100 Answers to 20 Questions – Havant Parliamentary Candidates

GENERAL ELECTION

TOP 20 QUESTIONS

100 ANSWERS FROM HAVANT PARLIAMENTARY

CONSTITUENCY CANDIDATES

Alan MakConservative Party

Tim DawesGreen Party

Dr Graham GilesLabour Party

Steve SollittLiberal Democratic Party

John PerryUnited Kingdom Independence Party

20 Questions1. Without national security, we are unprotected from those who would do harm to our nation and its interests. Do you undertake to fight for spending on defence to be maintained at 2% of GDP, as an absolute bare minimum? If not, how do you think we can deal with the multiple threats of Islamic fundamentalism, a re-awakening bear in Russia, and a Russian backed threat to the Falklands from Argentina? Surely, we cannot rely entirely upon the US taxpayer for our national security?2. National issues aside, what specific local issues do you intend to concentrate on that will benefit the people of Havant and Hayling?3. In the light of a recent report that, when imports are considered, UK CO2 emissions are actually rising: is it worth damaging the UK economy with environmental regulations and controls on CO2 emissions, when the result is simply to export the emissions, and work, to countries such as China, where regulations are often much more lax?4. There is much talk about protecting the NHS from privatisation but, surely, the main NHS principle is that treatment is free at the point of use and irrespective of the means of the patient. Given that nobody is seriously questioning the free treatment principle, do you believe that public sector service provision is inherently better and more efficient than private sector provision, or is there a place for the private sector to provide some services within or on behalf of the NHS?I5. f public service provision is always better, why is that true of the NHS, but not other parts of the economy, where nationalised industries (e.g. British Rail, British Leyland) have been manifestly inefficient and often provided poor customer service?6. It is a matter of public record that the UK now employs more people than at any time in its history. It is also a matter of public record that a greater proportion of those employees work in the private sector, as opposed to the government financed public sector, than has been recorded since records began around 15 years ago (Ref ONS). Given the crisis in the public finances, do you see this as a positive trend that should be continued or do they feel that more people should be employed by the government? If you would like to see more public sector workers, how do you think they should be paid for and by whom? 7. Following the Scottish referendum, the transfer of more powers of government to Holyrood and the likelihood of a large contingent of SNP MPs in Westminster after the election, how do you believe the UK constitution should be amended, if at all?8. How do you plan to approach first time voters to ensure they appreciate and vote on the big important issues rather than short term, personal areas of dissatisfaction?9. Is the profit motive a requirement for Good Customer Service?10. At the last election it was vote Clegg, get Cameron - what guarantee has a Lib Dem vote not to repeat that debacle?

11. Do you believe that immigration from EU countries, at 228,000 to the year ending June 2014 (ref ONS), is too high? If so, given that freedom of movement is a core EU principle, what should the next government do about it?12. In the light of Labour stating that a referendum on EU membership would cause economic uncertainty and be damaging to business in the UK, do you believe that a referendum on EU membership should be held in the next Parliament?13. Forty years ago, it was common in the UK for young people to undertake a 4 year apprenticeship and, simultaneously, to attend part-time further education to gain qualifications such as HNC. Only the very academic attended university but when they did it was fully funded by government grants. Nowadays, 50% of young people attend university, but they rack up huge debts, while the traditional apprenticeship is a thing of the past. How do you believe post-school education and training should be re-balanced to make it more affordable, more relevant to the majority of young people and better targeted to the needs of the UK economy? How do you believe the rights of zero hours workers should be protected, without such protections leading to a loss of jobs or working flexibility for those who want it?14. Do you believe the higher rate of income tax should be increased to 50%, or possibly higher? If the effect of such an increase did not increase revenue (an entirely possible outcome due to people relocating, not working as hard, using avoidance measures etc) would that make a difference to your views on what the top rate tax should be?15. Do you agree that the United States is our closest ally and that the 'special relationship' between our two nations should be fundamental to the UK's foreign policy?16. Should the UK renew, and even expand, its nuclear power generation capacity in order to guarantee security of energy supply and to reduce damage to the environment?17. Would you support the building of wind turbines, to generate electricity, within our constituency?18. Now that there is a possibility that the traditional two-party system may be in danger of collapse, is this the opportunity to consider a fairer electoral system, such as proportional representation, which could result in a mix of MPs reflecting more accurately the wishes of the electorate in general?19. The proportion of the electorate that votes in UK elections has been declining for many years, abstainees often commenting that 'politicians lie and are all the same'. Why are so many people so disillusioned with politics and how do you think this section of the electorate should be re-engaged into the democratic process?20. If you were elected as a Member of Parliament and could enact one single new law to benefit positively life in Britain, what would it be?

1. Without national security, we are unprotected from those who would do harm to our nation and its interests. Do you undertake to fight for spending on defence to be maintained at 2% of GDP, as an absolute bare minimum? If not, how do you think we can deal with the multiple threats of Islamic fundamentalism, a re-awakening bear in Russia, and a Russian backed threat to the Falklands from Argentina? Surely, we cannot rely entirely upon the US taxpayer for our national security?

NATO recommends that its members spend 2% of GDP on defence. We currently meet that target. We have a £34 billion defence budget, which is the fifth largest in the world, the second largest in NATO and the biggest in the EU. We certainly have the best Armed Forces in the world. We will have a review of defence spending (and indeed all other types of spending) after May’s general election – spending reviews usually take place after elections. I very much hope we can continue to meet the NATO target.In the meantime, because we fixing the economy, we are able to commit, in the next parliament (2015-2020) to renewing our Trident nuclear deterrent and protect the size of our regular Armed Forces; and invest £163bn over the next 10 years to providing our Armed Forces with the latest equipment and technology, including 2 new aircraft carriers.

Alan MakConservative Party

2. National issues aside, what specific local issues do you intend to concentrate on that will benefit the people of Havant and Hayling?

My 3 local priorities are:

Strong Economy: Hayling residents deserve a secure and prosperous future, and a strong local economy is key. I want to help deliver more jobs, rising living standards and inward investment. As a shopkeeper’s son, I will back our small shops and businesses in areas like Mengham, West Town and Eastoke, and encourage businesses to locate to places like Sparkes Marina which would be perfect for online-businesses or light industry. We need more all-year-round jobs to complement our successful, seasonal visitor economy. I will also support the continued success of our sailing, watersports and coastal tourism sector. Successful Schools: Every young person on Hayling deserves the best start in life, and every resident of all ages needs the skills to compete and succeed in an increasingly competitive economy. So, I will work with Colin Rainford and his staff at Hayling College to boost attainment, and support our infant & junior schools Mengham and Mill Rythe, using my experience as a long-serving primary school governor. I will also encourage life-long learning, including promotion adult education courses at places like South Downs and Havant College. Vibrant Communities: Hayling has a strong identity, excellent community spirit, and diversity (from the tranquillity of Northney to the hustle and bustle of the Seafront and Mengham). I want to protect and enhance this. Hayling also has a wide range of community groups, sports clubs and churches. Having met many of these groups, I am keen to support their continued growth and success, for example, helping them win funding or promote themselves locally. I will also support efforts to re-start the Hayling Ferry, and promote cycling working with Cycle Hayling.

3. In the light of a recent report that, when imports are considered, UK CO2 emissions are actually rising: is it worth damaging the UK economy with environmental regulations and controls on CO2 emissions, when the result is simply to export the emissions, and work, to countries such as China, where regulations are often much more lax?

No we shouldn’t dampen our own economic growth or burden our business and industry with green taxes whilst other countries carry on polluting. We need to encourage a reduction in carbon emissions on a global, or at least regional, scale.

4. There is much talk about protecting the NHS from privatisation but, surely, the main NHS principle is that treatment is free at the point of use and irrespective of the means of the patient. Given that nobody is seriously questioning the free treatment principle, do you believe that public sector service provision is inherently better and more efficient than private sector provision, or is there a place for the private sector to provide some services within or on behalf of the NHS?

The NHS should be free at the point of use, and care should be provided on the basis of need not ability to pay. Conservatives have increased NHS funding by £12.9 billion since 2010 and we will protect and “ring-fence” NHS investment after May 2015 to secure the NHS’ future. We will also ask surgeries to open at evenings and weekends. Keeping the NHS in public hands is the best way to continue the “public service ethos” of the NHS. There is a place for private sector involvement the NHS, for example medicines are made by private pharmaceutical companies, whilst Macmillan nurses, hospices and charities etc. are all non-public groups that work in and with the NHS. Dental and doctors’ practices are often arranged as private businesses (usually partnerships) which are paid by the NHS to see NHS patients (and also paid by private patients when they “go private”).

