Any references to my past work as an MP on this website are historic. I ceased to be an MP at the dissolution of Parliament on 30 May 2024.

You can contact John Redwood or his office using the following details:

The Rt Hon Sir John Redwood


Oliver Greensmith
Parliamentary Assistant
Telephone: 020 7219 4205

Casework Enquiries

John Redwood ceases to be an MP on the dissolution of Parliament on 30 May. If you have an urgent case please contact:

John and his staff will continue to follow up on outstanding constituency cases until a new MP is elected, but will not be taking on any new non-urgent cases after 30 May.

Please send all Casework Enquiries directly to the MP. You are strongly advised to contact us by email to avoid delays in your correspondence being dealt with.


  1. ReefKnot
    August 3, 2011

    According to a piece in the Daily Mail – prompted I understand by a speech made by your goodself, various Quangos have increased their staffing. One of these is the National Policing Improvements Agency which managed to add 108 new members to its payroll whilst only losing 9 people. Net gain 99 bodies.And yet, if you check out the Telegraph of 23rd Septembe 2010, this Agency is listed as due to be abolished. Is this a last gasp splurge, or have they saved themselves from death-row at the taxpayer’s expense ? What is going on ?

  2. Meershaum
    August 7, 2011

    How much per year, since 1975 to now, has the UK paid to the EU?
    A simple question I cannot extract from so many websites. Is it possible you could just list the sums, and percentage increase ( or decrease) each year?
    A concerned voter just wants to know where his taxes are being spent !

    1. Arunas
      April 4, 2012
  3. S Matthews
    August 7, 2011

    I would appreciate your thoughts on the insanity of the Feed In Tariffs available to the public for solar panels and the like. It seems that the electricity companies are forced to pay out approximately 46p per KWh to those who have installed them. This will force the price of electricity up at a time when many people are suffering from the high prices and companies will be rendered less competitive.

  4. Pam green
    August 8, 2011

    The current violence on the streets of London is totally unacceptable in a developed country. We pride ourselves on being a role model for democracy and end up being a laughing stock. The police and government appear impotent in the face of feral youths. Someone needs to take charge and restore faith in the rule of law. Where are Cameron and Boris? I trust you will ensure all are aware of the disgust of the electorate at this sorry state of affairs.

  5. Kevan Mealor
    August 9, 2011

    Mr. Redwood,
    I have just read your artical on the European Union in the Daily Telegraph.

    I agree with every thing you said. Keep it going.



    1. mark hodgkinson
      March 9, 2013

      Dear kev

      RBS has now been bailed out by tax payers like me and since being bailed out has continued to lose money and show no morality whatsoever.

      The RBS Bankers were fiddling the LIBOR rate (words left out-ed – matters sub judice) They have had to fork out nearly 500 million because of the PPI scandal in fines and another 400 million as a result of the Libor. (complains no-one prosecuted for possible crimes-ed)
      This year RBS has decided to regard the people in RBS responsible for the latest losses – another 5 billion to make the losses since the bail out reach an unbeleivable £34 billion pounds.

      Now I am a free marketeer and a diehard tory, but even I cannot imagine how on earth it is remotely sensible to reward this “performance” by awarding, this year, £607 million pounds in bonuses to the guys at the top.

      The EU does many daft things well worth attacking, but the sham of a plan to limit banker bonuses to double annual salary is not really a sensible taget to attack given the quite shocking behaviour by our bankers over a long period.

      The bankers greed and dishionesty and the inability of anyone to get a grip on their dynastic bonuses brings free market capitaism into serious disrepute.

