Andrew Selous MP

South West Bedfordshire MP Andrew Selous raised the unfairness of the current schools funding formula with the Schools Minister in a House of Commons debate yesterday.  Under the current formula Central Bedfordshire schools receive £657 per child less than Luton schools and £156 per child less than Buckinghamshire schools.

Speaking after the debate, Andrew Selous said, “It is not fair that our neighbouring areas, Luton and Buckinghamshire, one richer and one poorer than Central Bedfordshire, both receive more money than Central Bedfordshire children do.  I welcome the Government’s decision to change the funding formula to deal with this unfairness and to give greater certainty and clarity to schools over their budgets”. 

The exchange in Hansard was as follows:

Andrew Selous (South West Bedfordshire) (Con): Let me be the first to congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (Richard Graham) on a superb introduction to this important issue, which has drawn a large number of hon. Members to the Chamber. It would have been nice to see a few hon. Members from Her Majesty’s Opposition, but they seem to be somewhat absent. I congratulate my hon. Friend on the sensitive way in which he has raised this important issue.

We all have a duty to speak up for our constituents. Central Bedfordshire council is in the unique position of having a local authority on one side of it, Luton, which is generally poorer than central Bedfordshire, and a local authority on the other side of it, Buckinghamshire, which is richer. Both authorities receive more money per child than central Bedfordshire. I put it to the Minister that it is very hard, as a Bedfordshire MP, to explain to my constituents why the authorities on either side, one of which is poorer and one of which is richer, receive more money. It makes an eloquent case for why the formula has no logic or rationale.

Each child in central Bedfordshire receives £4,658, compared with a child in Luton who receives £5,315 and a child in Buckinghamshire who receives £4,814. A child in Luton gets £657 more and a child in wealthier Buckinghamshire, our neighbour, gets £156 more. Every political party across the spectrum in central Bedfordshire is unhappy about that. The leader of Central Bedfordshire council wrote to the Secretary of State on 25 January to express the views of the whole council on this matter.

Some hon. Members have already mentioned that relatively wealthy areas often have significant pockets of deprivation. That is true in my constituency. There is deprivation in Houghton Regis, for example. The indices of multiple deprivation in some wards in that town are not dissimilar to those in much higher-funded Luton next door. The formula fails poorer children in wealthier areas. We need to look at that to see whether the formula could drill down and give additional funding for poorer children in slightly wealthier areas.

This Government made an impressive start on this issue by publishing “School funding reform: next steps towards a fairer system” a few weeks ago. I am grateful to the Minister and his colleagues at the Department for recognising the problem and setting out a route map for dealing with this issue.

It is worth putting on the record that this Government came into office inheriting a complete economic shambles. We are still having to borrow £120 billion just to pay for public expenditure this year and we are honouring our commitments on increasing funding to the NHS and on international development. Notwithstanding that, Ministers in the Department have maintained cash budgets for schools, which is no mean achievement. That should go on the record in this debate. Many hon. Members know that the only way to deal with this issue, and the unfairness that many of us are rightly raising, is to get the economy growing and get real economic growth. In a time of rising budgets, I believe that by doing so we will be able to make significant progress towards dealing with these inequalities. I should welcome some reassurance from the Minister that that will happen as the economy grows.

The Minister of State, Department for Education (Mr Nick Gibb): It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Gray. Let me begin by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (Richard Graham) on securing a debate on a topic of great importance to us all; indeed, I met him and other colleagues on 12 March to discuss it.

I understand my hon. Friend’s concerns. Gloucestershire is ranked 136th out of 151 authorities for funding allocations per pupil. In 2011-12, funding per pupil was £4,661, compared with the national average of £5,082. My hon. Friend’s opening remarks and the whole debate reflect concerns across the sector about the school funding system.

My hon. Friend is the Martin Luther of school funding reform; indeed, I found a letter from the F40 chair, Councillor Ivan Ould, nailed to the door of the Department for Education. It listed four options or grievances, and we will respond to it in due course. I should, however, point out that option 3 would cost £99 million, which is not an insubstantial sum, given the current financial climate.