5. If public service provision is always better, why is that true of the NHS, but not other parts of the economy, where nationalised industries (e.g. British Rail, British Leyland) have been manifestly inefficient and often provided poor customer service?

Public provision is not always better, but it is in the case of the NHS because we have a cross-party consensus, strongly shared by the public, that the NHS should be in public hands and have a public service ethos (i.e. the NHS should be free at the point of use, and care should be provided on the basis of need not ability to pay).

No such cross-party consensus – or public consensus – exists in relation to nationalised industries. The Conservatives are clear that governments are not good at making cars or running trains in the long-run. The profit motive in these situations helps to drive up quality and customer service. In contrast, the NHS is different because most of the people working it are not motivated by profit, but by a desire to help people.

6. It is a matter of public record that the UK now employs more people than at any time in its history. It is also a matter of public record that a greater proportion of those employees work in the private sector, as opposed to the government financed public sector, than has been recorded since records began around 15 years ago (Ref ONS). Given the crisis in the public finances, do you see this as a positive trend that should be continued or do they feel that more people should be employed by the government? If you would like to see more public sector workers, how do you think they should be paid for and by whom? No, the state should be small but smart. For example in the NHS, we have hired 9000 more doctors since 2010, whilst reducing managers by 6000.

7. Following the Scottish referendum, the transfer of more powers of government to Holyrood and the likelihood of a large contingent of SNP MPs in Westminster after the election, how do you believe the UK constitution should be amended, if at all?Our priority should be English Votes for English Laws. We will maintain the Westminster Parliament as the UK and England’s law-making body. But we want Parliament to work in a way that ensures decisions affecting England can only be taken with the consent of the majority of MPs representing constituencies in England (like Havant), or in England and Wales. We will end the unfairness whereby Scotland is able to decide its own laws in devolved areas, only for Scottish MPs also to be able to have the potentially decisive say on similar matters that affect only England.

8. How do you plan to approach first time voters to ensure they appreciate and vote on the big important issues rather than short term, personal areas of dissatisfaction?I have visited every secondary school in the constituency (plus South Downs and Havant Sixth Form College) to talk to students about the importance of elections and voting. Engaging with young people and first time voters directly is the best way. I have also set up the Havant Next Generation Network (NGN) for young people, which whilst focusing on business and careers, also has a remit to encourage young people to get involved in civic and community life, including by voting. I also have a growing number of first and second time voters working as volunteers on my campaign and I engage with them directly about the big issues the country faces.

9. Is the profit motive a requirement for Good Customer Service?

What is the context specifically? In general, yes it helps, but good customer service also comes from pride in doing a good job. In our family’s shop, we thought of good customer service as standard.

10. At the last election it was vote Clegg, get Cameron - what guarantee has a Lib Dem vote not to repeat that debacle?

This election is choice between a strong, competent Conservative government that is building a secure and prosperous future for the country, and turning our economy around – or the economic chaos and instability of Ed Miliband and Ed Balls in Downing Street propped up by the Scottish Nationalists.

11. Do you believe that immigration from EU countries, at 228,000 to the year ending June 2014 (ref ONS), is too high? If so, given that freedom of movement is a core EU principle, what should the next government do about it?

Yes it is too high. We currently have limited room for manoeuvre as regards movement of people into the UK from other EU member states. The only solution is to re-negotiate this point (and other aspects of our relations with the EU, including clamping down on “welfare and health tourism”), which we will do if re-elected, and then letting the British people decide if they want to stay in or leave the EU by offering them an in/out referendum. Our current relationship with the EU doesn’t work well for Britain – so we should get a better deal, or not be afraid to leave the EU if we don’t.

12. In the light of Labour stating that a referendum on EU membership would cause economic uncertainty and be damaging to business in the UK, do you believe that a referendum on EU membership should be held in the next Parliament?

Yes an in/out referendum should be held, and we have promised to hold one by December 2017. I advised and helped James Wharton MP, the Conservative MP who put forward the EU Referendum Bill, and I am committed to ensuring we have a referendum to let the British people decide.

13. Forty years ago, it was common in the UK for young people to undertake a 4 year apprenticeship and, simultaneously, to attend part-time further education to gain qualifications such as HNC. Only the very academic attended university but when they did it was fully funded by government grants. Nowadays, 50% of young people attend university, but they rack up huge debts, while the traditional apprenticeship is a thing of the past. How do you believe post-school education and training should be re-balanced to make it more affordable, more relevant to the majority of young people and better targeted to the needs of the UK economy? How do you believe the rights of zero hours workers should be protected, without such protections leading to a loss of jobs or working flexibility for those who want it?

The traditional apprenticeship is not a thing of the past. It is alive and well. In fact, apprenticeships are very popular. Conservatives created 2 million apprenticeships between 2010-2015, and we will create 3 million more if re-elected. Local businesses like Head Romance, an award-winning hair salon in central Havant, run by two childhood Hayling friends employs a growing number of apprentices, as do many other local businesses. Post-school education and training should be re-balanced by ensuring young people have good careers advice and a range of options (a job, an apprenticeship or further study, rather than university being the only route). We can make it more affordable by asking employers to help with the costs of an apprenticeship or university (for example with scholarships). We also have to be frank and accept that students themselves benefit from post-school education and training, and should therefore also be expected to make some financial contribution. Employers should also work with government and training bodies and universities to ensure post-school education and training is targeted to the needs of the UK economy.Labour took no action on zero hour/flexible hours contracts during 13 years in office. Conservatives took action quickly to make them fairer by banning exclusivity clauses in these contracts which tied people to 1 employer so they couldn’t take on other jobs if their main employer didn’t give them any hours. Flexible contracts allow certain groups who want to be in the jobs market and to earn a wage, but who don’t know exactly what hours they can work each week. For example, they may have study commitments or child care commitments that change. Around 1 in 50 jobs uses a flexible/zero hours contract, but we should certainly protect this group of workers.

14. Do you believe the higher rate of income tax should be increased to 50%, or possibly higher? If the effect of such an increase did not increase revenue (an entirely possible outcome due to people relocating, not working as hard, using avoidance measures etc) would that make a difference to your views on what the top rate tax should be?

No. We need to get the right balance between taxation, and allowing successful, hardworking people to keep more of the money they earn.

15. Do you agree that the United States is our closest ally and that the 'special relationship' between our two nations should be fundamental to the UK's foreign policy?

Yes, we have strong economic, cultural, military and historic links with the US, and we work closely with them at the UN, NATO and other international bodies. In particular, we co-operate at all levels on military and intelligence sharing under the “Five Eyes” agreement (an intelligence alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and the USA).

16. Should the UK renew, and even expand, its nuclear power generation capacity in order to guarantee security of energy supply and to reduce damage to the environment?

We should renew the nuclear deterrent, and we are the only Party to fully commit to renewing and replacing all 4 Vanguard-class nuclear submarines so we have a 24/7 deterrent 365 days of the year. We cannot know what nuclear threats may emerge in the 2030s, 2040s and 2050s, so the only responsible choice is to recommit to our continuous at sea deterrent now before it is too late.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_assessment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom

17. Would you support the building of wind turbines, to generate electricity, within our constituency?

No. I don’t support onshore wind turbines within the constituency.

18. Now that there is a possibility that the traditional two-party system may be in danger of collapse, is this the opportunity to consider a fairer electoral system, such as proportional representation, which could result in a mix of MPs reflecting more accurately the wishes of the electorate in general?

No. Proportional representation (PR) systems are unnecessarily complicated, expensive and do not produce decisive results. We have very recently considered a form of PR, namely the Alterative Vote (AV). We had a national referendum on the issue in 2011, and the British public said No to AV (67.9% voted against). Our First Past the Post system is easy to understand and administer (the candidate with the most votes wins), and apart from 2010 has usually produced decisive results in general elections.

19. The proportion of the electorate that votes in UK elections has been declining for many years, abstainees often commenting that 'politicians lie and are all the same'. Why are so many people so disillusioned with politics and how do you think this section of the electorate should be re-engaged into the democratic process?

There is a feeling that politicians are “all the same” and that politics doesn’t especially matter because nothing ever changes. However, at this election, politics definitely does matter – and every vote does counts. This election is clear choice between a strong, competent Conservative government that is building for a secure and prosperous future for the country, and turning our economy around – or the economic chaos and instability of Ed Miliband and Ed Balls in Downing Street propped up by the Scottish Nationalists. We should also engage people in ways that interest them, including using social media, public meetings and answering questions in surveys like this. We need to make politics fit around people’s lives, rather than the other way round.

20. If you were elected as a Member of Parliament and could enact one single new law to benefit positively life in Britain, what would it be?

