Fiona Bruce MP made Patron of Fair Votes for All campaign

Fiona Bruce MP made Patron of Fair Votes for All campaign

The Fair Votes for All campaign has welcomed Fiona Bruce, Member of Parliament for Congleton, as a Patron. This campaign is calling for English votes for English issues to be introduced into the House of Commons as soon as possible.

Fiona commented, “I am delighted to become a Patron of the Fair Votes for All campaign. This is a matter of fairness for people in my constituency whose voice in Parliament is currently diluted by Scottish MPs. With more powers being devolved to Scotland following the independence referendum last year, it is not fair that Scottish MPs continue to determine issues that do not affect their constituents. We should be able to decide our own priorities in our classrooms and in our NHS. I am determined to sort this out and, to this end, have placed a petition in my Congleton Office which I invite interested constituents to sign.”  

Graham Stuart MP, Chairman of the Fair Votes for All campaign, said, “I am glad to welcome Fiona Bruce MP as a Patron of the campaign. Fiona is a fantastic local representative who is standing up for the Congleton Constituency. As more powers are handed over to the Scottish Parliament, this basic constitutional unfairness cannot be ignored any longer.”

Fiona Bruce MP leads on amendment to Serious Crime Bill to outlaw sex-selective abortion

Fiona Bruce MP leads on amendment to Serious Crime Bill to outlaw sex-selective abortion

Almost 80 MPs have tabled an amendment to the Serious Crime Bill.

Fiona Bruce has tabled a parliamentary amendment to the Serious Crime Bill which would make it clear that conducting an abortion on the grounds that the unborn child is a girl – or a boy (although this practice mainly affects girls) is illegal.

Seventy-three MPs signed the amendment to the Serious Crime Bill yesterday and more have added their names today.

If selected for debate in the House of Commons at the next legislative stage of the Serious Crime Bill, which is likely to be within the next two to three weeks, the amendment will be voted on and, if ratified by a majority of MPs, it will become law.

Fiona Bruce MP said: “The amendment has two aims. Firstly, to make the Government to think of ways to support women who are under pressure to abort on grounds of the sex of their baby. Secondly, to stop this practice by confirming, beyond doubt, the current law. This clarification is necessary to prevent false information being distributed to women- still today, BPAS, Britain’s biggest abortion provider, on their website, insists that sex-selective abortion is not illegal – and this despite my Ten Minute Rule Bill of last November when MPs voted 181 to 1 that it is indeed illegal.”

“Evidence from women shows this is still happening and so stronger legislative force is needed – hence my amendment to the Serious Crime Bill. I am delighted that so many MPs are supporting it to send out such a clear message that this practice must stop. If we condemn this in countries like China where it has produced such an imbalance in young people that villages can have 30 young men to one young woman- whilst no-one is saying that the extent of the practice here is at anything like that level- it is happening here and it is equally wrong. I cannot be allowed to become culturally acceptable and we should no longer be turning a blind eye to it.”

Rani Bilkhu, founder of Jeena International, and spokeswoman for StopGendercide.org, said: “The Government has been clear that sex-selective abortion is illegal. But the UK’s biggest abortion provider BPAS continues to contradict them. It has been very upsetting to see some people claim that there is no evidence of sex-selective abortion in the UK. We know it is happening because we have been continually supporting women for nearly a decade who have had them or are being forced or coerced in having them. In their desperation to oppose this initiative, some radical commentators have said that there is no way to help women like those we deal with except through racial profiling.

“This is nonsense, and if the same argument were made about FGM and forced marriages, people would run a mile. We know sex-selective abortions are happening in the UK and the time has come to face up to it. People speak about choice. The women who we deal with rarely have a choice. Many are forced or coerced to abort simply because they are girls, this is the first act of violence against women and girls. We are supporting Fiona Bruce and her colleagues because it is the right approach, making a clear statement about the law, and providing the means for the Government to take practical action and to send a clear message to all stakeholders including communities that practice sex selection abortions is not only acceptable but against the law.”

Fiona Bruce’s Ten Minute Rule Speech, 4^th November 2014

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm141104/debtext/141104-0001.htm#14110444000291

Fiona Bruce’s Article in The Daily Telegraph, 22^nd January 2015

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11362379/Gender-abortion-Its-time-for-urgent-action.html


** A change has been made to the second paragraph on this release as the wording originally used has been interpreted as implying that women seeking a sex selective abortion would be breaking the law under this amendment. This is emphatically not the case, and has never been the intention of the amendment. Thanks to BPAS for pointing this out!