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the passion, commitment and perseverance he has shown in campaigning for a fairer funding system and formula. He has raised these issues on countless occasions, including when I visited Tredworth junior school, Finlay community school and Gloucester academy in his constituency last July. I also pay tribute to the work of my hon. Friend the Member for Worcester (Mr Walker), who has provided the leadership and steering for the F40 campaign in Parliament.

I wholeheartedly agree with hon. Members that the current system for funding schools is in desperate need of reform. It is based on an assessment of need that dates back to at least 2005-06, if not further, so it has not kept pace with changing demographics and the needs of pupils across the country. It is also too complex and opaque, so head teachers and governing bodies are often unable to understand how their budgets have been calculated.

It is not right that schools with very similar circumstances can receive vastly different funding for no clearly identifiable reason. We have found that funding between similar secondary schools can vary by £1,800 per pupil. As my hon. Friend the Member for South West Bedfordshire (Andrew Selous) said, the neighbouring areas of Luton, which is poorer than central Bedfordshire, and Buckinghamshire, which is richer, receive more funding per pupil than central Bedfordshire. My hon. Friend the Member for Loughborough (Nicky Morgan) made a similar point, when she said that Leicestershire, which received the lowest amount in the country, received £900 less per pupil than the city of Leicester. That seems unfair.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South (David Mowat) said, there is a 50% discrepancy in funding between Warrington and Westminster local authorities. My hon. Friend the Member for Redditch (Karen Lumley) said that Redditch receives £1,000 per pupil less than Birmingham. My hon. Friend the Member for Kingswood (Chris Skidmore) noted that one side of the Sandwell road in his constituency receives £4,487 per pupil, while the other receives £5,469 per pupil. I have never been compared to Mr Gorbachev, but I accept the challenge to tear down these walls and end these absurd inequities.

The Government remain committed to reforming the funding system so that it is fair, transparent and reflects the needs of pupils across the country. On 26 March, the Secretary of State for Education announced our intention to introduce a new national funding formula during the next spending period. I am sympathetic to my hon. Friends’ wish to see us move faster and address the system’s inequities much sooner. However, in reforming a system that is so entrenched, we need to proceed with caution, and it is important that we introduce full-scale reform at a pace that schools can manage. At a time of economic uncertainty, stability is crucial.

Our priority must be to ensure that schools are able to focus on delivering high educational standards and are not side-tracked by destabilising shifts to their funding. Attempting to introduce any dramatic change to the funding system at a time when we are, by necessity, addressing the budget deficit could cause problems in those schools where there might otherwise be significant changes in their funding.

We will move towards introducing a new funding system, but at a pace that gives us sufficient time to agree the construct of a new formula and that allows schools enough time to adjust to changes in their funding arrangements. Since last spring, we have consulted widely on how to create a funding system that is fair and logical and that distributes extra funding towards the pupils who need it most. The Department for Education has had a number of conversations with key groups, including schools, local authorities, unions and academies, to consider how we can move towards a fairer funding system.

The announcement made by the Secretary of State for Education on 26 March not only reaffirmed our commitment to introducing a new national funding formula during the next spending round, but set out detailed funding arrangements from next year. The funding arrangements from 2013-14 will make the local funding system simpler and more transparent for schools, early years provision and high-need pupils. Under the new arrangements, education provision will be funded on a much clearer, more comparable basis than under the current system. Head teachers, parents and governors will be able to see precisely how their budgets have been calculated, and why.

The first step—we have heard a lot today about first steps, in various languages—to simplifying local funding will be to work on the basis that as many services and as much funding as possible will be devolved to schools. I firmly believe that schools are best placed to decide how to meet the needs of their pupils and to target funding effectively.

Richard Graham: Just to clarify, I think that we all welcome the announcements made by the Education Secretary on 26 March, which will, as the Minister says, simplify things considerably; but does the Minister see that as a first step, which can be improved during this Parliament?

Mr Gibb: It is certainly a first step, and an important one that should not be underestimated; but the national funding formula, to which we want to move in the longer term, will commence in the next spending review, not the present one.

Our approach of simplifying local administration and the local formula and of maximum delegation to schools will give head teachers, principals and governors much more control over how funding is spent.

