VIEWPOINT FOR 30 OCTOBER 2008
FROM DR RICHARD TAYLOR

I wrote last week about my disappointment over the lack of debate about important amendments to Bills in the House of Commons when the timetabling for debates does not allow time for all amendments to be considered. Then it is all too easy for those low on the selection list to be talked out of time by unnecessarily long speeches on earlier listed amendments possibly of less importance to many people.

The same happened this week with the Local Transport Bill when a sensible amendment tabled by Labour back benchers 

"to ensure that the authority's local transport policies (taken as a whole) contribute to the mitigation of climate change" 

was below the position on the selection list that was reached and thus could not be debated or voted on. 
To make it even worse I understand that there is a standing order that decrees that any Government amendment that is not reached in a debate can be automatically voted upon without consideration. Thus with a Government majority, at a stroke the Government always gets its way. To be fair my understanding is that this is not a new arrangement made by this Government.
________

Thus my relief was great when I learnt that the Government had taken notice of the wishes of so many people, some of whom have written to me, about the Climate Change Bill. 
Government amendments made sure that emissions from international aviation and shipping are taken into account when considering targets for the reduction in carbon emissions and that the first clause in the Bill relating to the target for 2050 now reads 

"It is the duty of the Secretary of State to ensure that the net UK carbon account for the year 2050 is at least 80% lower than the 1990 baseline".

The Government amendment increased the figure from 60% to 80%. So here we had a welcome, but all too rare example of where the Government had acted on a well organised campaign for the strengthening of what would have been an insufficiently challenging Bill.
________

I am very angry that the consultation about post office closures has been no better than other consultations of which we have had such bitter experience here. 
All four of the threatened post offices in our area are to close despite our efforts, petitions and arguments. 

The closures of the branches at The Walshes and Comberton Hill are against all reason. 

I planned to talk to Postwatch to discuss appeal only to find that Postwatch closed down on 1st October! 
It has been taken over by a vast conglomerate named Consumer Focus that covers all consumer affairs including energy and the Welsh, Scottish and National Consumer Councils. 
Is this a plot to stifle any effective resistance?

Post Office Ltd will retain 320 branches across Herefordshire, Worcestershire and the West Midlands area but I have learnt that only one branch of the 55 proposed for closure in this area has been reprieved. It is in the centre of Walsall and without knowing details of the area it is hard to say why this branch was more deserving of preservation than The Walshes or Comberton Hill.

I will table some Parliamentary questions but answers to these are rarely helpful particularly about local issues.

R.T.

© Independent Kidderminster Hospital & Health Concern 1995-2008
(webdesign@chaddesley-corbett.co.uk)