Fiona Bruce MP continues to fight for constituents in Parliament over planning issues

Fiona Bruce MP continues to fight for her constituents on planning issues in Parliament

Speaking in a debate in Parliament yesterday on Planning and the Housing Supply Fiona Bruce once again championed her constituents fight for the protection of our greenspaces and for locally determined planning:

“ I am here as a voice for my constituents, who feel grievously let down by the lack of clarity of the planning policy, practices and procedures of local and national Government. Only one thing is clear: despite more than 20 action groups representing thousands of people across my constituency, despite many public meetings, the most recent of which was held last night in Congleton town hall, despite my bringing successive leaders of Cheshire East council to meet Ministers for clarity on these issues, and despite countless letters having been sent to Ministers on behalf of constituents, we still have developer-led development in our area and unsustainable, unplanned development. It ignores town plans, places no weight on the emerging local plan and makes a mockery of localism.

The national planning policy framework, with its presumption of sustainable development, contains an inadequate definition of that—in fact, it is barely a definition at all—which certainly does not equate with my constituents’ definition. Sustainability means there being enough schools, roads, medical centres and facilities for local people, and there simply will not be enough if the rate of development continues in our towns.

In Alsager alone, which is a town of some 5,500 houses, applications are in the pipeline for 3,000 dwellings. This is a town recently described by the chief planning officer of Cheshire East council as “currently unsustainable”. In Sandbach, which is a town of 8,000, some 6,000 applications have been granted or are in the pipeline. Just last week, two consents for Sandbach were granted, in Abbeyfields and Congleton road. That makes the consents already granted for Sandbach sufficient to cover one third of its 20-year supply. And those are on greenfield sites. This is countryside. This is prime agricultural land. The mayor of Sandbach is in the Chamber today, having come directly from 10 Downing street, where he presented a petition objecting to the Government’s policies.

There is then the unclear procedure surrounding the requirement for a five-year supply of housing. That is simply unjust. The primary reason for the two appeals granted last week was that Cheshire East apparently is unable to demonstrate a five-year housing supply, and yet the council told residents months ago that it had developed a robust strategic housing land availability assessment, which would satisfy requirements for a five-year housing supply.

Who is right—national Government, through the inspectorate, or local government? How was it that Cheshire East could say that it had demonstrated a five-year supply if clearly it had not? Is there no means by which such statements can be validated with central Government before they are made? Surely the only way cannot be for the strength of such a supply statement to be tested on appeal, because it adds insult to injury for thousands of pounds of local taxpayers’ money to be spent on such appeals, when it could be spent on meeting local people’s needs. There is so much confusion regarding the requirements that injustice is being introduced into our communities, particularly because there are other sites—brownfield and non-brownfield, including in Sandbach—that the local community have already said that they will accept for development.

That brings me to my next point. It is wholly wrong that people in the towns of Alsager, Congleton, Middlewich and Sandbach in my constituency were offered the opportunity and funding under the Government’s neighbourhood plan front-runner schemes to develop neighbourhood plans, only to find that those town plans count for absolutely nothing, in terms of the Planning Inspectorate’s decisions regarding appeals against developments.

The situation is also producing inconsistent decision making. Just last week, when two developers’ applications were accepted for Sandbach, we had a refusal for a site at Sandbach road north in Alsager. That was despite the inspectorate acknowledging the lack of a demonstrable five-year supply of deliverable housing in Cheshire East, and apparently, according to my interpretation, giving weight to the draft Cheshire East local plan, which other decisions refused to do. It stated:

“It would seem wise in this part of the borough not to proceed with development which would go beyond the draft strategy at this stage.”

The inspectorate also rejected the developer’s appeal on the grounds that it is in open countryside, and that harm to it would be significant and demonstrable. But so it would be to Abbeyfields, Congleton road and Hind Heath in Sandbach, which have already been granted. We really need clarity on these issues. How long should a local plan realistically take to develop? We pride ourselves in this country on clear and speedy delivery of justice. We say that justice delayed is justice denied. We talk about the rule of law. And yet, in planning, we could not have murkier, muddier waters. That is simply unfair.

Our local authority has been working for three years on a local plan. What has gone wrong? Why does the draft plan that was prepared last year, which was the subject of a six-week public consultation, now have to be radically altered and be the subject of a further public consultation, while all the time, developers rub their hands with glee and take advantage of that void? Will the Minister provide whatever assistance is required for Cheshire East council from a senior planning adviser to ensure that there are no further delays or confusion regarding what is required to get our local plan through? My constituents have had enough.