The second step on our journey is to reduce the number of factors that local authorities can use to distribute funding to schools. At present, they can use 37 factors when deciding how to allocate funding—a point that the hon. Member for Westminster North (Ms Buck) raised. Each of those 37 factors can be interpreted widely and applied in different ways. That has resulted in long and complex local formulae, with huge variations across the country. We are reducing the number of factors that local authorities can use from 37 to 10.

The 10 remaining factors are clearly defined and help to ensure that funding is used to support the attainment of pupils. They are a basic per-pupil entitlement; a deprivation element; an element for looked-after children; low-cost, high-incidence special educational needs; English as an additional language for the first three years after the pupil enters the system; a lump sum, and we are consulting on whether to set a maximum cap of between £100,000 and £150,000; split sites; rates; and private finance initiative contracts. Also, for the five local authorities some but not all of whose schools are within the London fringe area, we will allow some flexibility to reflect higher salary costs in those areas. No longer will local authorities fund schools based on historic factors that we consider less important, such as the number of trees, or the number of ditches surrounding the property. It is right that, at a time of austerity, funding should be focused on supporting pupils to achieve. Each local authority will be required to publish details of its formula on a simple, clear and consistent pro-forma.

To strengthen local decision-making, the third step will be to make some changes to the schools forum arrangements. We will make improvements to their composition and operation, so that their business is more transparent and decisions better reflect the views of education providers. For example, we expect that schools forums should operate similarly to other council committees. Meetings should be held in public and decisions should be publicised.

Mr Buckland: An issue has arisen in the local authority in Swindon, where decisions on the allocation of moneys relating to the pupil premium have caused consternation, as some schools are entitled to more premium than others. I welcome my hon. Friend’s remarks about more transparency in schools forums.

Mr Gibb: In 2013, those issues will be made public, so if some schools forums are redistributing the pupil premium in a way that was not intended, it will become clear and apparent.

David Mowat: Are the 10 factors, which the Minister has read out, that are to be used within a local authority to achieve a fair allocation potentially the basis for a national funding formula by which the money would get to the local authorities in the first place, which is the nub of the problem?

Mr Gibb: My hon. Friend raises a good point. Those are the very issues on which we are consulting, in moving to a national formula. We must move away from the phenomenally complicated formulae that currently apply in allocating funds to local authorities.

To ensure that we are better placed to introduce a national funding formula over the coming years, we are also making changes that will substantially improve how local authorities are funded. They will continue to be allocated amounts for each pupil through the dedicated schools grant based on previous funding levels. The difference will be that that grant will be allocated in three notional blocks: for schools, early years and high-needs pupils. The notional blocks will not be ring-fenced, so local authorities will continue to have flexibility over how they spend their money. That approach will benefit pupils and schools from all sectors and phases.

We will use the October census, rather than the January census as we do now, to calculate budgets for the schools block. Therefore, mainstream maintained schools will receive their budgets earlier, giving them more time to plan. The separate high-needs block will help to secure a more transparent and sustainable approach to funding pupils with high needs. Schools and other providers will be expected to contribute to the costs of a pupil with high needs, up to a clearly defined threshold. Any cost above that threshold will need to be met from the high-needs block. That will ensure that funding for high-needs pupils is funded in an equivalent way, whatever type of institution they attend, and it will improve consistency when young people move from one part of the country to another. The early years block will continue to be funded on the basis of the January census, but that funding will be adjusted to reflect actual numbers by the end of the financial year, to take into account the fact that young children join the school system at different points in the year. It will ensure that local authorities have greater certainty about funding for early years children.

We are aware that we need to reform the administration of the local authority central spend equivalent grant, which is very dear to the heart of my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester, so that there is greater comparability and transparency. We are exploring a new Department for Education grant that would substitute an element of the formula grant that is currently paid by the Department for Communities and Local Government. The new grant would cover relevant central educational services and be paid on a national basis, per pupil, to local authorities and academies. That, combined with the maximum devolution of funding to schools, would replace the need for LACSEG. Making the local system simpler and more transparent will mean that, when we come to address the national system, there will be far less complexity for us to untangle. This is the start of the process for which my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South calls.