Fiona Bruce MP raises awareness of Raynauds and Scleroderma in Houses of Parliament

Fiona Bruce MP raises awareness of Raynauds and Scleroderma in Houses of Parliament

Speaking in a debate in the Houses of Parliament last week, Fiona Bruce praised Alsager based national charity the Raynaud’s and Scleroderma Association and raised awareness of the work they do and the NHS assistance needed for Raynaud’s and Scleroderma sufferers.

Speaking in the House of Commons, Fiona Bruce MP said “Ahead of this debate, I have been contacted by an exceptional charity in my constituency, the Raynaud’s and Scleroderma Association, of which it is my privilege to have been patron for many years. That outstanding charity was founded and is based in Alsager in my constituency, and it is the only charity providing national support, research and help for people suffering from Raynaud’s and scleroderma—two debilitating conditions that affect the digits and the autoimmune system. The charity also supplies support to their carers.

I am glad to take the chance today to pay tribute to the work that the RSA does every day for people suffering from those debilitating conditions. Despite working from a tiny terraced house on limited resources, it has raised millions of pounds to fund national treatment and vital research. It has helped the country’s understanding of the conditions, as I have heard personally from clinicians and doctors. As a result, I believe that the RSA’s concerns about the proposals that we are discussing today demand a hearing.

The RSA’s work makes a huge difference to the lives of those affected by the conditions, especially those with Raynaud’s when their condition develops into scleroderma, which is rarer and more serious. The progress the association has made in research into and treatment of the conditions is outlined on its website. Its chief executive officer, Elizabeth Bevins, contacted me prior to the debate because she is concerned about the plans we are debating, which could reverse the progress that has been made over recent years on services for these rare conditions. I will quote from Elizabeth’s letter to me:

“Having followed the development of NHS England with interest since its launch…and having welcomed Specialised Services commissioning at national rather than local level as an important cornerstone of the plan to help eradicate any ‘postcode lottery’ issues, I am now concerned at the proposed changes on national commissioning for specialised services.”

She added that she shared the concerns of the Specialised Healthcare Alliance, which she thought had articulated the position well in the statement it released on the issue. That statement says:

“Specialised services are best planned on a national level–in the past patients experienced very different levels of access to specialised care.”

Elizabeth is concerned that NHS England’s plans to let local commissioners share responsibility for commissioning such complex services, thereby incentivising them to direct funding to local priorities, could result in a patchwork quilt of provision. An example is the prescription of the drug Bosentan for scleroderma. The drug can often help to prevent the formation of digital ulcers. The RSA is extremely concerned that access to that drug and others for the rare conditions to which I have referred should continue to be “equitable and consistent”.

These diseases are rare, so shared knowledge across clinicians nationwide is essential. Scleroderma affects only about 8,000 patients in the UK. The RSA has stated that

15 Jan 2015 : Column 345WH

“treatment is best and most effectively made from a few specialist hospitals across the UK…who work with a patient’s local hospital to manage what can be killer diseases.”

I hope that, in continuing with the proposals, Ministers will take into account the concerns of the RSA.”

Elizabeth Bevins, CEO of the Raynaud’s and Scleroderma Association said “It is so important that the voices of those who have rare autoimmune rheumatic conditions, namely scleroderma, are heard now and in the future.”

Let's Stick Together

Fiona Bruce MP welcomes planned Let’s Stick Together course in Congleton Constituency

Fiona is delighted the Let’s Stick Together programme in Congleton has secured funding.

The Let’s Stick Together Programme operates under the umbrella of Care for the Family, a charity committed to strengthening families and relationships. A pilot for Care’s Let’s Stick Together programme was recently funded by the Department of Education and was piloted in three local authority areas.  It seeks to address the fact that the levels of family breakdown can be reduced with early intervention and small changes in behaviour – through help and advice to mothers and fathers of young children.

Funding has now been approved by Cheshire East Council for a Let’s Stick Together Programme for couples to be launched and operated (by volunteers) in the Congleton Area.

Fiona Bruce MP said “Research suggests that one in three cohabiting couples split up before their child’s fifth birthday and Care for the Family are seeking to address this issue.  They have concluded that it is rare nowadays for new parents, despite excellent pre and ante-natal care for their child, to be advised, however obvious it may seem, that a new arrival can put on strain on their relationship and that there is a need for greater support for new parents in these times particularly when so many do not have a family support network roundabout. That is why I am so pleased that a Let’s Stick Together Programme here in Congleton, something I have campaigned for both in Parliament and Congleton, where it can do good helping couples stay together for the benefit of themselves, their children and their community as a whole I pay tribute to Carolyn McQuaker, the faith representative for The Children’s Trust, for pursuing this project.”