I also ask the Minister to ensure that we have clarity on our five-year housing supply numbers, and that a clear message is sent to the people of my constituency, as I have sought to provide for three years, giving them every and any necessary and available means of help to resolve those issues. My constituents simply cannot understand the situation. They feel angry, in despair, ignored, impotent as regards the plans for development of their own communities, and without any democratic recourse, as one has said to me, except the ballot box.

On behalf of the Under-Secretary of State for Education, my hon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mr Timpson), I confirm that he, too, has been working tirelessly with planning action groups in his constituency, which is adjacent to mine, and also in Cheshire East. He recently arranged for the Planning Minister to speak to those groups so that they could hear the advice that the Department had for Cheshire East council on resolving the adoption of the local plan and housing supply. I would appreciate that advice and clarity being given today in the Minister’s response.”

Responding to the debate the Planning Minister agreed to Fiona’s request for specific assistance to Cheshire East Council with their Local Plan “to get the plan to a point where it can pass examination.” This will be provided by the Minister’s team, which includes a former Chief Planning Inspector. Fiona spoke directly after the debate with the Leader of Cheshire East Council, Michael Jones, who has accepted this offer. Fiona is arranging the meeting urgently.

Fiona Bruce MP Campaigns for BBC Radio Cheshire

Fiona Bruce MP campaigns for BBC Radio Cheshire in Parliament

Speaking in Parliament yesterday Fiona Bruce MP once again raised the possibility of BBC Radio Cheshire on which she has been campaigning for a number of months:
“I want to refer to BBC radio broadcasting in two very different parts of the world. First, I want to say something about BBC Radio Cheshire—or, rather, the absence of it.
In July 2012, I had what I thought at the time was a constructive meeting in the House with David Houldsworth, the BBC’s English regions controller, and Mary Picken, head of communications for BBC English regions, about the absence of local BBC radio in Cheshire. Most of my constituency is effectively not covered by local radio at all, because there is no distinctly local independent radio broadcasting. The three of us had what I felt was a very fruitful and fair discussion. I explained that Cheshire was becoming an increasingly well-defined region with three strong unitary authorities working together to develop its economic potential—although it has been recognised not only for that economic potential but for the quality of life there, not least by the numerous BBC executives who have relocated to the county following the BBC’s move north. We all agreed that Cheshire was very distinct from the two city regions of Liverpool and Manchester, and that the current BBC local radio provision for Manchester, Merseyside and Stoke did not serve Cheshire appropriately.
I accepted from David at the time that, given the current economic climate and the fact that there was no spare transmitter capacity in the region, setting up and broadcasting from a new BBC Radio Cheshire might present a challenge. That, however, was nearly a year and a half ago, and I want to revisit the issue now. More important, I want to revisit the fact that at that meeting, on behalf of the BBC, David Houldsworth acknowledged the need for a clear and identifiable source of information about Cheshire and its news and views, and said that he would take what he described as active steps to bring about the creation of a BBC Cheshire news index on the BBC news website, which would enable all the news and wide-ranging events across Cheshire to be gathered in one place for people to view. There are similar forums on the BBC website for other areas in the north-west, such as Lancashire, Merseyside, Cumbria and Greater Manchester, all of which have their own dedicated pages.
Shortly after the meeting, Helen Boaden, who was then director of BBC News and is now director of BBC Radio, confirmed that the BBC

“is actively looking at the idea of an online Cheshire index and is hoping that any regulatory issues can be resolved as soon as possible. If that is the case it should be possible to launch an index within six months.”

As I said earlier, that meeting took place in July 2012. Since then—I hope that the House will forgive the pun—there has been radio silence. My office has heard nothing about the setting up of a BBC Cheshire news index. I should very much like to know from the BBC when that will happen.”
In response the Minister, Maria Miller MP, said
“My hon. Friend the Member for Congleton addressed the role of local radio, particularly in Cheshire. She has campaigned hard and I do not have much to add at this stage. I hope she gets the answers she needs and that BBC Radio Manchester and BBC Radio Stoke pay heed to and focus on her powerful arguments.”
Professor TJ Wheeler, Vice Chancellor and Principal of the University of Chester commented on the proposed Cheshire coverage:
“Given the scandals over pensions, retirement packages and redundancy payments, together with the massive salaries for ‘top talent’, the BBC can hardly plead poverty or insufficient resources for a modest initiative in Cheshire which would cost no more than £500,000 to set up and a running budget of £200,000.”

Fiona Bruce champions the broadcasting of BBC World Service into North Korea

Fiona Bruce champions the broadcasting of BBC World Service into North Korea

Fiona Bruce MP, Vice Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on North Korea called this week for the BBC World Service  as ‘a beacon of hope and a voice for freedom for the oppressed throughout the world’ to offer programming in North Korea.

