Richard Benyon

Thank you for sending me the National Flood Forums Manifesto for flood victims.  I have set out my answers to your questions below;

Conservative Government will ensure an early implementation of the Floods and Water Managements Act.  Whilst we were opposed to the slimmed down Bill and accepted the criticism of the legislation from the EFRA Committee we thought it was important to support the Government to get as many of the recommendations from the Pitt review on to the statute books as quickly as possible so that measures can be improved to limit the risk for people living in areas at risk from flooding.

It is my Party’s policy to build on the findings of Sir Michael Pitts review to ensure that floods and flood prevention will be given a much higher priority across Government.  We hope that the Flood and Water Management Act will end the intuitional confusion over responsibility for flood risk management, implement necessary measures recommended in the Pitt Review and ensure England and Wales are better prepared for a flooding emergency.   There are several ways we will seek to strengthen the legislation:

1. We welcome the strategic overview role of the Environment Agency for all types of flooding but we must also ensure that the legislation does not centralise power.  The legislation must recognise the importance of local knowledge in reducing flood risk.  Local flood risk management strategies, instead of being consistent with the national strategy, should have regard to it. There should be a right of appeal against decisions by the Environment Agency to carry out work on private land. 

2. Greater clarity is needed on the costs involved for local authorities.  It is important that local authorities are properly funded to fulfil their new responsibilities.

3. We welcome steps to develop sustainable drainage systems which are essential to reduce the risk of surface water flooding – as occurred in West Berkshire in 2007.  We must ensure the legislation fully ends the automatic right of developers to connect to the sewer network for surface water drainage.  Water companies should also be consulted on all new building developments to ensure capacity. Greater clarity is needed on the funding arrangements and responsibility for the maintenance of sustainable urban drainage systems.

Greater commitment must be given to the maintenance of rivers and watercourses and the Environment Agency must regularly publish details of work. I am aware that this is not necessarily pertinent to Thatcham but I support the work the Environment Agency has done in West Berkshire to train local communities to carry out proper weed clearance on rivers where the amount of weed in the river was a major contributory factor in flooding in 2007.  However, I will also continue to ensure that the Environment Agency does carry out weed clearance on a regular basis concentrating on the highly at risk communities on the rivers Lambourn and Pang.

I remain concerned that a number of Pitt recommendations have been slow to be implemented.

A national emergency framework, one of Pitts urgent recommendations and promised by the government by the autumn of 2008 has still not been implemented.  We will make sure that it is as soon as possible after the election.

A National Resilience Forum to facilitate multi-agency planning has still not met.

The Natural Hazards team, which is assessing vulnerable critical infrastructure, was only established in May 2009 – two years after the summer 2007 floods.  Details of their findings are expected soon.

In addition, nearly a year after the floods nearly 5000, many of them in West Berkshire, had not returned home and, in summer 2009, 168 families were still waiting.  Pitt called on the Government to provide monthly updates on the recovery effort but the Government failed to produce these.  A Conservative Government will regularly report on the circumstances of displaced households.

We have to learn from the floods in 2007 of the importance of command and control and decision-making as flooding emergency takes place.  There was a general consensus that the Council’s Emergency Control Room worked well with Silver Command and that there was general good co-ordination across agencies at a local level.  This was not always the case elsewhere but we do want to ensure that lines of communication are clearly understood. One area of concern on the day was lack of information available to schools.  Schools did not know if it was better to send the children home or find somewhere for them to remain under supervision whilst their parents were dealing with flooding in their homes.  This matter has been recognised by the Council and the LEA will have involvement in the emergency control room in future.

I have worked closely with the Environment Agency and have built up a good working relationship with their area manager, Simon Hughes.  If re-elected, I will build on this relationship to ensure that the measures they are carrying out across West Berkshire are clearly understood and are reflective of the views of local communities and local people.  I believe it is beholden on all of us in elected positions at every level and for agencies such as the Environment Agency to inform local people about the mitigation measures being carried out.  This could go a long way towards bringing peace of mind to a great many people who suffer stress and anxiety whenever heavy rainfall occurs.  It is for this purpose that I have written on a number of occasions to households in Thatcham to inform them about measures being carried out on their behalf.

At a meeting with the Secretary of State immediately after the 2007 floods, I raised concerns with the then Chief Executive of the Environment Agency about their approach towards flooding of rivers that are Sites of Special Scientific Interest.  The Chief Executive more or less said to me that concerns for wildlife and the natural environment must not be compromised in order to mitigate the effects of flooding.  I believe that this was an insensitive and wrong approach at a time when huge distress was being caused to communities across my constituency.  I am glad to say that a different approach seems to apply now and while I will always be concerned for the natural environment and the maintenance of Sites of Special Scientific Interest, we cannot allow communities to live under the threat of future flooding because of a valid commitment to precise management requirements of river systems.

