully support. These Plans provide an opportunity for communities like Thame to have a say in the future in a way which the current system never did and which will make the Plans a formal part of the planning system, ensuring that local voices have to be taken into account.

However, the roots of Labour's top-down planning system have burrowed deep across Government. Enabling localism to flourish in practice has required a new Bill – the Localism Bill – and a major change to the way in which planning policy is delivered. Both of these are on course to start delivering next year.

Opening up planning to local residents and their councils

Planning positively for the future and in a way which encourages growth is essential if we are to deal with the economic mess left behind by Labour. At the same time we need to preserve our heritage and we will continue to protect Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, National Parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest and the Green Belt. Our approach to planning is based squarely on giving local people a greater say over future development and putting sustainability at the heart of the planning system.

The sheer complexity of the current planning rules makes them inaccessible for local residents. England's existing national planning policy is now over 1,000 pages long. Then there are the vast volumes of Regional Strategy documentation created under the last Government – in addition to councils' own Local Plans. The planning regime has increasingly become the preserve of lawyers and pressure groups, rather than local communities.

We wish to condense these 1,000 pages of complex guidance down to a succinct 52 page policy document, called the National Planning Policy Framework. This has been published for public consultation and I urge you to read it. It can be found at:

www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/draftframeworksummary

Our reforms put sustainability at the heart of the system

Although the draft has been warmly welcomed by very many groups, some bodies have suggested that it is a green light for all development. This is wrong. The Framework is about making existing policy simpler and more accessible whilst retaining the protections on which we have come to rely. Let me reiterate that the Framework continues protection for heritage; it makes no change to designations such as Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, National Parks and Sites of Special Scientific Interest; and, it continues to preserve the Green Belt. In other areas, local councils will decide where to locate development when they draw up their plans – subject to meeting environmental safeguards. As well as protecting the greenbelt, the Framework provides a new designation for councils to protect valued green space which is outside nationally protected areas.

But we also need to provide for the future needs of our communities – that is, after all, what planning is all about. We need to look at how we encourage the economic growth and private sector job creation on which our prosperity depends. Thus, one of the key changes in the new Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development. The presumption means that where a proposal does not give rise to problems it should be approved promptly. The local plan sets out what is and is not acceptable and remains at the heart of the planning system.

This is not a free-for-all. The system is led by the local plan

The presumption in favour of sustainable development is not a free-for-all for developers. It is a way of ensuring that local plans are evidence-based and that they establish locally a proper balance between environmental, social and economic factors. It is also a way of ensuring that we promote development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

Some such as the CPRE have chosen to mis-interpret all this as an attack on the countryside and as going for growth at all costs to the detriment of the environment. This is not so. The fact is that there is no necessary contradiction between increased levels of development and protecting and enhancing the environment, as long as development is planned and undertaken responsibly. The planning system must play an active role in guiding development to sustainable solutions.

Local planning committees will still be able to reject applications which are not in accordance with their local plan, and local plans will not be able to provide for development which would significantly and demonstrably cause harm. Local councils will still be able to prioritise the use of brownfield sites. Indeed the Framework encourages them to produce plans by using natural resources prudently and enabling the re-use of existing resources.

The current system is broken and has failed us

The current planning system does not do this. It is not just cumbersome and confrontational; it is broken. It lost its balance years ago. That is exactly what the people of Thame and the district council found out when putting the current core stratgey together. Labour's old planning system failed them just as it failed to stop plans to build on the green belt in 30 places around the country including outside Oxford; plans we are now finally killing off.

This perspective of the old planning system is not just mine. It was shared by well over 100 organisations (including environmentalists) that I consulted when I was writing Open Source Planning, the paper on which our reforms are based. So what do sensible commentators make of our proposed new system? Professor Sir Peter Hall, one of our leading academic planners, summed up our reforms thus: "revolutionary? Only in reaction to a planning system that has become steadily more dysfunctional."

I cannot help feeling that the hysteria which organisations like the CPRE are trying to generate is mainly due to the fact that they are afraid of change to a system which they will no longer be able to control because it puts trust and knowledge firmly in the hands of local people. We are fixing this broken system by simplifying planning in a way that promotes sustainable growth, protects the environment and places local people back in charge of their own communities

Conscription is not the answer

A return to military conscription has been suggested by some who have written to me since the riots as the solution to the problem. I understand where those who have suggested this are coming from.  Like the Jesuit claim "give me a child for his first seven years and I'll give you the man", conscription is expected to mould an indivdual early enough to affect subsequenl behaviour based on exposure to obedience and discipline. It's an attractive idea but I am afraid it's also wrong.

Recent international research[1,] in a situation where you can compare contemporary groups who were and were not conscripted, shows clearly how conscription actually increases the likelihood of developing a criminal record in adult life. It is worse where conscription starts at 18 rather than 21 and the longer the time spent conscripted. Much of this is down to economic reasons and the reduced or delayed job prospects amongst those conscripted. Not for nothing did Margaret Thatcher's favourite economist, Milton Friedman, oppose conscription. One thing that does, however, seem to work is an additional year of schooling.[2]

The Prime Minister is right that what we need are short periods of non-military service that capture notions of team-work, discipline, duty, and decency. National Citizen Service npw provides this to thousands of young people in the UK. Extending it to all 16 year olds is based on experience not instant reaction.

So far, of those that have appeared before the courts because of the riots, 20% have been juveniles. 80% have been adults, many but by no means all of them young adults. That is why the Prime Minister is also right to stress that the solution lies in a range of policy across Government from education to welfare not just youth policy. It lies in mending our broken society.

As a postscript, let us remember that many 'peacetime' British conscripts lost their lives in action and about 150 commited suicide. It wasn't the answer for everyone. Two of conscription's most famous alumni, after all, went on to terrorise London's east end. They were the Kray twins.

[1] "Conscription and Crime: Evidence from the Argentine Draft Lottery" Galiani Sebastian, Martin Rossi and Ernesto Schargrodsky 2010, FEEM Working Paper No. 55.2010

[2] "The Effect of Education on Crime: Evidence from Prison Inmates, Arrests, and Self-Reports." Lochner, Lance and Enrico Moretti, 2004, American Economic Review 94(1), 155-189.

Growth and the North-South divide

Two constituents originally from the North-West complained to me recently that the Government had not yet abolished the North-South divide. I explained that the whole country needs to generate the growth required to clear up the economic mess left by Labour. One way was by stimulating growth and providing substantial private sector jobs which is what the Government's Regional Growth Fund of £1.4 billion is about. The new Enterprise Zones just announced move us away from over-reliance on the City and stimulate growth in all parts of the country. However, all of this is only going to be successful if it is sustainable. That is why the infrastructure required to support growth should not continue to lock it in to the South East.

Governments have always been criticised for never investing in infrastructure. Now, for the first time, we have a Government which has a national infrastructure plan and a desire to see the country operate without an artificial divide at Watford Gap. This is of course just what residents of the South-East have always wanted too. Many surveys have highlighted local fears that the South East is sinking, metaphorically, under its own weight and that congestion, overcrowding, environmental degradation and hostility to development are the signs of this. A different picture is painted by those in the North East. So there ought to be wide support for projects which ensure the north can participate in growth.

However, whatever anyone might feel about the specific details of a project it is sad that protest today too often exchanges proper debate for raw emotion. The Forests, NHS, and BSkyB campaigns were all too willing to abandon rational argument. Those attacking HS2 should make sure they don't fall into this trap. It is wrong to caricature HS2 as being about a quicker ride to Birmingham rather than the broader need to spread growth.

£3.75 billion of cash savings in just ten months

I welcome the news that Government has made £3.75 billion of cash savings in just the ten months from May 2010 to March 2011. Last year my colleague, Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude, promised to leave 'no stone unturned' in the hunt for savings from central Government spending. The Government has done just that to save billions of pounds of taxpayer money.

The money saved includes:

• £870 million saved by cutting spending on consultants
• Nearly £500 million by spending less on temporary agency staff
• £800 million saved by negotiating better deals with suppliers
• £300 million saved from IT projects
• £90 million saved by better monitoring the properties Government rents
• £400 million saved from marketing.

This Government has managed to save a staggering £3.75 billion of taxpayer's money simply by slashing the waste that Labour allowed to spiral out of control. People across the constituency will be shocked to learn of how much fat we cut just by doing sensible things like not renting unnecessary buildings, scrapping wasteful IT projects, negotiating better deals from suppliers and reducing spending on advertising and consultants.

The amount saved in just 10 months equals more than £225 of taxes for every working household in this constituency. It is always right that money should be spent where it's needed rather than simply frittered away, so I'm both pleased and relieved that these important savings mark the beginning of a new ethos in Whitehall.

The riots

I was glad that Parliament was recalled for a day on Thursday: I returned to Parliament myself. I completely condemn the scenes of riot and looting that we have seen on our television screens and in our communities. This is criminality, pure and simple which needs, as the Prime Minister made clear, to be firmly put down.

Responsibility for crime always lies with the criminal. But crime has a context and we must not shy away from confronting this. We have already put emphasis on how Britain has become a broken society. It is why in the first session of this new Parliament we have not only tackled the problems of the economic and financial mess left to us but also addressed deep-seated problems such as welfare dependency.

Whilst there is much on which we can all take a welcome consensual approach it was a shame that, in closing the debate, Labour could not agree with the nature of the problem.  What they said was  that they did not think any part of this country was sick or broken.

There has been no better example of our broken society than the riots of the last week. Of course it is true that we also saw some outstanding examples of bravery and community spirit in the aftermath of the riots. But these do not prove that society is not broken. They prove that there is enough decency left in society to give us hope that the problem can be fixed.

Like many MPs, I am sure, I have had e mails over the last week blaming the riots on anything from the lack of corporal and capital punishment, to the lack of military service experience, the Human Rights Act, soft sentencing, a conspiracy by the liberal intelligentia, cuts which have not yet taken effect, the absence of martial law and even our membership of the EU. It is an eclectic group of 'causes' all perhaps sharing a rather specific perspective.

The truth is that the Prime Minister is right when he says that a major problem in our society is children growing up without knowing the difference between right and wrong and a culture that glorifies violence. We do need more discipline in our schools, action to deal with the most disruptive families and a criminal justice system that scores a clear, heavy line between right and wrong.

But at the heart of violence sits street gangs. We must use the record of success against gangs from cities such as Boston in the USA and Strathclyde in Scotland and this must be a national priority.

Many of the criminals we have seen on the streets are young teenagers but by no means all. Many were adults who should have known better and set appalling examples of behaviour. While parents have a responsibility to ask themselves the question "where is my child tonight?", I hope that one good thing that will come out of this is that young people will realise that 'politics' is not something to be left to others and that they will join with me in asking how we can help shape the way forward.

First caricature of Henley MP

Artist Gary Barker has produced the first known caricature of me in the Estates Gazette.  Printed here by permission, the picture shows me wielding the axe against Labour's planning targets.

Boost to local pubs

I have enthusiastically backed a Government review intended to help local pubs. The Government on 2 August launched a review of restrictive covenants, a legal clause that can be used to prevent community pubs reopening as public houses following a sale. In just 5 years between 2004 and 2009 some 572 pubs are believed to have been permanently lost following a sale with a restrictive covenant, potentially depriving thousands of regulars of an important community asset.  Covenants can have a double whammy effect, not only taking away a vital community hub but also preventing local people from being able to step in and revive their 'local' as a community-run asset. By changing the use of certain restrictive covenants, communities would be given greater opportunities to use the new 'Community Right to Buy' power in the Localism Bill, which gives local communities the chance to take over and run much-loved local assets, such as the 'local', when they come up for sale

Pubs are hubs of community life, as important to the local social scene as they are to the local economy. That I think has been a very clear message from the Henley Standard's Drink Local campaign. But time is being called at too many of our 'locals', depriving people of treasured places to get together in the community. We are putting the people back in charge, giving them the power to step in and save their much-loved community assets. By reviewing this restrictive red tape we will enable people to use their collective powers to ensure that their locals remain local and continue to thrive at the heart of every community'.

To further support thriving community pubs, the Government has introduced a more generous small business rate relief scheme, to help half a million small firms. For two years from October 2010, small firms will receive 100 per cent rate relief (i.e. pay no business rates at all) on properties up to £6,000 Rateable Value, and a tapered rate relief from £6,000 to £12,000. An estimated 330,000 small firms will pay no rates at all .

Letter published in The Times

This letter was published in The Times on 9 August 2011

Sir,

I can assure you, as the principal author of Open Source Planning, there is no threat to the Green Belt from the Government's planning reforms.