Speaking in Parliament she said:

“The(...)area that I want to discuss is a world away. I must don the hat that I wear as vice-chair of the North Korea all-party parliamentary group to speak about BBC World Service broadcasting into that country-—or rather, again, the lack of it. I think that we would all accept the importance of the BBC’s role as a key instrument of soft power in promoting universal values—human rights, the rule of law and democracy—and would accept that, at its best, the BBC World Service is a beacon of hope and a voice of freedom for the oppressed throughout the world. Broadcasting into North Korea would enable the people there who are victims of the most egregious and repressive regime in the world to know that they are not forgotten.
I hope that Members will forgive me if I remind them for a moment of the atrocities that occur in North Korea, and of why it is so important for us to shatter the wall of communication isolation that has afflicted the North Korean people for well over three generations. There are beginning to be cracks in that wall, largely owing to the advancement of technology. I think it important for the BBC to be at the forefront of that, rather than lagging behind.
Only last week our media reported that humans were being used as guinea pigs in North Korea, and that whole families were being placed in what were effectively glass boxes so that chemical weapons could be tested. That is cruelty beyond imagination, but it is just one example of what is happening in that country. People are being steamrollered to death, children are being starved to death, and thousands more are wandering the streets without parents. The children of prisoners are being treated as prisoners from birth. Hundreds of thousands are being held in gulags, many simply because of their beliefs or for making a cursory statement against the regime. Many are literally worked to death in prison factories, sleeping at their machines. A vast number of people are starving. Aid is being misappropriated at borders, never reaching those for whom it is intended. Those who succeed in escaping—which is rare—may lose their lives in the process, and three generations of their families may be threatened with imprisonment, perhaps for life. In short, they are the most persecuted people on earth.
Surely we should use our soft power through the BBC World Service to uphold human rights, democracy and the rule of law, and to develop this nation into one that we would see as habitable for human beings, not the nation we know of today. The cost of that would be a fraction of the £100 million lost from the BBC through the digital media initiative, not to mention the high celebrity salaries and executive pay-offs.
The all-party group held a meeting some months ago with Peter Horrocks, director of global news, including the World Service, and he kindly agreed to look into this suggestion. I contacted the Foreign and Commonwealth Office some time later and received a letter in response in March 2013 from the Minister of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for East Devon (Mr Swire). He confirmed that Mr Horrocks had

“agreed to look into the suggestions that the group made in more detail. I understand that this work is ongoing. The BBC has committed to updating the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the APPG once this work has been completed. I do not want to prejudice that update and look forward to hearing more from Mr Horrocks on this in due course.”

I should be grateful if the Minister present today updated the all-party group on that.
My right hon. Friend the Minister of State also indicated that Mr Horrocks had said

“that the BBC Worldwide are currently exploring the possibility of offering BBC cultural television programmes to the North Korean state broadcaster.”

I should be grateful for an update on that, too.
We know how effective the British Council has been in North Korea in its teaching of English over very many years. I believe it has now taught English to almost 4,000 North Koreans. It has had access into North Korea, which has made a huge difference. I have spoken to several escapees and refugees who learned some of their English as a result of the work of the British Council. That and the BBC World Service are excellent examples of the use of soft power, which the UK is so good at.
We should remember that the Foreign Secretary retains his role in setting the strategic objectives of the BBC World Service. He still has oversight, and post-2014, will retain his current role of agreeing objectives, priorities and targets. I hope he will look favourably on the extension of broadcasting into North Korea and I ask the Minister to refer that point to him for a response.
I close by reminding the House of the respect in which the BBC World Service is held across the globe for the quality of its reporting. I share that respect; it is a service that I listen to frequently when I sometimes find I am unable to access the kind of slumber I would wish after a long day in this House. The quality of the BBC World Service never fails to impress me, and the public agree. The Chatham House-YouGov 2012 survey on British attitudes towards the UK’s international priorities asked people the following question:

“Which of the following do you think do most to serve Britain’s national interests around the world?”

They ranked the BBC World Service radio and TV broadcasting second only to the armed forces, with an overwhelming 68% of opinion-formers believing the BBC World Service is the UK’s most important foreign policy asset.
Let us use that asset to promote a safer world and address some of the most egregious human rights atrocities on earth today. That would be in the interests of not only North Koreans, but us all.”

In response the Minister, Maria Miller MP, said

“I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton for her contribution, in which she spoke incredibly powerfully about the BBC’s role in taking concepts of democracy and human rights around the world. I would like to touch on the impact that the BBC can have on the international stage in representing us and playing a key role in how we are perceived as a nation. As well as stimulating the interests of businesses and tourists alike, through the work of the BBC we are spreading Britain’s reach and enhancing our reputation as a nation. In a recent survey of about 900 business leaders in the United States, India and Australia, nearly two thirds of respondents said that the BBC was the main way in which they found out about the UK, and over half said that they were more likely to do business with the UK because of what they knew about the BBC. That is extremely powerful, and important to understand. Therefore, when the BBC fails to adhere to the standards we expect, and does so repeatedly, the potential for damage is great and goes well beyond our shores. That is perhaps another reason why this debate has been so heated at times. As a brand and as a business, the BBC has an important and powerful role in helping us to preserve what is great about our nation and taking to a wider audience what Britain stands for today.”