I am troubled by the many reports I receive about the massively increased insurance premiums and excess charges. As you will know, I have taken this matter up with the Association of British Insurers in seeking to get their members to understand that the floods that place in Thatcham and in many other parts of the Newbury constituency should not be equated to the problems suffered in places such as Tewkesbury.  In our area it was a matter of surface water flooding.  The chances of this happening again do exist but are remote.  Insurers need to take into account the many measures that have been taken by Town and District Councils and by the Government through he Environment Agency.  There should be no excuse for the kind of insurance premium hikes that have been reported in Thatcham.

I am a firm believer in keeping as much of the effort to mitigate flood risk as local as possible.  I believe elected members at every level should work closely with organisations such as the Thatcham Flood Forum to ensure that all their concerns, which will reflect the hopes and fears of many, form part of the decision making process.  I very much hope we can all tap in to the wealth of local commitment from Town Councils and interested local people to ensure that it is not just left to Government to solve problems relating to flooding.

This concept fits neatly into David Cameron’s call for a “Big Society”.  It is all about harnessing people’s natural enthusiasm to volunteer and making sure Government is there to support them wherever needed.

I hope you feel this answers the questions raised in the manifesto.  I remain willing to clarify any points made at any stage.

The Conservative Candidate for Newbury, Richard Benyon is urging voters to compare the two campaigns being run by the main contenders in the Newbury constituency.

Richard said:

“In every leaflet that I have put out I speak only of my record and of the Conservative Party’s policies.  Compare this with Liberal Democrat literature, which is negative, scaremongering and seeks to misrepresent Conservative policy and my record at every opportunity.

Nick Clegg called for a new kind of politics.  It is just such a pity that the Liberal Democrat campaign in West Berkshire is so representative of the old sniping unpleasant politics of the past.”

The good news is that local people are not fooled by the false claims in Liberal Democrat literature”

Notes:

1. One leaflet claimed “top Tories want to scrap our NHS”.  The NHS is the Conservative Party’s number one priority in this election.  It is our policy to protect and improve the NHS.
2. Liberal Democrats claim “tax brakes are only for millionaires”.  Our tax policies are targeted at the poorest. Reversing some of Labour’s National Insurance tax rise will help those on low incomes and those seeking work.  We will work with Councils to freeze Council Tax for two years.  This will particularly help those on low incomes and those on fixed incomes such as pensioners.  We will end the couples “penalty” in the tax credit system that makes the poorest better off if they live apart from their partner.  Under our Inheritance Tax proposals, only millionaires’ will pay it!
3. Liberal Democrats claim that Council Tax rises would have been lower under them, but consistently fail to mention that when they were in power they averaged a massive 7.1%, whereas under the Conservatives they have averaged a more manageable 1.9%.
4. Unlike claims made in Liberal Democrat literature, Richard has always supported greater transparency of Parliamentary expenses.  He has been entirely open about his expense claims and publishes them in every detail on his website. Richard has never claimed for food, furniture and does not claim the second homes allowance.

Conservatives to scrap Labour’s jobs tax on NHS and use savings for cancer drugs

Cancer patients in West Berkshire will get access to drugs that they are currently denied under Labour if the Conservatives win the general election, Richard Benyon, Conservative Candidate for Newbury announced today.

Under the bold new plans, the NHS would save £200 million because Conservatives will stop Labour’s jobs tax on employers. This NHS saving would be used to pay for drugs which have been blocked by the Government’s quango, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). In Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust, which employs 4,834 staff, the cost of Labour’s increase in Employers’ National Insurance contributions – the jobs tax – is estimated to be £725,100.

The Labour Government has failed to provide patients with the cancer drugs they need – drugs which are widely available in Europe. Britain has more cancer deaths per head than Bulgaria. The current system lets Ministers off the hook. They blame bad decisions on unaccountable bureaucrats in NICE, the agency which approves drugs for the NHS.

• Under the Conservative blueprint, the money that would have been eaten up by Labour’s jobs tax would go straight to a new Cancer Drugs Fund. No cancer patient will be refused access to drugs that have been licensed since 2005 if their doctors say they need them.
• Conservatives will also change the way that drug companies are paid for NHS medicines. Effective treatments for all conditions, not just cancer, would become available on the NHS, with drug providers paid according to the value of their new treatments.

Richard Benyon said:

“There is a clear choice at this election: Labour and their jobs tax that will take £200 million out of the NHS budget; or the Conservatives who will stop the jobs tax and use the savings in the NHS budget to create a Cancer Drugs Fund.

“The NHS is our number one priority. We are committed to helping our NHS become truly world-class. Giving West Berkshire’s patients access to cancer drugs widely available in Europe is a key part of our plan for change and making the NHS even better.”