One of the main reasons for a National Planning Policy Framework is to ensure that Green Belt, AONB and other environmental features such as ancient woodland have consistent, national protection.

Under our reforms local communities and their councils will have unparalleled power to plan where development should or should not go, free from the straight-jacket of Labour's regional plans which threatened to concrete over the Green Belt in more than thirty places. They will too have the chance to designate as protected areas local green spaces which are important to them.

There is no green light for all development. Plans must meet strict sustainability criteria which set a balance local people think is appropriate between environmental, social and economic factors. The campaign against our reforms misses the point that local communities are best placed to take decisions on planning and that the NPPF supports them by giving a national framework for protection and enhancement of the environment and cultural assets.

The Framework is important for enabling neighbourhood planning. CPRE, in fact, is helping to implement this key reform under a Government contract.

A look back at the last three years

This article was first published in the Estates Gazette on 30 July

It is almost three years since I was invited to provide a blueprint for the reform of the planning system to sit alongside two earlier papers produced by the Conservative Party before the General Election on localism and housing. The result was Open Source Planning.

Taken together, the three papers set out a comprehensive picture of the measures an incoming Conservative Government would take to reform the planning and housing sectors. Open Source Planning was singled out in the Coalition Agreement post-election as providing the principles for planning reform in the programme of the new Coalition Government..

A consensual approach

From the very beginning our approach has been consensual. As part of the preparation of Open Source Planning I had discussions with well over 100 organisations which habitually used the planning system. The consistent theme amongst them was that the planning system was broken. There was also recognition that we had captured the mood and experience of best practice in wanting to see local residents as part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

Some got what we were trying to achieve straight away. Author and planning consultant, Nigel Moor, wrote at the time that what we were proposing was a truly radical approach and one which would be a definite improvement on the current system. In a now famous side-swipe at his own profession he described opponents of the proposed reforms as being "like unreformed Stalinists [who] bemoan the loss of housing targets, unreflective of the failure of Labour's regional spatial strategies to actually deliver the housing needed."

Enthusiasm and co-operation

Three years later continued engagement with the industry has been immensely helpful in refining our ideas. By and large even Nigel Moor's Stalinists have become collaborators and many, many more have gone further and become active partners in helping us get it right. Indeed, the reaction has increasingly been enthusiastic. The Sounding Board of regular users of the planning system which was set up by the Conservative Party in opposition and which I chair has gone on to produce valuable research into, for example, neighborhood planning around the world whilst a group of planning practitioners, widely drawn from a variety of disciplines, themselves produced their own draft of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) in order to help engage industry thinking on planning policy.

For me, of course, it has been a huge privilege to have been involved in taking a set of radical proposals from the drawing board through to legislation. The job is not yet finished but the Localism Bill is expected to receive royal assent later this year and the Government's consultation draft of the NPPF is on track for publication in the summer.

The principles of my paper shine through

Throughout this process, the principles of Open Source Planning have continued to shine through – in particular, Open Source Planning's emphasis on growth. The very first page makes it clear that we need a transformed planning system in order to get the investment and growth we require. Indeed, the same paper introduced the concept of a Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development as the golden thread running throughout the reformed planning system. The emphasis on delivering growth in a balanced and sustainable way has been there from the beginning.

The paper goes on to say that only a localist approach is like to achieve this. Without reform, growth "would be hampered and possibly crippled, because today's centralised, bureaucratic planning system gives local communities little option but to rebel against Whitehall and regional diktats and, all too often, against the notion of development itself."" That view remains central to our planning reforms today.

Removing central and regional housing targets and the Regional Spatial Strategies is key to this but so too is their replacement with powerful incentives such as the New Homes Bonus and the introduction of neighbourhood plans.

A major driver of reform has been to make planning accessible in order to engage the many. The publication of the Government's draft of the NPPF will hopefully be the model of clarity and succinctness for which Open Source Planning called.

Some of Nigel Moor's Stalinists may still be around but I have been impressed how developers have moved quickly to change their own culture to embrace the new system in order to gain competitive advantage. Those initial meetings with users of the planning system now seem a world ago.

The case for international aid

An article written for publication in July 2011

The revelations of serious wrong-doing within News International and the police may have dominated parliamentary proceedings before the summer Recess, but they have not been the only issues of concern. There is widespread fear that the crisis in the Eurozone will spiral out of control damaging economies which are not in the euro as well as those that are. Further afield, the famine and humanitarian disaster in Somalia has once again focused attention on foreign aid.

Whilst charity might begin at home it should not end there and I am proud that we are leading the way in the Horn of Africa in dealing with the appalling suffering being experienced by millions of Somali people.

Judging from my postbag, there is a strong feeling in the constituency that there is a moral need to provide international aid even in tough economic times at home. 0.7% of national income is not too high a price to pay for saving the lives of the poorest people in the poorest countries and for helping stop the rise of the Afghanistans of tomorrow.

It is right, though, that our approach to aid should have been given a thorough shake-up and that every pound needs to be scrutinised that it is value for money and is being spent well. By 2016 our aid programmes in 16 countries such as China and Russia will have closed. Aid will focus on results and be based on evidence not guesswork. A new independent aid watchdog will review the effectiveness of our aid programmes.

Aid is not just from Britain it is also for Britain. Some may have no heart for immunising a child against the killer childhood diseases for less than a cup of coffee. But can they also dismiss the need to stop troubled countries failing and unleashing terrorism, crime, mass migration and humanitarian and environmental disasters?

In the next four years, British aid will get 11 million children into schools, vaccinate huge numbers against preventable diseases and stop 250,000 newborn babies needlessly dying. If a fraction of our current military spending in Afghanistan had been spent there 20 years ago like this imagine how it could have helped find a positive future for Afghanistan on the world stage.

As local e mails and the delegation of constituents which recently came to see me made clear, this is a chance for the UK to provide high quality, high impact aid.

"the architect of the government's planning reforms"

A major interview conducted with me by Kate McCann of the  Guardian has been published on-line as part of its Local Government Network. The article acknowledges my role as "the architect of the government's planning reforms".  To read the interview follow the link to http://www.guardian.co.uk/local-government-network/2011/jul/08/john-howell-planning-vacuum-utter-nonsense

Townlands - why the delay?

I was concerned at the headline in last week's Henley Standard (24 June 2011) that the Government's reforms to the NHS were delaying the reprovision of Townlands Hospital. I have spent some time discussing the matter with the Department of Health (and the PCT) to clarify the situation as I, like everyone, am concerned at the delays that have occurred. The only change that has arisen out of the reform plans is the removal of PCT approval limits for projects and the requirement that approval be given for projects by the Strategic Health Authority (SHA).

It is not clear why this has become a headline now when it has been Department of Health policy for over six months. An up-date on the Department's policy on this was published on 14 December last year and the Department of Health wrote to PCTS back in February to explain the rules. As a result of this, SHAs have been required to approve all capital contracts entered into by PCTs.  Indeed the Henley Standard on 8 April made reference to the fact that the PCT was already seeking SHA approval. Planning for services and decisions on what are seen as relatively small capital investments, such as this one, are matters for the local health service.

As I set out last December, what is clear is that the Townlands project which was on the table when I first became MP has changed. We now have a much more complex project. If we can pull it off, this is a much better project than the old one and will bring more benefit to the area and I am pleased to read that everyone remains committed to making this work to deliver the hospital as quickly as possible.

Ending a rotten compensation culture

I took the opportunity of questions in the House of Commons on 28 June to the Lord Chancellor to call for a clamp down on 'bloated compensation payments' which result in the tax payer footing the bill from high success fees charged against public authorities. I called on the Government to reform our ever growing and rotten compensation culture.

Justice Minister, Jonathan Djanogly MP, confirmed that the Government is taking forward a fundamental reform of no win, no fee conditional fee arrangements in order to deter frivolous claims and those without merit getting to court. The Minister has said: "We have to reverse the mechanics of a system which is having not only financial but cultural implications in terms of people rushing to the courts, putting in claims unnecessarily."

The civil justice system is looking at spiralling legal costs, slow court processes, and, unnecessary legal action. I have a growing fear that we are being sucked into a compensation culture. This is often directed at public bodies with the taxpayer footing the bill. I wanted confirmation that we were going to reform this pernicious culture. I am personally very glad to see the Government taking bold steps to reform our civil justice system. We must see a more proportionate claims culture and one which, importantly, does not burden the taxpayer in these tough economic times.

Our planning reforms

As the inspiration for many of the reforms to the planning system we have made in the Localism Bill I was pleased to be asked to contribute to a conference on hosuing organised by BNP Paribas Real Estate and consultants Tristan Fitzgerald Associates.  As I was unable to attend in person I contributed by video. 

I am grateful for permission to provide access to the video via the following youtube address http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XhGPkPmP8c

Our planning reforms provide a robust framework for building the houses and other development we badly need.  The previous system's reliance on central targets and an almost perverse delight in keeping local people away from having any say in the shape of their neighbourhoods has not delivered.  Powerful financial incentives and a presumption in favour of sustainable development will provide the rigour and evidence-based approach which will lead to the growth and the development the country needs. This is about as far from a charter for NIMBYism as you can get.

Clerks to No 10

This month I had the pleasure of hosting a visit to Parliament of almost 40 Oxfordshire town and parish clerks led by Henley Town Clerk Mike Kennedy (see picture). I had arranged a full tour of both Houses of Parliament and afterwards the Prime Minister, an Oxfordshire MP of course, was kind enough to invite them for coffee. They all had photos with him and their local MPs on the steps of No.10.

I saw much more in this than just the chance for our clerks to find out what Parliament does and to meet the Prime Minister. Our parishes and towns are key players in two important policy areas at the heart of the Government's approach – localism and decentralisation; and these are inextricably linked to the notion of the Big Society. Our clerks already do a magnificent job keeping their tier of local government going but they are now part of a radical move to devolve power away from central Government.

The Localism Bill shows how we will deliver greater power to local communities and strengthen local democracy: We've set out how there will be new rights for local communities such as a new right to challenge to take over services; a new right to bid to buy local assets such as pubs; and a new right to veto excessive council tax rises through a referendum. There's also a community Right to Build giving local communities the freedom they need to come together to build new homes and amenities in their towns and villages.

Britain has become increasingly centralised over the years. Central Government has had a high degree of control over what can be done locally. Those parish and town clerks who visited me will see local decision-making become the norm rather than the exception. They seemed up for the challenge.

Drink Local

The Henley Standard has launched a Drink Local campaign which hits the spot. I support our local pubs. I know what a great community role my own local plays in my village. Unless we use our local pubs we will lose them. That would be a catastrophe because pubs ought to be at the heart of our communities and many are.

But pubs are no longer just for drinking in. These days it is difficult to tell where a pub ends and tourism, leisure and entertainment begins. The average landlord now relies on food for over half of his or her turnover. Meals have overtaken drink for the first time to become the most important element of a pub operator's business. This level of diversity is hugely welcome and great for the customer. But, it means there is no single, simple solution to tackling the problems many pubs and restaurants face.

Some in the industry see the answer in a reduction in VAT from the current 20% to 5% in the hope that this will increase the number of customers and boost profits, jobs and investment. Even the pub and restaurant industry accepts this is a mid-long term goal and that in the short term there is little chance of a VAT reduction while the deficit and our economic problems remain so big. The risk is that if we reduce VAT here, we drive a coach and horses through our internationally-backed plans to reduce the deficit. We open up calls for a VAT reduction from every sector of the economy which relies on us spending our money on anything other than our basic needs.

The Government isn't being short sighted in resisting singling out pubs and restaurants for special VAT treatment. There is actually little evidence to show that reducing VAT would make a difference. The example that is often quoted to support a VAT reduction is France. But the situation there was very different and what the French government gave with one hand in reducing VAT on restaurants, it took away with the other by removing reliefs on social security payments. The equivalent in the UK would be swopping VAT for an increase in the rate of National Insurance – a tax on jobs which would do no one any good.

So if a reduction in VAT is not the panacea what can we do?

There are two things we can be concentrating on to help our pubs and restaurants: busting the barriers which stifle business imagination and making sure there is fair competition.

We've already made a good start on these. Take barrier busting. Restrictive covenants on pubs have so often held back competition and we're already seeing how we can end the practice, for example, by which a new pub is often prevented from using a redundant pub to start up its business. We're changing the licensing rules so that pubs can attract more customers by for example playing more live music and we're giving local councils the power to give discounts on business rates to pubs to help keep costs down.