Congleton Wins North West in Bloom

Congleton Wins North West in Bloom

Fiona Bruce MP said:  “Congratulations to Congleton for winning North West in Bloom! This tops off a glorious summer of Festivals and Community Events in the town and everyone involved in making these happen and contributing towards the beautiful planting displays across the town can rightly be very proud.

As we approach the National Convention of Market Towns in early November with representatives from all over the country coming to Congleton this gives the town yet one more thing to celebrate.”

Bid to cut EU 'red-tape

Conservative push to bin EU bureaucracy and go for growth in the Congleton Constituency

Last week, six British business leaders reported back to the Prime Minister with an ambitious package of 30 reforms to slash EU red tape. Taken together, the proposed measures could save Britain tens of billions of pounds: securing our economic recovery and creating jobs in the Congleton Constituency.

The taskforce’s report – Cut EU Red Tape – targets burdensome rules in five key areas of business that will affect Congleton:

1.      Starting out;

2.      Exporting;

3.      Expanding a business;

4.      Developing new products;

5.      Overall competitiveness.

The PM had asked six business leaders to present their report directly to Cabinet, reflecting the seriousness of the issue, and the Conservative Party’s determination to reform the EU to work better for hardworking people in Congleton.

Welcoming the report, local MP Fiona Bruce said:

‘It’s vital that local business gets access to the EU’s single market. But all too often EU rules are a handicap for firms in my constituency hampering their efforts. Hardworking people, particularly owners of small firms, are forced to spend far too much time complying with pointless, burdensome and costly regulations. That means less time developing a new product, winning contracts or hiring young recruits. The Conservatives are determined to change that and to get the EU working for business, not against it.’

‘That’s why the Prime Minister got this Taskforce together: so we could establish from businesses what they really need. This report makes clear there are lots of simple and practical ways to cut EU red tape and save tens of billions of pounds.’

Prime Minister David Cameron said:

‘We must now persuade our European partners and the European Commission to listen to business and to move faster to reform the way Europe regulates. At next week’s European Council, I’ll be calling for a clear commitment to sweep away unnecessary bureaucratic barriers and to unleash private sector growth - helping to secure the economic recovery for all.’

ENDS

NOTES to Editor

 Specific proposals

 The business-led proposals include:

·         Fast-tracking measures to set a maximum cap on the fees that could be applied to card, internet and mobile payments, thus reducing costs for retailers and SMEs and through them for consumers, all of whom deserve a clear, comprehensive framework to cover this area. 

• Scrapping EU-wide requirements for small businesses in low-risk sectors to keep written health and safety risk assessments.  These record-keeping requirements cost businesses time and money. This would benefit at least 220,000 UK small businesses and save businesses across the EU an estimated €2.7 billion.
• Abandoning plans to force small businesses such as one-man gardening firms and carpenters to pay fees to register to collect and transport waste, even when the materials involved are harmless and the quantities small.  Abolishing these rules could benefit 460,000 small businesses in the UK and many more across Europe.
• Taking urgent action to simplify costly and complex chemicals regulation, which threatens the competiveness of hundreds of small firms. 

Taskforce members

 The six members of the taskforce are:

• Marc Bolland (Chief Executive M&S);
• Ian Cheshire (CEO Kingfisher);
• Glenn Cooper (Managing Director, ATG Access); 
• Louise Makin (CEO BTG);
• Dale Murray CBE (Entrepreneur and Angel Investor);
• Paul Walsh (Diageo).

Principles of the Taskforce

The Taskforce have also set out how to prevent similarly unnecessary legislation in the future by getting EU law-makers to put business, not bureaucracy, first and follow clear principles that should be the DNA of any new EU laws.

They propose a new common sense filter to ensure that all new legislation is rigorously assessed to ensure that it is pro-growth and pro-innovation.  This would include not accepting any new regulation unless cuts of equivalent or greater value can be implemented, as pioneered in the UK with our ‘One-in, Two-out’ rule, variants of which have been adopted by France, Italy and Spain.