Notes to Editors

CANCER PATIENTS NOT GETTING THE DRUGS THEY NEED

Third of cancer drugs turned down: NHS quango, NICE, has assessed 15 new cancer drugs since November 2008. A third of them have been turned down completely and the rest have only been partially recommended for use in the NHS (Hansard, 16 March 2010, Col.765WA).

Fewer cancer drugs available in the UK: An international study comparing different European countries has found that: ‘Austria, France and Switzerland are leaders in the uptake of new cancer drugs’ and that: ‘The uptake of cancer drugs in the UK is far below the European average’ (Nils Wilking et al, Comparator Report on Patient Access to Cancer Drugs in Europe, 15 February 2009).

Cancer survival rates lower in Britain: Each year around 240,000 people in England are diagnosed with cancer and around 129,000 die from the disease. In the last 20 years, the UK has seen a substantial decline in cancer mortality. But survival rates in Britain still lag behind European average levels; indeed, the gap between the average number of deaths from cancer in European countries and the UK overall has widened over the last 13 years. It has been estimated that up to 11,000 deaths from cancer in England could be prevented every year if survival rates were at the levels of the best-performing countries in Europe (Abdel-Rahman M, et al., What if cancer survival in Britain were the same as in Europe: how many deaths are avoidable?, British Journal of Cancer, vol 101, pp S115-S124, 2009). Bulgaria has 170.3 cancer deaths per 100,000 population whereas the UK had 178.1 according to the most recent comparative figures (Eurostat health data, 2007).

EFFECT OF LABOUR’S JOBS TAX ON THE NHS

Labour’s jobs tax will cost the NHS £200 million: The Labour Government’s increase in National Insurance rates would put increased spending pressure on the NHS. This is because the NHS, just like any other employer, would also have to pay the one per cent increase in Employers’ National Insurance rates. The cost to the NHS would be around £200 million – approximately £150 per employee (HM Treasury, Budget 2010; NHS Information Centre, Workforce statistics, 25 March 2010).

No new money to cover the cost of the jobs tax: Labour are not providing any extra money for the NHS to cover the cost of their tax on jobs. It will therefore have to be paid for from the NHS budget through their plans for £4.4 billion of ‘efficiency savings’ in the NHS by 2012-13 (Department of Health Press Release, 24 March 2010).

CONSERVATIVE PLANS

Conservative plans will save the NHS £200 million – to be spent on frontline services. Conservatives will increase NHS spending every year in real terms. On top of this, our plans to reverse the bulk of Labour’s tax on jobs will lead to savings of £200 million from the NHS budget. This money will then be available to spend on frontline services again – which is why we are able to say that we will use it to create a Cancer Drugs Fund to give all cancer patients the new drugs they need. In the longer term we want to overhaul the way drugs are assessed and priced so that all the best new drugs are available on the NHS.

Macmillan Cancer Support has supported Conservative plans saying: ‘If a clinician is saying that my patient will actually benefit from this treatment than it should be made available. People will call our helpline and say they are so desperate to get hold of this drug their physician has told them about it. They will talk about mortgaging their house, remortgaging their house to actually get hold of it, which is why we can't allow current system to continue’ (The Daily Telegraph, 3 April 2010).

Make more drugs available. We will reform the way drug companies are paid for NHS medicines so that any effective treatment can be made available through the NHS, with drug providers paid according to the value of their new treatments. These reforms – a move to a system known as ‘value-based pricing’ – will take effect by 2014 and will give cancer patients access to the kind of treatments commonplace in Europe but denied here.

Until the introduction of value-based pricing in 2014, a Conservative government will use the money Labour would have spent on Employers’ National Insurance Contributions for NHS staff to create a Cancer Drugs Fund, giving all patients access to the cancer drugs their doctors say they need if these drugs have been licensed since 2005. This will include any drugs licensed between that date and when our value-based pricing reforms take effect in 2014. We will add this money to the NHS tariff in order to pay for the extra cost of these drugs. This means that if these drugs have been licensed as being safe since 2005, doctors will be able to prescribe them without needing to apply to their Primary Care Trust for funding.

Speed up NICE approval. We will ensure that NICE appraises new cancer drugs at the same time as they are licensed as safe by the Medical and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. This will mean no more delay between a drug being approved as safe and then having to be approved as cost effective for NHS use.

Key manifesto pledges to help improve West Berkshire’s quality of life and economy

Big government, high taxes and politicians up in Whitehall won’t solve Britain’s problems, Richard Benyon, Conservative Candidate for Newbury said as he welcomed David Cameron’s impressive blueprint for a Conservative Government. Its key message is that everyone across West Berkshire should get together and get involved to solve Westminster’s broken politics, fix Britain’s broken society and get our economy moving.