I am aware of the concerns covered in the opening remarks made by my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester, including those about small schools, which were also discussed by other hon. Members during the debate. We have considered the additional needs of small rural schools in developing the new funding arrangements. As my hon. Friend the Member for South East Cornwall (Sheryll Murray) pointed out, very small schools are very expensive. We have built enough flexibility into the proposed system to allow local authorities and schools forums to support successful small schools—for example, through the lump sum that I referred to earlier.

In the remaining period of the spending review, schools are being funded at flat cash per pupil, in addition to which schools receive £600 per pupil eligible for free school meals. However, to support our proposed changes and to protect all schools, including small schools, from significant locally decided fluctuations in their budgets, we will continue to operate a minimum funding guarantee of minus 1.5% per pupil for 2013-14 and 2014-15. Therefore, in most circumstances, schools across the country can be assured that, over the next two years, their budgets will not be reduced by more than 1.5% per pupil each year.

Our analysis has shown that those measures will protect the majority of small schools. However, we are consulting on the issues and listening to all the sector’s concerns. Formal decisions on protection for small schools and, indeed, other areas of reform will be announced in the summer.

South West Bedfordshire MP Andrew Selous has called on the Government to help villagers in Hockliffe and Whipsnade who are not connected to the mains gas supply as well as Park Home residents with their heating bills in a House of Commons debate. Local resident Lorraine Bond of Whipsnade Park Homes asked Andrew Selous to visit her about this issue as she paid £300 a month for cylinders of LPG (propane gas) in last year’s freezing winter. Central Bedfordshire Councillor Alan Shadbolt has also tried to get Hockliffe residents on mains gas for many years.

Andrew Selous called for

• Park Home residents and others relying on LPG to be fully informed of the costs of heating their homes before they buy or rent
• The Office of Fair Trading to examine more fully competition among LPG suppliers
• For the Government “green deal” on insulation to be speeded up for Park Home owners, and
• For the new renewable heat incentive to apply to Park Home owners

He also praised Aldwyck Housing Association for the photovoltaic hot water heating on all its 179 new properties in Sandringham Drive Houghton Regis which residents said lead to much lower heating bills for them last year. Andrew Selous said, “Like everyone else, I hate being cold. Hockliffe, Whipsnade and Park Home residents have to bear extra heating costs and I want to see them helped in practical and sustainable ways. I also welcome the Government’s new carbon emissions reduction target insulation programme which will also apply to Park Home owners.”

The debate in Hansard was as follows:

