Locally the Conservatives look as though they are building up to another smear campaign. No surprise there then. This time by insinuating that our hardworking MP Don Foster has not been influential in amending and creating law in Parliament.

This follows claims in 2007 election that we were planning fortnightly waste collection – we were not and more recently that we are planning bin taxes – we are not and anyway its the Conservatives in charge. And talking of waste the facts are that since the Tories have been in charge they took away a cardboard collection for the city centre traders, delayed the implementation of same day waste collection by two years and have kicked food waste collection into the long grass.

Dons reply

Dear Mr xxxx,

 

Thank you for your letter of 6^th April.

 

I can assure you that I have not misled voters by the claims that I have written and amended hundreds of laws during my time as an MP since 1992.

 

You mention the “Road Traffic reduction Act” but to that can be added the work I did, for example, to make the iTrip legal in this country. (“However, OFCOM agreed to change the “ridiculous” law after a lobbying campaign led by the Liberal Democrat MP, Don Foster which should end the black market.” Evening Standard, 7^th December 2006).

 

Equally, you can add my success in changing the law in respect of civil weddings. (“Moves to relax the rules followed pressure from the LibDem culture Spokesman, Don Foster.” Guardian 21^st June 2005)

 

The majority of successes, however, have come through amendments to Bills.

 

As you will appreciate, during the passage of a Bill through parliament there are opportunities for proposed amendments to be debated and voted upon during both the “Committee” and “Report” stages. A surprising number of amendments come from the government and these are drafted by officials and their legal advisers. Other MPs are required to draft their own amendments, although they frequently obtain advice on wording from a variety of lobby groups and from the committee clerks.

 

During my time in parliament I have proposed numerous amendments to the Bill Committees on which I have served. The majority, of course, did not get the support of the government of the day either were lost on a vote or were withdrawn by me after I received assurances in respect of the points raised.

 

However, many were successful. In some such cases the amendments were accepted as written such as ones that allowed local authority data to be used in identifying people who will benefit from the “Targeted Help Scheme” for digital switchover.

 

In respect of particular benefits to Bath, you may be aware of the amendments I made to Transport Act 2000 which have allowed us, eventually, to take more active steps to control open top tour buses in the city.

 

More frequently, Ministers have agreed to the points I have made but asked me to withdraw the amendment so that they can have the wording checked by lawyers and then re-presented at a later stage or for action to be taken along the lines I have proposed.

 

The following exchange, also from the Transport Act 2000, illustrates such a move;

Keith Hill; “Speaking of cheerfulness brings me to the hon. Member for Bath. He has played a prominent and notable role in our proceedings and never more so than on the issue of tourist buses. I suspect that when he dies, which I hope will not be for many years to come, the phrase “tourist buses” will be found engraved on his heart. He has worked extremely hard to ensure that the topic is brought to our attention.

There is also the question of the fuel duty rebate, a matter of considerable concern to the hon. Gentleman. As he knows—quite possibly better than I do—fuel duty rebate is paid only on certain conditions. He also knows that my officials have recently been making checks in Bath to see whether those conditions are being met by tourist buses. We are looking at the results with our lawyers and if we conclude, as we suspect we may, that not all the conditions are being met, we will take action. I undertake to keep the hon. Member in touch with developments.

I go further than that. I also undertake to review the fuel duty rebate conditions to see whether they meet today’s circumstances, as they should. We may want to make changes. I make no promises as a review must be approached with an open mind, but I can assure the hon. Gentleman that it is as a result of his representations in this Committee that I have felt prompted to carry out this review. I hope that, in that knowledge and with that assurance, he will feel able to withdraw the amendment.”

A further example relates to legislation on the Olympics and Paralympics 2012 when I proposed that there even be a change to the title of the Bill to reflect the importance of the Paralympics.

The Minister’s reply shows, again, the process of withdrawal and re-introduction.

The Minister for Sport and Tourism (Mr. Richard Caborn):

On amendment No. 64 and the sentiments expressed by the hon. Gentleman, one of the things that we put very forcefully in our bid was that the Paralympics were coming home, because 1948, when the Olympics took place in London, was, many say, the origin of the Paralympics. I therefore agree in principle with what the hon. Gentleman said. If he withdraws the amendment, I will ensure that it comes back on Report. The lawyers want to look at it, as always, but I am sure that we will not deviate from the words in the amendment. With that assurance, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will withdraw it. We will bring it back on Report.