Speaking in the House of Commons as Chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Strengthening Couple Relationships (full speech attached), Fiona Bruce said “My simple and unapologetic message is that, for children, what matters is that relationships that are safe, stable and nurturing… The three dimensions of safety, stability and nurture are all important aspects of the social and physical environments that protect children and are indispensable to their fulfilling their potential.”

Fiona met with Carolyn McQuaker last week, faith representative on The Children’s Trust in Cheshire, who, with Fiona, promoted the campaign for funding for Let’s Stick Together sessions in Cheshire.

Carolyn McQuaker said “This funding will help us to set up and train teams to deliver these important courses in Congleton and across the Borough.”

Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con): I commend the Government for their groundbreaking work in beginning to put relationships at the heart of family policy.
The Minister can be justly proud of the Government’s progress in a number of ways, including: raising the care leaving age for young people who are fostered, acknowledging that ongoing relationships with foster parents can be incredibly redemptive for children whose birth families have been unable to raise them; transforming the adoption landscape, so that heroic adoptive parents get the support that they need, making it far more likely that they can provide a stable, loving family and that the adoption is as successful as possible; building on the existing evidence-based programme and approaches that help couples to strengthen their relationships and prevent family breakdown; and investing in parent-child relationships by launching the CANparent scheme, providing vouchers for free parenting classes in three trial areas.
The coalition must also be congratulated on recognising marriage in the tax system, acknowledging the greater stability of marriage. Unmarried couples with children are at least twice as likely to split up as those who are married, regardless of income. Furthermore, the Government established a cross-cutting Cabinet Committee on social justice—which rightly treats family breakdown as a driver and not simply as an effect of poverty—and appointed the Department for Work and Pensions as lead Ministry on the issue, to bring all relationship support policy under one Department. I also thank the Prime Minister for his speech in August this year in support of strong families.
I could go on, but I want to leave plenty of time to explain why relationships matter so much to children’s well-being and to make it clear that while that is a great start, it is only a start. The agenda has to be seen as a journey with a long distance left to run. It is like a ship that has finally set sail and edged out of the mouth of the harbour, but is still a long way from achieving its purpose in setting forth. What is that purpose? The over-riding priority for family policy has to be to tackle our epidemic levels of family breakdown in this country.
With the exception of our Prime Minister and a few others, some of whom are present—I acknowledge the support of Members attending the debate—politicians often hold back from talking up the benefits of marriage and committed relationships. They worry that by emphasising the need to support and encourage such relationships they will be seen as judgmental or moralising, or as adopting a “nanny state” approach. The costs of family breakdown, however, are enormous; at £48 billion, they exceed the defence budget. Surely it
21 Oct 2014 : Column 178WH

“is not a nanny state so much as a canny state”

that tackles the issue—not my words, but a quotation from the conclusion reached by the Centre for Social Justice in its July 2014 Breakthrough Britain report, “Fully Committed? How a Government could reverse family breakdown”.
The CSJ has probably done more than any other organisation to put the issue on to the policy agenda. I pay tribute to the CSJ, to the leadership of my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr Duncan Smith), now the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, for founding the organisation and inspiring so much of its work, and to the excellent work of Dr Samantha Callan.
The CSJ report states:

“Strong and stable relationships and families are indispensable to a strong and stable society. Secure, nurturing, loving and reliable family environments are crucial for the health and wellbeing of children, adults, and wider communities, and where these factors are absent this can have a profoundly damaging effect on the fabric of society. Yet for almost half a century there has been an escalation in family breakdown across Britain—divorce and separation, dysfunction and dadlessness.”

