In the last week of this parliamentary session there is frantic activity to force through outstanding Government Bills.

The Anti-Social Behaviour Bill cleared the final hurdle of consideration of the Lords Amendments.
A significant New Clause added by the Lords on High Hedges reduplicated Private Members Bills that had failed in the Commons. With Government backing this was passed and local authorities will soon have power, under controlled conditions, to force owners to cut back high hedges that are causing serious problems for neighbours.

A potential rebellion over limitations to trial by jury in the Criminal Justice Bill fizzled out as some opposing Labour backbenchers, with notable exceptions, abstained in preference to voting against the Government.
We now have to wait to see how the House of Lords will respond to rebuffs and what effect this will have on the Government.

By the time you read this article we will know if another major threat of a Government defeat has also faded out.
I am waiting for the debate on the Lords Amendments to the Health and Social Care Bill. 
The crucial amendment removes the proposal for Foundation Hospitals from the Bill. 

A combination of Labour and opposition MPs support this amendment for different reasons. The effect could be a Government defeat if the Labour rebels hold their nerve against the pressure from their whips who even feel it necessary to fly home the Sports Minister from Australia for the vote. Although I am in favour of decentralisation of power in the NHS to local people and I support the Government’s extra investment with reforms I believe this particular reform leading to Foundation Trusts is misguided and ill thought out. I hope the Labour rebels will have had the courage of their convictions and have realised that this is a vital vote for the good of people that transcends political motives. There are acceptable ways of achieving the same ends that would encourage collaboration across the NHS rather than competition.

At home I have had further discussions about the Education Review. 
It is unfortunate that school closures and mergers are included in the consultation that should concentrate on the major issue of tiers of education where local opinion is divided. 

Incidentally I learnt at Stourport High School that it provides vending machines that only supply healthy drinks and food and that these machines produce a useful income for the school.
An impression we have been given during the Health Select Committee’s inquiry into obesity is that school children will only buy fizzy drinks, sweets and high fat crisps from vending machines that schools have to have to produce extra income. I shall have great satisfaction in pointing out to the Committee that at least one school in Wyre Forest is way ahead of the field in this respect.