I would vote for more funding for school breakfast clubs. Before local residents chose me as their Conservative MP candidate, I served as President of Magic Breakfast, a children’s charity that sets up school breakfast clubs and feeds hungry children. It costs around £42 a year to feed a young child breakfast during term time, and breakfast boosts a student’s classroom concentration, attainment and exam results. It would be a very worthwhile investment.

Tim DawesGreen Party

PF PowerPoint Presentations


No. We need to guarantee our security by a number of things, including a modern and flexible armed forces that is well-equipped and trained, But in general the kind of armed forces we need is changing. We should wait the results of the strategic defence review, but my feeling is that as a proportion of overall income the defence budget may well be below 2% of GDP and, given that enables us to spend more on other important public services like education and the NHS, I am relaxed about that.


Let's talk specifically about Hayling. I want to see better public transport links – including a properly managed Hayling Ferry service and a bus service that runs later into the evenings. I also believe that both local residents and visitors would benefit considerably from more investment in cycling facilities, including a hard surface north/south route across the island. Greens have long campaigned for a more community centred NHS and whilst we recognise that blue-light emergency and other specialist treatment services are best concentrated at QA, I feel that Hayling needs a local community NHS service that provides for minor injuries, walk-in treatment and out-patient services. Ideally this should be integrated with a GP practice. I am concerned about the closure of local police stations and would prefer to see a dedicated police service point on the island. I don't think the Library is the best place for that. I am also mindful that the reduction in local police presence and patrols is causing concern and will be discussing this issue with the Police Federation representatives this week. On tourism, we would like to see a more imaginative and active approach taken by Havant Council, building on and complementing the growing success of local businesses and those involved in water sports locally. We'd also like to see improved landing and storage facilities for local fishers. On conservation, more attention paid to conserving the natural areas on the island, especially the wilder portions of our coastal areas. Hayling does not need any large supermarket development or any large scale housing developments. I would look sympathetically on limited number of new small scale housing developments within existing build up areas, but use my influence to support those opposing any encroachment on playing-fields or green field areas. There are some simple and cheap things that could be done to encourage better greener energy use. One obvious one is the provision of two or three public charging places in HBC car parks for electric vehicles. This would also encourage eco-tourism.


The question is so deliberately loaded I hesitate to answer it, but simply put – unless we reduce our CO2 emissions then Hayling, maximum height above sea level 5 metres, is doomed to sink beneath the waves. Of course by exporting our manufacture we have made our figures look better, though they are going up now in any event, mainly due to the increase in coal burning, but that strategy is wrong in so many ways. Unless we get back to making things ourselves and growing more of our own food, then in long term Britain will loose out. By the way, China is actually making significant strides in renewable energy and already produces a bigger percentage of its power from renewables sources than does Britain.


Oh, I disagree. People are questioning the free treatment principle, they may think its unpopular to talk about it before an election, but they are privately considering such options as treatment charging and health insurance schemes. Certainly the leader and many inside UKIP have done so and the BMA has specifically warned about the danger of it losing the free at point of service principle only this week. Dentistry, may I remind you, is not charged under the NHS – a departure from the principle that led Bevan, the NHS's founding father, to resign from the Labour government of the day. It's not just privatisation that is wrong with the NHS; it's an over-reliance on top down organisation and the ridiculous idea that market principles can be applied to a caring service. People don't become doctors and nurses to be told they need to compete with their fellows in the hospital or NHS area down the road. Removing the internal market nonsense from the NHS would save around £5billion every year.


Who ever said it was? Of course there is a role for private enterprise competing to provide new equipment, drugs etc. top the NHS. In this area the only alternative is stagnating Stalinism and competition (between suppliers) is a healthy thing that drives efficiency and innovation. The profit motive and private business has it's place in our society. The thing about more general privatisation in the NHS is that it doesn't just mean that a proportion of the tax we pay to fund the service goes in profit and other costs such as contract management and tendering, it also means the only “capitalists” involved will be the large corporates. The very people who have been cheating us by not even paying tax on the profits made from trading here. Smaller, leaner (and often more innovative) businesses don't get a look in and find themselves squeezed out. Consider the Southern Health (provides mental health services across IOW, Hants, Berks and Bucks) cleaning contract which was let to a single big company only last week. This contract replaces a sensible patch-work of provision that included directly employed staff, where appropriate, and lots of small companies – all of whom are now shut out. Public service organisations can be well managed, effective and good for the country. Investment starved British Rail services from Havant to Waterloo actually ran the route in 10 minutes shorter time than the fastest now from the private operator. The CEGB was a great success in building an energy infrastructure and strategy. And – let's say it – the NHS does a pretty good job, scoring well in general on international comparisons and coming in at around half the cost of health provision in the private USA.

6. It is a matter of public record that the UK now employs more people than at any time in its history. It is also a matter of public record that a greater proportion of those employees work in the private sector, as opposed to the government financed public sector, than has been recorded since records began around 15 years ago (Ref ONS). Given the crisis in the public finances, do you see this as a positive trend that should be continued or do they feel that more people should be employed by the government? If you would like to see more public sector workers, how do you think they should be paid for and by whom? This is a non-question. Whatever the employee of the person driving the train s/he is still paid for by a combination of taxation subsidies and passenger fares. I would like to see fewer people employed by large tax-dodging corporations and more by those that have a real stake in what they do and their communities. That might be government or local government, but it also might be employee-owner partnerships (like Waitrose) or mutuals owned by their customers (like Nationwide). I would also like to see more people working for themselves (another significant trend, is that many more are) and for smaller, locally-based businesses. 7. Following the Scottish referendum, the transfer of more powers of government to Holyrood and the likelihood of a large contingent of SNP MPs in Westminster after the election, how do you believe the UK constitution should be amended, if at all?I would like to live in a much more federal and community-empowered country. I don't think that Westminster MPs from places other than England should vote on purely English legislation – though I recognise that some apparently “English” matters may have implications for those in other parts of the UK – so defining “purely English” is not straight-forward. The really big issue is what happens if there is a referendum on EU membership. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will almost certainly vote heavily to stay in. If England votes to leave (and wins a UK majority or not) the constitutional tensions will be much more immediate and serious. 8. How do you plan to approach first time voters to ensure they appreciate and vote on the big important issues rather than short term, personal areas of dissatisfaction?I don't think first time voters are any less politically aware. They certainly tend to be significantly less tribal and that's a good thing. I have visited all the local colleges and six forms and have tried to engage with younger voters as much as possible through social media (they tend not to come to hustings or be the person answering the door as I knock on them). In my experience, young people are better at looking at long-term issues and policies than more older population – though of course that is a massive generalisation and individuals are all different. One think I advise people to do is use the independent policy comparison sites – especially “blind-tasting” ones such as https://voteforpolicies.org.uk/


No. I was a senior local government officer for many years and always strived for openness and excellence in customer service. You can find bad and good customer service in all types of organisations. The key to good customer service is having customer-fronting people who really believe in what they are doing. Better still locate them in the community they are serving.


You vote for an MP for your constituency not for who forms the government and certainly not for who will be Prime Minister. Voting Lib Dem here, or not, will not make a blind bit of difference. The Tories have held this seat since they inherited it from the dinosaurs at the end of the Jurassic era. It is said that the transfer of power was hardly noticeable. If you are a Tory... so be it. Otherwise you need to decide how best to protest. Few will vote Lib Dem this time because (a) they have lost their way nationally, (b) it's clear they cant win and (c) it's also clear that locally they are not really trying and have a part-time candidate from another part of the county who gives the impression he had his arm twisted to do it at all. Those who thing this country needs real change and are looking for a radical alternative will either vote UKIP (if they are on the reactionary right of politics) or Green (if on the centre or the Left) because that's the way their vote will make the most impact – albeit as a non-winning but perhaps unexpectedly strong representation. Incidentally, I don't believe in tactical voting in general elections, but I was interested to see that the most respected tactical voting web site – VoteSwap is advising Labour voters in Havant to vote Green! See - voteswap.org/seat/i65699

http://t.co/Lgox56NhPm


I believe in free movement of people as much as possible. We do need controls in our difficult world, but the free movement of people across the EU is a major benefit – not least for UK citizens. Because of the London factor and the relative health of the UK economy at present there are bound to be people coming here from other EU countries, but it works both ways. In fact there are currently only a very slightly larger number of EU citizens living here than there are UK citizens living in other EU countries. And, by the way, figures show that UK citizens living abroad cost their host countries much more in health costs than NHS costs of treating EU citizens here. Primarily that is because Brits living abroad tend to be older. So we actually benefit from the reciprocal health treatment arrangements the EU gives us. Most of us know people who have moved to France or Spain for the “good-life” in the sun and those whose work takes them to Holland or Germany. My own 19-year old nephew is now living in Berlin after winning an apprenticeship with Siemens when he left school. Is that not a good thing? We live in a new more mobile Europe. Let's all welcome the advantages of that.