When it comes to competition we've banned the sale of alcohol below cost price. This will help protect local pubs from deep discounting by some supermarkets. When a pub is up for sale we've provided for a cooling-off period to allow the community the chance to put a bid together to buy it. Local residents can make a good job of running a pub; there's already a successful example in the north of my constituency in the village of Sydenham.

Ultimately, though, the title of this campaign says it all. If we don't drink local there won't be a local to drink in. I am more than happy to work with our local pubs and restaurants to see what else can be done to help them continue to play a vibrant role in our towns and villages.

Checking out Olympic prep

I visited GB Rowing Team rowers at the Redgrave Pinsent rowing lake on Saturday (11 June) to check out their preparation for the World Rowing Championships and for next year's Olympics. The lake forms the most southerly point of the Henley constituency in the parish of Eye & Dunsden. The lake and its boathouse are an elite sport training centre for the GB rowing squad and provide medical and science facilities as well as the coaching and other sport training required.

David Tanner CBE, British Rowing's International Manager and Performance Director and Team Manager for the GB Rowing Senior Team, said: "I was delighted John was able to accept my invitation to visit us again. It is important to understand just what a contribution the facilities here at the lake have made to the country's rowing success. To understand the professionalism of our rowers and staff you have to experience it first hand and I was pleased to be able to give John a feel not only of what goes on on the water but what goes on backstage to make it all happen."

I was delighted with the chance to see more of the total operation at the facilities and to talk to the rowers. Morale is good and enthusiasm is high and that is in no small measure due to the investment made at the lake. The facilities here are first class and have brought together into one place GB's rowing experience and expertise. It was a special treat to understand from David just what it is a coach looks for in the performance of a boat.

Culham's fusion expertise will not be compromised

This article was written for the House magazine, the journal of Parliament

I am a great fan of nuclear fusion research and I am glad that it is once again fashionable to say so. Over the best part of a decade I have been privileged to see at first hand the progress which has been made on fusion as a result of work on the Joint European Torus (JET) and the UK's own research programme at the Culham Centre for Fusion Energy in my Oxfordshire constituency.

The JET project has made enormous progress. But it is clear that a larger device is going to be required to show the scalability of fusion to a commercial level. This part of the JET baton is already scheduled to pass to the ITER project in southern France within a few years. The future of fusion lies in wide international co-operation and funding.

The view expressed  by the Guardian newspaper that the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) (1) scheme will imperil JET and by implication UK fusion research not only fails to recognise that JET's future is part of a bigger picture but it is also nonsense. In discussions with Culham it is clear that the perceived negative implications of CRC have been the subject of gross hype. One of Culham's leading managers told me that while they have argued that this tax should not be levied on clean energy research, CRC simply would not affect the long term future of Culham. He also pointed out that the much quoted figure of £400,000 as the cost to Culham of CRC needed to be set in the context of the £80 million funding it receives in total. Culham also points to the pipeline of exciting research which will start after the summer and which would not have been entered into if there were real cash concerns.

Culham has a unique experience of fusion both from a scientific and an engineering point of view which I have been glad to show-case for both Houses of Parliament. However, it seems I need to organise another visit of its senior team to Parliament if the exaggeration made over the effect of CRC is not to undo the positive confidence Culham exudes.

(1) The CRC is a mandatory scheme aimed at improving energy efficiency and cutting emissions in large public and private sector organisations. These organisations are responsible for around 10% of the UK's emissions.

Reading’s City Bid – but will it be a better neighbour?

MPs today (7 June) debated Reading's bid for City status in 2012 as part of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee. My colleagues, local Reading MPs, Alok Sharma and Rob Wilson, set out Reading's powerful case for consideration pointing to the key role it plays in the wider area in work, education entertainment and leisure, and retail.

I also participated in the debate and welcomed the bid from the town which already has many of the characteristics of a city. However, I raised three questions about what a City of Reading would be like for its neighbours, questions for which answers are required if the town wants my unequivocal support and that of constituents. The three questions were

(1) Would a City of Reading make territorial demands on the Henley constituency and other surrounding constituencies?

(2) Would a City of Reading engage fully with the people of South Oxfordshire over highly sensitive and emotive issues such as transport and any project for an additional bridge across the Thames?

(3) Would a City of Reading be a good neighbour to the people of the Henley constituency?

It would be churlish not to support Reading's bid for City status. It already provides huge opportunities in many areas for people living in my constituency. But I think if Reading wants the enthusiastic support of people in this constituency these are just the questions for which it is right for us to seek answers.

Cabinet Office Minister, Mark Harper MP, assured me that submissions for City status would be on the basis of existing local government boundaries.

The Day the MP met the President

I had an opportunity for a hand-shake and a brief discussion when President Obama came to visit Parliament on 25 May. The President addressed both Houses of Parliament in Westminster Hall and spoke about the shared values between the UK and the US. The President also covered the role the two countries have played in a range of international situations.

On leaving Westminster Hall, the President stopped to speak to a number of MPs and Peers. The Speaker introduced me to the President. It was a great pleasure to meet the President and to exchange a few words on his speech. The speech had covered wide ground and it was good to have a chance to show my appreciation for it.

This was the first address in Westminster Hall by a President of the United States to Members of both Houses of Parliament.

Congratulations to Culham

The news this week that the County Council has pulled back from closing Culham primary school is very welcome. My congratulations go to the parents, governors and friends of the school who have worked so hard to bring together finding a new head, increasing the school roll and helping with the school's deficit.  They have shown exceptional skill and tenacity in seeing this through and their success is a triumph for the whole community.

Working with Culham's county councillor, Lorraine Lindsay-Gale, I have been happy to support the school and have used that support to help make the case with the county council for saving the school. 

Our village schools are genuinely at the heart of our communities providing not only the obvious benefits of a small, friendly environment in which children can learn but also the opportunity for people of all ages to volunteer and contribute to village life. But many rural village schools, despite a first-class standard of education, suffer from fluctuating school rolls, fluctuating budgets and the difficulty of finding a head teacher.

Culham village school is a good example of this. But it is also a good example of a community which would not accept the closure of its school lying down. Everyone has been impressed by the energetic and focused way that the community has lobbied to stop the County Council closing the school and have explored all options including becoming a Free School. It has taken real ownership of the difficulties the school has faced and they deserve our hearty congratulations.

Irony at Westminster

A version of this article first appeared in the Thame Gazette in May 2011

It has been an ironic month in Westminster. The House of Commons made clear its support for The Localism Bill which brings real change to local government and to planning. After a successful third reading it is now on its way to the House of Lords and the Bill is expected to become law later in the year. The Bill gives local people a greater say in shaping their areas and ends the top down targets which were a hated feature of the previous system. One change that is also made is the end to a Planning Inspector's right to impose change on a local community against its wishes.

It's a personal pleasure for me to see progress on this Bill. As the Minister, Greg Clark MP, said in debate it was my seminal paper, "Open Source Planning", which was the source of inspiration for many of the policies in the Bill.

The irony though is that the dying system which the Bill replaces has given us all a last kick in the pants with the objections to SODC's core strategy raised by the planning inspector examining it. It's quite a technical – but none the less controversial – argument which revolves around how you calculate the number of new houses you need and where they should go.

In this case, SODC has tried to strike a balance between the houses required to satisfy demand and the harm which providing too many houses would do socially and environmentally. SODC's approach included taking some account of the unplanned applications for new houses which arise each year and which are known as windfalls. By recognising that there is always a stream of windfalls every year SODC's plan was designed to help take the pressure off the need for big new sites at places like Thame. However, the Planning Inspector has taken a different view and insists that additional new sites should be found to take up the slack and to make sure the promised housing is really delivered.

SODC has pushed the boundaries of planning policy as far as they can go; after all, this is not a NIMBY council and it is trying to act responsibly in planning for new houses. If the Inspector has his way, though, room for additional houses in the district will have to be found.

The third leg of what proved to be an ironic trilogy was that, at the same time as all this was going on, I was briefing Thame town councillors on what the new planning system would look like and what the opportunities for Thame would be. It was an up-beat and enthusiastic discussion. The changes we are making to the planning system are some of the boldest since 1947. But they need to be. With over 7 million not in decent homes according to Shelter and with house building at the lowest levels since the 1920s there's a real problem even before you take into account the need for economic growth in the country.

A report published this month by a group of planning practitioners, including a leading environmentalist, hit the nail on the head. It said that the notion that economic growth necessarily leads to environmental degradation must be firmly laid to rest by ensuring that development is undertaken responsibly and that it generates benefits which help secure local economic, social and environmental objectives.

That fits in well with the new planning system's emphasis on the need for planning to be more bottom-up rather than top-down and for it to be based on real engagement with local communities. I welcome the changes we are making to ensure that we can all play a role in planning for our own areas and that planning is not just left in the hands of the professionals.

Rising like a Phoenix

I recently went to visit a group of young people from Oxfordshire who have been working alongside firefighters as part of a special project which aims to teach them self discipline, motivation, teamwork and leadership. The 11-13 year olds took part in a five day course at Goring Fire Station to learn fire fighting skills as well as problem solving and working as part of a team. At the end of the week, they celebrated at the station with a passing out parade  giving them an opportunity to demonstrate what they had achieved.

I was delighted to attend the parade and participate in the ceremony to mark the end of this week of training for young people. There was a real sense of pride from them in what they were doing and I think that they learnt a lot about themselves and about teamwork. This was a brilliant initiative by the Fire Service and it is to be congratulated for projects like this.

The project, named The Phoenix Project, is a scheme run by Oxfordshire County Council's Integrated Youth Support Service in collaboration with the Fire and Rescue Service. It is a prime example of partnership working within Oxfordshire County Council. It is an excellent opportunity for young people to obtain an in-depth insight into the work of the Fire and Rescue Service. It is a very intensive week of educational sessions into road and fire safety as well as practical training sessions similar to those undertaken by professional fire fighters.

What an MP does

One of the tasks I have set myself is to explain more fully what an MP does.  In my first year I was able to set this out in two Westminster Reports which were delivered to every house in the constituency.  These can still be accessed on the Westminster page of this web-site.  One of these looked at the issue from the point of view of activities in Westminster. The other looked at it from the point of view of the constituency. This is a topic which I have also covered locally at two Probus Club meetings and a local Rotary meeting.

This week I also had the opportunity of being invited on to Anne Diamond's show on BBC Berkshire to cover the same topics.  This was an excellent opportunity to show how the role of an MP has grown over the past decade and is now so much more multi-faceted.  You can listen to the interview via your computer by logging on to http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00gghwx The interview is available until 16 May.

Local elections

The local elections on 5 May produced a decisive result within the constituency. The constituency straddles two Districts – Cherwell and South Oxfordshire. The total of councillors now stands at Conservative 27; Independent 4; Liberal-Democrats 4.

I would like to thank all those who stood for these elections and for the elections to town and parish councils which took place on the same day. I have always thought that – win or lose – standing for election is by far the best personal development course someone could go on; you really learn a lot about yourself. It also takes courage to put your head above the parapet for what you believe in. Congratulations to all those who put themselves forward.

MP in murder mystery

I joined colleagues from our acting troupe "Death Over Dinner"  on Friday (6 May) to perform a two-act murder mystery as part of the Dorchester on Thames Festival.  As a company we perform murder mysteries for free for charites in South Oxfordshire and beyond.  I have found performing these plays a rewarding way of making a contribution to local charities which gives everyone - including the actors - a bit of fun.  Friday was no exception and our play "Sins of the Father" was well-received.  All proceeds are shared between the charity Footsteps and Dorchester Abbey.

Friday's play was based around a 1950s rural Yorkshire village. The first act always contains vital evidence about possible motives, methods and timing and, by the end of the act, one of us has been murdered. Supper is served in the interval whilst the audience attempts to solve the case. Then, during Act 2, the solution is revealed. Prizes are awarded for the best detective work.

The company includes (back row) Terry Chipperfield, Rosemary Mills, John Howell, Angie Paterson and Geoff Russell (front row) Sarah Gladwin, Sue Kitson all of whom have a past in Dorchester Amateur Dramatics Society.  Let us know if you think we might be able to help you raise money.

Sharing our joy

I spent the Bank Holiday weekend visiting Royal Wedding and May Day events around the constituency.

On the Friday (29th April ) I visited seven street parties. Two of these were in Henley (St Andrews Road and Church Street). Others included Nettlebed, Harpsden, Great Milton, Tiddington (near Thame) and Warborough.

I wanted to do two things. First, I wanted to say thank you to all those who had put such effort in to organising street parties and other community events to celebrate the Royal Wedding. In fact, it turned more into congratulations than thanks as everywhere I went these events were clearly roaring successes. Secondly, though, I simply wanted to share the joy of the day with constituents. It was a fantastic day and I am sure we are all the better for it. It has given us all a great boost.