The report and the statistics speak volumes about why we have no grounds for complacency in this country. For example, by the time that children are sitting their GCSEs, nearly half of them live in broken homes. That proportion rises to two thirds for those in low-income communities, and we must highlight the fact that it is the poorest who are hit hardest by family breakdown. Almost half of all children under five in our poorest households are not living with both their parents, which is seven times the number of those in the richest households. One statistic in particular brought home to me the distorted priorities in our society: more teenagers have a smartphone than have a father at home.
We are known as the single parent capital of Europe, with one quarter of families with children headed by lone parents. That figure rises significantly in our poorest neighbourhoods and can be as high as 75%. Other countries are doing much better. In Finland, more than 95% of children under 15 live with both parents, and the OECD average is 84%. Many parents raising children on their own are doing an amazing job against the odds, but few set out to do that—it is rarely a lifestyle choice. They find it incredibly difficult and they do not want their children to be in the same position when they are older.
Why does stability matter so much for children? Surely the most important thing is that they are safe? Surely if a relationship is no longer loving and nurturing for the adults and children involved, it is time to call it a day. Campaigners against domestic abuse often argue against an emphasis on stability, on the grounds that violent and controlling relationships should not be stable and need to end. I will explain why, however, it is overly simplistic to pit safety against stability.
Not for one minute am I saying that a partner who is being subjugated or suffering significant and severe abuse should be under any societal or economic pressure to remain in an exploitative relationship. Nor am I saying that the poor status quo of low-quality relationships, even where there is no abuse, should simply be endured because of an ideological emphasis on stability. Relationship education, support, counselling and therapy represent a spectrum of help for those who do not want their
21 Oct 2014 : Column 179WH
relationship to end, but deeply want it to improve. That is why this and future Governments need to keep investing in effective programmes and research on what works.
Parents’ desire to stay together is often rooted in their awareness that relationship breakdown profoundly affects children. Children whose family splits are more likely to experience behavioural problems, to underachieve in school, to need more medical treatment, to leave school and home earlier, to become sexually active, pregnant or a parent at an early age, and to have poorer mental health and higher levels of smoking, drinking and other drug use during adolescence.
That is explored in another report, which was produced last month by a number of parliamentarians. I was privileged to be involved, under the leadership of my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Jeremy Lefroy), who I am pleased to see present today. That important report, “Holding the Centre: Social stability and Social capital”, which I hope the Minister will read, if he has not already received a copy, states that social capital is the wealth of our nation:

“While economic recovery is an essential foundation, it is not enough. Debt burdens, housing costs, worries about social care, and lack of confidence that all will share the fruits of domestic hard graft and global competitiveness weigh heavily. Fractured relationships are both a cause and consequence of these issues.

Strong communities and extended families can build both financial and social capital, increasing wellbeing and reducing long-term pressures on public spending. Every department of the government should therefore be crystal clear about the extent to which it relies on family and community relationships and the costs of that contribution being compromised.”

The report welcomes the Prime Minister’s announcement of a “triple test” for family policy, so that

“every government department will be held to account for the impact of their policies on the family”,

and it states:

“He is right to say that ‘whatever the social issue we want to grasp—the answer should always begin with family’.”

The report highlights the Prime Minister’s comment that

“to really drive this through, we need to change the way government does business”.

It makes a number of recommendations that, as I have said, I hope the Minister will look at and will respond to in his speech.
My simple and unapologetic message is that, for children, what matters is a trinity: relationships that are safe, stable and nurturing. The United States Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, the equivalent of Public Health England, treats safe, stable and nurturing relationships—or SSNRs, in our acronym-prone world—as one of the essentials for childhood. It states:

“Safe, stable, nurturing relationships…between children and their caregivers…are fundamental to healthy brain development”

and

“shape the development of children’s physical, emotional, social, behavioral, and intellectual capacities”,