Debate on Energy and Climate Change – House of Commons Tuesday 20 December 2011
Andrew Selous (South West Bedfordshire)
I represent a constituency that has a large number of park homes, which I visit regularly. I am particularly grateful in this regard to a constituent, Mrs Lorraine Bond, who has a Whipsnade park home. She asked me to come to see her a couple of weeks ago, having corresponded with me for quite a while about the exorbitant cost of heating her home using liquid petroleum gas cylinders—this is common for many park home residents. She told me that last winter, when it was cold, she was spending £300 a month on average to keep her park home warm. It is possible to have five extremely cold months in a difficult winter in the United Kingdom, so my constituents are having to spend £1,500 to keep their park homes warm. If we bear in mind the fact that most park home residents are elderly—they tend to be pensioners—and often on low and fixed incomes, the House will realise the significance of that sum. It causes me great concern and that is why I wanted to raise the matter with the Minister today.
The Office of Fair Trading just completed its off-grid energy report in October of this year. It describes the cylinder LPG market as
“a mature and declining market”
of only some 25,000 to 50,000 homes for the 47 kg cylinders of LPG. It points out that bulk LPG is more economical and involves greater ease of delivery and handling, but even bulk LPG is more expensive than other off-grid fuels such as heating oil, about which we hear a lot in this House, solid fuel or electricity. They all, in turn, are much more expensive ways of heating one’s home than a mains gas supply connection, which many rural areas do not have.
The market for liquid petroleum gas—propane and butane in the main—is very limited. There are only three major cylinder suppliers, Calor Gas, Flogas and BP Gas, and the OFT noted that retail arrangements for cylinder LPG
“in effect require dealers to deal exclusively with one supplier.”
It notes, with considerable understatement, that
“these agreements could potentially restrict competition.”
The OFT has said that it
“may return to these issues in the context of the wider cylinder LPG market at a later date”.
It urgently needs to do so, because we are talking about very vulnerable people on low incomes with little choice about the way in which they heat their homes. Our current regulation is purely through the OFT and the Competition Commission, because Ofgem and Consumer Focus do not have a remit for this market.
What can we do? The first thing we need to do is ensure that any future potential park home residents are well aware before they move in of how much it could cost to heat their home. They need to have that knowledge before they take the decision to become a park home resident.
I was encouraged when earlier this year, on 24 March, in column 1084 of Hansard, one of the DECC Ministers said that the green deal and the energy company obligation would apply to park home residents. That is very welcome, but what has happened with the renewable heat premium payment? Some £15 million of Government money, aimed at around 25,000 homes, is due to be spent up to March next year, so have park homes been covered by that payment scheme? If they have not been, can we ensure that they are in the remaining months?
My major question for the Minister concerns whether the renewable heat incentive, which starts in March next year, will apply to park home owners. As I hope I have outlined, they are some of our most vulnerable residents who are in greatest need of the new technology and financial support that the Government are bringing in through that incentive. I understand that at the moment that decision is still, in classic Government language, “subject to policy development”, so I urge my hon. Friend the Member for North Norfolk (Norman Lamb), as the Minister on the Front Bench, to ensure that this group are covered. As I have said, they are the most vulnerable residents and they need this help.
A couple of weeks ago, I visited a major new development in my constituency in Houghton Regis, on Sandringham drive, where every roof—the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Caroline Lucas) will be pleased to hear this—had photovoltaic cells on it, leading to water heating. It did not benefit from the renewable heat incentive, but the residents told me that they had very light heating bills last year as a result of that new technology. Above all, park home residents, who are mainly pensioners and mainly on low incomes, should be the ones to benefit from the renewable heat incentive and the technology that is coming in, which could make heating their homes much more affordable.
Norman Lamb MP [responding on behalf of the Government] Finally, I will deal with the contribution of the hon. Member for South West Bedfordshire (Andrew Selous). I am grateful to him for raising the concerns brought to his attention by Mrs Lorraine Bond. The amount that she and others have to pay over the winter just to heat their homes should concern us all. He is right that the recent Office of Fair Trading report highlighted that cylinder liquefied petroleum gas—
The concern is that the consumers we are talking about are mostly on very low incomes, are often elderly and struggle with their heating costs. I will talk about the steps that the Government are taking. The Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change, the hon. Member for Wealden wrote to the OFT recently, asking it to consider how to make markets work more effectively for vulnerable consumers.
Park homes will shortly be able to receive help under the Government’s main home energy efficiency scheme—the carbon emissions reduction target. CERT requires all domestic energy suppliers with more than 50,000 consumers to reduce householders’ carbon dioxide emissions by promoting low-carbon energy solutions. Under CERT, suppliers are free to decide what measures to promote. I recognise that suppliers have chosen not to install measures in significant quantities to date, but there have been successful trials this year of park home insulation solutions that significantly reduce energy use. Those trials have shown what can be achieved. Solid wall insulation for park homes will get a formal carbon score under CERT, which will incentivise energy suppliers to promote these measures to park home residents during the final year of the CERT scheme.
Finally, I have taken on board the concerns raised by the hon. Member for South West Bedfordshire about the renewable heat incentive. It is clearly important to ensure that that matter is considered fully. The concerns that he has raised will be taken on board by the Department. Every effort will be made to ensure that these vulnerable consumers are protected as well as possible.
ENDS

Andrew Selous MP has visited Royal Mail’s Dunstable Delivery Office to pass on best Christmas wishes and encouragement to the postmen and women at their busiest time of year.

Mr Selous was shown round the Delivery Office by local Delivery Office manager Andy Anderson and was introduced to all the postmen and women who are working hard doing their bit to sort and deliver the area’s share of the estimated total Christmas postbag of over 162 million items in the Thames Valley region.

Andrew Selous MP said: “It was great to meet the hard-working Royal Mail postmen and women at Dunstable Delivery Office and to see at first hand just how much effort they put into delivering for people at this time of year.

“Posties do such an important job at this time of year and I like to thank them for their efforts and wish them all the best over the busy festive period.”