Yes, providing the popular interest in that continues (I sense it is waning a little). Democracy cannot take second place to short term market factors. I fear the implications were the UK to vote to leave the EU, but I think the people have the right to discuss the issue and ultimately to decide.


Yes, well, 40 years ago we still had a manufacturing industry. We still had a thriving local building industry and we had proper provision for training on the job supported by college courses for day-release. Where are all these now after 40 years of Labour and Tory governments that have woefully failed to support them? I referred in my answer to question 12 to what seems to me to much better opportunities available in Germany, which still has a thriving indigenous industrial sector. If young people want to go to university and that is the right thing for them, then fine – they should have that opportunity without being forced into debt. The Greens would abolish the massively inefficient and damaging tuition fees and bring us into line with Scotland. We also propose to follow the example of some successful education systems elsewhere and set up Youth Colleges as an alternative to more academic schools for the 16-19 age group and would look to fund quality vocational training in local colleges to support real trade and skills apprenticeships.


Our policy is to have a top rate of income tax of 60% on very high earners. In part that is intended as a disincentive for employers to pay salaries that are so high they contribute to instability in our society. Removing tax loop holes at the same time as raising higher rates changes the game with respect to net tax take. It's not at all clear that higher rates lead to more evasion in other countries with less lop holes – though they may be part of the reason that inequalities are less pronounced. Some very rich people will want to do the unpatriotic thing and go an live a less vibrant, culturally poorer life in a middle-eastern country or some other tax haven. That's OK, we can do without them. I don't think most scientists, engineers and leading thinkers will go – especially if we radically improve the amount of money spent on research – as the Greens propose.


We have not always followed US to war (Vietnam), nor they us (Suez). It is a strong and mostly healthy relationship, but more of our trade and many of our strongest cultural links are with Europe. I am very fond of America personally and would always want to see a close and mutually respectful relationship, but not a slavish one such as developed between the Blair and Bush administrations. I do believe very strongly in the importance of collective security, but I want to see that extended beyond the limited vision of NATO to include Russian and the emerging economic powerhouse countries. The UN is my preferred vehicle for a more inclusive and stable collective security in the future, but I accept that there may need to be interim arrangements. None of this is easy to achieve whilst Russian and some other regimes do not altogether share our “rule of law” and open democratic principles, but I am not that confident about all the NATO members either – for example Albania and Turkey may in the future prove very problematic in certain circumstances. In the final analysis, a simple “England and the US against the rest” policy is myopic and unrealistic. We should be trying to deal with conflicts on a global scale and bring as many as we can into a common security system – only that way will those countries, like Russian and Iran (and indeed Turkey and the Baltic States) that feel threatened, be made to feel secure and confident enough not to threaten back.


No. It is of course easy to say “if it were me, I wouldn't start from here”, but that is how I feel about energy strategy in the UK. The truth is that since Thatcher and monetarists decided that the market was the solution to everything and we just needed to privatise the lot and all would be well, we simply haven't had a strategic national energy policy worthy of the name. We are paying for that now with increased energy insecurity. We need to move to a renewable energy low-carbon energy economy if we are to avoid catastrophic climate change. Wind energy is a great asset in the UK because we have so much potential. Even now, with only a small fraction of that potential exploited wind sometimes contributes as much as 25% of our energy needs. The trouble is of course it contributes that when the wind blows, when it doesn't the generation capacity drops to hardly aything. If you want to understand our current energy mix, I recommend you look at this web site: http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/. As the notes on the site explain because a lot of wind capacity is not linked to the national grid telemetric system its contribution is actually understated, but even so when I checked just now it was registering at just short of 15% - and its not that windy today. The major advantage of nuclear is that its output is reliable and so it provides the base load to the grid. I would not like to contemplate an energy strategy that sought to move away from fossil fuel completely, as I believe we must in order to plan in the national interest, without the knowledge that nuclear was there to support the base load pro temp. But nuclear is inherently dangerous and ruinously expensive. Tidal and geothermal solutions could, I believe, replace the need for nuclear altogether and in the longer term will be much more cost effective and of course won't threaten the environment or our safety. We also need more capacity for storage of wind and solar energy – our existing two pumped storage stations, absolutely critical to the way the grid works, are both older than some nuclear stations already decommissioned. The tragedy is that we have failed to invest at all significantly in these technologies. If we start now, there is still time to catch up.

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/


Yes. Off-shore certainly, where shipping lanes allow, and on-shore where practical. I would certainly support community owned wind turbine solutions, perhaps linked to pumped storage hydro systems, OF AN APPROPRIATE SCALE, on Hayling.

18.Now that there is a possibility that the traditional two-party system may be in danger of collapse, is this the opportunity to consider a fairer electoral system, such as proportional representation, which could result in a mix of MPs reflecting more accurately the wishes of the electorate in general?

Yes. I support electoral reform at all levels of government. It is overdue in local government as well as parliament. In fact, in local government, with the multi-member ward system we have here in Havant Borough, it hard to find any kind of argument for not having it.


It could be something to do with the fact that politicians have proved sometimes to be greedy, out of touch and not always entirely trust-worthy. I think it's also the result of having an unfair election system and one that pushes all the main parties to the right-centre ground making them very similar and very conservative (with a small C). However, I feel that a much more significant factor than any of these is the decline of community and community-identity. The idea that we are all just individual consumers with no sense of collective responsibility came along with consumer materialism, globalisation and a sense that individual rights are more important that collective duty. This tendency, strongly espoused by right-wing conservatives and pandered to by Labour and the Lib Dems is a corrosive force in our society. Do you know something? Greed isn't good - it's evil. We can only exist at all as individuals within a mutually supporting society. More equal societies are happier and more stable. So what would I do? Well, in the short term I would encourage individuals to re-engage with their community, or that part of their community they most relate to, and in the longer term, I would change our much of the way we relate, work and live together to make individualism less significant and get people wanting to work for the common good.


There are so many and I would of course want to talk to others and take soundings – especially if I came high up in the private member's bill ballot. But I think an Electoral Reform bill that brought in a truly fair election systems would have a lasting impact for good in our country, so in order to answer your question, that's the one. This said, as Caroline Lucas has proved in her first term in parliament as the first Green MP, there is a lot of ground you can cover in 5 years if you are determined enough to make change for the better and are prepared to work with others of good faith to make it happen.

Dr Graham GilesLabour Party


With the volatile world we find ourselves in - stronger conventional armed forces are essential, backed up by an independent nuclear deterrent. Britain still has a leading international role to prevent military mass-destruction. 2% of GDP for all NATO members is the minimum ‘insurance policy’ if diplomacy fails. The UK cannot afford to weaken its defences or its pre-emptive capacity in a world of known obligations and less predictable threats.There’s no question of us changing our position on Trident – we support renewal and renewed focus on multilateral disarmament. Labour’s priority is to see strong high-tech Armed forces equipped for the challenges of the 21st Century with the skills and ability to tackle emerging, interconnected threats. Our decision in office to commission the two most advanced aircraft carriers in the world demonstrates more than anything else our commitment never to compromise Britain’s national security and ability to punch above our weight whatever, wherever and whenever the challenge.


In Parliament I will champion affordable geothermal power for Havant and Hayling Island families and businesses through European green energy grants (as Labour MP Alan Whitehead did in Southampton). This zero-carbon sustainable energy resource is drawn from the hot aquifer located 1000 metres below the Island and Havant. It is environmentally friendly, requiring no fracking, no injection of toxic chemicals and no re-drilling. The only discharge into the atmosphere is water vapour! Unlike wind and solar energy, geothermal heat and power is permanently available. Low cost green energy would be the single most attractive key to incoming investment and entrepreneurialism. It would boost business profits in line with local interests.Developing and improving off-road cycleways will benefit commuters and leisure riders as an alternative to the main Havant road. I would help negotiate shared rights-of-way, focusing on providing safe routes especially to island schools. We should target European Community sponsorship for an ambitious Havant and Hayling cycle infrastructure as other cities and towns have. This would include a full upgrade of the Hayling Billy and construction of a leisure bridge. This sensible sustainable strategy anticipates multiple benefits to reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, preserve flood-defences and boost green tourism. The European Cyclists’ Federation (ECF) is targeting 6 billion Euro for cycling between 2014-2020, including construction of 50,000 km of new cycle paths. Cycle project grants can be obtained from various programmes and agencies. In principle, cycling initiatives are eligible for funding in the EU policy areas of transport, energy, environment, health, regional development and tourismAdequately funded smart Neighbourhood Policing is essential for our families, businesses and tourists. Implementation of modern technologies can help reduce costs and increase efficiencies but reducing numbers of qualified local police officers is dangerous. Another 5 years of arbitrary 20% cuts in policing is unsustainable, as is the failed expensive Crime Commissioner experiment. From my own experience leading justice reforms, 80% of the causes of crime related to alcohol and drugs can be significantly addressed by a strategic approach to supply and demand reduction of such substances, especially to our children and teenagers. I’m coordinating a team to develop a break-through inter-disciplinary approach called SPERA for police, probation and health services. As we know in practice it is possible to tip the balance in the direction of hope if we are tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime.People I meet want specific plans for how we can change things, like reducing student loans and solving the cost-of-living crisis. They want to work or start a business and lift their family to a higher standard of living. As a social reformer and criminologist I have evidence-based experience and solutions to tackle causes of homelessness, hunger, debt and dependency. Local vulnerable people are hoping for a hand up not a hand-out. I have a track-record of reforming services in health, education and justice. Now I'm asking for the trust of voters to represent and work in Parliament to energize our local economy and empower our neighbourhoods.