all of which ultimately affect the whole of their lives as adults. Children’s mental health rests largely on their benefiting from safe, stable and nurturing relationships.
The three dimensions of safety, stability and nurture are all important aspects of the social and physical environments that protect children and are indispensible to their fulfilling their potential. Safety is the extent to
21 Oct 2014 : Column 180WH
which a child is free from fear and secure from physical or psychological harm. Stability is about the degree of predictability and consistency in a child’s environment—including consistency in the people to whom children relate—as well as how they interact with caregivers and others.
Stability gives a child a sense of coherence and enables them to see the world as predictable and manageable. Without it, they may not form the secure and nurturing attachments they need for optimal development. Moreover, if the adults around them are not in stable relationships, it can make it more likely that a child will be exposed to relationships and environments that are stressful and unsafe. Many stepfathers are incredibly caring and conscientious, but sometimes living with unrelated males is a significant risk factor for child maltreatment, as in the baby Peter tragedy and many other serious child abuse cases.
Nurture concerns the extent to which a parent or carer is attuned and responding to the physical, developmental and emotional needs of their child. Nurturing relationships make a child feel safer and able to embrace new situations and explore their world with confidence. I should say that it is not one-way: one of the most fulfilling experiences of my life has been nurturing and bringing up two boys, who are now aged 18 and 21. Safety, stability and nurture overlap, and all matter. Children are more likely to grow up with all of them if their parents’ relationship is intact and high in quality.
In a worrying situation, over the past few days and weeks, world leaders and national Governments have been calling other countries to account over their lack of action on the Ebola outbreak. The scale of such a challenge requires all the wealthy nations of the world to plough in significant resources and make a sacrificial effort. Small gestures will not stem the tide. I would argue that exactly the same can be said about stemming the tide of family breakdown.
Evidence from the Healthy Marriage Initiative in the United States shows that those states that put a significant amount of resource into the poorest communities saw correspondingly significant increases in children growing up with both their parents and declines in child poverty. The states that did not had far less to show for their efforts. Our Government’s own research has already shown that Relate’s couple counselling and Marriage Care’s marriage preparation courses show a more than elevenfold return on investment through savings due to reduced relationship breakdown—that is, for every £1 invested, over £11 is returned to society. Courses such as those show that relationship skills can be learned. We need more of them in our society, in which so many people—particularly young people—embark on relationships with no role model for how to sustain a healthy relationship over time.
I am reminded of a discussion I had with a colleague in my law firm. It had become clear to me that our family department was advising on divorces for couples in shorter and shorter relationships. I asked the head of the department, “What is the shortest marriage that you have advised on now?” He turned to me and said, “The couple did not even end their reception. They had a row
21 Oct 2014 : Column 181WH
during the reception and came to us for a divorce.” Does that not highlight a lack of understanding of what commitment means, certainly in a marriage?
I welcome the Prime Minister’s commitment not to allow funding for relationship support to drop below the current level as long as he is in post. But that level is meagre in comparison to the scale of need: it is just 0.02% of the cost of family breakdown. I understand that public finances are tight and that there is concern that the evidence base for effective programmes and approaches is still slender. However, surely the answer is to build on that base. Sir Graham Hart urged the previous Government to do that in the review of relationship support they commissioned him to undertake in the late 1990s. It is important to note that this is a cross-party issue. It concerns colleagues right across the political spectrum and should be above and beyond party politics. Any Government, of whatever colour, should treat it as a priority.
Relationship science is a growing and respected field of research in the US. One of its foremost proponents, Professor Scott Stanley, argues that we know enough to take action and we need to take action to know more. We have already learned a lot about what works in helping and supporting couples, but we need to keep on learning and improving all the time. Evidence matters enormously, so I am delighted that this Government have recently conducted their own family stability review. It is essential that the findings of the review are published soon, for the benefit of local authorities and commissioners of services.
We also need a “What Works” centre for families and relationships—not a vastly expensive proposition considering its potential return: the Early Intervention Foundation was set up at a cost of £3.5 million and is already making a huge contribution to local authority decision making. A What Works centre would help enormously in refining a curriculum for relationships education in school. It is critical that relationships are the priority in relationships and sex education in schools. There is hardly a person I know who does not agree with that. The subject should be a compulsory part of the national curriculum, drawing in local relationship support organisations as well as specialist teachers. Last week’s heated media discussions over the footballer Ched Evans’s rape conviction show how vital it is for all young people to understand issues such as consent, equality and respect in relationships, as well as commitment and the importance of enduring relationships.
We also need children’s centres in every community to evolve into family hubs where parents can get help with their own relationships, not just with parenting. Although all this help and support has to be delivered at a local level, it is essential that the policy agenda is championed nationally, otherwise it will have no hope of competing for time, money and attention in an already impossibly crowded set of priorities. Although I am aware that individual Opposition Members are extremely concerned about this issue, I am disappointed that apart from the shadow Minister there is only one Member on the Opposition Benches today, from the Democratic Unionist party, the hon. Member for South Antrim (Dr McCrea).
As chair of the all-party group for strengthening couple relationships, I had the privilege of hosting the launch yesterday, here in the House of Commons, of
21 Oct 2014 : Column 182WH
the Relationships Alliance’s excellent manifesto. That manifesto makes some excellent practical suggestions, including calling for a Cabinet-level Minister for Families with a properly resourced Whitehall Department. That would greatly help to ensure that the recently introduced family test for public policy is meaningful.
The manifesto has 12 points intended to challenge Government and promote cultural change. They include the suggestion that all front-line practitioners delivering public services should receive training on relationship support; that family and relationship centres should be piloted and established in the UK, as in Australia, where the Government have made a 20-year commitment to addressing the issue; that central Government should engage local authorities to develop and extend relationship support at local level; and that both local and central Government should ensure that services are designed to help at life transition points, so as to include a focus on couple, family and social relationships. Lastly, although there are other recommendations I have not mentioned, the manifesto says:

“The expanded Troubled Families programme should include a focus on supporting and measuring the quality and stability of couple, family and social relationships.”