  6. Ben Waddington
    August 9, 2011

    I am sure that I will receive your sympathy for my early signs of old age dementia. At present the only symptom is my inability to understand government policy on power generation. At the time when the Germans are abandoning nuclear in favour of new coal fired power stations (due to fear of tsunamis on the Rhine), we are persisting with the blight of windmills, (which don’t work when the wind don’t blow), and solar panels,(which don’t work when the sun don’t shine). If you remember neither wind or sun appeared last December.
    I do not accuse the government of lack of sincerity on “green” issues. I understand from the press, (which may soon be gagged), that a member of the cabinet even swapped his wife for a bicycle (Gaia be praised).
    On other policies, I question the munificence of foreign aid in giving money that we haven’t got to inflate the Swiss accounts of despots overseas.
    Pouring money into over borrowed Euro states in the form of “loans” which they cannot repay.
    Building a new palace for President Rumpy-Dumpy and funding separate private aircraft for him and his so called Foreign Secretary.
    On high speed rail, apart from environmental considerations, the high consumption of electricity doesn’t sit well with windmill generators. I can imagine announcements saying “the train will arrive at Birmingham on schedule if the wind picks up a bit”.
    I also foresee the time when I will be sitting at my computer pedalling my bicycle generator to preserve my flickering screen while I try to write yet another complaint to my MP. I would then proceed to my bed holding a candle to light the stairs following a power “outage”.
    I applaud the defence cuts. I can see dictators everywhere quaking in their desert boots when our Prime Minister utters the magisterial warning “ If you don’t behave, I’ll launch our rowing boat, and then you’ll be sorry”.
    I suppose that “spin” would portray the candle as combined light and heat, and the cycle electrical generation as useful exercise for the elderly.
    AKA Ben Waddington

  7. Baldev Singh
    August 11, 2011


    I would like to understand your views on one of the current entries on the government e-petition web site, namely, the suggestion that those found guilty of the recent rioting and looting around the country should lose their benefits.

    I would like to make it clear that on the face of it I am in favour of parliament at least discussing and debating this matter, furthermore, I am of the view their should be a greater linkage between rights and privileges with responsibilities across all spheres of this a citizen’s life and not just the benefits system.

    I would be very keen to understand if you will at least support the idea that such a debate should take place.

    Baldev Singh

  8. Darren
    August 11, 2011

    I was surprised to discover recently that, as of August 2010, a person recieving child maintenance from a non-resident parent does not have any reduction to their benefits. Is this a policy inherited from the last government?
    When a parent is supporting their child financialy, why does the taxpayer have to as well?
    If this were changed it could represent a huge saving in the welfare budget.

  9. Frank Squires
    August 14, 2011

    John, I I have never contacted a member of Parliament before. I am 68 years old and spent 40 years with the Thames Valley Police. I have always voted conservative but this last year has got me and a large number of my colleagues wondering if we have got it right. We support the austerity measures but sincerely believe that David Cameron is not in touch with grass rooted voters.
    His decision to continue throwing our hard earned money to countries such as India fuels a deep concern when we witness the old people in this country getting nothing.
    We are also extremely concerned about his decision to invite an American to advise on Policing in this country. This is the ultimate insult to the finest Police Service in the world.

  10. Graham Crawford
    November 4, 2011

    Your website only seems to be showing emails received for the month of August!

  11. Jack Gorrod
    November 12, 2011

    I have perused you web site – it has answered questions about Euro Import/Export which I have tried to get from the PMs office s far without success although I have persistently repeated the question.
    Your web site is an absolute credit to you. Good luck. My MPs effort pales into insignificance (Bradford West)

    Reply: Thanks

  12. Paul Nash
    December 10, 2011

    I just wanted to make a point about your BBC interview this morning. I write as someone who has great respect for you as a politician, although more to the left and European than you are, because you are honest, direct and logical. I regard it as always positive when such people get a hearing. Also, pro-Europeans can always remember Ted Heath.

    These look like good times for Eurosceptics, at least at first sight, but the City’s interests and those of the people do not always coincide and that is where I find a weakness in your position when one considers the interests of the people of Britain as a whole.

    In today’s interview you lumped together all the EU measures, disparaging the efforts that have been made to reform the fishing industry, food labelling and quality and alternative remedies. I would argue that there is much that is worthwhile in these measures, partly in the fact that they tackled problems instead of letting them fester. Your dismissal of them seemed a bit inconsistent when you went on to mention the valuable international WTO regime.