On the Monday (2 May), I visited May celebrations in Henley (Mill Meadow), Chalgrove and Wheatley.

These were very varied events from a major festival in Chalgrove to a more traditional May morning in Wheatley and Henley's traditional Mill Meadow fair. Once again, the commitment of those locally who had been responsible for organising these events was very humbling. These were events for everyone and everyone was enjoying the day. This was the constituency at its best. 

Say NO to this "miserable little compromise"

On May 5th we are asked to vote on whether we change our tried and tested way of voting for MPs (First Past The Post (FPTP)) to one called the Alternative Vote (AV) in which candidates are ranked in order of preference. You may think that AV doesn't matter in this constituency. Historically, its MPs have typically enjoyed a share of the popular vote nearer 60% than 50%. So there's no personal axe to grind here and no complacency either. Nevertheless, a YES vote could ensure that our democratic system is robbed of any credibility. That's why it's important that here we also all need to vote NO to AV.

AV is not proportional representation

AV is not of course the alternative system opponents to FPTP want. The phrase a "miserable little compromise" comes from a speech by Nick Clegg about AV. It recognised that those who don't like FPTP know that if AV wins they will never be able to have a proportional system. AV is not Proportional Representation.

So if you are tempted to vote YES to AV simply because you feel it is time for a change; think again. Is this really the right change at the right time? Lord Owen, who as David Owen founded the SDP which led to the creation of the Liberal-Democrats, clearly thinks not. He is opposed to AV because it kills off the chance of real reform for the long term. AV is not even a stepping stone to Proportional Representation.

If you think we do not need change or that this is not the right change then you need to vote NO to AV to avoid it slipping in by the backdoor. You might also like to ask yourself whether, when we are in such an enormous financial crisis, this is the right time to be spending what some have estimated as £250 million to make a change that no one, even its supporters, really wants.

AV is not fairer

One of the most bogus claims about AV is that AV is fairer. There's nothing fairer in taking away the right of one person, one vote. Under AV, that principle disappears. Your vote may well count only once while that of your neighbour may be counted again until the 'right' answer is reached.

Is it fair, either, that a candidate who cannot even command first or second place amongst the voters can win? That's what happened in Australia. That's a recipe for getting not just second best but third best when it comes to selecting your MP. Indeed, under AV it is quite possible that a candidate put up just for the sake of keeping the party name on the ballott paper who does no campaigning and no work could actually win. Is someone so unenthusiastic for the job likely to be the sort of person who will really stand up for his or her area or be effective in Westminster?

AV will not clean up politics

AV is not the way to clean up politics because the method of voting and cleaning up politics are two very different and unrelated things. What will clean up politics is the likes of the Right to Recall your MP if they commit serious wrong-doing which we have promised to introduce. Nor does AV put an end to 'safe' seats; quite the opposite, it creates a whole new swathe of them. What AV will lead to though are endless coalitions where manifestos mean nothing and deals are put together behind closed doors.

There's no merit in AV. This is a "miserable little compromise". Vote NO to AV on May 5th.

Unemployment falls

Figures have recently been released today for the number of people unemployed within the Henley constituency based on those claiming Job Seekers Allowance.  The figure for March 2011 was a total of 752 people down 18 from the previous month. There are only four constituencies in the country which have a lower rate of unemployment.

This is good news. This constituency continues to weather well the economic and financial situation in the country as a whole and it is good to see unemployment falling. 80% of our economy in the constituency comes from the private sector and it is clear that it remains buoyant despite the difficulties that many small and medium sized businesses are suffering.

Even better news was that the number of young people (below age 24) unemployed in the constituency has also dropped. The claimant count for this group now stands at 180 down 15 on the previous month. I am glad to see the youth unemployment figure beginning to fall. I fear, however, that many young people unable to get work may simply not be claiming JSA but are scraping by on shift work. That's why I am glad to see the emphasis on apprenticeships which I hope companies and public sector organisations in the constituency will continue to take up.

Growth and localism

A version of this article first appeared in the Municipal Journal in April 2011

From the tossing sea of cause and theory to the firm ground of result and fact.
Winston Churchill

The thesis proposed in some of the press that the Budget's emphasis on growth in our planning reforms is either new or incompatible with localism is simply wrong. On page 1 of the Conservative Party paper, Open Source Planning – the principles of which underpin the Localism Bill planning reforms – we made it clear that we need a transformed planning system in order to get the investment and growth we require. Open Source Planning was published as long ago as February 2010.   Indeed, the same paper introduced the concept of a Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development as the golden thread running throughout the reformed planning system. The emphasis on delivering growth has been there from the beginning.

The paper goes on to say that, without localism, growth "will be hampered and possibly crippled, because today's centralised, bureaucratic planning system gives local communities little option but to rebel against Whitehall and regional diktats and, all too often, against the notion of development itself." That view remains central to our planning reforms today.

During its passage in Parliament, the Localism Bill has increasingly enjoyed the sort of cross-party consensus which it has already built up outside Parliament. Shadow ministers on the Labour front bench, for example, had to concede however unwillingly that Regional Planning, together with its top-down targets, would not be coming back and that neighbourhood planning was the way forward.

In the two years before the General Election, I sat on nine public bill committees. I cannot recall an example of the last Government being as consensual about constructive amendments put forward by the opposition on a Bill of such importance. But consensus has been the way of this Bill all along. The Government will not shut its ears to sensible suggestions from wherever they originate to help ensure the Bill delivers the best possible outcome for the country, particularly in the face of the economic and financial chaos left by the last Government.

Outside Parliament, some developers already recognise that neighbourhood planning means fundamental culture change and that they can no longer rely on using the appeals system to get their way. For them competitive advantage means embracing the new system as quickly as possible. And why have they been so keen to do this? In part, it's because we have captured the mood and experience of best practice in engagement and consultation which is increasingly showing that taking residents with you makes commercial sense and works.

Most importantly, communities too are excited by the opportunities neighbourhood planning creates for them – and not for NIMBY reasons. What is clearly evident is the enthusiasm and determination of local people to use the opportunity to shape and influence development around their aspirations and the way in which powerful incentives such as the New Homes Bonus will support them.

The Government has already announced the first 17 neighbourhood planning front-runners who will trail neigbourhood planning ahead of he Localism Bill becoming law. For example, the Blaby South Community Forum, representing 11 parish councils, wants to create a neighbourhood plan to ensure growth meets the needs of the whole community by allowing the development of a retirement village. In Southwark, the community wishes to see more homes, improved housing conditions and more jobs in their area.

I have always said this debate is more about human nature than planning. On Labour's side are those who, to paraphrase the philosopher Thomas Hobbes, believe people are nasty brutish and NIMBY. On the other are those, like us, who believe that local communities will grasp the opportunity to say 'yes' rather than 'no' to development. The Localism Bill remains on track to enable that.

Raising the flag

Yesterday I joined my colleague Eric Pickles, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, to raise a flag for Oxfordshire outside the Department for Communities and Local Government.  The flag is the St Frideswide Cross flag promoted by the Oxfordshire Association.

This is a ceremony Eric started to celebrate the important place counties play in the nation's cultural heritage.  English county standards are flown alongside the Union Flag outside the Department's Eland House headquarters in Victoria for a week at a time in alphabetical order or - in cases such as Cornwall and Yorkshire - to coincide with particular county days. Our counties play an important role in our civic lives and it was a pleasure to take part.

MP goes back to school

I spent much of Friday (25 March) at Lord William's School in Thame. My visit included a meeting with the head, David Wybron, to discuss a range of issues about how Government education policy was affecting the school. I then held a question and answer session with sixth form students. The students asked a number of questions on topics which ranged widely from the budget and fuel prices to High Speed 2. It is always a pleasure to debate issues with the students at Lord William's. The questions are spot-on and show both that they are fully aware of current affairs and that they care about the issues of the day.

Following this, I was the guest at the formal weekly Year 10 assembly. Earlier in the year, Year 10 students had participated in a planning project to understand the issues around new housing in Thame. I congratulated the students on the professionalism of their approach. I explained how the planning system was changing and how the approach the students had taken was along the lines of the sort of community and neighbourhood planning that was going to be at the heart of the system in the future.

The visit was arranged by Nicky Stallwood, Personal Development Curriculum Manager at the school  Following the visit Nicky said "It was good to have John at the school and for the students to be able to ask questions face to face. It gave them the opportunity to link their work with real life decision making. It always helps when learning can be put into the wider context."

The Year 10 students showed they cared about their town and their environment but they were also realistic about its needs for the future. They were particularly keen to ensure that environmental issues were addressed such as ensuring that there were green spaces as part of any development. I thought they had particularly good insights and it was clear they had enjoyed the project.

I also told the students a bit about what it was like to be an MP. Using the example of the how the students passionately supported very different football teams I showed how it was impossible to represent everyone's views and how an MP needed to listen but then come to his or her own judgement on key issues of the day.

Libya and the budget

A version of this article first appeared in my monthly column in the Thame Gazette on 25 March 2011

You would have to have the emotional detachment of a Vulcan not to have been affected by two special Parliamentary occasions this week – the budget and the vote to commit British military personnel to enforce the UN resolution on Libya. Whatever your view on whether we should be taking action in Libya or not, the occasion showed Parliament at its best. I heard some of the most moving speeches since I became an MP. Many of these came from MPs who had had personal experience of combat. It was a far cry from the gung-ho, jingoistic comments which characterised the headlines of some of our national newspapers as colleagues relived the often harrowing effects that combat had had on them. It was difficult not to recall the words of the marriage service during the debate that this was a decision not "to be entered into unadvisedly or lightly; but reverently, dis-creetly, advisedly, soberly, and in the fear of God."

During the rest of the week I have had the opportunity to question those involved in the operations including senior military figures. At the heart of all our fears was that without our intervention there was near certainty that Gaddafi would have turned his assault on Benghazi into a humanitarian catastrophe with a massacre of the sort we have sadly seen in Rwanda and Srebrenica – a compelling reason to support the commitment of our forces.

The Budget is always a great Parliamentary occasion but of a somewhat different character. I appreciate that there will be different views on the budget but I thought this was good news for Thame and for the constituency as a whole and three reasons shone out. First, the measures on fuel duty will be welcome to those who have lobbied me intensively on this over the past few weeks. It's not been a unanimous view that we should help keep petrol prices low. One local opposition councillor argued we should not do so as high petrol prices encouraged everyone to cycle. As a highly rural constituency the car here is not a luxury but a necessity.

Secondly, 80% plus of our economy comes from the private sector and Small and Medium Sized businesses make up the bulk of that. They have already welcomed the reduction in corporation tax in the budget and the extension of the small business rate relief.

Thirdly I really welcome the £250 million shared equity scheme which will help 10,000 first time buyers get on the housing ladder.

Finally, in the midst of these great Parliamentary occasions one debate probably slipped by everyone. MPs voted to reject the salary rise they had been awarded by the independent regulator. Worth just noting, perhaps?

Youth services

I am very disappointed that the County Council will not be setting up an Early Intervention Hub in the Henley constituency which stretches from the edge of Reading to the edge of Bicester. I have lobbied for there to be at least one hub in the constituency but, in a letter, the County Council has said that it is not possible at the moment to stretch the funding to provide a hub nor does it seem likely in the near future. The only hub in the whole of south Oxfordshire will now be in Didcot.

Under the Council's proposals, its children and young people provision will be concentrated in seven hubs or regional centres, the principal role of which is to deal with improving outcomes for children who are already disadvantaged or disengaged. Other children will have to fall back on local youth centres which will, therefore, by default have to play a much bigger role in providing services to local children and young people. Many of these centres are at great distances from Didcot and there is no explanation as to how useful links will be made in these circumstances. These are also precisely the youth centres from which the Council is withdrawing funding.

I am disappointed that my suggestion of an early intervention hub in the constituency has been rejected and that there will apparently be little help in providing the early preventative intervention to stop young people here becoming disengaged. There is also an issue here of fairness. The number of youth centres in this constituency from which funding is being withdrawn accounts for about a third of all those in a similar situation across the whole of the county. That is disproportionate. Where funding is being withdrawn communities will be able to bid for funds from the Council's Big Society Fund to own and run the youth centres themselves.

I am all for communities taking on the ownership and running of local services. Henley and Watlington, Chalgrove and Chinnor are good examples of local creativity in youth provision. Local communities anyway often make a much better job of running these services than local or central Government. I recognise too of course the need the council has to do things differently in order to save money. However, this situation is very different from taking on an existing service and simply running it. First, the council is proposing major structural change in youth provision with the creation of the seven hubs. Secondly, it is asking local youth centres effectively to take on the Council's aim to deliver good outcomes for all children and young people. Thirdly, it is doing that without first having made sure that those youth centres have a stable future – whatever form that may take.

