I am by my nature a modernising reformer of parliament and our democratic systems. I therefore, support elements of the 'Reforming Parliament' agenda that relate to these matters.

I am a member of Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform (LCER) and so support Proportional Representation. I have voted for a fully elected House of Lords and support our manifesto commitment to make this happen.

I am not sure ID cards is a constitutional matter - it is one of policy. I have commented extensively elsewhere on this website on this subject. I have no fundamental objection to being able to identify myslef - but would oppose these on the basis of value for money and cost.

I am not supportive of creating two tier Members of Parliament voting on different issues.

However, I am generally a fan of a defined constitution (written) and know we are commited to making this happen too.

April 2010

Asthma UK is asking al candidates ti sign up to these specificpldges:

• everyone with asthma in the UK has access to a Personal Asthma Action Plan
• every asthma death is fully investigated so the unacceptably high figure of three deaths a day is reduced
• 24/7 access to high quality primary care at first point of contact is a central feature of comprehensive asthma standards.

Whilst of course I would support the aims of these pledges it would not be possible to guaruntee,as an individual MP that these can be delivered. I would certainly like to think they will be as long as we continue to invest in the NHS and that Labourcould deliver these aspiration. It would certainly be much more popular to simply sign up - but I would need to see more evidence of the number oftose withou personal plans - example of sortfalls in 24/7 'quality care' and then the implications of meeting those demands - and then contrast the with other increasing demands on the NHS and budgets from eqully compelling disease management campaigns. Witout doing so it would be a dishonest pledge not based o the facts and challenges. Upon seeing the evidence it may prove that we are near to delivering these outcomes - butI suspect there are gaps in the service by the nature of the questions!

I have close associations with autism and have taken up various cases in the constituency over the last decade to support parents with children who are autistic. So I know that services are not always there when they need them most.

Of course I support anything that improves the support and understanding of autism and support their campaign.

I have responded elsewhere on this site to the numerous campaigns about the pub industry over the last two years.

I do understand we are going through profound change in the way we drink and socialise in Britain and that this is having an effect on the future of many pubs.

I do understand that for many communities the Pub is the heart of the community and we need to do what we can to preserve them.

I also understand the role pubs play in dealing with the increasing drink problem we have in the UK.

I would therefore generally be supportive of measures outlined by CAMRA to assist Pubs, where I can, to survive in this new social climate. However, I also do support residents in areas where pubs do become a public nuisance and have campaigned against some of the initiatives taken up by theme pubs for example to encourage young people to drink to excess. Like many things there always needs to be a balance. I do support measures to balance the taxation of alcohol so that pubs are not disadvantaged by cheap alcohol in supermarkets for example.

I too am shocked that many Tory MPs and and candidates don't believe in climate change. From my experience hs s certainly true. Thet haven't changed as a party at all.

Yes of course I accept that climate change is affected by human activity and that to respond we need to move to our tough targets on renewable energy sources. We need to deliver all the things set out in the Climate Change Act and work at international level to deliver through Europe and the UN post Copenhagen. However, we also need to make it easy for everybody to act individually too.

January 2010

I generally support most measures to improve the lot of cyclists - as I am one myself and understand the need for so much more to be done to match the best facilities and conditions we see elsewhere in the world.

March 2010

I have always supported the UK having better relations with Cuba. I have never supported the US position on blockading Cuba. I always felt it was a relic of the old cold war.

There is a campaign worried about the Digital Economy Bill being enacted through the process of Wash-up rather than the usual long parliamentary scrutiny a Bill receives. I understand this concern at one level. The main concerns seem to be around the 'controversial' elements of the Bill.

It may be worth explaining that the 'wash-up' process requires cross party consensus and thereby any measure that does not have such support is lost in the negotiations. Therefore, controversial elements are lost and only widely supported measures are likely to be agreed. I hope this gives some reassurance on these aspects of the Bill that cause concern.

I agree the long standing convention of Wash-up is far from ideal but the convention has worked reasonably well.