If we delay reduction of carbon emissions and dependency on fossil-fuels until other countries do likewise, or only reduce our carbon foot-print when economically advantageous, future generations will be blighted by the effects of global warming. Currently, consumption habits in the rich world are three times the sustainable capacity of our planet. Unless we show serious commitment to environmental issues now and legislate to make the necessary changes, developing countries like China will not share the urgency required to keep global warming within controllable limits. Moreover, if the UK continues to implement the balanced energy policy, introduced when Ed Miliband was Minister for the Environment, our country will benefit economically and socially from green power generated within and around our coastline.


I will always fiercely defend our NHS from fragmentation and privatisation (and support proposals to join up local hospital and home-care services which will particularly benefit disabled and elderly residents in Havant). A Labour government founded the NHS (against Tory opposition) over 60 years ago. Times have changed since then, and it’s been necessary for the NHS to evolve. However, “free at the point of need” services must be retained without compromise or delay to patient diagnosis and treatment. Charging for services would disproportionately affect the poorest and most vulnerable in our society. There is no evidence that private sector provision is better or more efficient than public sector provision despite the ideological and corporate hype. Indeed the recent Hinchinbrooke Hospital fiasco showed that the private sector failed to provide core hospital services promptly, efficiently, safely or at reasonable cost. The NHS exists for patients not profits. There should be no more unaffordable broken promises and disastrous reorganisations as happened during the last 5 years under the coalition government. Labour has always been trusted to invest in the health of all who live and work in Britain from GP to A&E, from cancer survival to heart recovery, from patient safety to staff support. It’s never been more urgent to restore and invest in these NHS values


The Tories are relentless in pursuing a policy of increased privatisation, irrespective of the impact this could have on the quality, cost or efficiency of public services. It’s an ideological mantra of the right that “private is always better” - don’t forget they even wanted to privatise our forests until opposition MPs and public outrage forced a U-turn! In the last century our nationalised industries were sold to investors in the name of progress, but privatisation has not proved to be a universal panacea. An article in last August’s Daily Telegraph (a newspaper that champions Conservative privatisation ideology) concluded that “Britain’s railways are renowned for being the most expensive in Europe, possibly the world.” The question needs to be asked - why are our railways so expensive? Privatisation has not led to cheaper season-tickets, wage equality, better working conditions for staff, nor an end to debt, delays and over-crowding. One of George Osborne’s excuses for a failing economy was “leaves and the wrong kind of snow on the tracks!” The future of our public services has political, economic and social consequences that need to be examined honestly. It’s wrong to assume that fragmenting public services is always the most efficient and effective option. Health, Education, Justice, Defence and Forests are all targets of big-business. British core services should be not be sold-off to profiteering multi-nationals as they were in USA under the George W. Bush and his former corporate CEO-led administration

6. It is a matter of public record that the UK now employs more people than at any time in its history. It is also a matter of public record that a greater proportion of those employees work in the private sector, as opposed to the government financed public sector, than has been recorded since records began around 15 years ago (Ref ONS). Given the crisis in the public finances, do you see this as a positive trend that should be continued or do they feel that more people should be employed by the government? If you would like to see more public sector workers, how do you think they should be paid for and by whom? I am less concerned about the relative split between the number of private/public sector workers than the conditions of employment that employees experience. Punitive zero hours contracts in the private sector are scandalous, they have multiplied in the past 5 years and should stop now. Thousands of short-term immigrant labourers in Southern England are also known to be victims of exploitation. Moreover, I believe that only appropriate public services should be privatised. Certain care services that we rely on that should never be owned for commercial gain as we need them to be evidence-based, driven by long-term public interest not for profit or political vested interests. Private companies of necessity are driven by share-holder dividends over and above national demographic needs or the living wage. Front line public servants like town-planning, or the police, probation and prisons services should never depend on private sector staff or managers. I would also fiercely defend an impartial independent BBC from the competitive interests of corporate news organisations like the Murdoch Corporation. It’s reasonable and responsible that public services we all depend on should be funded, governed and staffed from general taxation.

7. Following the Scottish referendum, the transfer of more powers of government to Holyrood and the likelihood of a large contingent of SNP MPs in Westminster after the election, how do you believe the UK constitution should be amended, if at all?Powers that were once vested in central government have been devolved not only to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but also to the Mayor of London and a few elected mayors or unitary authorities. The coalition government is mandating Greater Manchester (without a referendum) to become the first English region to get full control of its health budget, as part of an extension of devolved powers. If committed to maintaining a United Kingdom, we need to have a serious debate about devolved powers throughout our nation. “English votes for English laws” is a good sound-bite but far too simplistic. I would advocate a more visionary approach to the future of 21st Century democratic governance in the UK. Starting with the House of Lords I would lobby for a fully elected second chamber of Parliament to be responsible for constitutional matters and scrutiny. My preference would be for a Senate providing equal representation to each of the four British principalities, elected by compulsory voting of all British citizens (this would also make PR a valid reform). Falling voter turn-out undermines the quality of debate and representation in Britain – compulsory voting as a primary citizenship responsibility would break the dependence forever of traditional king-makers, power-brokers and minority swing voters. An authentic new Parliamentary legitimacy would drive long-overdue reforms to our democratic representative bodies nationally, regionally and locally.

8. How do you plan to approach first time voters to ensure they appreciate and vote on the big important issues rather than short term, personal areas of dissatisfaction?

I consider that first time voters want someone to believe in, something to be hopeful about. That’s why we’ve branded our Labour message and vision as Hope4Havant. People are not asking for the world, they’re asking for a decent standard of living, a good education, a properly funded NHS, an affordable home of their own, a fairer more equal society. People I meet are not looking for a hand-out they’re hoping for a hand up. Britain can afford this, we’re one of the wealthiest nations. We cannot afford to force the cost of the global financial banking crisis onto our weakest citizens through bed-room tax and zero-hours contracts, or saddle our apprentices and graduates with student debt into middle age. Austerity is not working we urgently need to tip the economic and social balance in the direction of Hope.The top of our hope4havant.com home page has been encouraging all constituents to register to vote – up to a million citizens especially first-time-voters in Britain may be denied a choice on May 7th if they have not registered before the election.


Absolutely not! Good management and accountability are essential whether a company is private or public. Many charities and social enterprises have excellent business models, they are not driven by corporate hegemony or share-holders demands. It’s erroneous to equate profits with good customer service. Making a living does not mean that our businessmen and women are not motivated by a pride in their products and services. I strongly support local family businesses and entrepreneurs. They know that to survive and thrive there must be a good balance between product quality, customer service and turnover. Regarding the local tax burden on retailers in Hayling and Havant I would work with Councillors and MPs of all parties to reduce business rates and increase incentives for new investment.


As they’ve been serving as ministers the Tory government for the last five years, the Liberals may well support Cameron again if given the opportunity. Based on current opinion polls the next government will either be Labour or Conservative. We can have no assurance that the Lib-Dems will not opt again to join a right-wing administration intent on doubling the impact of austerity. Clegg has arrogantly declared that the Tories are “the scarecrow without a heart”, Labour “the tin man without a brain” – to follow his ‘Wizard of Oz’ analogy that makes the Liberals “the lion without a roar !” Polling consistently shows Lib-Dems polling well below UKIP, which makes their stated ambition, to provide compassion in a Tory coalition or ideas in a Labour administration, pretentious and unlikely. Perhaps the really scary scenario is ‘vote Cameron get Farage’?