The Act that subsequently followed does have the wording I proposed.

 

1.       London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006
Added ‘and Paralympic’ to short title

 

During the debate on this particular Bill I was also able to ensure a number of other changes most notably in respect of the way in which people who were deemed to have made inappropriate use of the Olympic words and symbols were to be treated. In brief, the proposed law would have made such people guilty unless they could prove they were innocent. I persuaded the government to change it to retain the normal approach of innocent until proved guilty.

 

Yet another example comes from the National Lottery Act 2006 where the exchange from Hansard illustrates the point.

Mr. Foster: In view of those clear assurances, will the Minister explain why in relation to another member being appointed to the commission, there is specific reference in the Bill to

“on the recommendation of the Commission”,

but in relation to the chief executive being appointed, there is no reference to that recommendation? Will the Minister, for example, be willing to table his own amendment to make matters clear?

Mr. Caborn: Yes, I shall consider the point that the hon. Gentleman has raised so there is no misinterpretation of the provision. I have given him a clear assurance, and I shall ask my officials to revisit the provision.

 

The change was made.

 

Finally, I will add that there are a number of issues that I have raised which may, or may not, lead to changes in the future. One example relates to the issue of gambling websites that are allowed to advertise within the UK because they are regulated in jurisdictions outside the UK but which the UK “recognises”. Such jurisdictions are called “white-listed” countries. The following extract from a letter dated 7^th April this year shows how concerns I have raised are being looked at and may (I am confident will) lead to changes.

 

“I also note your concerns in respect of recouping the costs of assessing “whitelist” applications. As I said during the debate, I accept that there may be more that we can do through the white listing process, and beyond, to realise greater benefits for the UK from overseas operators. I undertook during the debate to reflect on the issues that the committee raised and I will ensure that we consider these fully before initiating a further “white listing” process. I will report back to parliament before adding any further jurisdictions to the “white list”. (signed Gerry Sutcliffe MP)

 

I hope that this gives you a flavour of what I have been able to do. However, I hope that you will appreciate that my time is better spent trying to help people rather than researching the archives to compile a detailed list of all of my achievements.

 

Again, many thanks for writing.

 

Best wishes,

 

 

Don Foster MP

I support the Axe the Beer Tax campaign to save our pubs. The problems with alcohol misuse do not lie at the door of the pub but with the proliferation of supermarket discount schemes making a night out at the pub costly compared to a night in. It is just another example where the Labour Government is not understanding the impact of its policies. A sense of community is worth preserving and local pubs are part of that community.

Our MP Don Foster is a keen supporter of the campaign and was one of only 3 MPs at the campaign launch before Xmas. He is also on the official YouTube campaign video. Liberal Democrats fully support BUT have a range of additional issues that will support local pubs from tackling the pubcos who rip off tenants, minimum pricing to deal with super cheap prices in supermarkets and changes to stakes and prizes on category B3 and C machines.

Below is an email that was sent to many Councillors7
Dear Cllr ,

I am writing to make you aware of the ‘Axe the Beer Tax – Save the Pub’
campaign and to ask you to help.

The pub is a vital hub for many local communities, places where people come
together to socialise, raise money for charity or run sports clubs. Yet six are
closing every day and a record 2,000 pubs have closed in the last year,
resulting in 20,000 job lost.

The campaign has already gained considerable public support and is growing in
momentum. More than 40,000 members of the public have signed up as supporters
to the campaign and about 200 MPs have lent their support, including 95 Labour
and 59 Lib Dems with the Conservatives also launching their own Save the Pubs
Campaign.

The ‘Axe the Beer Tax – Save the Pub’ campaign was launched by the
British Beer & Pub Association and CAMRA (the Campaign for Real Ale) and
has five key demands of Government:

1.        Axe plans to increase beer tax by a third
2.        Enforce existing laws, not create new ones, to
deal firmly with irresponsible drinkers and premises
3.        End the irresponsible promotion of alcohol in
supermarkets, pubs and elsewhere
4.        Trust responsible adults to make informed choices
about what they drink, not to punish them for the actions of an irresponsible
minority
5.        Support the British pub as a vital part of social
life in local communities

The immediate focus of the campaign is to persuade the chancellor to scrap
plans to impose a 2% above inflation increase in beer tax – even though
already tax amounts to 33% of the price of a pint.