I also understand some of the concerns and difficulties encountered in this Bill. This is a difficult area - trying to balance the need of creative industries to protect their work whilst at the same time dealing with the reality of the Internet and a generation used to 'downloading'...I guess neither side will be happy with whatever outcome is reached.

Whilst it is far from ideal I will not oppose the Digital Economy Bill at 2nd Reading but will vote at Report Stage to remove anything that remains controversial.

You will not be surprised to learn that I have been lobbied equally by both sides of the argument on this Bill. Whatever happens to the Bill there will be some element of dissatisfaction.

A full text of the debate on the Energy Bill and amendments is here - http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmhansrd/cm100224/debtext/100224-0008.htm#10022460000002

I was away on Parliamentary Business in India with a cross party delegation at the time of the Bill so did not take part in any votes or its proceedings.

February 2010

I have pretty strong views about the governance of football - or the lack of it.

It saddens me to see a sport turned into money making/ losing business with over inflated wages and a raw deal for the fans.

I sat on the All Party Football Group inquiry into this. Our report can be found here:

http://www.allpartyfootball.com/inquiry8.htm

I am more passionate about grass roots football though. Too mnay top clubs have chased the dream on behalf of fans - with their tacit support when it is going well. More fans need to speak out when times are good - not just when they go wrong.

That is why I was instrumental at getting the government to help establish Supporters Direct - to help create membership owned clubs.

I am supportive of the Gingerbread campaign - lose the lables for single parents. It has always seemd wrong to me for anybody to be stigmatised in this way.

http://www.gingerbread.org.uk/portal/page/portal/Website

Obviously I am supporting the thrust of this campaign and its aims.

I have supported NSPCC campaigns before and been in the minority of MPs to support their campaign to ban smacking for example.

As a parent I obviously support the arguments for greater protection for children.

However, as with every campaign group that makes specific demands before an election organisers will know not everybody can commit their party to such specific calls for action in advance. For example I am not 100% convinced about the effectiveness of the Children's Commissioner and would need to be convinced giving more power is actually a good idea!

March 2010

I have stated that I support the role of many local pubs in our communities whilst at the same time recognising the damaging effects of alcohol and excess drinking in our culture. I understand that much excess drinking is a result of cheap alcohol available from other outlets - not pubs.

I will support measures to ease the burden on pubs but also recognise that social changes in the way we entertain have also had a dramatic effect on pubs - not just government policies.

March 2010

As members of Amnesty International I am more than happy to keep human rights as central to government policy and my own campiagning as an MP.

Having been fortunate to travel to different places in the world I have come to cherish the freedoms we have to meet, protest, worship and express our human dignity through our basic human rights.

I also know that Amnesty makes sure we do not take any of our human rights for granted in the UK and I generally support these campaigns too. There will however, always be some very tough choices where there are competing human rights at stake and therefore not all issues are completely absolute!

The Libel Law Campaign has got the government to respond by saying it will review the Libel Laws. This is a good news and this victory was won quite quickly.

I supported the campaign and will continue to do so as I understand there has been a slow shift in the culture of these cases which does seem to inhibit scientific publication.

January 2010

I support greater transparency in lobbying as elsewhere in the political system.

Whilst I appreciate 38Degrees feels a compulsory register is the answer I don't beleive it is enough. I know that a register idea is welcome and I would support it.

I am a big fan of the BBC and will do all I can to protect it in the future. It does not mean they are beyond criticism and some fo their inflated salaries for executives and so-called stars need to be questioned.

But I will and always have campaigned for the BBC and its public broadcast remit.

There are increasingly shrill voices from the Murdoch empire about the role fo the BBC. They wish to see its demise for their own commercial interests. The Tories seems to have done an informal deal with Murdoch for his support in his newspaper empire. This isn't good for democracy and certainly a right wing Tory government attacking the BBC is no good for any of us.

We did establish the Jenkins Commission in 1998 to look at these matters but the conclusions he came back with prove to have little general support.

And for those of us who support PR this is the problem. We then rarely agree on which system we would like to introduce.