Immigrants have made a huge contribution to our economic and social life. The Treasury estimates that 0.6% of GDP is generated by migrants – more than the total economic growth in our economy. 40% of workers in the NHS are migrants and a significant number of EU and non-EU doctors. With Labour, migrants from the EU will not be able to claim benefits until they have lived and worked here for at least two years. A Labour government will make it illegal to undercut the minimum wage by exploiting migrant workers. Everyone who works in our public services will have to speak English. We will work again with minorities to strengthen integration within our neighbourhoods. In discussions about European migration, the larger number of UK citizens living abroad is rarely mentioned. If we leave the European Union, as UKIP and some Tories want, this would not “solve” the immigration problem at all. Moreover, it is highly likely that an equal number of British citizens living abroad would be forced to come home as generous health and public services in EU countries would no longer be available to them. This would clearly exacerbate the English housing crisis, caused by lack of leadership and investment in NIMBY construction and infrastructure. Neither the coalition nor UKIP are willing to raise an even more complex matter, the scandal of illegal immigration and human trafficking into Britain. Tory cuts and attitudes have compromised our capacity to reduce this growing threat. Only close cooperation between well-resourced police, border agencies and intelligence services alongside our EU counterparts can stem this organised predatory crime. It has been estimated that 30,000 modern day slaves have been smuggled by brutal gang-masters into England. Reducing illegal migration into this country can only be achieved by a strategic interdisciplinary collaboration inside and outside our borders. Unfortunately, Britain is losing its influence and reputation in Europe. UKIP are viewed as objectionable and the Tories as awkward. I maintain high level contacts with justice and interior ministry leaders in Central Eastern Europe. We established reforms, Master degree programmes and on-line training together. The time is right to strengthen not weaken collaboration with our neighbours if we want to avoid the road, rail and air corridors of Europe being highways for predators.


We have been going through unprecedented government austerity in response to the worldwide recession. A crisis caused first by collapse of the unregulated US economy which torpedoed the European and British banking systems with sub-prime loans. Financially, this country is not yet out of the woods. Many businesses (including indigenous UK companies) remain located here rather than continental Europe or elsewhere in the world, only because we belong to the European Community. There is a debate to be had about Europe but this is not the time to threaten our fragile economic recovery. A Tory government would plunge us into a potentially destructive two-year debate on our future in Europe, which would have a damaging impact on our economy. Now is not the time to create uncertainty for investment and jobs based in Britain which depend on our EU membership.Moreover, it is important for British working people to recognise that Cameron’s renegotiation of our EU membership is not to protect their interests. He unambiguously wants to ‘free’ Britain from the human rights, health & safety regulations that protect individuals but add costs to businesses. Also, the main activity of the UK coalition government in Europe has been to defend millionaire Bankers’ bonuses, resist financial regulation designed to stop another global crisis, and to block an EU ‘Robin Hood Tax’ on financial transactions.


Havant and Hayling island benefit from excellent educators but all schools and colleges have struggled to manage cuts and confusion in education policies. I believe in choice, but aspirational education for all needs to be properly funded for the long-term. My Charity ‘Europe to Europe’ runs Summer Schools for disadvantaged high-achievers called OpenEd, which encourages an international world-view, enterprise, character and leadership. For example investment in our pupils can support ambitious young teams starting a business at 16, creating an NGO at 17 and running a political campaign at 18. Billions of Euro EU Erasmus+ funding for this innovative extra-mural education is available until 2020 if local schools and youth organisations are simply prepared to apply for it. There is a need for an integrated 21st century vision to encourage, facilitate and mentor young entrepreneurs to set up new ventures with a low-tax threshold. As I’ve said many times on the door-steps and hustings: ‘If you haven’t got a decent job in Havant, haven’t got an affordable home in Havant, haven’t got a meal in Havant – then you haven’t got a hope in Havant !”. Real wages have fallen £1,600 a year since David Cameron took office, the largest fall since the 1870’s. This has left many working people struggling, with one in five workers low paid, and half of those in poverty now living in a working family. Labour’s plan ensures that working people will benefit from an £8 an hour minimum wage, action to promote a living wage, and a ban on exploitative zero hours contracts. Alongside getting young people back to work, a compulsory jobs guarantee, a responsible welfare system, and abolishing the unfair bedroom tax – this is how we will tackle the cost-of-living crisis, reduce dependency on food banks, and earn our way back to greater productivity and higher living standards for all.


Business interests and the Conservative party once forecast that introduction of a minimum wage would be catastrophic for the country and cause the loss of many jobs. This scaremongering proved not to be true. Restoring the highest rate of tax to 50% is reasonable and ethical in current circumstances. Ordinary working people and those unfortunate enough to rely on benefits have borne the brunt of VAT and austerity taxation up to now. Those with the broadest shoulders should at least appear to be carrying the greatest load. We must not allow unsound economists or fat-cats to get away with scare tactics which resist a fair taxation system. Labour is committed to end non-dom status and also empower the HMRC to crack down effectively on corruption and tax evasion.


Great Britain is still a global power, the fifth or sixth richest in the world. With Queen Elizabeth being head of State in 53 countries, our diplomatic, economic and political influence is undeniable. Clearly, the UK has a ‘special relationship’ with the Commonwealth. Since 1970 Britain has also had a ‘special relationship’ with Europe as a member State of the expanding European Union. We also have a long historical and national security ‘special relationship’ with the USA, especially through NATO and the UN. Each of these special relationships have on-going fundamental importance to the unique global foreign policy of our nation. Of course special relationships have to be mutual. If the USA considers the UK to be its closest ally and the UK considers the USA to be its closest ally then we have the basis for active strategic collaboration on matters of global resonance. I had a two hour breakfast with President Obama in February at which international ‘special relationships’ were very much on the menu. For me the tests of our UK-USA special relationship are now threefold: the imperative of peace and reconciliation between nations; the urgency of binding global agreements on reversing man-made climate change; and the reduction of threats from terrorism and nuclear proliferation.


Due to a lack of investment in renewable energy and appropriate energy saving initiatives in this country over the past 5 years, it is inevitable that we need some nuclear power generation for the next 30 years. However, we should invest more in renewable energy including free geothermal energy for Havant and Hayling, as in Southampton. We must certainly adopt a precautionary principle against new fossil-fuel power generation - I oppose fracking for environmental, health and economic reasons. Given the complexity of our local geology, population density, and the importance of local aquifers to our water supply, it would be extremely ill-advised to permit gas-fracking anywhere along the south coast. I support a new generation of efficient, safe nuclear power plants on existing sites because it is essential for our growing industrial, scientific and domestic requirements. Investment in 21st Century nuclear fission is part of Labour’s integrated UK strategy to provide all the energy we need without harming the planet.


I’m not against the construction of efficient coastal and off-shore wind turbines in principle, as long as they’re appropriately located with proper environmental impact assessments. This should include negotiated benefits for local residents and businesses in terms of financial and energy incentives. There are clear advantages in renewable technologies like wind and solar power, as turbines and solar panels can ultimately be removed and landscapes easily reinstated. Such innovation is to be preferred over fracking, which causes permanent environmental damage, with pollution to springs and aquifers. It also releases other seriously global warming gasses such as methane. Natural gas may be cleaner than coal, but it is still a damaging fossil fuel – that causes man-made climate change. People once expressed reasonable objections to land turbines on the basis of perceived ugliness and disturbance. This is much less a matter of concern these days, not least as people admire their sculptural elegance and clean technology. Modern windmills have become familiar landmarks across Britain and Europe replacing the belching coal power stations, which were so ubiquitous and unhealthy in past generations.


Irrespective of the outcome of the 2015 general election, I would personally be in favour of a fairer system for electing our MPs that better reflects public opinion across the country. There are many inherent problems with our current “first past the post” system, including a bias towards two parties that must control the minority ‘swing-vote’ in order to form a government. Pressure to vote tactically for a second choice to keep a third party out of power does not reflect individual preference. This is a disincentive to vote if one’s preferred party doesn’t have any chance of being elected. However, my view is that any change to our voting system should be accompanied by retention of sensible equitable constituency boundaries and the introduction of compulsory voting as a citizenship responsibility. This would strengthen the power of personal democracy and force politicians to debate on the issues. Currently the system encourages some candidates with a sense of entitlement to apply for the job without needing to debate the difficult questions, or even turn up for the job interview.


There are many reasons for disillusioned and disengaged electors, including of course recent scandals of MPs abusing Parliamentary and EU restaurant expenses. Failure by politicians to live up to their job description is damaging to public confidence. Lib Dems signed covenants never to increase university tuition fees, Tory’s promised not to impose a top-down reorganisation on the NHS, guaranteed to wipe out the deficit by 2015, and foolishly committed to reduce immigration to 10s of 1000s “no ifs, no buts!”. Understandably this all leads to cynicism and lower voter turn-out. For my part, I will re-engage the electorate through exposing truth and empowering hope. This means setting clear objectives I know can be achieved through diligence, hard work and a smart entrepreneurial approach to funding projects and the priorities people want to achieve in Havant. For example, I’ve already identified billions of Euro available to our constituency from existing EU funds for Geo-thermal renewable energy, Cycling infrastructure, extra-mural Education projects, and Environmental protection to protect our coastline.