Andy Anderson, Royal Mail Delivery Office Manager at Dunstable said: “Christmas is the busiest time of year, and our people really do pull out all the stops throughout the year to ensure mail is delivered quickly but even more so over the busy festive period. So we are pleased that Andrew Selous MP came along to witness the hard work that goes on behind the scenes.”

He added: “The postal staff do a fantastic job at this time of year to ensure that friends and families stay in touch through their Christmas greetings and gifts. And as usual, we urge our customers to post early so that friends and family have longer to enjoy their Christmas greetings!”

It is also vital that people remember the last posting dates for mail. These are:

• Tuesday 20 December for 1st Class items
• Saturday 17 December for 2nd Class items
• Thursday 22 December for Special Delivery items
• Monday 12 December for airmail items to Western Europe
• Friday 9 December for Eastern Europe, the USA, Canada and Japan
• Monday 5 December for mail to the rest of the world

Customers can help Royal Mail ensure that all their letters, cards and parcels are delivered as quickly and efficiently as possible by taking a few easy steps:

• Use a 1st Class stamp! – Post 1st Class for just 46p and have your Christmas card delivered the next day – anywhere in the UK.
• Post early! – Avoid disappointment by posting your cards and parcels early. The last posting dates this Christmas are: December 17 for 2nd Class mail; December 20 for 1st Class mail; December 22 for Special Delivery.
• Use a postcode! – A clearly addressed card or parcel, with a postcode, and return address on the back of the envelope, will ensure quick and efficient delivery.
• Use Special Delivery – For valuable packages and parcels guarantee delivery with Royal Mail’s Special Delivery, which means your gift is tracked, traced and insured against loss.
• For more information about Christmas with Royal Mail visit: www.royalmail.com or call 08457 740 740.

For Further Information Contact:
Sally Hopkins
Royal Mail Press Office
020 7250 2468
Sally.hopkins@royalmail.com

Andrew Selous MP has visited Royal Mail’s Leighton Buzzard Delivery Office to pass on best Christmas wishes and encouragement to the postmen and women at their busiest time of year.

Mr Selous was shown round the Delivery Office by local Delivery Office manager Judith Lockhart and was introduced to all the postmen and women who are working hard doing their bit to sort and deliver the area’s share of the estimated total Christmas postbag of over 162 million items in the Thames Valley region.

Andrew Selous MP said: “It was great to meet the hard-working Royal Mail postmen and women at Leighton Buzzard Delivery Office and to see at first hand just how much effort they put into delivering for people at this time of year.

“Posties do such an important job at this time of year and I like to thank them for their efforts and wish them all the best over the busy festive period.”

Judith Lockhart, Royal Mail Delivery Office Manager at Leighton Buzzard said: “Christmas is the busiest time of year, and our people really do pull out all the stops throughout the year to ensure mail is delivered quickly but even more so over the busy festive period. So we are pleased that Andrew Selous MP came along to witness the hard work that goes on behind the scenes.”

She added: “The postal staff do a fantastic job at this time of year to ensure that friends and families stay in touch through their Christmas greetings and gifts. And as usual, we urge our customers to post early so that friends and family have longer to enjoy their Christmas greetings!”

It is also vital that people remember the last posting dates for mail. These are:

• Tuesday 20 December for 1st Class items
• Saturday 17 December for 2nd Class items
• Thursday 22 December for Special Delivery items
• Monday 12 December for airmail items to Western Europe
• Friday 9 December for Eastern Europe, the USA, Canada and Japan
• Monday 5 December for mail to the rest of the world

Customers can help Royal Mail ensure that all their letters, cards and parcels are delivered as quickly and efficiently as possible by taking a few easy steps:

• Use a 1st Class stamp! – Post 1st Class for just 46p and have your Christmas card delivered the next day – anywhere in the UK.
• Post early! – Avoid disappointment by posting your cards and parcels early. The last posting dates this Christmas are: December 17 for 2nd Class mail; December 20 for 1st Class mail; December 22 for Special Delivery.
• Use a postcode! – A clearly addressed card or parcel, with a postcode, and return address on the back of the envelope, will ensure quick and efficient delivery.
• Use Special Delivery – For valuable packages and parcels guarantee delivery with Royal Mail’s Special Delivery, which means your gift is tracked, traced and insured against loss.
• For more information about Christmas with Royal Mail visit: www.royalmail.com or call 08457 740 740.