I urge all constituents to complete the council's questionnaire by 4 April 2011 and to ask for an early intervention hub in this constituency.

The Big Society

A version of this article first appeared in my monthly column in the Thame Gazette on 25 February 2011

It's been a busy month at Westminster: from revolution across North Africa to welfare reform. In between I got in a few oral questions to Ministers about international business and about pensioners losing out on Pension Credit. But the Big Talk has been about the Big Society.

A consistent message from parish council and charity meetings I have attended over the years has been "if we could run this or that service, we would do a better job than the council or Government". I believe them.

A close second was the cry that local residents wanted Government off their backs so that they could run their own lives. I've always thought you could measure the size of the obstacle Government has been to local action by the growing length of forms you have to fill in! How many times have we in Thame been told that the number of houses we need has been decided in a remote regional plan? In future, you, with the local council, will plan for what's required, exercising real responsibility for the homeless and those in need.

You can of course take the view that the Big Society is just doing Government's job – and that that's what we pay our taxes for! But if you do, is it any wonder we end up disappointed? Government does not know all the answers and is neither always best placed to help nor the best place to start. Local residents can run post offices, pubs and libraries just as well as Government or big organisations. Parents are already creating Free Schools.

As an MP I see this every day. On the one hand are legitimate requests to fight for a Thame resident against the Revenue or the CSA.

On the other, though, is the constituent who believes it is my responsibility not theirs to complain that the edges of their new fridge are too sharp. Is there a better example than this of why the Big Society is needed ? So much have we come to see the State as the provider of everything that personal responsibility, innovation and engagement have in so many cases simply been driven out of the window.

For all that, Thame has a proud tradition of volunteering; it's an open-hearted sort of place. But too often the impact of that volunteering has not been able to stick and grow. If we want responsible people power we need social action like volunteering and civic participation which Government supports not hinders.

The Chiltern Centre, Henley

I was delighted when the Chiltern Centre emailed to tell me a few weeks ago of the good news that it had been awarded £268,000 from the Social Enterprise Investment Fund to extend its buildings and provide two additional bedrooms. But it was particularly distressing to hear that on top of this good news came the unwelcome recognition that Chilterns' reserves were at their lowest, that pay cuts and redundancies would follow and that £350,000 would need to be raised.

Chilterns makes a big difference to the lives of whole families where a young person has a disability. These include challenging learning difficulties such as autism.  Embracing the whole family recognises the way a disability creates pressure on siblings and parents. What hits you when you go through the door is the warmth of the welcome, the care which is given and the sheer unflapability and professionalism of the staff.

I thank Phillip Schofield for being the patron of this appeal. I have already said that I will do whatever I can to help Chilterns raise the £350,000 the Centre needs. I am sure that the generosity of all those who live or work in this area will not let us down in reaching that target.

A longer version of this news item can be found on my campaigns page by clicking on the word link. 

Our local shops

This Friday I completed a tour of some of our village shops to see how they were doing and to understand the problems they face. Village shops can be particularly vulnerable at times like this but it is our shops that in many cases are the real hearts of our communities as the Henley Standard's Think Local campaign showed. What I found was a good news story and a healthy tale of success and entrenuerial activity.

In Stoke Row I heard how the service delivered by the local garage was attracting customers from considerable distances not just the local villages. The start of a fast food operation in the village store has clearly gone down well and has added a welcome diversification to the range of services it offers.

In Ewelme, the still relatively new village shop has already won ORCC Community Shop of the Year -  in January 2010. It is difficult to imagine a more successful example of a community shop. Run by a paid manager and local volunteers it is a not-for-profit community initiative which in addition to the products and services it sells also offers teas and wi-fi access.

It is not all plain sailing. A constant theme was the need for Government to get a move on in reducing bureaucracy and cutting red tape. In Chalgrove, for example, I was able to see for myself how the regulations imposed by the Food Standards Agency impacted on the business at the local Londis store.

It is important as an MP to give support and encouragement to our local shops. In this case, it was also a particular pleasure to see and hear how local shops were not just surviving but doing well in these difficult economic and financial times.

The European School Culham

It is a great shame that the plans to save the European School at Culham by allowing it to become an Academy have been thwarted by a monumental piece of European bureaucracy. This is a unique school which deserves a unique solution.

As I understand it, what has killed the deal is the insistence by European schools bureaucrats that there is a high level of liability on the sponsors of the Academy as individuals for the future performance of students within the school. The terms of this seem to be such that it is difficult to envisage anyone – even Government – being able to take this on and run the risk of protracted litigation and cost every year.

I fully support the efforts of parents to save the school by creating a European Free School out of all or part of the current European School. I have discussed this with Lord Jay of Ewelme who so ably led the Academy bid and I have already written to the Rt Hon Michael Gove MP, the Education Secretary, to ask him to help bids for a European Free School and to deal with requests quickly. I have additionally been in conversation with neighbouring MPs Nicola Blackwood and Ed Vaizey to ensure we can act together on this.

Up-date on forests

The Government's decision to end the consultation on forests and woodlands is a brave one and one which shows a genuine wish to engage with public opinion. The consultation was put in place to enable a comprehensive debate to take place on the future of the forests for which the Government is absolutely committed to improving and enhancing access, biodiversity and conservation. It is clear, however, that many people remain unconvinced that the Government can deliver on this and this is crucial to any future plan. We have all seen or read about the legacy of forest sales which took place under the previous government with inadequate protections and which led to reduced access to our woodland, and we remain determined not to let that happen again.

Ending the consultation – for that is all it was – was inevitable after the campaign against the Government's proposals chose to distort it into one which was less about what could be done to enhance our forests and woodlands and more about creating hostility to private ownership. By cynically exploiting people's unfounded fears, the important messages of the consultation were drowned out at the expense of an important discussion.

The attempt to demonise private ownership has, of course, done nothing to encourage private owners of forests and woodlands to go further in terms of access or to recognise the good work that many already do. Given that 95% of the forests and woodlands in this constituency is privately owned this cannot be in the interest of all those who use them and the jobs that they support.

The Government will now set up an independent expert panel which will report directly to the Secretary of State in the Autumn on how best to move forward. I hope that this will provide a real opportunity to improve biodiversity in our forests, to effectively implement strong protections for access rights and to consider the best way in encouraging local groups to take ownership of local forests and woodlands.

Where are our missing pensioners?

Up to 1,500 pensioners in the constituency could be missing out on a vital benefit which could mean an addition of, on average, over £50 per week to their household income.

I raised the issue of the take-up of Pension Credit on the floor of the House of Commons on 14 February asking Ministers what could be done to make sure this support reaches those who need it most. There are currently 2,390 pensioners claiming Pension Credit in the Henley constituency. This is a take-up rate under half that of the national average. Although some of this reflects the relative affluence of the constituency, it is estimated that as many as another 1,500 are eligible for the Credit but are not claiming it. I wanted to know what Ministers are proposing to do to improve that.

Work undertaken when I was a member of the DWP Select Committee in the House of Commons in the last Parliament showed that many pensioners did not know about the benefit, felt stigmatised in claiming, and, did not want to give out personal information or fill out long forms. So I was pleased that Ministers said that the Department for Work and Pensions was working with the Revenue (HMRC) to see whether those entitled to the benefit could be more easily identified from existing information provided to Government and payments made automatic.

I am delighted that by making access to this benefit simpler the Coalition Government is looking to make sure that people who are in need will get it. This is very much the approach to the benefit system as a whole which is going to be simplified and streamlined in the Welfare Reform Bill which will shortly come before Parliament.

Helping end the HGV nightmare

I very much welcome Government plans to end the nightmare of HGV lorries being directed along roads in the constituency which are clearly unsuitable. Under new proposals the power for only the Department for Transport to set a road classification e.g. an A or B road, will be swept away. Local councils will be given the power to downgrade a road or to up-grade one if they think it makes better sense for that road to be used as a primary route. Councils will no longer have to get approval from the Department for Transport.

I am really pleased that this is a Government which recognises that local people are best-placed to decide the classification of local roads. This could help councils beat the pockets of congestion we all know exist. However, it also needs action to be taken to make sure that Sat-Navs reflect this and do not send lorries down routes that are not suitable. I am glad, therefore, that the consultation on these proposals is asking for ideas to solve this problem. I understand major Sat-Nav producers are keen to solve this problem as well, but, at present it seems to take too long for Sat-Navs to change when a member of the public reports a route as unsuitable.

Local authorities will be required to send a formal record of any changes to its road network to DfT but reporting will be streamlined - with the current eight forms replaced with one. As part of the move to open up Government, policy about the road network and classification will for the first time be made available to the public. This will help motorists and communities to hold central and local government to account for their decisions. This will also include policies on detrunking and trunking - the process by which a local authority takes over a road from the Highways Agency (or vice versa). This will help explain why some roads are run nationally, and where they could be run locally.

I have received many complaints from constituents about this issue. The residents of villages such as Aston Rowant, Kingston Blount and Chinnor have been campaigning relentlessly to stop HGV lorries trying to get to Thame along the B 4009 after coming off at Junction 6 of the M40.  The residents of Henley and surrounding villages regularly point to the narrowness and rural nature of their roads. This is a chance to make our views count and I urge everyone to participate in the consultation.The consultation can be found at: http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/open/2011-02/ and will be open until May.

Flushed with relief

After a long campaign lasting some 30 years, residents of Sydenham, outside Thame, and Kingston Blount are now within sight of seeing an end to raw sewage sweeping down their streets and into their gardens every time there is heavy rain. Thames Water has now agreed that the problem is of sufficient concern that it meets the initial requirements for investment in improvements to the system.

I have been supporting the residents in their lobbying of Thames Water.  I know that companies like Thames Water have difficult decisions to make about where they invest their customers' money, but in this day and age that even one home should be flooded with sewage is unacceptable. This is a problem which goes back not just to the time of my predecessor but to my predecessor's predecessor. I am delighted that we have been able to make significant progress and thank Thames Water for its co-operation.

Paul Stancliffe, Chairman of Sydenham Parish Council summed it up when he said "After 30 something years I am delighted to have got to this point. I recognise that there is still a long way to go but this is an important step." Peter Gibbons, Chairman of Aston Rowant Parish Council was kind enought to add: "Our thanks go to John Howell for his intervention and efforts to help us move this forward. It is a good example of how an MP can work for their constituents."

Thames Water's investment plans will now go through a detailed exercise including costing and further design work. It is clear that the work that local residents undertook to gather data on the extent of the problem really helped to give substance to their case. Their tenacity and their attention to detail are now paying off.

Small business is big business

The economy of the Henley constituency is driven by the private sector; less than 20% is generated by the public sector. Small and medium sized companies make up the bulk of our businesses and many are increasingly scattered throughout the constituency in discreet, rural business centres. I visited one of these on 28 January just outside Henley at Greys Green, Rotherfield Greys, as part of my continuing exploration of business in the constituency. The Greys Green Business Centre consists of about 20 small businesses each in old farm units.

In addition to visiting the businesses themselves, I was able to meet many of them collectively to discuss the issues facing small businesses locally. I am grateful for the chance to visit the sort of entrepreneurs this business centre and the constituency encourages. Importantly, it gives me the opportunity to understand the issues and concerns that businesses have. I have been keen to encourage local businesses throughout these difficult economic times – hence the Recession Networking Events I arranged in Henley. It is equally important now to encourage our entrepreneurs who will provide much of the growth we now need.

Businesses at the Centre include well-known brands such as Ella's Kitchen which produces organic baby foods and Elizabeth Cleall a well-known interior designer in the Henley area. My visit was arranged by Douglas Watson of international tile-makers Douglas Watson Studio, whose studio is also on the site. The business owners raised a range of issues including the need for more rural business centres of similar scale for those starting a business or making their first move from the front-room to a separate place of business. They also raised issues such as the impact of employment legislation, red tape and regulation and accessing finance.

Henley Internet champion visits Parliament

Henley resident, Margaret Goodwin, today visited Parliament at my invitation  to celebrate her crowning as Internet Champion 2011 by Age UK and BT. Margaret was given a full tour of Parliament including visiting the Chamber of the House of Commons and the House of Lords. I was later able to take Margaret on to the terrace of the House of Commons to view the river front (see picture).