Solar PV panels on all south-facing roofs to generate electricity.

I invested in 18 SolarPV panels on my roof three years ago. They already generated more than 14,000 kW hrs. My quarterly electric bill averages about £15. Imagine what benefits such installations could make to families and enterprises in Hampshire and to our environment across the country.30% of our national energy demand is domestic. Generating electricity from sunlight is a win-win-win-win policy, for our environment, our energy economy, our family budgets, and our local neighbourhood enterprises. Solar PV panels not only efficiently return installation costs within 5 years (less in Havant and Hayling where sunlight is 150% above the national average), they also significantly reduce family electricity bills, provide skilled apprenticeships & employment, create permanent business opportunities, and achieve sustainable zero-carbon energy to protect the planet.With short-term interest rates now at 0% the cost of this national policy makes it ‘a no-brainer’. In the term of one parliament Solar PV would more than pay for itself - and then provide another 20 years of free benefits. For the people of Britain my proposed law would achieve for many, elimination of energy poverty and empowerment of business growth, even with no further public investment from future governments.

Steve SollittLiberal Democrats


The Liberal Democrats believe that the current level of funding in defence is adequate and that the way that this funding is spent needs to be re-evaluated. The Party wants to end our 24 hour nuclear patrols with a saving of £4 billion over the lifetime of the current system. The Coalition government has spent more than 2% of GDP on defence over this parliament. We are committed to conducting a Strategic Defence and Security review shortly after the General Election to ensure that we are making best use of the funding available. Personally I do not believe that Trident is the way forward and that it would not help deal with the bigger security issues affecting the UK at this time


There needs to be stronger guidance around housing and related infrastructure. It’s the one issue that I hear about over and over again and know from my experience over the last 20 years in local government is the one area where people feel they have no real control. The Liberal Democrats among others want to increase the building of properties as there is an acute lack of housing but this has to be led by coherent policy and not just left the way it is. Without good infrastructure (including NHS provision, schools and roads) housing expansion whilst answering the need will not develop the community it becomes part of.

A good local MP also needs to live in and understand their community and ensure their voice is heard in Parliament. That is why I have committed to move to Havant if elected.

My experience of working with a number of MPs and also in my present role in the NHS makes me very aware of the importance of residents feeling they have a representative who listens


Liberal Democrats have campaigned for a long time over the issues around increase in CO2 and the effect this has on our environment. They have been able to ensure that policies in the Coalition reflect this even though the Conservatives were not supportive and have already promised to dismantle some of that good work if they win a majority I don’t believe that its worth damaging our economy with environmental regulations but some lines need to be drawn in the sand Whilst the regulation may be weaker elsewhere it is our responsibility to show that we are willing to work to control and reduce CO2 and work with others to reduce there emissions too


Working in the NHS I am aware that there are already some input by private providers into the NHS and the health sector couldn’t function without some of this specialist support including the work done by specialist providers such as Macmillan nursing, something that I have had personal experience of. There are also some private organisation input which helps to cover some minor surgical work I am afraid that not all agree to the free treatment principle and that is regrettable and very naïve We are committed to meet the requirement of funding as shown in the five year NHS England plan and have costed this policy unlike others. Personally I am passionate about the work the NHS does and that it should remain in the public sector where it is safest. There is a need for private input but this should be to support its aims


Different areas require a different approach. In the case of the NHS I believe that remaining in the public sector is the correct option as does the Liberal Democrats. Personally I feel that British Rail has functioned better since it passed into the private sector although it’s still important that government maintains some controls. They do this over ticket pricing controls and the regular tendering process although this may now be in need of review

6. It is a matter of public record that the UK now employs more people than at any time in its history. It is also a matter of public record that a greater proportion of those employees work in the private sector, as opposed to the government financed public sector, than has been recorded since records began around 15 years ago (Ref ONS). Given the crisis in the public finances, do you see this as a positive trend that should be continued or do they feel that more people should be employed by the government? If you would like to see more public sector workers, how do you think they should be paid for and by whom? There is a clear link between government debt and the number employed in the public sector. There has been a movement to private sector employment and this is partly due to the policies of the past around the transfer of services from the public to private sector When there is a fall in the deficit and there is more public money available there may well be a rise in public sector staffing but I firmly believe that this should be affordable and sustainable It is unacceptable to put staff in either the private or public sector in a situation leading to uncertainty 7. Following the Scottish referendum, the transfer of more powers of government to Holyrood and the likelihood of a large contingent of SNP MPs in Westminster after the election, how do you believe the UK constitution should be amended, if at all?Yes. There should be a change there will only allow English constituency MPs to vote on English related issues. There would clearly lead to issues if a coalition after the election involved the SNP but with delegated responsibility for areas like the NHS already made to Scotland and Wales this would seem a sensible approach8. How do you plan to approach first time voters to ensure they appreciate and vote on the big important issues rather than short term, personal areas of dissatisfaction?I will be using the record of the Liberal Democrats in Government delivering 75% of our manifesto as part of the Coalition. Some first time voters will feel that a specific policy or area is more important to them and by talking about the impact of that area and how it impacts of the larger picture I would seek to show and explain what can be achieved. It’s as much about listening to their concerns and then telling them about the wider issues too


Having worked in several customer service areas in both profit and non-profit organisations a profit motive should not be a requirement for good customer service.


It is very clear that unless something changes quite dramatically in the next two weeks that there will not be a majority government. The public decided through our present voting system at the last election that not one party would have a mandate on their own and so we ended up with a coalition. This is likely to be the outcome this time too although clearly I have no idea if the Liberal Democrats will be part of that. Ironically a recent poll suggest that the public would prefer us in that position again if there was not an outright winner. I am very proud that the Party took that step and helped establish stable government that has survived five years. The Party grew up and became part of Government. If the public don’t vote for a majority government then I feel it’s vital to try and establish stable government


I feel that free movements of EU citizens is a good thing and helps to promote vitality and diversity of our country. There is significant movement both ways and being part of the union has been an asset The Liberal Democrats have introduced measures to ensure that EU migrants must wait three months before claiming out of work benefits EU Migration benefits our economy hugely and they contribute more in taxes than they take in benefits


The first ever government containing Liberal Democrats has also been the first ever government to set out in law the requirement to hold a referendum when there is a proposal for a further transfer of power to the EU When that referendum comes we would want that to be an “in/out” referendum


The Liberal Democrats have worked in the coalition to increase apprenticeships and this expansion would continue with an aim to double the number of businesses with apprentices including extending them to new sectors of our economy. We would develop the skilled workforce needed to support this growth and extend the Grant for Employers for the remainder of the next Parliament and deliver 200,000 grants to employers We would also expand the number of degree equivalent Higher Apprenticeships.The present system of university funding only requires students to pay back after they are earning more than £21,000 a year. The majority of people I have talked to feel that the present system is fair and allows for the required finance in the university sector. A continued expansion in apprenticeships could reduce the number attending university but student fees do not appear to have significantly reduced the number who wish to attend at present There are times when fixed term contracts and other flexible contracts work well for some employees and businesses. However that is not always the case and we would work to stamp out abuse. We would create a formal right to request a fixed contract and consult on how to make regular patterns of work contractual after a period of time.


I would not support a 50p tax rate as it’s unlikely to raise more tax revenue. The issue we have to address is tax avoidance and our polices will do that as well as introducing a new tax on properties worth more than £2million On this basis the tax rates should remain the same with an increase in personal tax allowance to £12500


The US is an important ally to the UK but we should not ignore the other allies we have within Europe and beyond. Our foreign policy should be the best one for the UK and not specially aligned to the US


The UK should seek to ensure that nuclear energy remains part of our energy power generation whilst recognising the risks of this If we are serious about finding alternatives to gas and oil longer term then other environmental methods of generation are required through wind and tidal power but there would need to be some nuclear input into that to ensure we were not in a situation where we were short of generation capacity


Yes. I would support the building of wind turbines and also the use of tidal energy in the constituency


The present system has failed for a number of years since the rise of a third party in a system not designed for that concept. It was clear in 2010 when the Liberal Democrats received nearly a quarter of the vote but only 57 seats that they system was in need of change and indeed the Liberal Democrats tried to get this change made but it was thrown out by the Tories. 2015 will show again that the system is unrepresentative and unfair and that residents in safe seats for a particular party won’t have their voice heard as the system disadvantages them. I have always supported and continue to support a PR system


I feel there are two issues leading to disillusionment with politics

Firstly, is the system to elect politicians. As I highlighted in my answer to Q18 and the failings of the first past the post system, the system does not encourage engagement in safe constituencies in a way that makes a difference and engages the public

Secondly, is often the perceived differences (or lack of them) between political parties. It’s up to all of us to be clear about how we are different and use examples of how we have made that difference. The issues around the perception of all politicians lying is unfortunate as most are hardworking and dedicated individuals. The only way we are going to increase participation, without introducing an Australian system of fines if you don’t vote, is by connecting with people and how politics impact on their lives.