 And they have ensured that Brussels bureaucrats can easily remember these principles by proposing a seven-letter mnemonic, based on the word ‘COMPETE’:

?         C – competitiveness test

?         O – one in, one out

?         M – measure impacts

?         P – proportionate rules

?         E – exemptions and lighter rules

?         T – targets for burden reduction

?         E – evaluate and enforce

Fiona Bruce welcomes Cheshire Brave Officer of the Year to Parliament

Fiona Bruce MP welcomes Cheshire’s Brave Officer of Year 2013

On Wednesday 16^th October Fiona Bruce MP welcomed the Cheshire Brave Officer of Year 2013, PC Claire Ford, based at Congleton Police Station, to the Houses of Parliament, following her nomination for a National Police Bravery Award for her actions.

In September 2012 PC Claire Ford arrived alone at a blazing house in Rode Heath which had two people inside. PC Ford entered the property to try and get the people out and discovered the male had no intention of leaving the property. After managing to rescue the female out, PC Claire Ford had a physical fight with the male and managed to pull him to safety.

Fiona Bruce MP, commented:

‘It was a privilege to welcome PC Claire Ford to the Houses of Parliament and I congratulate her on her commendation for this award. Her selfless act of bravery undoubtedly saved the lives of two people and I am delighted she received such a high level of recognition for this. The police, and indeed those who work for the other emergency services, often put themselves at risk to protect and help others and I know people across the Congleton Constituency have enormous gratitude for all that they do.’

Prostate Cancer UK

Fiona Bruce MP meets with Prostate Cancer UK over prostate cancer issues

Over a table football ‘friendly’ at Conservative Party Conference Fiona Bruce MP agreed to champion the charity’s fight to improve the quality of prostate cancer care in the Congleton Constituency and to help raise the issue on the party’s agenda. 

Fiona said: “There are 250,000 men living with prostate cancer across the country – many of them in my own constituency - and our goal should be to ensure all these men get the care and support they need regardless of where they live. This is an issue we need to attack head on if we are going to help more men survive and have a better quality of life. That is why I have pledged to help Prostate Cancer UK bring about real and lasting change for men in my Constituency and beyond. By working together as a team, I am sure victory can be ours.”

Chris Kirby from Prostate Cancer UK said: “prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men and set to be the most common cancer overall by 2030 yet there are still wide variations in the standard of care that men receive across the country. We have vowed to lead a movement to change this and I am delighted that [name] has signed up to champion us in our mission.  Men deserve the best, and we’re determined that’s exactly what they get.”

Anyone concerned about prostate cancer can call Prostate Cancer UK's confidential Helpline on 0800 074 8383 or visit www.prostatecanceruk.org. The helpline is free from landlines, staffed by specialist nurses and open from 10am to 4pm on Monday to Friday plus 7pm - 9pm on Wednesdays.

Sex Selection Abortions

Fiona Bruce MP raises the issue of Sex Selection Abortion in Parliament

After launching and chairing an inquiry into abortion due to foetal disability earlier this year, speaking in Parliament recently, Fiona Bruce MP criticised the way the current Abortion Act does not specifically prohibit sex selection abortions:

“Honourable Members, has it come to this? People in this country have spent 40 years fighting discrimination, but no action is to be taken when one of the most blatant forms of discrimination—the deprivation of life on account of being a girl—is highlighted. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield, Southgate (Mr Burrowes) on bringing forward the debate, and I entirely agree with him that the time has come to review the moral, legal, ethical and practical framework in which the Abortion Act operates.

This is not the only form of discrimination against the unborn child in this country. Over the course of more than a year, the cross-party parliamentary inquiry into abortion on the grounds of disability, which I had the privilege of chairing and which published its report in July, took evidence from 300 witnesses. The full report can be seen at the website abortionanddisability.org. Just as people are shocked that abortion can be allowed on the grounds of sex, people we spoke to were shocked to discover, in an age when we go to extensive lengths to accept, support and respect disabled people, seeing them as wholly equal, that a child can be aborted right up to the moment of birth on the grounds that they may be disabled. In contrast to the situation for non-disabled babies, there is no 24-week time limit. Indeed, we heard that many expectant mothers felt funnelled into having an abortion when they were told that they were expecting a potentially disabled child.

The inquiry highlights the lack of clarity in the abortion regulations about what constitutes a serious disability. Some mothers who were told they were expecting a disabled child told us the diagnosis was wrong. Others were told that abortions would be allowed on the grounds of a cleft palate or a club foot, and indeed they can be. Those are minor disabilities, as I know, because I have a son with a club foot. In an era of enormous support for the disabled and their families, we cannot allow this form of discrimination to persist. We must take action to review it.

Equally, we must take action to prevent any hint of discrimination against an unborn child on account of their sex. We have had much more than a hint that this is happening; we have the investigation from The Daily Telegraph. The time it took to look into that investigation—19 months—is deplorable. In his statement of 7 October about the investigation, the DPP said:

“on balance, there is just sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of a conviction.”

