have your say
Scroll down to take a look at the local debate on this page. Contribute to the debate yourself by adding a comment on the Contact page. Please note, comments are moderated before appearing on the website.
Comment on 16 August 2009: I would like to draw your attention to an article which appeared in the Daily Mail Saturday 15th August. COUNCILS SIEZE HOUSES OF THE OLD - According to a dossier compiled by the Tories, local councils are taking possession of empty properties and renting them out regardless of whether the owner wishes it or not. It appears that owners of properties do not have any rights and these council can go to Residential Property Tribunal and then let the home passing on any rent once they have recovered their expenses. Once a tenant is in they have more rights than the owner and getting them out can be very lengthy and expensive. I am sure you are aware of the situation and I cannot understand how such a law was passed. Where were the Conservatives when this was muted? I personally did not vote for this man or any labour (new or old), what I want to know is can you give me your assurance that once your party is in parliament this is going to be one of the first things you will repeal. According to the article, Caroline Spelman is deeply concerned over these bullying tatics, and so am I. Even better what can you do now? and when? We seem to be becoming a very communist state is this the thin edge of the wedge and when is it going to stop. In case you are unaware of what is happening if a property is empty for 6 months this is when the councils step in usually to either the sick or the elderly. |
Adrian's response: I have read the article to which you refer and I share your concerns. I am not a fan of the Empty Dwelling Management Orders and to the best of my knowledge they have not been used in West Lancashire. Until recently, only 20 or so had been issued, but it now appears from this article as though some councils are using the current recession to use the orders in a very heavy-handed way. That must be stopped. Conservative policy will be finalized at the time of the manifesto, but the party recently issued a paper which shows our approach in this area. I've attached a copy for your interest. The approach favoured is a collaborative voluntary partnership with looser regulations, not the bureaucracy involved with these Empty Dwelling Management Orders. |
Comment on 25 June 2009: Hi, I would like to know if the Conservatives have any plans to close off the walkways that go between houses and under certain bedrooms. It is not only often noisy at night for people like us that sleep in bedrooms above these walkways, but they are a haven for teenage gangs and other criminal activities i.e. racing small motor bike through etc. |
Adrian's response: I sympathise greatly with the point which is made by Mr Phillpott. If we were starting again from scratch we wouldn't dream of designing a house where a pavement sits directly under someone's bedroom. The answer relates to money(there's a surprise!). Under the current system, almost £5million of tenants' rent is taken by the government to spend in other councils. The current finance system is under review, but unless the system is radically altered, my own personal view is that large scale voluntary transfer (LSVT) of our housing stock to a housing association should be reconsidered. It may be the only/best option to deal with the issues you raise. It would certainly allow more money to be retained locally for reinvestment and improvement. |
Comment on 18 June 2009: I, along with most people I know, are increasingly concerned, both at the disproportionate cost of our membership of the European Union, the loss of sovereignty which follows the apparent change of use of our National Parliament to that of a rubber stamping office on major issues and the negative trading balance which has existed since we first joined the European Common Market. We have been led deeper and deeper into what appears to be a self serving organization, at a price that we cannot afford. Members of the European Parliament, at a huge cost to the taxpayer appear to merely carry out the bidding of a group of European Ministers who engage in a form of horse trading in order to achieve political ends rather than making our lives easier or safer. The humble taxpayer is not even allowed an opinion as to whether this process is acceptable or not. Prior to the next election, as a long term Conservative voter, I would be grateful for your views on the above. |
Adrian's response: The British people voted to join a Common Market not a Federal European Union. That is my starting point. I am not seeking election to the House of Commons to maintain the current position where 75% of our legislation is determined in Europe. David Cameron has already pledged to renegotiate the European treaties by seeking an opt-out from the Social Chapter. I welcome this, but personally I would support further moves in many other areas to establish a much looser relationship between Britain and Europe closer to the Common Market which the British people voted to join. As many of our European neighbours wish to pursue even deeper union, that will require our consent. We should ensure that our consent is only given for our European neighbours to progress to deeper union, if at the same time they agree to a looser releationship for Britain. |
Comment on 9 June 2009: We keep hearing Labour MP's saying that they are going to press ahead in the time they have left with 'Constitutional Reforms'. Do you know what they have planned and what impact/damage this will cause ... especially as a new Conservative Government may be left to pick up the pieces? Also we understand that the changes to the Licensing laws to potentially 24 hour drinking have had a big impact on the increase in binge drinking, anti-social behaviour and the rise in drink-related crime and admissions to hospitals. Do the Conservatives plan to address this when they get into power? |
Adrian's response: It's not at all clear what the Government plan in terms of "constitutional reform". I worry that what we get is something calculated purely for the Government's narrow political advantage. What we need is a General Election as soon as possible, so that the British people can have their say. I want to see powers brought back from Europe, an increase in free votes, election of select committee chairmen and for Parliament to have a greater say in determining its business timetable. On your second point, we are seeing the tragic consequences of the Government's low priority to alcohol abuse. There were 8,700 alcohol related deaths in 2007, more than double 15 years previously and alcohol related injuries clog up our accident and emergency departments. Conservatives have promised to create an environment which promotes sensible drinking, make sure drinking laws are enforced, and work with business to find innovative and effective ways of tackling alcohol abuse. For example, we plan targeted tax rises on alcopops, strong ciders and other problem drinks associated with binge drinking. The extra revenue raised will be used to reduce taxes on low strength beer and cider. |