Nuclear or natural?

It is clear to all that the oil and coal reserves of this planet will not last forever and both of them, even with the latest technology, are a major contributory factor towards global warming.

Something needs to replace them for our energy needs.

Some will argue that nuclear is the way forward, that it is clean and efficient and would solve our energy needs for centuries to come and they often make a strong case, but the disposal of nuclear waste is still and has always been an issue and so, given recent events in Japan, is the question of how safe the actual process itself is.

It is apparent that, no matter how good the safeguards are, we cannot safeguard against the forces of nature. Mother nature is still capable of destroying mans greatest achievements in a matter of seconds and this is where I believe that using natural forces to generate energy has it's main advantage.

It is not hard to imagine wind, wave or solar energy plant being destroyed by natural forces such as the earthquake and tsunami that has hit Japan, but it is easy to see that it does not have the same potential for devastation that the destruction of nuclear facilities could have.

Harvesting the, by comparison more sedentary, forces of nature is by far the cleanest and safest way to move away from our need for fossil fuels.

Let's not go from the frying pan of a dependence on fossil fuels into the fire of oblivion that could come from a dependence on nuclear energy.

What would be the benefit to Gosport of allowing smoking back in pubs?

It is no accident that today, when the Anti-Smoking Plans are announced by the government, is the day that this question comes to my mind.

I have no doubt in my mind that the majority of people in Gosport would like the government to do all it can to ensure that young people either never smoke or give up smoking early enough for it to make a real difference to their health. Even hardened smokers advise their own children not to start smoking, not just for the health benefits it brings but for the financial benefits it brings not to be forced, through addiction to nicotine, to spend nearly £7 for every packet of cigarettes that you buy.

The health benefits to the individual of never smoking are well documented and proven beyond all doubt and and as an ex-smoker who gave up about 10 years ago in my forties, I can personally vouch for the well documented fact that, although it may seem like it, it is never too late to give up smoking.

The ban on smoking in public places has also encouraged more and more people who do smoke not only to go outside when they are in public places, but also to go outside when they are at home. A lot of smokers have made the decision that they do not want to subject their children, their partners and their visitors to the dangers of passive smoking.

So why is it then that Caroline Dinenage, who in her election manifesto promised to be Gosport's champion, voted back in October for a relaxation of the smoking ban to allow smoking in pubs and private members clubs where no food is being served? A move which was thankfully defeated.

I have been puzzling over this one for some time. Does she think that the people of Gosport want this?

If so, she has not done her research, because if Gosport is like anywhere else in the UK with regard to this issue, and there is no evidence to suggest it is not, then the majority of people in Gosport believe that the smoking ban is a good thing.

Is she doing this in an effort to save the many public houses that are closing down?

If so, once again she has not done her research, because there is no evidence that the smoking ban has caused any more pubs to close than would have done through other, mostly economic, factors.

How could anyone who represents the best interests of Gosport want to take a backward step in legislation that has a proven benefit to health?

Why did she, as a loyal Conservative who very rarely votes against party policy, choose this issue to rebel on?

If she is reading this, or anyone who knows her is, I'd be truly interested to know what she thinks the benefit to the people of Gosport would be if the smoking ban was relaxed.

Do the pensions reforms really go far enough?

Whilst I applaud the flat rate pension of more than £140 a week that Sir Iain Duncan-Smith has been working on with Steve Webb, his Lib-Dem minister for pensions, I also have to ask does it really go far enough?

Pensioners will receive a flat rate of pension, set above the pension credit rate, regardless of how long they worked or earned, this will ensure a basic level of income for all of our pensioners without the need for means testing. It will also encourage people to save because those who have saved will be better off.

But does it go far enough?

Now that there is no longer a link between how long you work and earn and the amount of pension you get, do we really need National Insurance?

Isn't N.I. now, many may argue it has been for a while, just another form of Income Tax?

And if so, surely it would be more efficient and cheaper to administrate, not to mention more honest, if we collected it like that?

We could save millions in administration costs by doing so, which could be used to relieve some of the pressure of cuts on the less well off.

Is it now time to scrap N.I. all together in favour of a single Income Tax?

I think so.

How the vote went

All Liberal Democrat MP's signed the NUS pledge here's how they voted yesterday....