We are talking about conviction for a criminal offence, according to the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. What kind of message does that decision send? It sends the shocking message that authorities in this country will turn a blind eye to involvement in acts preparatory to the commission of an unlawful abortion—authorities in whom trust is vested to apply and uphold the laws made by this Parliament.
The reason the DPP gave for not proceeding with the prosecution was that it would not be in the public interest. Prosecutors have also pointed out that the issue has become sensitive and political. How can it not be in the public interest to state firmly and clearly that abortion on the grounds of a child’s sex is wrong? It is wrong morally and legally, and if the law is not sufficiently clear on this point, it is our duty as parliamentarians and politicians—I see nothing wrong in politicians being involved in this issue—to make it clear.
The grounds on which an abortion is legal have never included the sex of the child, and that is true not just in this country. The UN convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, which the UK has ratified, is a legally binding treaty in UK law. The convention recognises the right to choose the “number and spacing” of one’s children, but not the sex. International law is very clear: sex-selective abortions are not legal.

We recognise that in this country when we fully condemn China’s one-child policy, which has resulted in a disproportionate number of young men, running into the millions. The ratio of young men to young women in many parts of China is now 30:1. This country prides itself on respecting human rights, and we cannot be so hypocritical as to condemn that policy and then do nothing when such things occur within our own borders. I said that there was more than a hint that that is happening; in January 2013 I tabled an early-day motion, citing

“recent confirmation by the Department of Health that there are discrepancies in the balance between the number of boys and girls born to groups of women from some overseas countries to an extent that”—

in the Department’s words—

“‘falls outside the range considered possible without intervention’”.

The motion called on the Department of Health to put procedures in place to address the issue, and it was supported by more than 50 parliamentarians. There are a number of parliamentarians here today, but I know from the EDM alone that there are far more who support the views that have been expressed today.

There is further evidence. Dr Vincent Argent, a former medical director of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, has been quoted as saying that the practice is “fairly widespread” in the UK; and there are data from Dr Dubuc of the university of Oxford, who has studied the issue for 35 years, suggesting that sex-selection abortions are happening with increasing regularity among certain groups in the UK because of the increasing availability of technologies to determine the sex of an unborn child. The statistics show that the practice is particularly prevalent when a third child is expected.

The Attorney-General (Mr Dominic Grieve): I should explain that I have only Department of Health statistics to go on, but this may be helpful. As far as the UK as a whole is concerned, the statistics on gender balance in births fall squarely within what are regarded as acceptable norms. As to mothers who were born in other countries, there is, with only one exception, no clear evidence of such a divergence from the norm. Interestingly, the country in question is Sri Lanka and, curiously, the birth ratio for mothers born there is 99.2 male children for every 100 female children, which suggests the opposite of what my hon. Friend is talking about. There again, however, there is nothing to suggest that the ratio is outside the statistical norm.

Fiona Bruce: If my right hon. and learned Friend will allow me, I shall send him Dr Dubuc’s data and research, which show figures that at least need to be looked into.
I ask for not only Ministers but the British Medical Association to take action. The 2012 third edition of its guide, “Medical Ethics Today”, does not clearly prohibit sex-selection abortions. The doctors we heard of in the investigation by The Daily Telegraph clearly felt uncomfortable. I should have thought it would help the many other doctors who might feel uncomfortable in such circumstances if the BMA medical ethics committee were to take a clear stance against the discriminatory practice in question, and support practitioners accordingly. As to the reference by the Director of Public Prosecutions to the General Medical Council taking action on the investigation by The Daily Telegraph, it is worth remembering that the GMC has no powers on criminal actions and cannot prosecute breaches of the law.

Finally, in April, I presented a ten-minute rule Bill on the very issue that we are debating. It was interesting to note that there was no opposition from any Member of the House. My purpose was to raise the issue and to remind the police and Crown Prosecution Service that abortions on the ground of gender are illegal in this country. My Bill called on the Department of Health to establish procedures to record the gender of babies aborted under the Abortion Act 1967, when the sex can be determined, and to consider a review of the penalties for anyone found to have facilitated the abortion of a child because of their gender. The United Kingdom prides itself on striving for gender equality and tackling discrimination in all its forms, and any indication of that most fundamental form of gender discrimination and violence against women must surely be investigated further.”

Fiona Bruce MP welcomes Government Action on Online Protection

Fiona Bruce MP welcomes the Government’s Action on Internet Safety.

At a meeting this month the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport the Rt Hon Maria Miller MP thanked MPs who have pressed for greater online protection for children - Fiona Bruce MP was a Member of the Parliamentary Inquiry into Online Child Protection.

