Many congratulations to my colleague John Redwood the MP for Wokingham who has recently been voted as the Backbencher of the Year on the Conservative Home website. I was placed 14th and the highest placed of any in the North West area. A big thank-you to all those who voted for me. I particularly appreciated the fact that the sites editor Tim Montgomery publicly declared in the article that he had voted for me. It is true that I am only interested in trying to do what is best for my constituents and I will do this regardless of any personal advancement. Despite what many think there are lots of MP’s ( on both sides of the House incidentally)who are genuinely interested in trying to improve the lot of voters.
The full article can be found by clicking here
11 thoughts on “Backbencher of the Year”
I assume your constituents can expect you to support Michael Gove’s proposal that we buy the Queen a new yacht for the Jubilee – cost approx £60m ?
No one as far as I am aware has suggested that public money be used. I do support the proposal that if the funds can be raised a new vessel be purchased to commemmorate the Diamond Jubilee. It could be used for decades to come and would provide valuable jobs during its construction phase and many permanent jobs once it ws commissioned. Such a vessel could be used for a whole variety of purposes and not only by the Royal family.
First of all, congratulations to you. Can’t be bad for a first term MP even to get in the list. I look forward to seeing you move up the list in future years.
There is one fairly current issue which pretty much everyone in the country seems to agree on, which might give a good backbencher the opportunity for further “glory”
The Government, and particularly George Osborne, is regularly condemning the idea of Bankers getting bonuses despite their systematic failures. I would venture to suggest that very few of us can understand why, then, a bank like RBS, which is 83% Government owned, is able to push ahead with plans to pay out these bonuses.
Mr Osborne should instruct the Directors of the Bank that they are not to pay any bonuses, and that the Government will use it’s voting power to vote against any Director bonuses. It should also ensure that no other bonuses are paid, by sacking any directors who approve them.
This is not a difference in opinion between George Osborne and myself. I agree with him. I am just asking him to use his powers to implement what he says he wants to do.
As one of the Backbenchers of the Year, I would see this as a great opportunity for you to both back up your Government’s own position and gain support amongst your constituents.
Call on the Government to back up it’s own rhetoric by action
Well done David – don’t want to be churlish but I do note that 16 people voted for you so I would not too excited.
Don’t worry not excited baout it at all! Simply surprised ( if not amazed ) I was in the top 20 at all.
“It is true that I am only interested in trying to do what is best for my constituents”
Could I remind you that your first parliamentary utterance outwith your maiden speach was to bemoan the freezing of the civil list. Are there any royals in Bury North that I am not aware of?
Actually I asked a question about what preparations were being made for the Diamond Jubilee.
“In view of the announcement by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that regrettably the civil list is to be frozen yet again…” (Hansard: HC Deb, 24 June 2010, c436)
The question may have been about the preparations, but your first utterance was about the civil list.
I have amended the typo in my reply to your first comment and so amended your comment just so it makes sense – hope you don’t mind. I do think it was regrettable that after ten years of the civil list being frozen there was no increase. I know you do not agree on this point. I should add that since then the whole issue of the civil list payments has been resolved by the passage of a new Act of Parliament which links the payment to the monies received by the state from the Crown Estates. Of course if the Crown Estates were still in the hands of the Crown there would be no need for a civil list payment.
I still fail to see how your interest in the finances of our head of state and her family are part of your stated sole interest in doing what is best for your constituents.
You repeatedly highlight the defecit as being the primary economic issue we face, yet seem prepared to lose £7 billion from the national balance sheet to fund the monarchy.
I merely mentioned it in passing as part of my question. In any event i would maintain that as the Queen is incredibly popular much more popular than any politician the Monarchy is incredibly good value for money. The Monarch has an integral role in our Constitution and it is essential that the Monarchy is provided with the necessary funding. Incidentally the new Sovereign Grant Bill went through Parliament with all party support.
Comments are closed.