CANDIDATE	CONSTITUENCY	VOTE
Alexander, Danny	Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey	YES
Baker, Norman	Lewes	YES
Beith, Alan	Berwick-upon-Tweed	YES
Birtwistle, Gordon	Burnley	YES
Brake, Tom	Carshalton and Wallington	YES
Brooke, Annette	Mid Dorset and North Poole	NO
Browne, Jeremy	Taunton Deane	YES
Bruce, Malcolm	Gordon	YES
Burstow, Paul	Sutton and Cheam	YES
Burt, Lorely	Solihull	ABSTAINED
Cable, Vincent	Twickenham	YES
Campbell, Sir Menzies	North East Fife	NO
Carmichael, Alistair	Orkney and Shetland	YES
Clegg, Nick	Sheffield, Hallam	YES
Crockart, Mike	Edinburgh West	NO
Davey, Edward	Kingston and Surbiton	YES
Farron, Tim	Westmorland and Lonsdale	NO
Featherstone, Lynne	Hornsey and Wood Green	YES
Foster, Don	Bath	YES
George, Andrew	St Ives	NO
Gilbert, Stephen	St Austell and Newquay	YES
Hames, Duncan	Chippenham	YES
Hancock, Mike	Portsmouth South	NO
Harvey, Nick	North Devon	YES
Heath, David	Somerton and Frome	YES
Hemming, John	Birmingham, Yardley	YES
Horwood, Martin	Cheltenham	NOT PRESENT
Hughes, Simon	Bermondsey and Old Southwark	ABSTAINED
Huhne, Chris	Eastleigh	NOT PRESENT
Hunter, Mark	Cheadle	TELLER
Huppert, Julian	Cambridge	NO
Kennedy, Charles	Ross, Skye and Lochaber	NO
Lamb, Norman	North Norfolk	YES
Laws, David	Yeovil	YES
Leech, John	Manchester, Withington	NO
Lloyd, Stephen	Eastbourne	NO
Moore, Michael	Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk	YES
Mulholland, Greg	Leeds North West	NO
Munt, Tessa	Wells	ABSTAINED
Pugh, John	Southport	NO
Reid, Alan	Argyll and Bute	NO
Rogerson, Dan	North Cornwall	NO
Russell, Bob	Colchester	NO
Sanders, Adrian	Torbay	NO
Smith, Sir Robert	West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine	ABSTAINED
Stunell, Andrew	Hazel Grove	YES
Swales, Ian	Redcar	NO
Swinson, Jo	East Dunbartonshire	YES
Teather, Sarah	Brent Central	YES
Thurso, John	Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross	ABSTAINED
Ward, David	Bradford East	YES
Webb, Steve	Thornbury and Yate	YES
Williams, Mark	Ceredigion	NO
Williams, Roger	Brecon and Radnorshire	NO
Williams, Stephen	Bristol West	ABSTAINED
Willott, Jenny	Cardiff Central	NO
Wright, Simon	Norwich South	NO

28 voted FOR, 21 voted AGAINST, 6 Abstained, 2 were not present and the Government whip Mark Hunter (Cheadle) acted as a teller.

A story in The Sun is being used to stir up racial hatred.

In a story entitled "Three Lions Off My Shirt" The Sun with it's usual talent for misrepresentation has given racists a reason to use the world cup to stir up racial tension.

The metropolitan police department sent a letter out to pubs in the Croydon area giving advice and guidance on tackling trouble during the world cup. Amongst suggestions like using plastic glasses and employing door staff, they suggest "dress code restrictions e.g. no football shirts".

No suggestion of no England shirts, just no football shirts.

No suggestion that it may upset anyone.

Just a suggestion, amongst other suggestions, that you may deter those likely to cause trouble by introducing a dress code.

This is now being used by people with an interest in stirring racial hatred by saying that the suggestion was that the England shirt may cause offence to immigrants.

THIS IS A LIE!

There has never been any suggestion that the England shirt or flag upsets anyone.

DO NOT FALL FOR THESE LIES!

Lib Dem coalition.

I know that amongst my colleagues and also amongst the Conservative party activists there are some concerns about the coalition and what it means to them at the grassroots level.

I would be dishonest if I said that I did not also share some of their concerns. There are real concerns at what this will do to our vote at the next general election.

In the constituencies we fought on the basis that a vote for us would keep the Tories out. With the old "Labour Cannot Win Here" mantra still ringing in their ears, they awake to apparently find that they have a Tory government anyway.

These areas will have some difficult questions to answer next time we go to the polls, not least of which is, why should anyone vote LibDem if all they are going to get is a Tory government anyway.

The answer is staring us in the face...
The answer is in the concessions that the Tories have had to make to form this coalition. The answer is in the policies that we have influenced.

The answer is we do NOT have a Tory government.


We have made progress toward implementing the four key promises of the Liberal Democrats at the last election. We have made progress towards fair taxes, a fair start for every child, fairer politics and a green sustainable economy.

We will not in any coalition get it all our way, but we have delivered on some of our promises.

You do not have a Tory government, you have a Tory LibDem coalition that draws on the policies and principles of both parties.


It is not a total victory, the war has not been won, but the first battle has. We have made progress towards the fairer Britain that we promised.

Our voice is being heard!

And to all of you who may still have doubts it is worth noting that if we are to prove our case for proportional representation then we also have to prove that coalitions work, because under PR this situation will become the norm.

If we want to realise our dream of a truly representative house then we must prove that coalition governments can work.

Thank You

Thank you to everyone who supported me, please do not be disheartened, I'm not!

We have increased the LibDem share of the vote and Labour has been pushed into 3rd, we have a good platform upon which to build.

There were 9 candidates that thought, following on from the Sir Peter Viggers duckhouse affair, that they stood a chance of upsetting the applecart and it is clear that only one of us has emerged from this as a real contender to shake the Tory hold on Gosport.

This is not the end of the road, this is the beginning.

We will be back, and the campaign starts now.

If any of you would like to be part of that campaign please let me know.

Once again thank you for your support.

Rob.