100 Answers to 20 Questions – Havant Parliamentary Candidates

GENERAL ELECTION
TOP 20 QUESTIONS
100 ANSWERS FROM
HAVANT PARLIAMENTARY
CONSTITUENCY CANDIDATES
Alan Mak
Conservative Party
Tim Dawes
Green Party
Dr Graham Giles
Labour Party
Steve Sollitt
Liberal Democratic Party
John Perry
United Kingdom Independence Party

20 Questions
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?
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 Mak
Conservative 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.

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 Dawes
Green Party
PF PowerPoint Presentations
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?
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.

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

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?
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.
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?
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.

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

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?
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.
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, 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.

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?
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.

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?
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.
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?
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.

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?
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.

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
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.

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?
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.
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?
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 Giles
Labour 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.

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

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?
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.
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?
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

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

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
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.

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?
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.

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?
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.

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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.

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?
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.
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 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.

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?
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 Sollitt
Liberal 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

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

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?
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
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?
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

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

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
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
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?
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

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 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.

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?
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
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?
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
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?
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
18. Now that there is a possibility that the traditional two-party
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

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?
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.
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 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 Perry
United Kingdom
Independence Party
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?
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.

100 Answers to 20 Questions – Havant Parliamentary Candidates

100 Answers to 20 Questions – Havant Parliamentary Candidates

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Semelhante a 100 Answers to 20 Questions – Havant Parliamentary Candidates

Semelhante a 100 Answers to 20 Questions – Havant Parliamentary Candidates (19)

Mais de Hayling Island

Mais de Hayling Island (20)

Último

Último (14)

100 Answers to 20 Questions – Havant Parliamentary Candidates