Ben Bradshaw MP

Yesterday there was a debate on Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) in Westminster Hall, I made an intervention to point out that local interests must be considered when it comes to involving fishermen and other sea users in the planning of MCZs.

Intervention:

Mr Bradshaw: Is the hon. Gentleman also aware of research commissioned by the recreational anglers? It shows that fishing interests are not always allied. Sometimes the commercial fishing sector can be in conflict with the recreational sector, and the recreational sector, in many parts of the country, brings more income in to those local communities.

Mr Sanders: The right hon. Gentleman is correct. There are also divers and other people using the seas who contribute financially to the economies of the local areas concerned.

Campaigning for Marine Conservation Zones in Westminster.

Yesterday the Commons considered several amendments to the Equal Marriage Bill. Several opponents of the bill had argued that the bill would cause problems for some teachers and schools, I spoke to point out that the Government’s Education Secretary had previously said he would not have supported the bill if it had posed any threat to freedom of speech for teachers.

Speech:

Mr Bradshaw: Why does the hon. Gentleman doubt the word of the man who is often described as the darling of the Conservative right—the Education Secretary—on this very matter?

Mr Bradshaw: Does my hon. Friend share my surprise that some Government Members do not seem to believe the Education Secretary who, in clear evidence about freedom of speech for teachers, said:

“If I thought any legislation, however well intentioned, would make life more difficult for great teachers and great schools, I wouldn’t support it. I have complete confidence in the protection our law offers freedom of conscience and speech.”?

He said that no change to the proposed legislation was necessary.

Today I asked questions in the house on the badger cull, flood insurance and equal marriage. These are three areas which my constituents have expressed a great deal of concern over.

Here is the Hansard transcript with my questions and the Government’s answers:

Flood Insurance

Mr Ben Bradshaw (Exeter) (Lab):

What steps he is taking on flood insurance.

The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson):

We are at an advanced stage in negotiations with insurers towards producing a successor to the statement of principles. Today, the Association of British Insurers has written to say that insurers will continue to abide by the current agreement for a month beyond the end of June to allow further time for the outstanding issues to be concluded. I am placing a copy of the letter in the Library of the House. We are aiming to conclude negotiations as soon as possible to ensure that households can continue to access affordable flood insurance.

Mr Bradshaw:

A one-month extension is simply not good enough. The Government have had three years in which to sort out the problem, and, in the meantime, householders and businesses in Exeter and throughout the south-west face huge hikes in their premiums because of the uncertainty. Can the Secretary of State assure the House that both the Prime Minister and the Chancellor understand that no country in the world has a free market in flood insurance, and that there will have to be some sort of underwriting if there is to be a deal?

Badger Cull

Mr Ben Bradshaw (Exeter) (Lab):

What is the Government’s estimate of the costs of policing the badger cull, and who will pay for it?

Mr Heath:

We have made it very clear that this Department will cover the marginal costs to the police forces involved of policing the cull, when it takes place. Obviously, the level of costs will be entirely dependent on the level of illegal activity in the areas in which the cull is taking place.

Equal Marriage

Mr Ben Bradshaw (Exeter) (Lab):

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that in the Church of England’s formal evidence to the Bill Committee, given orally, the Bishop of Norwich made it quite clear that the Church was perfectly happy with the existing and unamended safeguards that the Government have provided in the Bill? What damage does he think it would do to the established status of the Church of England if the bishops in the other place were to use their privileged position to try to thwart legislation that had the overwhelming support of this House in a free vote?

Sir Tony Baldry:

Members of the House of Lords, irrespective of where they come from, are Members of Parliament, and the other place is a revising Chamber and has perfectly good constitutional arrangements. The right hon. Gentleman will not be insensitive to the fact that there are still concerns about, for example, the position of Church of England or faith schools that wish to teach traditional concepts of marriage and whether they will be protected under the Bill. I am quite sure that, from the position he adopts and comes from, it must be in his interest as much as it is in anyone else’s that we get this legislation right.

Below is a link to my article in the Western Morning News about the impact of Thatcher and Blair on the politics of today:

http://www.thisisdevon.co.uk/Labour-leader-sees-flaws-Thatcher-Blair-legacies/story-18777987-detail/story.html#axzz2RHVXrI91