I acknowledge, and pay tribute to, the four organisations involved in producing the manifesto: the Tavistock Centre for Couple Relationships, Marriage Care, Relate and OnePlusOne.
To conclude, the Minister will agree that there is no shortage of ideas. In my brief speech, I have referred to three substantial reports on this subject, issued in almost as many months this summer and autumn. The challenges are huge, but they must be addressed—whatever the colour of the next Government, and by us all. The Relationships Manifesto states:

“Clearly, government…can only go so far, and it requires collective action from citizens, business, civil society and government to create the condition for people’s relationships to flourish.”

I urge this Government to grasp the nettle of family breakdown more firmly than has been the case before. That will immeasurably help this and future generations of parents to massively boost their children’s life chances, enabling them to face the future full of hope, to reach their potential, and to be fully confident that they are loved and that they matter. As the CSJ’s report says,

“Without concerted action across government and beyond to address our epidemic levels of family breakdown there is a danger that the agenda will be lost”,

and it is the children in our society who will pay the highest price.

Encouraging Young Volunteers

Fiona Bruce MP and Youth Council work together to increase youth volunteering in Congleton

Fiona Bruce MP is working with the Congleton Youth Council to encourage young people in Congleton to volunteer for local charities and organisations after a Youth Council survey of over 700 young people in Congleton identified a gap in this area.

Fiona Bruce said “In general, this area has a very high level of dedicated volunteering which I am constantly impressed by. I am, therefore, delighted to help lead this campaign, along with Congleton Youth Council to encourage more young people to volunteer. I am seeking to make contact with voluntary organisations across the town to urge any groups interested in joining the scheme to offer volunteering opportunities for young people. Organisations willing to support this excellent initiative of Congleton Youth Council can contact my office to register their interest and for more information go to www.youthinfo.co.uk.”

The joint project is to encourage more young people in Congleton to volunteer and any local volunteer organisations is being asked for suggestions or availability they may have to help inspire and recruit young volunteers – and to help their organisation!

This is the second joint project of Fiona and the Youth Council. The first ‘Towards a Drug Free Congleton’ on which they have worked for over two years, is now up and running, engaging both High Schools, the Police and Fire Services to ensure that over time every young person in Congleton is equipped to understand the dangers and pressures of, and to withstand, doing drugs.

If you are a young person interested in volunteering, please look at the Youth Council’s youth volunteering website (www.youthinfo.co.uk). Once organisations have signed up they will have the ability to post activities and volunteering opportunities onto the site for young people to view.

Fiona Bruce asks Science Minister to consider Planning Exclusion Zone around Jodrell Bank

Fiona Bruce asks Science Minister to consider Planning Exclusion Zone around Jodrell Bank.

In a speech in the House of Commons today, Fiona Bruce asked, on behalf of Goostrey Residents, for a prohibition of further development for an area around Jodrell Bank to include Goostrey.

The full text of Fiona’s speech appears below and the response from Science Minister Greg Clark.

In addition Fiona Bruce MP met with Housing Minister Brandon Lewis earlier this week to also ask him for such an Exclusion Zone following last week’s public meeting in Goostrey on Local Planning.

Fiona Bruce MP said “I have now pressed both the Science and Housing Ministers for an Exclusion Zone from further development to include Goostrey on the basis that this unique request requires cross-government consideration. I am determined to do all I can to protect Goostrey from inappropriate development and to ensure the on-going maximum effectiveness of the nationally critical work at Jodrell Bank.”

Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con): Some of the most exciting and innovative developments in this country today are along the science corridor, which a number of Members have mentioned. It crosses several constituencies, including mine and that of my immediate neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (David Rutley), to whom I pay tribute for calling the debate. The Government have rightly committed many millions of pounds of national funding to supporting the corridor and adjacent infrastructure—not least in my constituency, where £45 million of growth deal funding has gone towards the Congleton link road, about which I have spoken in the House on a number of occasions; I am grateful to Ministers for listening and responding to my points. It is of great importance to businesses in my constituency, such as Reliance Medical, Senior Aerospace Bird Bellows and Airbags International. However, that is not what I want chiefly to speak about today. I want to focus on Jodrell Bank.
The world famous dish of Jodrell Bank lies within my constituency, although I must confess that the controls are in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member
14 Jan 2015 : Column 309WH
for Macclesfield, so we share an interest. Jodrell Bank is important locally, regionally, nationally and internationally. I want to highlight that importance and express concern about a threat to its work and to recent Government investment in it.
To provide some context, I should say that Jodrell Bank has been at the forefront of radar technology since it became world famous in 1957, as the Lovell telescope emerged as the only instrument capable of using radar to detect the Russian satellite Sputnik. It now hosts the e-MERLIN national facility as well as the Lovell telescope. It continues to produce world-class science. It also hosts the outstanding Discovery centre, which has done much to increase public awareness of science in the UK. That has more than 140,000 visitors a year, including about 16,000 schoolchildren taking part in its education programme, and it has received numerous awards. The BBC transmitted its “Stargazing Live” programme from Jodrell Bank from 2011 to 2014.
As we heard, the Square Kilometre Array is at the leading edge of astrophysics research, and continues to receive the full support of universities, businesses and public sector agencies across the north and beyond, which work together to underpin its activities. It is a very important area—a national and global network of telescopes, with Jodrell Bank at the centre, carrying out unique, world-leading science, across a wide range of astrophysics and cosmology. The facilities at Jodrell Bank are used by almost every university astrophysics group in the country and hundreds of scientists in the UK and Europe, and across the globe. The developments being undertaken by Jodrell Bank, and its potential developments, are of huge importance to jobs and the economy.
In 2013, the Minister’s predecessor as Science Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Havant (Mr Willetts), opened the SKA and Jodrell Bank as its centre. The SKA is a project that joins thousands of receivers across the globe to create the largest, most sensitive radio telescope ever built. Members of the SKA include Australia, China, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, South Africa, Canada, Germany and Sweden; and the UK leads it. At the opening Dame Nancy Rothwell, of the university of Manchester, called it a “cutting edge science project” and said that it would

“become a real science and engineering hub”.

The Minister’s predecessor said:

“This project is pushing the frontiers and that is why the Chancellor has awarded some of the extra £600 m towards science development”

to it. He said it was

“a global strategic project but one that Great Britain is a major player in.”

The economic benefits of that work for the national economy cannot be over-estimated. However—and it is a big “however”—it is threatened. Professor Simon Garrington of the university of Manchester has spoken of the detrimental effect of radio interference from surrounding developments on the work at Jodrell Bank:

“Radio interference has an impact on almost all the experiments that are carried out at Jodrell Bank.”

He explains that in many observations radio interference is the main factor limiting the quality of the data and that

“every increase in interference...reduces the amount of useful data that are left”.

14 Jan 2015 : Column 310WH
He adds that

“when there are lots of these…as might be the case for emission from housing developments then it has a significant impact on the data.”

Even a domestic microwave in someone’s home can have an impact on the work at Jodrell Bank. It is important to remember that decades ago Professor Lovell moved his work at the university from the centre of Manchester to Cheshire, to avoid such interference.
Professor Garrington says that the work of Jodrell Bank has already been hampered by local development, explaining that the

“discovery of pulsars was led by Jodrell Bank for many years”

but that

“now…we can no longer find new pulsars and our experiments are limited to timing the pulsars which are already known. We do make the most precise measurements...but really interference limits the extent to which we can search for new pulsars.”

He explains how researchers at Jodrell Bank have done the most extensive analysis anywhere, to understand how towns, developments and roads affect the work. He has given evidence to a planning committee in Cheshire in the past month, and says:

“We have in the last few months constructed a detailed map which quantifies this loss due to distance and terrain...What this model shows is that the largest potential contribution is often from local villages such as Goostrey”.

Goostrey is a village in my constituency, between 1 mile and 2 miles from Jodrell Bank. Professor Garrington adds that modelling of the proposed development in Goostrey

“shows that it will add significantly to what is a present and growing problem...We believe this continued development at this rate so close to Jodrell Bank poses a significant impact on the science that can be carried out at this international institution.”