You can help to make the Government think again by:

1.        Signing up in support at www.axethebeertax.com/support-us.aspx and urging your colleagues and constituents to sign up too;
2.        Contacting your MP and urge him or her to sign
EDM 10 by using our online lobbying tool;
3.        Link your blog or website to the Axe the Beer Tax
website and embed our beer taxometer;
4.        Use the materials on the Axe the Beer Tax website
(www.axethebeertax.com/downloads.aspx)
to highlight the campaign including using our logos, posters and beer mats etc;
5.        Contacting your local pubs to help produce a
petition to Save the British Pub.

If you need any further information, please do get in touch with the campaign
by emailing info@axethebeertax.com.

Many thanks for your support.

Dr David Long
Chief Executive, British Beer & Pub Association

Mike Benner
Chief Executive, CAMRA

2 years on, will Council finally join ‘Cycle To Work’ scheme?

 

Keen cyclists Councillor Roger Symonds and Councillor Paul Crossley have been trying for the last 2 years to persuade B&NES Council to sign up to ‘Cycle To Work’ – the Government initiative which offers employees VAT-free bikes, repaid by loans that are exempt from income tax and national insurance, through a salary sacrifice system. The Council does not pay towards the bike and acts only to enable the facility to process through its payroll. It is successfully operated by many local companies and many Councils across the country.

 

The proposal has also been backed by Bath MP Don Foster. Finally the Council leaders are said to be ‘considering’ the proposal through a feasibility study.

 

Councillor Crossley (Lib Dem, Southdown) said:

 

“All employers should be encouraging staff to cycle to work. The more people that cycle, the safer and less congested our roads will be. Cycling is also great for keeping fit!

 

“The Cabinet has made a big issue of congestion problems in Bath over the last six months, launching a website and advocating infrastructure schemes; however they are ignoring an opportunity to put in place a small-scale, cheap and popular idea which could make a real difference. The Government ‘Cycle To Work’ scheme is a great initiative and the Council is failing in its leadership role by not participating.”

 

Councillor Symonds (Lib Dem, Combe Down) added:

 

“The Conservative administration has been dragging its feet on this issue and putting up all sorts of problems that simply show they do not understand. Several employees and Councillors would like to take advantage of the Government initiative. We should be signing up now. At last it looks as though the Council will follow more enlightened employers such as the University of Bath and Bristol City Council where Cyclescheme has been running for years.”

The negotiations between Council, Charity Commission and the Rec Trust are inching forward to a solution.

It looks like the breakthrough may be in adding land to the Trust. Something I first suggested 4 years ago when I proposed adding the Tumps into the trust as a way of enlarging the trust and providing more land for open access to all for sport and leisure. The latest proposal is to add the Firs Field which the people of Combe Down support – so lets hope it helps unlock the stalemate.

I also support the view of our local Councillor Sharon Ball that we should be looking to allocate Western Riverside land as a back-up. The top priority is maintaining Bath as a sporting city with top class teams such as Bath Rugby an integral part of the city fabric.

Comment from Real Friends of the REC

The Real Friends of the Rec – Important News!

MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH FOR THE FUTURE OF THE REC! 

Today Bath & North East Somerset Council confirmed that it was in discussions with The Recreation Ground Trust regarding a potential land transfer to the Trust as a possible means of ensuring the long term future for Bath Rugby at the Rec. This is a major breakthrough for the future development of the Rec.

The Real Friends of the Rec have expressed their delight at the positive developments announced today by Bath & North East Somerset Council in relation to the Recreation Ground, Bath.

Real Friends Chairman Peter Downey commented: “Ever since the possibility of a land swap was raised and Bob Calleja’s response saying the concept was worthy of consideration, we have felt optimistic that this represented a realistic way towards the outcome that the people of Bath want.

“We’re delighted that the Council has responded quickly and imaginatively, and would like to offer our congratulations to all those concerned for their decisive actions. If the Charity Commission accepts this proposed land swap as a way of balancing the benefits and detriments, then we really do see light at the end of the tunnel. The fact that Bath Rugby also responded so positively to the land swap concept further justifies the view that this is the breakthrough we have all been working for.

“The beauty of this is that the Firs Field will be secured as an open space, the Recreation Ground Trust will have an ongoing source of income that will make the charity financially viable, and the people of Bath and beyond will see world-class sport on the Recreation Ground.”