For Further Information Contact:
Sally Hopkins
Royal Mail Press Office
020 7250 2468
Sally.hopkins@royalmail.com

Ends

South West Bedfordshire MP Andrew Selous has warmly welcomed the announcement that the Public Inquiry for the A5:M1 Link road (Dunstable Northern By-Pass) will take place at the Superdrug Distribution Centre in Dunstable on Tuesday 7 February 2012. Andrew Selous said “This is excellent news for the whole of our local area and is just the boost that local people and local businesses need. It is expected that the opening for this vital road for our area will create an extra 5,850 new jobs which will be extremely welcome. The reduction of congestion in Dunstable, Houghton Regis cannot come soon enough. Local villages will also benefit hugely from the reduction in rat running”.

Andrew Selous, MP for South West Bedfordshire, joined Nancy Dell’Olio in Parliament to support HIV charity Terrence Higgins Trust’s (THT’s) Stand Up, Stand Out campaign for World AIDS Day (December 1st). The campaign has been set up to raise public awareness of the UK’s growing HIV epidemic.

The Health Protection Agency (HPA) announced earlier this week that there are now more people living with HIV in the UK than ever before, with the number of those with the condition expected to reach 100,000 next year. In 2010, there were 5,870 people living with HIV in the East of England. THT’s Parliamentary reception, also attended by Public Health Minister Anne Milton, highlighted the need for a renewed focus on HIV prevention to stop the spread of HIV.

Andrew Selous MP said: “I am delighted to back this important campaign on World AIDS Day. HIV remains an important health issue, and affects people in every corner of the UK, including Bedfordshire. I would encourage local people to do their bit to Stand Up, Stand Out and help raise awareness of how we can reduce the spread of HIV.”

Sir Nick Partridge, Chief Executive of Terrence Higgins Trust, said: “We’re very pleased Andrew is helping us to raise awareness of HIV this World AIDS Day. Our Stand Up, Stand Out campaign aims to raise greater awareness of HIV. There are more people than ever with HIV in the UK and one in four may be passing on the virus, unaware that they even have it. Lets start talking more about safer sex, testing and treatment to keep people well and prevent even more becoming infected.”

World AIDS Day, which has been running every December since 1988, is dedicated to raising awareness of HIV and AIDS. In the UK alone, 91,500 people are living with HIV and over 6,500 are diagnosed every year.

Ends

For press information, please contact Will Harris in the THT press office on 020 7812 1629, or email will.harris@tht.org.uk.

Andrew Selous MP for South West Bedfordshire is taking the pledge to encourage people throughout South West Bedfordshire to give time to benefit the local community, after joining pop mogul Pete Waterman and BBC Radio Five Live presenter, Rachel Burden in the build up to CSV Make a Difference Day, the biggest single day of volunteering on Saturday 29 October 2011.

Pete Waterman and Rachel Burden have given MPs across the nation a ‘pledge kit’ with a host of ideas to benefit others, such as writing letters and drawing pictures to sick children in hospitals, baking a Chocolate Fridge Cake to donate to a lonely neighbour, homeless shelter or nursing home, planting a mini meadow in a local park to attract wildlife or even knitting blankets for lonely pets in shelters.

Andrew Selous MP is taking part in a Sleep Out at St. Albans Cathedral on Friday 2 December to raise funds in aid of a local homeless charity. Andrew is also a local school governor, he is also President of various local charities and organisations and also helps other local charities and organisations within his constituency. Andrew is also on the Steering Group of the South West Bedfordshire Community Family Trust.

CSV Make a Difference Day ambassador, Pete Waterman, says “Rachel and I are encouraging MPs and people of all ages to take part in CSV Make a Difference Day to combat feelings of isolation, loneliness and anxiety, as well as making local communities a happier, more welcoming place.

“Get to know your neighbours, make friends, get fit and transform the place where you live into a beautiful haven. Lift community spirits by organising a garden makeover, Halloween street party or bingo evening at a homeless shelter, nursing home or hospital ward. Even simple changes like reporting faulty street lights can have a positive impact in strengthening communities.”