Fiona Bruce: I am raising this concern because the village of Goostrey has 900 houses and there are now plans to build up to 250 additional houses. Applications have been put in and some have been agreed. The latest one is for a development of 119. A public meeting was held in the village only last Friday, attended by 250 people, asking for consideration of an exclusion zone for further housing development around Jodrell Bank of up to, say, 2 miles; no doubt the parameters could be established by discussion with Jodrell Bank, which I understand supports the proposals. I am keen that the Science Minister should be aware of the request, and I hope that he will consider it.

The Minister for Universities, Science and Cities (Greg Clark): Both Cheshire Members referred to the Square Kilometre Array. We are very proud of this asset. The heritage of Jodrell Bank in being at the leading edge of science is very important to us. I am due to meet the review panel for the SKA next month, and I will signal our wholehearted commitment to the project and to promoting Jodrell Bank as the rightful location for the SKA’s headquarters. I will take up with my ministerial colleagues the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton.

Fiona Bruce MP Continues Campaign Against Hospital Car Park Charge Plans

Fiona Bruce MP Continues Campaign Against Hospital Car Park Charge Plans

Having enlisted the support of the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government is her campaign against hospital car parking charges, Fiona has now written to the Chief Executive of the Macclesfield NHS Trust, John Wilbraham pointing out the response of the Secretary of State and asking once, again that these plans to impose parking charges at Congleton War Memorial Hospital be now abandoned in light of the Secretary of State’s response in the House.

In a question in the House of Commons at the end of 2014, Fiona Bruce MP asked Eric Pickles MP to join with her in the campaign against the introduction of car-parking charges at Congleton War Memorial Hospital.

At Local Government Questions in the Chamber of the House of Commons, Fiona Bruce asked:

Will the Secretary of State join me and many Congleton residents in objecting to proposals to introduce parking charges at Congleton War Memorial hospital for the first time? That plan is likely to increase, rather than decrease, local parking congestion, and rather than benefiting patients and their families it will in all likelihood benefit the car park charging company through aggressive fines.

The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Eric Pickles MP, responded:

I have a War Memorial hospital in my own constituency. My hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Robert Halfon) has been vocal in pressing local health authorities on this practice, which particularly affects people who are visiting patients who are in hospital for a long stay. It does not seem to be the most sensible way of raising funds.

Speaking after this response Fiona Bruce said “The proposal to charge local residents to park at their hospital, a hospital founded by public subscription, is deeply offensive, and I am delighted that the Secretary of State has joined in objecting to this as robustly as he did. I hope this sends out a clear signal to the Health Authority that these plans must be abandoned without further delay.”

Fiona Bruce MP supports Congleton British Heart Foundation shop with donation event

Fiona Bruce MP supports Congleton British Heart Foundation shop with donation event

Fiona Bruce MP for Congleton organised a donation event for the British Heart Foundation (BHF) shop Congleton.

Fiona joined the shop staff and volunteers and spent time in the Congleton BHF shop at the event, after being requested to help by the Congleton BHF Shop Manager, Robin Hughes.

Fiona said: “The BHF is such a fantastic cause and the work they do is vital in the fight against heart disease. Meeting the staff and volunteers was fantastic; the BHF Shop in Congleton is fresh, bright and welcoming -why not take a donation and whilst there, buy something too! I’d urge everyone to see what they have that could be donated to help raise money for this vital work.”

Robin Hughes Manager for the Congleton BHF shop said: “We’re really grateful to Fiona Bruce for coming in, visiting our shop and organising donations to us following our request for her support. Stock donations are absolutely essential to the success of the charity, and play a vital part in fighting coronary heart disease, the UK’s single biggest killer.

Every penny of profit raised in the BHF shop goes to fund vital, life-saving research into heart disease. We’re always looking for more volunteers, so even if you can only spare an hour, pop in to find out more information. Congleton BHF shop is always looking for unwanted items such as clothes, shoes, accessories, books, DVDs etc. The shop offers a free collection service, just call 0800 915 3000 to book. “

BHF Shops

• Last year BHF Shops raised over £31 million to help the BHF fight heart disease the nation’s single biggest killer.
• BHF Shops sell 90,000 items everyday and have over 20,000 volunteers.
• The BHF now has over 700 Shops including 12 in Northern Ireland. Their aim is for everyone in the UK to have a local British Heart Foundation Shop.
• The British Heart Foundation’s Online Gift Shop offers a range of products including; healthy living products, branded merchandise, gifts for her, gifts for him, wedding favours, and much more, available from giftshop.bhf.org.uk
• For more information on British Heart Foundation Shops or to find your local shop visit bhf.org.uk/shops