“We certainly feel sufficiently positive and we hope that the Club is of the same view, to be thinking about the next stage, which will require detailed plans and financing to be put in place. We are well aware that due to the current economic climate we cannot simply expect Bath Rugby to do this on their own and will help in anyway we can.

“We believe it will require a major collective effort to drive this important project forward, but we feel very positive that our motto of ‘All Sports for All People’ is closer now than it has ever been and Bath Rugby can achieve a facility that reflects their status as a leading club in the Rugby world.”

Go to http://www.realfriendsoftherec.co.uk for more information.

As co-chair of our Learning Difficulty Partnership one of our key goals is to get people with LD into real jobs and work with employers to show them that such workers are as productive and valuable to the workforce as others.

After a very good visit from the Cincinatti hospital and project search we are now moving forward on several fronts.

1. We are working with a specialist recruitment advisor

2. As part of Valued in Public we are putting on in the Guildhall a whole day to encourage departments and organisations in the public sector to set goals and aspirations to employ people from this section of the workforce.

3. Starting our own Search project. We will have a class at the RUH (workforce 5000) operated by the Fosseway school with 12 young people from a variety of schools working and learning job skills on site so that the RUH can find top quality staff. Similar schemes in America place 85% of pupils into work.

4.  Creating a Family Lead Jobs project with Norton Radstock College

5.  At the beginning of May putting on a special day for families and helpers to understand self-directed job searching.

People with a Learning Disability have the worst job prospects in the country and the highest unemployment rate. Hopefully with some of these measure we will start to turn this statistic round in B&NES.  It is certainly a major aim for our Partnership Board. Whilst the Government is deservedly getting stick at present on misuse of the public purse in many areas its work on Valuing People is good and deserves credit and promotion.

Here in Bath and NE Somerset one of the smaller areas of disagreement has been on the area of multi use paths. Footpaths that can be used by walkers, runners, cyclists and horseriders. The Liberal Democrats are  support the concept that all paths should be shared access and that we should be promoting as wide an access to as many linked paths and routes as possible. In contrast the Conservatives are trying by all means to slow things down, fragment route options and put the onus onto horse riders to establish need.

We have been running a trial for quite a while now. The results showed a success for the trial. But what a response from the Conservatives. A grudging minimal acceptance with paths disrupted so as to minimise their use and  a policy change by stealth.  What is it about Conservatives that they are seemingly always trying to stop progress.

Decision report at this LINK

Decision register at this LINK

For good information on the Trails Trust and its objectives click on this LINK

So I have just launched a Call-in campaign on this flawed decision and will see if I can get it changed.

Call-In Request of decision E1821: ‘Equestrian Access on pedestrian and cycle paths – multi user trial review’ (WL 20-Feb-09)

We the undersigned call on the Cabinet member for Customer Services, Cllr Charles Gerrish, to reconsider the following aspects of his decision for the following reasons:

Paragraph 2.1:

·         We believe that the trials have proved to be a success and that they should be continued.

·         The arguments on widths at various sections have arisen from a misunderstanding of the TA90 regulations and have not taken into account that in places the width restrictions are in fact made by Council signs. Indeed TA90 cannot be applied to existing paths.

·         We are concerned that the report considers the position taken by South Glos but ignores the position taken by Somerset on the principle of multi use.

·         We are concerned that the future potential for long distance trails is being lost by this piecemeal approach and that in the long term connectivity of the many trials will be of enormous financial, social and health benefit.

·         We believe that the reason of unsuitability and conflict is wrong as shown in Government reports in 2000 and 2002.

·         The Sustrans Director for the Nations and Regions, Andy Wistow, has stated that shared use paths can be as narrow as 2.5 to 3 metres wide. Sustrans are building multi-use paths across the country and this is being accepted elsewhere.

Paragraph 2.5:

·         We believe that this recommendation changes the policy position of the Council by stealth. Currently the Council policy is for inclusive access whilst this recommendation changes the evidence so that horse riders will have to establish a need. We believe that Council policy should not be changed without a full discussion and debate with Councillors and the public.

·         Riding is a growing means of transport and leisure and if paths and routes can be connected then over time a series of long distance trails can be set up which will benefit tourism, health and leisure.

·         As we move to a world without cheap oil then it is in everyone’s interest  to have the widest range of multi use paths.

Signed by:  1.         Councillor Paul Crossley (lead)