CSV Make a Difference Day, is the UK’s biggest single day of volunteering on Saturday 29 October 2011 with events taking place a week either side. This year the focus is isolation and loneliness. The campaign is looking to demonstrate how giving time through volunteering with friends, family and neighbours and being an active member of the community can make people feel less lonely, anxious and isolated.

CSV is giving away free inspirational ideas on how you can combat isolation and loneliness to create a happier, stronger and safer community:

• ‘How-to make a chocolatey difference’ a special Chocolate Fridge Cake recipe by Chef, Sam Stern
• ‘How-to volunteer to combat loneliness’
• ‘How-to write a difference’ for very sick children in hospitals
• ‘How-to get online’ for people who have never used the internet
• ‘How-to combat community isolation’
• ‘How-to knit an animal blanket’ (because pets get lonely too!)

The campaign is looking to empower lonely and isolated people as well as individuals and groups to volunteer this year. New independent research shows that nearly a third of young people are currently more anxious about their future since the onset of recession, while 1 in 10 of the population report anxiety following the summer riots.

To find out more about volunteering on CSV Make a Difference Day, call us on FREEPHONE 0800 284 533 or email difference@csv.org.uk or go online at www.csv.org.uk/difference

Andrew Selous MP met with representatives of WaterAid at Conservative Party Conference in Manchester to discuss the international water and sanitation crisis that is taking the lives of 4,000 children every day. The local MP also took the opportunity to hear first hand what WaterAid is doing to help address this crisis through its work.

Andrew Selous stated after meeting the WaterAid team that: “A lack of clean drinking water is having a devastating impact across the globe. More children die in sub-Saharan Africa every year because of diseases brought about by unsafe water and poor sanitation than are killed because of AIDS, malaria and measles combined.

According to the World Health Organisation, for every £1 invested in water, sanitation and hygiene, there is an economic return of £8, mainly through time savings and reducing productive days lost to illness. Hygiene promotion is considered one of the most cost-effective of any health interventions. The benefits of bringing these services to communities include more children, particularly girls, able to attend schools as they aren’t busy collecting water and fewer patients for family members, doctors and nurses to treat.

Barbara Frost, Chief Executive of WaterAid said: “It’s staggering that nearly four in every ten people don’t have a toilet and one in eight doesn’t have clean water. As well as the tragic human cost in lives lost and poor health, this tragedy is holding back economic growth in countries across the world. This is why we are so pleased that Andrew Selous has taken the time to learn more about these issues and how we want to work with the Government to tackle them”.

Since WaterAid was founded 30 years ago, it has reached nearly 16 million people with safe water and 11 million with sanitation.

Andrew Selous also said: “David Cameron rightly highlighted in a recent trip to Africa that we need to get Africa’s economy growing. I was particularly inspired to learn from WaterAid that every one pound invested in water and sanitation generates an economic return of eight pounds. Poor sanitation costs Sub-Saharan Africa around 5% of its GDP every year, equivalent to the amount of aid the continent currently receives from western nations. If we solved this crisis, it would be a major spur to growth in African economies, making investment in water, sanitation and hygiene a good value investment that works for the world’s poorest.”

The UK Government last year directly provided 1.5 million people with access to clean drinking water and 800,000 with sanitation.

The Anthony Nolan Charity which works to save the lives of people with blood cancer has challenged MPs to recruit young men between 18 to 30 to join the stem cell register so that more lives can be saved. Every year in the UK 1600 die because they do not receive a stem cell transplant in time. Recruiting more young men to the register means that hundreds of lives could be saved every year.

Joining the register is really simple. All young men need to do to register is to go to the website www.anthonynolan.org/mp and enter the MP code PE24. There is only one in a thousand chance that men on the blood cell register will be asked to give a stem cell transplant which is now done by having an injection and then giving blood.

South West Bedfordshire MP Andrew Selous said “Blood cancer is like leukaemia, mainly affects young children and many die needlessly because not enough potential donors have come forward on the register. The Anthony Nolan Charity are highly respected in this field and work very closely with the NHS and provide far more stem cells for transport than the NHS does itself. I know that there are many people locally who will want to help. I hope that the family and friends of 18-30 year old men will encourage them to log on to the website www.anthonynolan.org/mp and put in the code PE24.”

See a copy of the poster here – mp_selous