    The current UK position, which boils down to defending the City as the fortress, or perhaps one should say remaining stronghold of British power and prosperity, makes absolute sense, although if the EU advances it may not always do so — but I suggest that it undermines that position to pretend that no good work has been done by the EU, especially when you appeal to voter-consumers who have been more victims than beneficiaries of City activities in the last couple of decades.

    Reply: I am an opponent of the fishing regime which I believe has done great damage to our fishing grounds. I also think the herbal medicines and alternative remedy industries have been needlessly damaged. We joined what they called a common market. That does need so many massive law codes.

  13. Nigel
    December 12, 2011

    Did you see the interview on BBC World today before the commons debate? If not then you should try to see it. He put the case from a business point of view and took all politics out of it. His position, to me, seems very close to your own.

    This is a business spokesman putting the case. Moreover, he was part of the previous Labour Government. His view, expressed in pragmatic business terms, completely demolishes the arguments put forward by Mr Milliband and his team.

    Maybe the Government should quote him more on this issue.

  14. Derek Emery
    January 9, 2012

    Thought you might like to see paper by Prof Patrick Minford of Cardiff University on “Should Britain Leave The EU” at
    It suggests we would be far better off outside of the single market with its inflated prices. I suspect the UK will inevitably distance itself from the EU over the next decade as it relentlessly moves towards further integration ruled by the unelected elite which the UK will never stomach.

  15. Alison
    January 9, 2012

    Regarding excessive size of welfare state

    This is in part due to those receiving welfare voting for policies that favour welfare or secure a public sector job.

    interestingly children arean’t allowed to vote as they are not deemed capable of making balanced decisions in favour of overall society.

    My experience is that those in the public sector or receiving benefits will vote for their interests and so our population is now skewed to the needs of those that do not generate wealth.

    Best solution: allow those that are employed in the private sector to have an addiotional vote!

    Human Rights bods would say that this is saying that private sector workers have more rights than unemployed – but it would be one solution!

  16. David Murphy
    January 31, 2012

    Please back the Lords and vote amendments amendments to Clauses 51. Support a fairer Welfare Reform Bill

  17. Graham
    February 11, 2012

    A long and great admirer of yourself (almost too intelligent and able to be voted by lesser if not jealous fellow MP, to lead the Party) , I have only recently been made aware of your diary.

    It is most unfortunate that the Tory Party had to compromise itself by sharing cabinet seats with Liberal members, some of whom along witha few grandees , would sooner be seen sharing power with Labour. It is my ferverent hope that the Tories will not only be able to secure an outright election win in 2015 and forge ahead on policies that are good for the country, but also find a prominent cabinet seat for JR. Whilst the thought of him as Deputy PM would conjure up delicious scenes of him delivering unhesitating, knowledgeable and withering replies at the despatch box to hapless opposition members, it would be a luxury the country could ill afford. To that end, his wider skills would be better employed forming and driving forward sensible policies in meeting the UK energy needs, which wind(mill) farms haven’t a hope of meeting.

    Chris Huhne’s job would be well suited, . ,

  18. David Walker
    February 12, 2012

    Congratulations on your excellent diaries. Re MP’s pension contributions get used to it. As a Police Officer I paid 11% all my working life as I believe did the fire brigade. So how did teachers get away with half that and civil servants paid nothing?
    Please save us from bankruptcy by getting us out of Europe.

  19. John Eustace
    February 19, 2012

    I wonder if you could possibly turn your attention to explaining to a local constituent the NHS reforms?
    I generally consider myself well informed on topical issues but for the life of me I cannot see the point of the proposed reforms – they seem guaranteed to cause chaos and loss of morale and I have no understanding of the expected prize. What am I missing?

    Reply: Both the Lib Dem and Conservative manifestoes promised to put more power in the hands of medical professionals to manage their service and decide on how to spend money. Both recommended cutting the regional and national bureaucracy that stood in the way of these delegated decisions. Both promised to give patients, in conjunction with their GPs, more power over where and when they could receive treatments. The underlying aims of the reform are to give patients more choice, and to spend less on bureaucracy.