It was a great pleasure to be able to provide this tour for Margaret as a means of celebrating her great achievement in becoming an Internet Champion. Her skills and her desire to help others stand out and her hard work and dedication have been recognised at a national level. I was honoured to be able to help celebrate her success in this way. The role of Internet Champion commits Margaret to helping people over 65 to use the internet. She sees great value in its ability to connect people with friends and family in addition to helping enjoy hobbies and interests and being able to shop for bargains.

Margaret said "I am trying to persuade as many older members of the public to use the internet and see what difference it makes to their lives. I hope that I can persuade BT to offer more lines and terminals for our libraries; whatever form they take."

There are some 6 million people over 65 who have never used the Internet. Age UK manages a number of UK-wide digital inclusion programmes and is keen to ensure that more older people get on line and benefit from the enhanced quality of life and social inclusion the internet can provide.

Nursery support

The Henley constituency has a healthy, mixed economy of private, voluntary and independent early years providers such as nurseries and pre-schools. But there are fears that many will find it difficult to continue trading and some may be forced to close unless changes are made to give them more flexibility in the way they can operate. That is the result of feedback from the constituency's nurseries and pre-schools after concerns were raised with me by representatives of the sector at the end of 2010.

It's crucial that all children, regardless of background, are given the best opportunities in the early years of their development. I am pleased, therefore, that there is general support for the entitlement to 15 hours early years education for all three and four year olds and for the extension of this to include 15 hours a week early years education to all disadvantaged two year olds from 2012-13. At the moment, though, there is not a level playing field among nursery providers and the financial pressure on private, voluntary and independent providers is simply not sustainable. That's why we need to tackle unnecessary bureaucracy and overregulation opening up the market to make it fairer and more equitable.

The responses to my survey highlighted the lack of flexibility in the system and concerns about the way the Code of Practice, which governs what providers may do, is being implemented by local councils. Some providers specifically mentioned how they were not allowed to charge any fee over and above the set rate (top-up fees) which they believed limited the flexibility of what they could offer. Others raised the question of general financial viability and warned that with rising costs there were doubts as to how they would be able to stay in the black for much longer.

I know the Government is keen to tackle unnecessary bureaucracy and over-regulation in this sector and I am pleased with the steps it has already taken. In April, local authorities will have to introduce an Early Years Single Funding Formula to improve the fairness and transparency of funding nursery education, so parents and providers can hold them to account. In addition, the Government has removed the requirement for children's centres in the most disadvantaged areas to have both an Early Years Professional and a Qualified Teacher - leaving these centres free to decide which of the two roles is right for them. I am grateful for the detailed feedback provided which will enable me to raise live practical issues with the Minister.

New Year Message

I would like to wish everyone a happy and peaceful New Year and to thank so many for their kindness and support during 2010. In particular I also want to thank all those who have delivered such sterling service during 2010 to their local communities. One of the great things about this constituency is that wherever you look there are outstanding examples of selfless volunteering and our communities are the stronger for it. I am delighted to have had the chance to visit and support so many during the course of the year.

2011 is not going to be an easy year. For what it is worth, most of the professional pundits have already had their say and have cast their pall over the year ahead freely strewing gloom down the calendar. There is no doubt that in 2011 we will feel the effects of what are inevitable and necessary cuts as they begin really to bite. But it is right that we take decisive action now which will bring us back to economic health as soon as possible. There is also much we can do to help ourselves and we will all need to challenge the old ways of doing things. I am optimistic that the values of self-reliance and cooperation exhibited throughout the constituency will once again stand us in good stead.

Given the lack of success of pundits in the past of predicting the future I have taken Socrates' view to heart that we should avoid undue elation in prosperity, or undue depression in adversity. Not very exciting perhaps but probably the more useful recommendation for all that.

Goring HSBC bank

Just before Christmas I organised a meeting with representatives of HSBC to discuss the closure of its branch in Goring. The meeting was also attended by Cllr Ann Ducker of SODC and the chairman of Goring Parish Council, Alan Strong, and a number of other parish councillors.

We challenged the HSBC representatives hard on the commercial reasons for the closure but it was clear that the decision to close the branch had irrevocably been made. We therefore focused on how the bank could limit the disruption and inconvenience to customers in and around Goring particularly those less mobile.

Work will now take place between the parish council and HSBC to identify a suitable village centre site for an HSBC cash machine while help with using phone and internet banking will be provided by the bank to customers.

We will also be exploring whether a new bank might want to take on the current HSBC site in Goring.

Tuition fees

I recognise that the issue of tuition fees has aroused considerable anxiety, but we need to provide sustainable funding for our higher education sector and a fair and progressive system of student funding.

This is not a new issue. In 1963 only about 6% of young people went to university. By the mid 1990s, a third of all school leavers were going into higher education. It was clear even then that free, higher education paid by general taxation was not a sustainable option.

Even the last Labour Government recognised that the system of tuition fees it had eventually set up in 2004 in response to this problem was not sustainable. That's why it set up the Browne Review.

Tuition fees will rise to between £6,000 and £9,000.

I welcome the commitment that there will be no upfront tuition fees for students and students will not begin repaying their loans until they have graduated and are earning over £21,000.

I believe the Government is making positive steps to attract students from lower-income backgrounds with the measures it will implement. A £150 million National Scholarship Programme will give students from poorer backgrounds the opportunity to study at the best universities. Under the funding measures student support will also be extended, increasing the maintenance grants available. For those students that cannot commit to full-time study, part-time students will, for the first time, have equal access to student loans as full-time students.

The measure to increase the repayment threshold from £15,000 to £21,000 protects graduates on lower incomes. The repayment threshold will be up-rated every year by inflation to reflect the changing value of money over time. In addition, graduates earning below £21,000, will not be required to contribute to loan repayments. These measures will be implemented for the 2012-13 academic year and will not affect current students and graduates.

So let's deal with the most common myths about tuition fees.

MYTH 1 – I don't have £9000 so now I can't go to university

No-one going to university will have to pay anything up-front with the new plans. You'll only have to pay money back after you graduate – and then only if you earn over £21,000 a year

MTYH 2 – I won't be able to repay the debt

You don't have to pay anything back until you start to make over £21,000 a year – and even then, the monthly repayments will be linked to how much you're earning to ensure they're affordable. If you lose your job, or your earnings drop below £21,000, you won't have to make any repayments until you start earning over £21,000 again.

MYTH 3 – I'd be better off under the old system

Under the old system, you started paying back money as soon as you earned over £15,000 a year – but with the new plans, you won't pay anything at all unless you earn more than £21,000. In addition, everyone will have to pay back less a month, with most graduates being £45 better off a month, £540 better off a year.

MYTH 4 – I'll be paying off the debt forever

Any outstanding debt will be written off after thirty years, regardless of how much you've paid back by that point. The new system is designed so that graduates on lower wages will have at least some of their debt written off, with the poorest quarter actually paying back less in total than they do currently.

MYTH 5 – Tuition Fees aren't fair

Graduates earn, on average, at least £100,000 more over their lifetimes than non-graduates, so it is fair that they contribute towards their education.

MYTH 6 – The poor won't be able to go to university

With no up-front fees, no-one should be put off going to university on financial grounds. The new system will also give more assistance to poorer students:

Maintenance grants will be increased from £2,906 to £3,250.Universities charging more than £6,000 will have to prove they are taking more students from disadvantaged backgrounds.£150 million will be invested in a National Scholarships programme to get students from disadvantaged backgrounds into top universities.

MYTH 7 – Parents will have to foot the bill

Parents will not pay any of their children's tuition fees. The new plans mean that only the student has to pay their tuition fees, and only once they have graduated are earning enough to be able to afford it.

MYTH 8 – Teaching will get worse

The new plans will enable universities to spend more on teaching, not less. The Government will continue to contribute 40 per cent of universities' income – and the changes will benefit universities by putting them on a more financially sustainable footing and making them more responsive to the needs of students.

MYTH 9 – Universities will suffer

The old system of university finance is unsustainable, which is why the Browne review was established in the first place. The new plans will give universities a sustainable funding stream and higher levels of income in some circumstances. They'll put in place a mechanism that rewards universities that respond to the needs of students, for example by encouraging teaching.

MYTH 10 – Labour's graduate tax would be fairer

A graduate tax would mean poorer graduates paying more and richer graduates paying less – which is neither fair nor progressive. With the Coalition plans, you don't pay anything until you start earning over £21,000; but, under a graduate tax, you would start paying when you earn just £6,475 – so even those earning minimum wage would have to pay.

Townlands - a different project

Between 2004 and 2005 I was a member of the Oxfordshire Joint Health Overview & Scrutiny committee – the committee now chaired by Henley councillor, Dr. Peter Skolar. The biggest problem then was the re-provision of Chipping Norton hospital. This was the first time in the county that a major project involving an NHS community hopsital and a substantial social care facility had been put together on one site. It was a problematic and at times legally tortuous undertaking. But we got there eventually.

I was reminded of this recently at a series of one-to-one meetings I held with the PCT, the Oxfordshire & Buckinghamshire Mental Health Trust and the County Council about Townlands. I wanted to understand why I and others felt frustrated about the project and to understand what the risks were that might prevent a successful outcome.

What was clear was that the Townlands project which was on the table when I first became MP has now changed so substantially that you can only really understand what is going on by thinking of this as a completely different project. That's important because unless we understand the new risks it is difficult to have a realistic expectation of the outcome and the time it will take. What we are now looking at is not that far different to the project at Chipping Norton six years ago.

This is no longer a project solely about 18 beds in a community hospital with the reprovision of the medical services available now. I was left in no uncertain doubt that that simple project is no longer considered financially viable.

Instead, we now have a complex project involving a hospital, a developer, the county council, and a suite of social care provision from extra care housing to the re-siting of Chiltern End – all taking place in a dire financial and economic crisis.

Let me be clear; I happen to think that if we can pull it off this is a much better project than the old one and will bring more benefit to the area. Everyone I have spoken to remains committed to making this work.

But if all of us are going to be able to hold decision-makers to account and to understand the project's progress, we need to make sure that the realities of the project and the greater risks involved are not lost on us as a result of the extended partnership arrangements which will now be required to complete the project. Without this, people will not have the tools to set their own expecations appropriately and that will be the worse for the project.

Expenses

Last week the new Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) published a list of MPs' expenses for the period May to August 2010. In future expenses are to be published every two months. My expenses were as follows:

Communications £ 104.40

Computer software (1) £ 2,515.63

Pooled staffing resource (2) £ 3,877.50

Accommodation away from the constituency (3) £ 4,442.01

(1) The one-off purchase of an approved package used by most MPs to manage the volume of constituent emails and correspondence to ensure that replies do not fall through the cracks.

(2) The annual subscription to the parliamentary research resource in the House of Commons

(3) The monthly rent on a one-bed-roomed flat close to the House of Commons (as per the previous two years)

These amounts are not directly comparable with claims made by other Oxfordshire MPs. Each of us submits claims to our own timetable.

In order to be completely transparent I have published all the expense claims I have made to date since the May election.  To go to the page to download the expenses click here.

Help for houses at risk of flooding

This constituency has 2,746 houses at risk of flooding from rivers. But only 986 of them have registered with the Environment Agency's Floodline Warning Direct service. This service gives you 24 hour warnings of the risk of flooding to your property and it is free.

Ring 0845 988 1188 or go online to the Environment Agency to register.

Goring HSBC to close

HSBC has decided to close its branch in Goring on Thames on Friday 18 March 2011 on the grounds that it is not commercially sustainable. Local account holders were told by letter on 22 November. The bank is seeking to install an ATM machine in the village in discussion with the Parish Council. It has also said that it will provide training on phone and internet banking to those with special needs such as those with impaired mobility. Nevertheless, the reality for many will be that the nearest branch will now be in Pangbourne.

I am naturally disappointed that the bank has decided to close this branch. This takes away another facility from a rural community at a time when all our local facilities are under pressure. I am grateful that the bank is looking to install an ATM and that it recognises that this closure will affect a number of vulnerable people. I am glad too that it is also seeking to reduce the impact for those that use the branch. However, many may well find internet and telephone banking intrusive or will be suspicious of using them - and of course you cannot do everything by phone or on screen. For some, access to a branch at anything between 4 and 8 miles away will be difficult given the problems of public transport in the area.

At the moment we are unable to judge the basis on which the evaluation of the branch has been conducted; I have therefore asked for more information. I recognise that some of this information may be commercially sensitive. However, in this day and age the bank needs to take us into its confidence and demonstrate how it judged the branch's viability.