I favour a system that improves proportionality to reflect the wishes of the electorate and so that every vote counts and has equal value. However, I also strongly believe the constituency link is vital to make sure MPs are connected into the people they represent. So whilst I support the fact that we will have a referendum in the next parliament – probably this autumn – to change to PR I am also a little disappointed that the suggestion is for just the AV system. This is a form of PR but does not get the balance entirely right. It does retain the constituency link and makes sure the MP has the majority support – but it does not necessarily deliver proper proportionality. The type of system we use should be part of further debate in the new House of Commons and perhaps choices should be given in a referendum.

I am opposed to the replacement of Trident. The issue of the upgrading and replacement of the submarine fleet was discussed in Parliament in 2007.

I do not support this replacement from a moral perspective. I do not believe there is a moral justification to use nuclear weapons against civilians in any circumstances. I could never agree to ‘push the button’. The logic of ownership of nuclear weapons is deterrence. If I cannot support their use in such circumstances there is not deterrence and therefore they are useless.

The debate in 2007 was not about the actual replacement of Trident missiles – more about agreeing to do the preparatory work in advance of a decision during this decade. It was also about reducing the nuclear warhead numbers and how the delivery systems would operate – ie reducing Trident submarines from the current 4.

I was a Parliamentary Private Secretary in the Treasury at the time and therefore was bound by collective responsibility. I should have voted with the government. I did however meet personally with Gordon Brown to explain my moral objections to nuclear weapons and he gave me personal agreement that I didn’t have to support the government line at the vote – so I did not vote for the replacement of Trident.

I am pleased that nuclear non-proliferation is currently being pursued at an international level by Obama and the other nuclear nations. However, as more countries try to acquire nuclear weapons and delivery systems the nature of non-proliferation will change dramatically as will the need to keep such weapons grade material out of the hands of terrorists. It is a truism that 9/11 changed geo-political responses to these challenges too.

I am happy to support the Rethink Campaign as I do believe this issue needs greater recognition amongst the public and public services. I know from so much of my casework how big this issue is on our communities.

http://www.rethink.org/how_we_can_help/campaigning_for_change/general_election_201.html

March 2010

I support the campaign to find a way to introduce some kind of Robin Hood Tax on banks and have done so from the start. I have been a long term supporter of the idea of the Tobin Tax too - long before the current banking crisis!

I was also one of the Sponsoring MPs for the Vulture Funds Bill which has now become law.

I am Secretary of the All Party Group on Debt Aid & Trade and have been a leading Campaigner on International Development issues for 20 years so getting money flows like this are vital for delivering aid budgets.

For those of us campaigning for things like the Tobin Tax we were told it would be impossible to get international agreement (we do need this) but the current state of the banking sector has helped galvanise world leaders.

I will continue to work for such a tax or something simlar to be introduced.

February 2010

As supporters of the RSPB ourselves we too have been invited to write to our candidates in the election to support this campaign.

Of course I am broadly supportive. It fits in very well with my campaigning around quality of life issues and wellbeing. I am a strong advocate of tackling climate change and environmental issues and therefore I do support the ideas behind this campaign.

A highly misleading campaign has suddenly been launched by the Residential Landlords Association about a gentle piece of legislation that has been campaigned for - and consulted on widely - over the last 4-5 years. The plans to make people seek planning permission to change a normal house into a 3-4-5 bedroom student house in Loughborough is warmly welcomed by residents, the local authority, student bodies and all political parties. UCO Class Orders will not do any of the things the RLA over hype in their press statement. There is no evidence for their attacks as we have seen in Northern Irelend where this legislation already exists.

This debate has been taking place for the last 4-5 years and the scare tactics employed by the RLA about the supposed implications it seems are irrational. Current HMOs are not even included. If the RLA think the unbalancing of neighbourhoods is acceptable then I believe they are out of touch with my local community in Loughborough and I am sure SARG would welcome them to show them the affects on local communities.

I feel sorry for Landlords who RLA have tried to scare about the impact of UCOs.

March 2010