  20. p norwood
    April 1, 2012

    Hope you are getting on with the new size rubbish bags issued by Wokingham council? Iam not bag already filled after 4 days, we need either larger bags or more. looks like bonfire may be needed!
    By the way do not agree with change to House of LORDS. we need expertise not mor political left overs & MUST retain a group of Cross Benchers how can this be if to be elected along party lines.?

  21. Michael James
    April 28, 2012

    You say (28 April) that because of its welfare/work regime ‘the US labour market more dynamic and successful’. But at 8.2%, isn’t its unemployment rate a good deal higher than that of several European countries with more interventionist labour market regimes?

    Reply: A good deal lower than countries like Spain and Greece, and below the EU average.

    1. Michael James
      April 28, 2012

      But it’s still not very good, and I’d like to know what Austria and Switzerland (and even Japan) are doing right.

  22. Chris Mitchell
    June 27, 2012

    What of the House of Lords Reform Bill? What will you choose?

  23. Arunas
    July 18, 2012


    Beeing a natural Conservative, I have been a member of Conservative Party for a year. I would like to continue to support and contribute, but for as long as it means joining the club of HSBC Stephen Green, Michael Spencer, Hackgate Jeremy Hunt and, above all, Cameron and Osborne, two ambitious, good-looking, selfish, clueless clowns who will say anything to stay in power and do the complete opposite for the same, I think I will wait for a little longer.

  24. Simon Bartlett
    August 21, 2012

    From looking at the latest borrowing figures the coalition will do well to get the deficit down to half of its peak value ( approx 180 billion ) Was this the policy of the last labour administration?

  25. Jon Barber
    August 22, 2012

    I wonder if you can explain (or are aware of) some of the bizarre changes made to refuse collection and recycling by Wokingham Council in the name of improved environmental credentials?

    Whilst many of these are cost reduction exercises wearing a very thin green fig leaf, many of them will have an adverse environmental impact whilst saving the council little or nothing. Specifically:

    1. No longer collecting green recycling(unless a fee of £80 per year or £1 per bag is charged – I estimate a less than 5% take-up of this service based on seeing how many green bags are put out on our road.)

    2. No collection of glass for recycling

    3. Limiting collection of general waste to 80 labelled bags per annum (pitifully inadequate for a family of 5 – on querying this we were invited to fill in a form for an additional 20 … enough said … )

    4. Not accepting bulk delivery of old batteries from tradesmen (e.g. alarm repairers when they replace old batteries).

    The nett-nett of the above is that I now make a weekly trip to the dump to dispose of my green recycling, glass and general waste (I’ll save my few remaining labelled bags for the winter) with little incentive to recycle more as I am going to have to make the trip to the dump anyway.

    If you multiply my weekly trip by the hundreds or thousands of people who will be in a similar position of providing their own waste disposal service then the environmental impact will be huge compared to the impact of a proper weekly collection.

    On my next trip I will also deliver my old alarm battery for recycling – but if I was not making this trip, I would have a strong incentive just to put it in the bin (with the associated environmental impact and also losing the value of the recycled lead – as it is cost effective to recycle batteries on pure economic grounds).

    I recognise that in the current economic circumstances, the council needs to control costs and raise additional funds and that financial incentives drive behaviour, but there is a much better way to achieve this. A properly managed and comprehensive recycling and waste collection system will always be massively more efficient than the broken, piece-meal debacle that currently exists.

    Firstly, do the maths on a comprehensive collection system (including glass, green waste, clothes and other recylables). Ideally you would simply ring-fence this cost as being a core council service. However, given the need to raise additional revenue, calculate a realistic cost to charge per additional bag (probably closer to 10p than the £1 currently charged) and make it easier for people to purchase the bags (the bin men drop them off on the next round after you have made the purchase).

    I am certain that some proper analysis will demonstrate that it is possible to avoid thousands of unnecessary trips to the dump in a manner that is cost-neutral to the council and saving its customers a great deal of time and effort

    Reply: The new system has enabled more to be recycled, I am assured. You should take these issues up with Wokingham Councillors, as they control the waste system and make the decisions on it.