The Comprehensive Spending Review

This article first appeared in the Henley Standard 29 October 2010

There's nothing so designed to bring the red mist down in front of my eyes than the caricature of Henley as too affluent either to be affected or to care about the cuts announced last Thursday (20 October). So I was not particularly impressed that this was the route down which a local radio station seemed to be driving me the morning after. For the past few months local organisations and residents have written to me to advocate a whole range of areas which should be exempt from cuts. The Henley Standard too joined in with its Kids not Cuts campaign. So let's not allow this opportunity to pass without making it clear: we do care and we all know that times are going to be difficult for many people.

Sadly, though, in many of the e mails I received it was difficult to find even a casual nod in the direction of what an awful mess we had inherited from the last Government. A few correspondents even turned out to be ‘deficit deniers' claiming there was no crisis at all.

So let's just remind ourselves of why this review was necessary. We were left the largest budget deficit in the G20 and the largest in our peacetime history after the deepest recession on record. The national debt had doubled from £351 billion in 1997 to £893 billion in April 2010. Every day we are spending £120 million on debt interest and without action we would have been left heading towards spending more on interest than on education and defence. Trapped in such a web of debt is not my idea of the future I want for our children.

What my radio interviewer seemed to object to was that I should find any good news in the Comprehensive Spending Review especially for our area. I know that we have our share of deprivation and poverty, but, we also have some key strengths. In the Henley constituency the number of unemployment benefit claimants in August was down to 755, ranking us 643rd out of 650 constituencies. The public sector in this constituency accounts for only 19.5% of those employed giving us a strong private sector base.

So I welcome the investment in the Diamond Synchotron in Harwell because I think that could be good for jobs even as far across as Henley and be a stimulus for new business. I am pleased too that the science budget has survived given the cutting-edge science base for many of the companies in the west of the constituency especially around Culham. For growth to be sustainable it must be based on private sector jobs. The news this week that the economy grew again last quarter by double the rate expected is good news for Henley as the lion's share of that growth came from the private sector.

And what of other good news? The protection for schools is good news. School budgets will grow by 0.1% in real terms each year which must be music to the ears of the Standard's Kids Not Cuts campaign. Ending the ring-fencing of Government grants to councils so that they can spend the money on local priorities is a major step on the road to bringing power back to local people. An additional £2 billion for social care and real growth in the NHS are also welcome particularly given the challenges we face with Townlands and Watlington Hospital.

And so too is the recognition that we shouldn't just deal with this problem to let it happen all over again in the future. So I am glad that we are tackling the welfare system, which currently accounts for 1/3rd of government spending, to make it simpler and to ensure that it will always pay to work and that those who get work will be better off than those who do not.

I'm not wearing rose-tinted spectacles. I know that for many it will be tough and many will have hard times on the road ahead especially as our local councils make cuts. Difficult decisions for example about the raising of the retirement age were necessary as was the need to tackle the deficit now. But I also believe this spending review is fair in protecting the poor, in creating a welfare system that helps the vulnerable, in supporting people into work and that it is affordable for the working families who pay for it from their taxes. Those with the broadest shoulders will bear the greatest burden and that is right.

As a country we have now stepped back from the brink. But I want to close on one small party political point; as a result of the tough stand we have taken on welfare and the savings we've been able to make, the budget cuts are lower than those planned in March by the last Government.

Moving ahead with Townlands

I am delighted that NHS Oxfordshire has approved an Outline Business Case for the redevelopment of Townlands Hospital. This is an important step and I hope that the reprovision of the hospital can now move ahead quickly and smoothly.

The Business Case talks a lot about the need for partnership working with GPs, the voluntary sector and others including the County Council's social care function and for the drawing together of wider community objectives. This is good and I am particularly pleased to see that the Business Case recognises the importance of mental health services, for example.

These are all welcome warm words but we need to understand fully what they mean. That's why NHS Oxfordshire and I have agreed to meet to discuss the project and wider health issues in the area.

Labour's deficit legacy hits Early Years projects

On 16 July 2010, the Department for Education (DfE) wrote to all education authorities advising of the need to make savings of £1bn to ensure no additional borrowing this year as part of the coalition government's aim to tackle the deficit. The DfE called in for review all projects which were part of the Sure Start Capital fund (which in Oxfordshire amounted to £14 million) but which were not contractually committed towards Children's Centres and the Early Years Capital Programme.

A week ago, the government advised Oxfordshire County Council of a cut of £2.75 million to the original £14 million budget. And the County Council has moved quickly to end uncertainty by announcing the winners and losers. In the Henley constituency the projects which will go ahead are Thame and Sonning Common children's centres and Berinsfield and Sonning Common Pre-schools The projects in the constituency which will not go ahead relate to Great Milton Children's Centre, The Old Station Nursery Ltd, Benson, Benson Pre-school, the Attic Nursery, Thame, and Great Haseley Nursery School & Day Nursery. I am naturally delighted that important projects in the constituency will now go ahead. However, that news is edged with sadness for me as five projects, including two in Benson, will not now be receiving funds.

These cuts are Labour's legacy. Labour doubled the national debt and left us with the biggest deficit in the G20. We have inherited from the last Government a national debt approaching £1 trillion and a budget deficit of £155 billion. The annual interest payments alone left unchecked will far exceed the total budget for running key services including education, climate change and transport. We have to clean up Labour's mess to get the country moving again.

Not to do so would be a major blight on the lives of our children not just for now but well in to their adulthood as they see their life chances threatened by the mountain of debt they would have to deal with.

Unemployment in the constituency

Figures recently released by the Office for National Statistics for July 2010 show that the Henley constituency has seen a drop of 245 in the number of unemployed claimants since July 2009. The total number of unemployed claimants stood at 749 in July 2010. This represents a rate of 1.6% of the economically active population. This ranks the constituency as 643 out of 650 in the UK for the lowest rate of unemployment.

I of course welcome the news that there has been a drop over the past year in unemployment and that the constituency has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country. I congratulate all those local businesses which have helped keep unemployment low in what are still very difficult times. As these figures are based on claimants it is likely that the real rate is somewhat higher. We should not be complacent or fail to recognise the impact of unemployment on those who are jobless and their families.

Let us not forget too that under Labour over the period from July 2005 to July 2010 unemployment in this constituency has gone up by nearly 97%. What is more there has been a worrying increase in the long term unemployed (unemployed for 12 months or more) which has risen by 65 in the past year. Whilst the number of young people (aged 24 and under) has fallen by 60 over the year from July 2009, the number is still 170% what it was in July 2005.

The Government's work programme will move towards a single scheme offering targeted, personalised help for those who need it most, sooner rather than later. Claimants facing the most significant barriers to work should be referred to the newly created welfare to work programme immediately, not after twelve months as is the currently the case. A greater level of personalised support means more people moving into and, crucially, staying in work and to make sure we get the best value for money, we will also be changing the framework to increase the role of the third sector and the private sector, and reward providers based on results. At the same time, we will also make sure the system is fair by ensuring that receipt of benefits for those able to work is conditional on their willingness to work.

Homing in on Superfast Broadband

A study by the Independent Networks Cooperative Association (INCA) earlier in the summer showed that the Henley constituency (which now runs from the edge of Bicester to the edge of Reading) was likely to be at best only partially served by Next Generation Broadband. The broadband revolution has forgotten too many of our villages. Speeds are so slow that they are practically unusable. It's a problem for many in the constituency. Those wanting to work from home and businesses in a rural area like ours find it difficult. Those that are ill may not be able to get on-line healthcare information. Students often cannot do research for homework and it is cutting people off from the social networking broadband can bring.

I have already held talks with BT to understand the work they are undertaking to ensure the constituency is covered. I have also raised with the county council the possibility of villages being able to use the broadband networks which are associated with village schools and remain unused out of school hours and for large stretches of school holidays. To take this forward I have a plan to

• Identify the examples of how this problem has been solved in other areas
• Keep the pressure up on BT as a key provider to tackle the problem in the constituency as quickly as possible
• Work with other providers to facilitate solutions for the area
• Work with local Parish Councils to identify the not-spots in the constituency and to identify the market for the use of fibre optic cables in local authority facilities such as schools
• Work with the County Council to encourage the use of school facilities
• Work with James Elles MEP on the associated problem of mobile broadband

DEFRA has pointed out that one third of all farmers have no internet access and yet it is increasingly assumed they will file their forms for payment online. It is also a major disadvantage to those without access who cannot download information on weather, disease patterns and market prices - all essential tools of the industry

MP blasts The Post Office

I felt it necessary to blast the Post Office after receiving notification that yet another post office in the Benson area has closed. RAF Benson post office closed for an unspecified but allegedly temporary period from 21 July. The notice to me was not posted until 2 August some two weeks later. This closure comes close on the heels of the announcement that the post office in Benson village will close later this summer.

Local residents and I had been hoping that the village would be able to put together a community solution to the Benson village post office replacement. But the Post Office has told local residents it is no longer in favour of community solutions and does not even much like an 'outreach' solution where services could be provided from a nearby post office in another village.

In a letter to the Post office, I have complained that the late notification of the closure of the post office at RAF Benson gives no useful information. It does not tell residents what the ‘operational' reasons are for the closure, what the Post Office is doing to restore the facility or when it is likely to be restored.

The closure notice invites local residents to ‘continue to use the Post Office' adding that they are ‘free to visit the service most convenient for them'. This is utterly disingenuous since it fails to mention that the service most convenient for them would have been in Benson village if it it too was not to be closed.

The Post Office's dog in the manger approach to a community post office is completely unacceptable in a situation in which a village of some 5,000 people plus a large and expanding RAF base are left without a post office. It is all the more unacceptable when the reason local residents now have to travel as far as Wallingford for a service is because the Post Office itself closed down a perfectly viable and profitable service in Crowmarsh under the botched rationalisation programme back in 2008.

In the constituency

I recently calculated the figures for my activities in the constituency between the general election and the beginning of August. These showed I participated in nearly 70 constituency activities in this period. As I, like all MPs, work in Parliament Monday - Thursday, constituency events take place on Friday and across the weekend.

JOHN HOWELL MP CONSTITUENCY ENGAGEMENTS MAY - JULY 2010

Schools related engagements 8
Community related engagements 35
Surgeries 8
Individual meetings/visits and briefings 15

Twittering is not enough

Young people want face-to-face contact with politicians and a two-way discussion on new, social media. That is the conclusion of an on-line forum - HeadsUp - set up by the Hansard Society for young people aged 11-18 in which they can debate the political issues important to them with national politicians.

I was one of 11 MPs who participated in a debate on the forum called Politicians and Politics; what needs to change. As part of that debate the MP challenged the young people on just how useful new media such as Twitter really are at getting over serious political points.

Through the Forum I asked young people how you stop twitter being more than the endless hot air people always criticise politicians for anyway? I wanted to know whether there were better ways of getting information across?

Young People participating in the forum agreed that there are limits to the usefulness of Facebook and Twitter. Despite Twitter and new media, playing a part in the recent general election campaign, face-to-face contact was seen as crucial for effective engagement.

New hide on Otmoor

It was a real pleasure to open one of the finest birdwatching and wildlife experiences in Oxfordshire with the RSPB's new Chief Executive Dr Mike Clarke on Friday 18 June.

The viewpoint, water meadows, lagoons and dozens of shallow pools have been created over the last three years. The project has been made possible by £1.3 million from funders such as WREN, the Heritage Lottery Fund, SITA Trust, Biffaward, Cherwell District Council, the Trust for Oxfordshire's Environment and the Viridor Credits Oxfordshire Fund through the Landfill Communities Fund.

The viewpoint and wetlands are already good for birdwatching. Interpretation in the viewpoint will help visitors get better experiences of the site's wildlife and inform people about Otmoor's history and how it has inspired artists and writers such as Lewis Carroll.

Otmoor is in every sense a treasured asset and I am pleased that visitors will now have an even more informed experience of the outstanding wildlife and environment which this area offers.

Huntercombe - the way forward

The meeting I arranged for local residents and members of the National Offenders Management Service (NOMS) on Thursday 10 June went very well. Both Paul Carroll of NOMS and the Acting Governor answered residents' questions openly. For the most part, the questions dealt with practical issues about the impact of the change of the current Young Offenders Institution into a Category C adult prison. As the Governor pointed out, the principal change is the age of the prisoners rather than any more fundamental impact.

The residents and the Governor agreed to my suggestion of a liaison committee which could meet on a regular basis to ensure good communications and to work out how practical concerns of the residents could be accommodated in changes to the way the prison could be run such as in the details of the day release of prisoners. There was a genuine wish on both sides to make the communication and the liaison committee work.