What the Government is now doing:

·        Online filters are now pre-ticked to prevent adult content featuring on them and have to proactively be changed by the user if they want such material.

·        The policing and criminal justice system has increased how effective it is in responding to cases and now has the largest child abuse image database in the world.

·        E-Safety is a new education initiative that is being launched in 2014 to give guidance to children aged 5-16 about using the internet safely.

·         The Education Act 2011 allows teachers the authority to delete inappropriate images on student’s phones.

Fiona said:

“I am very pleased at the plans that have been made on this extremely serious issue. They are a step forward to protecting our Children from unsuitable material online. I am encouraged to hear that the newly formed National Crime Agency will be appointed to tackle child abuse on and offline. A new education initiative E-Safety is happening for all children aged between five and sixteen and this will be implemented next year to help inform children on being safe online. It is vital that there has been cross-departmental work from the Government within media, education and law enforcement to protect and increase awareness for children and to prosecute where illegal and damaging activity has occurred. I hope that we will not stop here but continue to strengthen security online for the protection of the next generation. Children have the opportunity to have a childhood”.

Further Action:

 In September 2012 Fiona Bruce MP and a number of other MPs handed a Petition calling for Government action to improve online protection for children with over 115,000 signatories sent to Number 10 Downing Street. The Government has now taken action and has worked alongside the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to provide appropriate online Child Protection. The ISP now has domestic filtering in place as well as filtering over 90% of public WIFI facilities. Mobile phones also have closed access.

The Secretary of State was proud to announce that Britain is leading the way on Internet Safety. The importance to work alongside the industry was highlighted due to the constant development of internet sites.

Fiona Bruce MP said “it is encouraging to see that the issue of Child Protection is being tackled in a joined up way across many Departments including Policing, Criminal Justice and Education”.

Support for Deaf Children and Young People

Fiona Bruce MP speaks of New Life Church’s Deaf Aware Nursery in Parliament

Speaking in Parliament last week, as a member of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Deafness, Fiona Bruce MP praised the work done by Margaret Sanders who has run the deaf-aware nursery (itself running for 25 years) at New Life Church for 5 years.

Fiona also spoke of the need for better understanding of the requirements of deaf children and for their needs to be addressed and planned for at as early a stage as possible.

Fiona said “I am proud to have a deaf-aware nursery in my constituency, which is based at the New Life church in Congleton. It has been running for 25 years and caters for able children, as well as for children with needs, such as those with deafness or autism, and it will soon have a child with Down’s syndrome. For the past five years, it has been managed by Margaret Sanders, a special educational needs co-ordinator with a passion for inclusion who has worked hard to ensure that the nursery goes the extra mile to provide support for deaf children in an extra special way. However, such early-years provision should not only be available when one inspirational individual is backed by committed community support, such as that provided by New Life. The nursery also works closely with specialist organisations such as the teachers of the deaf.

Justine Heathcote, the mother of a profoundly deaf three-year-old girl who attends the nursery, has shared some of her experiences with me. Her daughter was diagnosed as deaf just after birth. It was a traumatic time for the family. Justine says generously that her family have received excellent support and care from the nursery and the local authority. Crucially, that included her daughter being given a teacher of the deaf immediately. I ask the Minister to do all that he can to ensure that that always happens. A family must be given the appropriate support straight away, either at birth or on diagnosis. I have heard that in some cases it takes 10 years from when hearing starts to deteriorate before a clear diagnosis is made.
Neil Carmichael (Stroud) (Con): Does my hon. Friend welcome the measures in the Children and Families Bill, as I do, to create care plans for people that go from nought to 24 years of age?
Fiona Bruce: I very much welcome that, because it is crucial that families can plan ahead from the earliest possible moment of childhood.
I was greatly encouraged to hear from Justine that her daughter got such excellent support, but I am aware that that is not universally available across the country. I ask the Minister to make an assessment of the varying standard of support across the country. One small example, which is important for Justine’s family, concerns her daughter’s hearing aids, which require four batteries a day. When they run out, Justine has a one-hour round trip to a hospital to collect them, yet in a neighbouring area, rechargeable batteries for hearing aids are available.
Another difficulty for some families concerns getting a statement of educational needs for their child. One highly experienced teacher of the deaf, Liz Gwynn, has spent many years liaising with local authorities. She told me—quite bluntly—that the reason for the delay or lack of statement is often that,

“local authorities don’t want to commit to the financial implications of a Statement.”