  26. michael lanagan
    September 4, 2012

    Hello, i’m a new visitor to your website.

    I note that in the third paragraph of Sep 4th post, the sentence,

    “It is spending on the plant and equipement you need to make future goods,” we have the french word, “équipement,” although without the accent.



    we all make a little typo from time to time


  27. Karl
    October 23, 2012

    I would like to draw your attention to the article in the daily mail which if correct is an absolutely disgrace. Why are we paying “huge ” sums and yet expect British tax payers to take it. We are seeing incredibly bad policy on pensions, international abuse of the NHS, housing and a range of other abuses. If this is the conservative way then god help us! Many of us are fed up to the back teeth of these situations. See below.

    Child benefit is paid to 40,000 children overseas as Osborne imposes cuts on UK families with anyone earning over £50,000
    New figures show millions of pounds are being spent on 23,855 families with 40,251 living across Europe
    The Treasury blames EU rules as two thirds of claims are made by families in Poland
    Tory MP Priti Patel says taxpayers will be ‘appalled’ by the ‘deeply unfair’ use of public money
    Conservative Mark Pritchard brands cuts ‘discriminatory and unfair’

    Read more:
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  28. Arunas Ruksnaitis
    November 9, 2012

    This sleigh of hand plays only to damage further the credibility of the Conservative party as prudent and competent managers of the economy.
    Somehow the Conservatives get the blame for non-existing “austerity”, and manage to destroy their remaining credibility by machinations such as changing the accounting rules as they go.

  29. R.K.Sims
    November 14, 2012

    BBC conflict of interest: Pensions relying on pushing alarmist climate agenda

    By contributing to a pressure group the BBC is in breach of the commitment to impartiality required by it’s charter, and slanting it’s output towards promoting man made global warming at the expense of even handed discussion.

    Surely this, and the BBC’s obvious political bias, should be discussed in Parliament.

  30. Phil P
    November 30, 2012

    Mr J Redwood

    Sir i can see others have mentioned what i am about to say and can see no reply to the question.
    I live in Arborfield inculding my self i have a family of 6 on average we use 4-5 bags of general rubbish a week our council have to me that it is expected to be be 1-2 bags a week for a small family so for mine 2-3 a week can you see where the math is not working out.

    I dont care about the money saving as the money saved is not going to the comunitity i pay my tax and additional cilot tax as im in ther army yet im being told i must pay for more bags at £4.50 for a roll of 8 bags this is a joke not a funny one either this is something that must be sorted out ill give you a steer i spent 10 years in germany did not pay a penny for rubbish collection or even to drop of at the dump they are peforming mass recycling we are not so in the long run maybe you could steer our wonderful (take its time) Gov to maybe save on giving out next years Foreign Aid and spend it on our on recycling but short term this contract with current refuse company needs sorting and quickly.

    I can forsee people just dumping there rubbish which we both know in the garrison area just gets left there as again our council is so pro H M Forces arent they.
    Sorry for my tone but i have had this on the phone with wokingham council and basicly got told to sod off which is nice as i pay that persons wage to do sod all but treat working people that pay there wage like crap.


    Phil Prodromou

    Reply: Wokingham Council decided to introduce a new refuse scheme as it has to pay substantial sums to dump waste to landfill. It therefore now asks users of the service who need more than 80 bags a year to pay an extra charge to cover additional dumping costs. Most people do find the 80 bags sufficient, as they are quite large bags. The Council is currently reviewing the scheme and will I trust take into account local feedback on it.