I would look to implement our Green Building Bill if we weren’t in a position to do this as part of government. This bill would require every home to be properly insulated by 2035 keeping bills down and cutting carbon and keeping people cool in the summer and warm in the winter. The bill would also give residents who insulate their homes fully £100 a year off their council tax bills for 10 years.

John PerryUnited Kingdom

Independence Party


UKIP as a party is fully behind spending 2% of GDP as a minimum on defence; the current government has cut the number of destroyers and frigates to just 19 and we currently have no functional aircraft carriers that can carry aircraft. When we do get aircraft carriers with aircraft, they will have half the number of planes originally expected. We believe that Trident Replacement programme should continue and that armed forces should not pay tax while on service abroad. UKIP oppose an EU Army, we support NATO instead.


Improve the standard of education and attainment of students in the Borough with a grammar school that would provide intensive academic education opportunities for all. Ensure apprenticeships are available and improve the economy to provide a sustainable working population. Abolish tuition fees for Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths and Medical students to encourage excellence in those subjects and provide resource for the skilled job vacancies that exist in Havant today. I would also halt green field housing development and focus on brown field sites for new houses.


I generally believe in the green agenda, but residents are currently paying £264 extra per year in green taxes which will double over the next five years. The effect of green taxes is to export jobs to countries without green taxes (China, India etc..) where manufacturing there produces more pollution than had the goods been manufactured here. Green taxes have the effect of forcing more people into fuel poverty with many having to choose between heating or eating and using food banks. UKIP would therefore scrap all green taxes and significantly lower the cost of energy for everyone and so encourage more manufacturing and jobs back into the UK. I support solar panels on houses, but not solar panels on farmland as in West Lane.


UKIP is against privatisation of the NHS. Labour wrote £60 billion of PFI contracts requiring the taxpayer to pay the companies £300 billion back, a poor business deal for the taxpayer. The Conservatives have privatised NHS services, with companies receiving the contracts making large donations to the Conservative Party. UKIP believes that profits should be retained within the NHS and used to provide a better service. We would also halt free treatment to non-Britons, saving £2 billion a year and use £300 million of those savings to abolish hospital car parking charges, part funded by an extra £3 billion contribution to the NHS.


The issue here is poor management; if management are not up to the role, they should be removed; the last two governments have been engaged in wholesale reorganisation of the NHS and these party political changes need to stop as the effect is reduced morale and performance.

6. It is a matter of public record that the UK now employs more people than at any time in its history. It is also a matter of public record that a greater proportion of those employees work in the private sector, as opposed to the government financed public sector, than has been recorded since records began around 15 years ago (Ref ONS). Given the crisis in the public finances, do you see this as a positive trend that should be continued or do they feel that more people should be employed by the government? If you would like to see more public sector workers, how do you think they should be paid for and by whom?

There are 1.8 million people “employed” on zero hour contracts. Also, because of mass immigration (over 620,000 gross per year) an oversupply of unskilled workers is enforcing wage compression making the minimum wage very often the maximum wage. I would like the public sector reduced and I welcome the growth in the private sector, but it must be with real jobs and opportunities and not with workfare and zero-hours contracts whose numbers are used to increase the numbers in employment.

7. Following the Scottish referendum, the transfer of more powers of government to Holyrood and the likelihood of a large contingent of SNP MPs in Westminster after the election, how do you believe the UK constitution should be amended, if at all?

English MPs should vote on English only laws just as Scottish MPs only vote on Scottish laws. Personally, I was never in favour of devolution, but accepting we have it, we need the Barnett Formula scrapped and funding to Wales and Scotland based on need.

8. How do you plan to approach first time voters to ensure they appreciate and vote on the big important issues rather than short term, personal areas of dissatisfaction?

I ask first time voters to look at the record of the previous governments. Labour doubled the National Debt to £800 billion, and the Conservatives have doubled the debt again over 5 years to £1.5 trillion (the Conservative debt increase being equivalent to £12,000 for every man, woman and child). The Conservatives pledged to cut immigration to 1/10, but increased it. The biggest issue is belief in Britain - UKIP believes in a Britain that can write its own laws, control its borders and govern itself. Labour, LibDems and Conservatives believe that many of those activities should be determined in the EU and not Britain.


Good Customer Service results in satisfied customers who spread the word and become loyal to the supplier. I disagree with the statement, I would say “Is the motive for Good Customer Service a requirement for profit”, with the answer, yes.


We in UKIP are hoping that voting for UKIP gets UKIP. UKIP gained 38% of the vote in Havant in the European Elections last year, beating the runners up by 8%. With the help of the electorate, we could repeat or beat that poll result and lead to UKIP influencing policy of the major party in government.


ONS data currently shows gross immigration of 624,000 and net immigration of 298,000 over the past 12 months. This is far too high. UKIP would implement an Australian style points system for immigrants and cut net immigration to under 50,000 immediately. Whatever the Conservatives state, their leader in the EU, Jean-Claude Juncker has stated that the free movement of people in the EU is non-negotiable. Cameron made a pledge to cut immigration to a 1/10 in 2010, but it has increased; any further pledges would be false. UKIP encourages immigration into the UK of people with the skills the UK needs, we believe that everyone outside the UK should have an equal opportunity to come here.


UKIP and I believe it should be held immediately with only British citizens voting and EU and foreign visitors denied a vote. UKIP trusts the people; Labour will not give Britons the opportunity to vote as they cannot be trusted and the Conservatives cannot be trusted to keep their word since they denied us their promised vote on the Lisbon Treaty.


UKIP Policy is no tuition fees for STEM subjects and I agree with that as there is a shortage of STEM subject graduates in the Havant area as evidenced by job vacancies. Since 45% of student loans are being written off, student fees could be at least halved with no fiscal impact to the government coffers. I believe we should reintroduce apprenticeship training, but this will only work if unskilled migrants into the UK are restricted from entry, and that is UKIP policy.

I deplore zero hours contracts and would want them banned; they came in after the EU implemented controls over contract workers, and so leaving the EU would help employers and employees alike.


Last year, once employees were paying 20% tax on £32,000 they were moved into the 40% tax band. This should be raised by at least £10,000. UKIP policy is to have an intermediate 30% tax band.I believe the highest rate of income tax should be set at such a rate to maximise tax revenue; France raised their tax rate too high so wealthy French employees moved to the UK to pay UK tax. Therefore, I believe 40% is the maximum tax rate we should have now, since low tax rates encourage more high paid employees into the UK and a greater tax take.


Today’s paper suggests that the special relationship has gone following savage defence spending cuts by Labour and the Tories. I believe we should try and re-kindle that special relationship so sharing intelligence for Britain’s benefit. We in UKIP believe spending must be at least 2% of GDP on defence. I would also like to see shipbuilding returned to Portsmouth.


Short answer: yes, as no CO2 emissions and it guarantees us energy security. Nuclear Power relies on fission; I am hopeful that cleaner nuclear power based on fusion may be with us in future years to allay green concerns.


UKIP Policy is no to wind turbines since they are inefficient and create additional wealth for rich people through the use of subsidies that are paid for by the poor through green surcharges. However, UKIP has a policy on local referenda, and if Hayling voted for turbines, I’d be compelled to support residents as the overarching UKIP policy is that UKIP MPs must follow the wishes of their residents.


As much as the first past the post system disadvantages UKIP, it does tend to give more decisive government


I agree, the leaders of the LibDems, Labour and Conservatives are all multi-millionaires, and career politicians. How can career politicians represent ordinary people if they have not had a job in industry and commerce? UKIP are different, Nigel Farage has had a substantial job outside politics, and I hope my significant commercial experience will convince voters that UKIP as a party and I as a candidate are not all the same.


Exit the EU and allow the UK and not the EU to write our laws, control our borders and govern ourselves. I believe in Britain; I believe in Havant and I believe in you.

That’s all for now, folks

We hope that this exercise has been helpful with your selection of a suitable candidate for the Havant constituency for the next five years, replacing the member for the last 23 years, David Willetts.

Now it’s up to you and all your fellow voters on Thursday 7th May at the polling booths!

PF PowerPoint Presentations

News & Politics

100 Answers to 20 Questions – Havant Parliamentary Candidates