The Conservative plans include:

• Supporting new entrepreneurs, helping the unemployed back into work, and stopping Labour’s new jobs tax.
• Letting public sector workers set up co-operatives to improve the services they provide.
• Giving voters the right to sack MPs found guilty of serious wrong-doing.
• Allowing parents and local community groups to open up and run new schools to raise standards.
• Helping first-time buyers own their own home through a permanent reduction in stamp duty for homes up to £250,000, and giving social tenants across West Berkshire an equity stake in their home for being good neighbours, to help them get a foot on the housing ladder.
• Empowering local residents to stop high council tax rises.
• Giving a locally elected representative responsibility for police budgets and strategies for Thames Valley Police force so that people’s priorities for tackling crime come first.
• Letting local people save valued community services like local pubs, parks or post offices from closure, and help supporter groups buy into football clubs.
• Showing how Whitehall and the District Council spend your money, by publishing detailed figures on spending and contracts online for all to see.

Richard said:

“We won’t get Britian’s economy moving with Gordon Brown’s jobs tax – we need to help local firms create jobs. We won’t solve our social problems with more big government from Labour – we need to build a Big Society where families are strong and our communities are safe. And we’ll never change politics if we leave it all to Westminster politicians – we need to give people across West Berkshire real power and control over their lives.

“At this election, West Berkshire’s residents face a choice: five more years of Gordon Brown’s tired government making things worse, or Conservatives who will get the country moving.”

Notes to Editors

The Conservative Party’s general election manifesto was published on 13 April.

http://www.conservatives.com/Policy/Manifesto.aspx

Some of the key proposals include:

#1 – BE YOUR OWN BOSS

Public sector co-ops: Giving public sector workers ownership of the services they deliver is a powerful way to drive efficiency. We will support co-operatives and mutualisation as a way of transferring public assets and revenue streams to public sector workers.

Work for Yourself: We will support would-be entrepreneurs through a new programme – Work for Yourself – which will give unemployed people direct access to business mentors and substantial loans.

#2 – SACK YOUR MP

At the moment, there is no way that local constituents can remove an MP found guilty of serious wrong-doing until there is a general election. We will introduce a power of ‘recall’ to allow electors to kick out MPs, a power that will be triggered by proven serious wrong-doing. And we will introduce a Parliamentary Privilege Act to make clear that privilege cannot be abused by MPs to evade justice.

#3 – RUN YOUR OWN SCHOOL

We will break down barriers to entry so that any good education provider can set up a new Academy school. Our schools revolution will create a new generation of good small schools with smaller class sizes and high standards of discipline.

Our school reform programme is a major part of our anti-poverty strategy, which is why our first task will be to establish new Academy schools in the most deprived areas of the country. They will be beacons of excellence in areas where school standards are unacceptably low.

#4 – OWN YOUR OWN HOME

First-time buyers: We want to create a property-owning democracy where everyone has the chance to own their own home. That is why we will permanently raise the stamp duty threshold to £250,000 for first-time buyers, meaning nine out of ten of them will pay no tax on their first home purchase.

Social tenants: We will make it easier for social tenants to own or part-own their home. We will introduce a ‘foot on the ladder’ programme to offer an equity stake to good social tenants, which  can be cashed in when they move out of social rented accommodation.

#5 – VETO COUNCIL TAX RISES

We want to give individuals more direct control over how they are governed. We will give residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local issue if 5 per cent of the local population sign up. Residents will also be able to veto any proposed high council tax increases. We will stop Labour’s plans to impose supplementary business rates on firms if a majority do not give their consent.

#6 – VOTE FOR YOUR POLICE

We will replace the existing, invisible and unaccountable police authorities and make the police accountable to a directly-elected individual who will set policing priorities for local communities. They will be responsible for setting the budget and the strategy for local police forces, with the police retaining their operational independence.

And we will give residents the information they need to challenge their neighbourhood police teams to cut crime. We will oblige the police to publish detailed local crime data statistics every month, in an open and standardised format.

#7 – SAVE YOUR LOCAL PUB OR POST OFFICE

Our new ‘community right to buy’ scheme will give local people the power to protect any community assets that are threatened with closure. We also will give people a ‘right to bid’ to run any community service instead of the state; and reform the governance arrangements in football to enable co-operative ownership models to be established by supporters.

#8 – SEE HOW GOVERNMENT SPENDS YOUR MONEY

We will bring in new measures to enable the public to scrutinise the government’s accounts to see whether it is providing value for money. All data will be published in an open and standardised format. We will require senior public officials to publish their salaries, and publish online details of spending and contracts, and give councillors the power to vote on large salary packages for unelected council officials.