That cannot be right.
The one-to-one support provided by a teacher of the deaf in my council of Cheshire East is greatly appreciated, but it amounts to only one hour a week. Ideally, every deaf child and their family needs much more support and time. A teacher of the deaf plays a critical role in a child’s development because they advise on whether the child is accessing the curriculum properly and adequately, on that child’s language development and how they are hearing through hearing aids or cochlear implants, and on whether they need a radio aid to help them. Such teachers can act as an intermediary between the child or family and the school, in addition to helping set targets for development and providing strategies and ideas for accessing lessons. All hon. Members will agree that that cannot be done in one hour a week.
In Cheshire East there is a ratio of one teacher of the deaf to every 45 children—a phenomenal challenge for those teachers. I struggle to see how a teacher of the deaf can support that number of children and their families, let alone even more, yet I understand that in some parts of the country there is even less support for deaf children.
The availability of care for deaf children and young people should not be a postcode lottery. The National Deaf Children’s Society reports that some families with a deaf child are fighting that issue by moving to a different area, which is surely unacceptable. There are examples of good practice and expertise across the country, and better sharing of support across local authorities and support networks would be beneficial. I would be grateful if the Minister would tell the House whether there are any plans to share best practice across authorities and promote a more collaborative approach.
The exemplary nursery in my constituency, to which I referred, aims to maximise the individual potential of each child, but it is placed in a dilemma. When a child who has received that much-needed support—designed to raise their attainment levels in the early years to those of their non-deaf peers—moves to primary school, they are assessed. If they are assessed to be above a certain level, any one-to-one support that the child previously received, or which they may need in future, is withdrawn, and they begin primary school without it. What should the nursery do? Should it support the child to develop to the maximum level possible and risk that one-to-one support being withdrawn when they go to primary school? Withdrawal of such support would undoubtedly result in the child falling back and not continuing to flourish to the same degree that they need and for which the nursery has given them a head start. If we believe that every child should have the opportunity to develop to their fullest potential, surely that must be the case for the more vulnerable children in our society.
If a parent wants their child to go to a mainstream school in later years, it is crucial for support to be established at the start and to continue throughout the child’s early years. Liz Gwynn explains:

“In a big class with a ratio of 15 pupils to one staff member, or even thirty to one, it is very easy for a deaf child to be overlooked, especially if they aren’t a behavioural issue. They can appear to be understanding, but when questioned often haven’t a clue and get by by copying what others are doing.”

Such a situation can result in low self-esteem and lack of confidence. That is the “stolen future” that the National Deaf Children’s Society is raising awareness of, and I commend its work with local groups and parents around the country. I encourage the Minister to support those groups and ensure that all families have access to them. Will he review the assessment procedure for deaf children and young people, not just when they enter school, but when they move to another educational establishment for the first time, so as to determine appropriate individual provision for that child or young person? Sign language is critical, yet 81% of parents with deaf children never learn how to fully communicate with their child through that.
Justine, to whom I have referred, says she managed to get funding for level 1, but was unable to get funding for level 2, which she took at her own expense of £400. Level 3, at £1,000, is simply too expensive for the family. Will the Minister consider what duties can be placed on local authorities to provide sign language support for families?

As we have heard, deafness itself is not a learning disability, but we can do so much more to ensure that the attainment of deaf children and young people does not continue to fall worryingly behind that of their non-deaf peers.”

North Korean Refugees Solidarity Worldwide

Fiona Bruce MP hosts the launch of ‘North Korean Refugees Solidarity Worldwide.’

On Thursday 10^th October Fiona Bruce MP hosted the launch of the new organisation, ‘North Korean Refugees Solidarity Worldwide (NKRSW),’ during North Korean Freedom Week in the Houses of Parliament.

The purpose of NKRSW is to coordinate and promote global solidarity of North Korean refugees and human rights activists worldwide. The aims of North Korea Freedom Week include revealing the reality of human rights violations in North Korea and building a global network of organisations to work effectively together for human rights in North Korea. Here in the UK supporters continue to press for a Korean language broadcast of the BBC World Service.

At the launch of NKRSW attendees heard powerful presentations from North Korean escapees and former political prisoners, including 26 year-old Jo Jin-hye who escaped from North Korea in 2006 amid the great famine after the torturing of her father to death and witnessing her two brothers starve to death.

Fiona Bruce MP, Vice-Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on North Korea commented:

‘It was a privilege to host the launch of the ‘North Korea Refugees Solidarity Worldwide. After South Korea, here in the UK we have the most North Korean refugees of any country in the world – some 500 - and, therefore, we have a very important role to play in helping to support North Korean refugees here who one day hope to return to their country and to help build a far better North Korea than they left. There are many ways in which we can help and this very importantly includes highlighting human rights abuses there – such as the recently reported use of prisoners to test chemical weapons – and supporting refugees in their endeavours to instigate change. I believe it is essential that we continue to fight for freedom and justice for the people of North Korea, the most persecuted people on earth, and whilst we should hope for a better future we should do more than just watch and wait for it.’