New Roman town discovered in South Oxfordshire

It is impossible not to be stunned by the exciting discovery of a new Roman town in South Oxfordshire. Strictly speaking, we should talk of a new Roman suburb because the new discovery looks to be a large settlement lying outside of the known Roman town of Dorchester on Thames. The use of geophysical surveys (the ‘geophys' of Time Time fame) has revealed an extensive group of buildings at the junction of two roads. A second somewhat smaller settlement has also been discovered nearer Warborough.

Almost 50% of all the Roman and Prehistoric scheduled (i.e. protected) ancient monuments in my constituency lie within a relatively tight circle around Dorchester and Warborough. This is a unique concentration of archaeology in some ways rivalling areas such as Stonehenge.

The work to find these sites was funded entirely by the residents of the local parishes. Their campaign group, PAGE, was set up to defend 8 Parishes against the threat of sand and gravel extraction in this area. Using an evidence-based approach to their campaign, PAGE employed the services of Keevill Heritage Consultancy and Abingdon Archaeological Geophysics to investigate the archaeology of the areas under threat.

This is extremely exciting news and a major contribution to archaeology both locally and nationally. We have always said that PAGE was not a NIMBY campaign. Sand and gravel are practically ubiquitous throughout the Thames Valley but this sort of archaeology is not. This area is unique. It would be madness to lose to gravel extraction this opportunity to see how an area was occupied over millennia.

Huntercombe - MP's success

Yesterday I had a meeting with the Minister responsible for the future of Huntercombe YOI. This followed a robust exchange of letters and emails between me and the head of the Youth Justice Board. As its letter (see article below) confirms, a decision has been taken to close Huntercombe as a young offenders institution and return it to the adult prison estate.

Yesterday afternoon I was called by the new Chief Executive of NOMS - the body which looks after the prison estate - who has apologised profusely for the lack of communication with me and local residents over this issue. He has also willingly agreed to my request that a senior NOMS official will come to discuss with local residents the reasons for the change and any implications locally.

A date is being arranged as quickly as possible for this meeting.

Huntercombe up-date

The following sets out the position as notified to me by letter dated 28 May from the Youth Justice Board in relation to Huntercombe YOI. I have now raised with YJB, NOMS and the Minister the need for an urgent discussion to take place with local residents to explain what will happen, to discuss the implications and to establish what relationship there will be between residents and the prison for example in relation to shared services such as the sewage system.

The Youth Justice Board (YJB) has confirmed that it intends to stop placing young people at HM Youth Offending Institution (YOI), Huntercombe, from 28 May 2010. The establishment will be returned to NOMS for use within the adult estate.

The YJB purchased 270 places at HMYOI Huntercombe as part of its responsibility for commissioning and purchasing places for children and young people under 18 sentenced or remanded to custody by the courts. Due to a welcome and consistent reduction in demand for custodial places of approximately 20% over the past 18 months, it is no longer necessary, nor an efficient use of public funds, for the YJB to continue to maintain this capacity at Huntercombe.

This is the third YOI that has been decommissioned in the past seven months, as part of an ongoing commitment to ensure the YJB continues to deliver value for money in the commissioning of places in the young people's secure estate. Based on this experience, the YJB, in co-operation with NOMS, has created a robust process to ensure decommissioning exercises are completed with the minimum disruption to the estate. On current planning, the exercise is scheduled to be completed in the next 8 to 12 weeks.

Individual plans will be prepared for the young people placed by the YJB at Huntercombe to minimise the impact of the withdrawal from the establishment, personal circumstances and welfare of each individual will be taken into account. This includes the continuation of education and interventions started at Huntercombe, and the ability of family members to maintain contact.

As young people are withdrawn from Huntercombe it is inevitable some will be placed further away from home. However these impacts will be mitigated through the Assisted Visits Scheme which is available for the families of young people, where support is required for travel expenses to visit young people accommodated in the secure estate. YJB will also be making greater use of video links across the youth justice system to minimise the disruption and expense of additional transportation.

Core Strategy delay gives unique chance

I welcome the decision of South Oxfordshire District Council to postpone taking forward its Core Strategy - the document which sets out details of housing and other development in the district - until after the new Government introduces fundamental reforms to the planning system later in the year.

We need to build more houses in this country. Shelter has already pointed to the millions who are homeless and we are all aware of the difficulties our own friends and families face because house prices are high.

You can either tackle this by bullying local councils and local people into accepting centrally imposed housing targets which is what the last government did; this resulted in the fewest number of houses being built since before the war. Or, you can take a bottom-up approach which puts the responsibility for future housing with local councils and local communities and makes them part of the solution.

This change presents us all with a unique opportunity to draw a line under the past and to move towards a system of collaborative planning. This is important particularly for our market towns some of which faced high housing numbers under the old system. Local residents groups and town councils need to grasp this opportunity to start working on professional, comprehensive area plans for their towns, whether master plans or Area Action Plans, which look at housing and the social and physical infrastructure required to support them.

Huntercombe Young Offenders' Institution

A proposal has been made for the Youth Justice Board to return HMYOI Huntercombe to the National Offender Management Service (NOMS). NOMS are proposing to use it as an adult prison. A formal submission on this issue is to come to Ministers for a decision. It has been made clear that no decision has yet been taken.

A spokesperson for the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) said:

"We aim to get good value for money for the taxpayer by meeting prison capacity requirements more efficiently. As the number of juveniles in custody is decreasing, we have proposed using HMYOI Huntercombe to hold adult prisoners. No formal decision has yet been made, but we are keeping staff updated on the process."

It is a shame that local residents and I had to find out about this significant proposed change to Huntercombe by means of leaks to the BBC. This has made it more difficult to assess the likely effect of what could be a major change on the community who live around the HMYOI Huntercombe and in surrounding villages. There are big potential implications locally in changing Huntercombe to an adult prison including how the buidling will need to be developed and the type of prison it will be. In addition to updating staff on what happens next I hope that NOMS will also do the same for local residents in an open manner and that it will listen to their views. I have, therefore, put down written parliamentary questions to the Ministry of Justice asking what the timetable is for changing the status of Huntercombe and what consultation will take place with local residents.

A constituency whose artists enrich our lives

This constituency is rich with talented artists. Oxfordshire ArtWeeks allows us to visit them in their homes and studios where they generously share their work and some of their secrets with us. On 21 May I visited five exhibitions around the constituency. At each I was struck both by the outstanding quality and imagination of the work and by the way the artists were on hand to talk about their art, what inspired them and some of the techniques they used. What made the exhibitions even more powerful was the intimacy of displaying the art in the artists' homes rather than in a gallery.

In Pyrton I visited Ruth Heppel (painting and drawing) and Lydia Segrave (metal sculptures). In Watlington, Peter Foster explained how he approached his work with stone and wood. Anne Arlidge's glass studio at Lower Assendon provided a fascinating glimpse into how glass could produce stunning pieces of art. Finally, Janet Callender's paintings of plants at her studio in Shepherds Green made a seamless transition between her paintings and her beautiful garden beyond. I also visited Emma Symonds jewellery collection on exhibition at the Hotel du Vin in Henley.

I am grateful for the kindness and patience shown by the artists and of course for their talent which enriches us all. I am also grateful for Oxfordshire ArtWeeks whose sign-posting was exemplary.

Howell wields trowel to lay foundation for Thame’s new Football stadium

It was a great pleasure to help tap into place the last foundation block of Thame's new football stadium at Meadow View Park on 21 May.

The new stadium will be the home to Thame United and 26 youth and adult teams in and around Thame spread across nine new pitches.

I was delighted to be joined by Adam Buckland, Thame's new mayor, and by Cllr Mike Welply, the chairman of South Oxfordshire District Council, for the foundation ceremony. This project was raised with me almost immediately after I first became the town's MP two years ago. It has been a pleasure to help the project along the way and I am grateful for the support given by the town, district and county councils and by organisations such as Sports Solutions GB and the Football Foundation. Above all though this has been a community project supported by so many in Thame under the Thame Football Partnership.

General Election results

I am honoured that so many people have put their trust in me and returned me as their Member of Parliament. I look forward to serving the constituency in the next parliament.

As a result of the General Election held on 6 May, I was returned with a majority of 16,588 having polled 30,054 votes. This equates to a share of the vote of 56.2%.

This is the largest majority and share of the vote at a general election in the Henley constituency since 1992 when Michael Heseltine was returned as the Henley MP.

Local businesses support reduction in hike in National Insurance

My telephone survey this week of local businesses has shown that 90% support the policy of stopping the huge hike in National Insurance (NIC) proposed in the budget. Many of the businesses who commented said that they agreed with the Conservative proposals that the hike should be reduced. Many commented that the rise in NIC was a disastrous tax on jobs both for the employee and for the business and would set back economic recovery.

First appointments made to my youth advisory group

I have announced the first in a series of appointments of young people to my youth advisory group. The group will work with me in three main areas: first, they will help me identify positive examples of the role young people play in the constituency which will be featured on my web-site and made available to the media; secondly, they will help me identify issues of concern to young people locally which I can champion with local and central government; thirdly, the group can itself act as a contact point and conduit for young people to raise issues. The first three members of the group are: Alex Longworth-Krafft (The Henley College) - deputy member for southern Oxfordshire of the Youth Parliament UK; Gemma Roberts (Lord Williams School) - member of the Oxfordshire Youth Parliament; Nathan Sinclair - former member of the Youth Parliament UK.

I also had the chance to visit the Young People's Xchange event in Wallingford where young people from the constituency were doing excellent work tackling preconceptions about young people.

Recession Networking Event unveils new bursary

An innovative bursary scheme was announced on 18 March as part of the second Henley Recession Networking Event hosted by Henley MP, John Howell. The bursary has been created by business networking organisation Refer-On after discussions with Job Centre Plus. It provides for three unemployed people nominated to spend three months with Refer-On developing their ideas for setting up their own business. The three will receive high level; practical and personal training and support, and, the sort of encouragement which comes only from personal experience. Discussions have taken place with Job Centre Plus, Bracknell and High Wycombe, with the hope that a national initiative will be drawn up. About 50 people attended the event, organised by the local team of Recession Networking Events, held at The Henley College. Those attending had the chance of meeting other local businesses, to talk to organisations providing help to businesses and to hear a series of presentations providing practical tips on how to keep your business healthy.

Standing up for South Oxfordshire charities on music charges

I have spoken up for local charities in South Oxfordshire over Government plans for proposed new music charges for voluntary organisations. I raised the issue in Parliament during questions to Minister of State Angela Smith at the Cabinet Office calling it hypocritical for the Government to claim that it has developed an environment that encourages charities to thrive when they are now saddling them with a cost of £20 million a year. Charities have always had to pay the licensing body, the Performing Rights Society (PRS), for music they play at events. But now the Government wants them to pay an additional £81 fee to Phonographic Performance Limited (PPL), which collects royalties on behalf of performers and record companies. The charge, which applies to a wide range of events such as fundraising discos, tea dances, community drop-in sessions or where it is used in charity shops, is due to come into force on 1 April. It would even hit a carers' association playing music to entertain children.

STOP PRESS Good news this charge has now been deferred until after the election STOP PRESS

Thame houses - time to speak out

I have called on South Oxfordshire District Council and Thame Town Council to help resolve the issue over the proposal to locate 850 new houses in Thame. Following my request to SODC to postpone further work on preparing its new local plan until after the General Election the council has now done so. Under the proposals I have drawn up for the reform of the planning system the town and SODC will have a freer hand on both the location and number of houses in the district after the election. It is also necessary though for Thame Town Council and the town working party to come up with a firm assessment of the number of new houses it believes the town needs in the period to 2026 and to do so in a way which is going to be able to stand up to scrutiny before a planning inspector.

Reassurance on future of Henley rail line

I have sought reassurance that the service on the Henley branch line to Twyford will not be adversely affected by First Great Western's (FGW) ‘refresh' programme for its Turbo fleet or by the extension of Crossrail to Maidenhead. Fears had been raised with me by rail customers that during the £8 million ‘refresh' programme for FGW's London Thames Valley fleet the length of trains might be shortened creating unacceptable levels of overcrowding particularly at peak times. There were also fears that the extension of Crossrail to Maidenhead and potentially to Reading might put the entire line at risk.

In a letter to me, Mark Hopwood, the Managing Director of FGW, has confirmed that as part of the turbo refresh programme a number of trains on other lines have been shortened where there was capacity. As a result, there will be no need to shorten the trains on the Henley branch line. FGW also confirmed that there was no threat of closure to the line as a result of Crossrail. However, the Minister at the Department for Transport, Chris Mole MP, has told me that the Government's commitment not to close stations only extended until 2014.