to provide a proper social existence can be enlarged and made to work again with an influx of new blood returning to their roots.
‘Mary Wells, member for Thanet’
Thank you Mr. Speaker.
‘Over the weekend I sent Mrs. Brampton’s outline proposal to my constituency overview group for their comments. I received a very thoughtful response which, broadly, was very supportive indeed. It was felt to be a very practical and positive addition to the national debate, and to be supported. If my own local overview group is typical, then I think the proposal is a winner. However, underlying the generally favourable reaction was a question which can be summed up as ‘Do we really want to go to war with the landowners right now?’
‘Joan Brampton’
Personally I think that the days when we should pay any attention to any pressure group or clique when considering the benefit of the wider population have long gone, or should have. On a practical level what I am proposing will only effect the margins of some huge landholdings. In some cases it would literally be the half acre corner of a field that could not be properly farmed anyway. It may even be that the more progressive and socially minded landowners will volunteer their land. Who knows?
The debate wound on, with several other ‘old’ members adding their own views and comments. Then, before winding up the debate, the Speaker asked for any questions from the new MPs.
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Imogen Black, member for Suffolk East.
I find Mrs. Brampton’s proposal very interesting, and really look forward to seeing its implementation. However, I wonder whether it goes far enough and would like to suggest some other areas of concern that a slightly wider proposal could start to address.
I am particularly interested in promoting ways to even more reduce CO2 emissions, thus leaving a better planet for our grandchildren to inherit. As part of this plan, we must stop transporting food across vast distances. Wouldn’t it make sense, therefore, that each new hamlet has access to enough land to supply itself with produce and that a requirment to use this land is written into any contract?
In principle we should reward people who buy local produce, with some kind of tempting incentive-system. Local recognition, say, with stickers on the windows of participating houses: ’We buy locally & we save your taxes’ . Perhaps part of the plan should be to make other land available for community enterprises that can sell to their local shop. Of course what would work is a reduction in a family’s tax levy if they earn enough points by buying locally. Could this be considered?
To me, this new proposal, if it’s taken to its logical conclusion, seems to offer a way for people to become more self-sufficient, growing their own fruit and vegetables on their new plot of land. Apart from those obvious benefits, perhaps we could encourage non-gardeners with a different reward scheme?
Mrs. Brampton.
Thank you for your question Miss Black,
I think you’re correct in identifying potential symbiotic relationships. What I have done so far is to propose a general plan, a framework, onto which other things may be bolted. While it’s important to stay focused on the main target, which is to enable people to live economically in a rural environment, there will doubtless be ways to enrich the whole experience.
Thank you Mrs. Brampton.
‘Thank you all for your contributions to this debate. In common with our tradition I would now invite a show of hands to indicate an overall acceptance or denial of Mrs. Brampton’s proposal.
All ayes for the proposal. Thank you, the proposal clearly meets with approval. I now invite Mrs. Brampton to work up her outline proposal into bill form for presentation to the house for further approval. Sitting members will know the process already, but I would like to remind new members that if they have a special interest in any proposal they are at liberty to approach the proposer and join him or her in its development. However, this should only be done after informing your constituency of your support for a particular proposal. Opposition to any proposal can also be organised in the same way. In this way, when any proposed bill arrives back in the house for final debate we can be sure that both pro and anti arguments are properly organised and represented.’
The Speaker went on to introduce the next debate. A proposal to re-address one of the stalled infrastructure developments of the old Parliament, introduced by the member for Estuary North, representing the ribbon development of towns in South Essex. His proposal was to spend almost half of the available money in one enormous reorganisation of airports and associated infrastructure in the London area in favour of a new development in the Thames Estuary. The mood of the house was resolutely opposed to spending such a large sum on just one project but there were enough MPs from that region who wanted a say to ensure the debate would run on for some time.
It was only bought to a halt with the intervention of the Chancellor to remind the house that the expenditure plans would almost certainly be part of a referendum seeking broad approval before being passed into law. This would almost certainly preclude any single plan that would benefit one region at the cost of removing a development opportunity that could benefit many. In his opinion only those plans that addressed the general development of the nation should be considered.
During the day’s debate Guy Simmonds, Amelia St. Beuve and others of that induction group had been sitting together on the old green-leather benches of the chamber. They’d been joined by Henry Halliday, the sitting MP for Argyll and Bute. Henry had spent most of the previous week with the group helping them through the induction process and now knew them all quite well. Henry’s hand had been almost continually raised during the Brampton debate but he had not managed to catch the Speakers eye. However, when it became obvious that the proposal was meeting with approval he had visibly relaxed and now radiated an aura of contentment. It was now quite late in the day and time to think about knocking off for the day.
‘Right you lot. How about a celebratory glass of wine down on the terrace. This has been a great day, even though you may not realise it yet.’
‘Why is it such a great day Henry?’ quizzed Julie Smyth, MP for Winchester and a General Practitioner in that city.
‘Firstly, because this is the first time since the Modern Parliament came into being that we have been given a free hand to come up with new progressive policies that stand a chance of being funded and, secondly, because Mrs. Brampton’s proposal is such a brilliant idea. For me it really hits the spot. My constituency is part of the West Coast of Scotland and has been hugely effected by all the issues that Mrs. Brampton raised in her speech and in her notes. I suppose, because this is your first experience in the chamber, you must think it’s always like that, but it’s not. Usually we’re trawling through a minefield of small adjustments to existing policies. Fine tuning. Important, of course, and things which make a real difference to individuals but, today, it’s like being a thoroughbred horse that’s spent it’s life in a farmyard and has just been shown the field.’
‘Do you really think it stands a chance then?’
This was the first time anybody had known Archie Turnbull, MP for Solihull but once a shop assistant, to volunteer a question. Like many of them it was taking a while for him to find his feet in the company of so many.
‘Yes I do. One of the signatures of our ‘Lottery’ democracy is that it tends to select a mean average from the population. Within the six hundred MPs there are always going to be those who shine, people who’ve already had experience of decision making at a high level or who have professional knowledge that can add to a debate, those with attractive personalities or for more obscure reasons command respect. But, generally, we’re a conservative lot, with a small c, for whom change is difficult. This is usually a good thing because it makes it doubly necessary to present a policy change with care and a high