    1. Phil P
      December 7, 2012

      Hmmm so the cost of the bags is for the dumbing of rubbish strange as the Council think that the cost to buy more bags is for the bags, i.e cost to buy, admin fee and delivery so could you please let me know which it is and if possible let me know why i have to pay twice for the removal of my rubbish ie tax and then for the extra bags finding really hard to get over Gov wasting mass amounts of money and our local council see it right to take up this new scheme 80 bags a year is less the 2 a week not enough for a family of 6 i use half a bag on nappies alone in a week but its ok ill just make my baby poo less stop my kids eating as much as they do just so i can save some money but then the council will just find another way to get at my money as a Tax payers we should not have to pay any extra for this sort of service while people on long term out of work get it for free and whats extra they just dump in the road which the tax payer then picks up the extra bill for it to be collected thank you for your reply please can you ask the Gov to save the next £2 bn they wish to give to a stupid cause and use it on something usefull like making i lives a little easier

      Reply: The Council provide 80 bags and the dumping of the rubbish in them from within the Council Tax and national taxes. For those who want to dump more they impose a charge for the additional amounts, to cover their extra dumping costs (Landfill tax etc). There is a general EU policy to discourage landfill dumping.

      1. Phil P
        December 7, 2012

        Well thank you again for the reply but would like to think that at a time like this while as a nation working people and the rich are paying the debt and for the free the local coucil feels its ok to get there bit also i understand the importance of reducing landfill waste and recycling which i think as a country we should be doing on a larger scale but currently not a a cost to those that a feeling the strain the most.
        Again i understand for most 1.5 bags a week is sufficient meaning .5 of a bag would be left for 2 weeks but for larger familys which due to the comments on wokingham council website is alot this is not suffcient 80 bags does not even allow for 2 bags a week which even as a family of 6 i could deal with please can you try to look in to this for my family i would need 104 bags a year that would be the 2 bags a week.
        Again thank you and i do understand but that extra £24 pound i would need to spend is alot of money that i would prefure went on giving my children things they need.

        Reply: Families of 5 can claim 100 bags and families of 6 can claim 120 bags free, instead of the standard 80

  31. john
    December 11, 2012

    I don’t know if we were given the correct number of rubbish bags or not – but we have now run out – which means I have to now use my car to take rubbish to the tip – which is totally defeats the object surely of being “green”. We have no control about the packaging used on food products or the resultant waste production of day to day family living – the rubbish is created – end of story. And i think personally it is the duty of the council to clear that rubbish without making people pay twice to do it!!!

    Nothing but a rip-off to get more money out of people – nothing green about it.

    Reply Many of the bulky items from domestic waste can be recycled, by placing them in the black boxes rather than in the sacks.

  32. Phil P
    January 10, 2013

    Mr J Redwood


    Maybe you can help me i have decided that after 12 years service to my Queen and Country i need to make the move back to civilian life as i will have to at some point and fear if i dont now it will only become harder.
    My choice is to live in Chichester West Sussex upon leaving the Armed Forces, due to this is where the only family i have live. I have spoken to and followed there advice now due to my time left i will not actually leave the Army Until appx Aug 14 yet the local council tell me i have no local ties due to being in Germany for 10 years and the rest here in Sandhurst but all council’s will say the same as i havent lived there.
    I understand this is an issue for local councils which they seem to be ignoring as only a few councils have dedicated support to the Armed Forces.
    But as my Current MP maybe you could find out what exactly the Gov are going to do, with masses being made redundunt and others like my self choosing to leave yet im told there is NO guarantee that I my wife and 4 children will be housed.
    now i no my time line is a long one but would that not assit a council as to be able to have some foresight into my housing needs or are they not important enough.

    Many Thanks for any help you can offer here. not just in my own needs but on the needs of the all the Armed Forces personel that choose to leave and get no support.

    Reply: Thank you for your blog entry. I suggest you write to your MP by email with a reply address, so that the case can be taken up in the usual way. Your MP is the one who represents your current family home address, or the last UK address you yourself had if you no longer have a UK address.

  33. Phil
    January 20, 2013

    Hello hope weather isnt causing you to many dramas.
    Just wondering what the Gov is doing to help its OWN people ie currently taking benifits from some that do deserve and need those on low income and those that cant work yet still allow those that dont deserve for many reasons to make cliams for far more then say what a working family might be asking for just by stopping these claims would save a very large sum allowing more to go to those it should and to reduce the amount spent on benifits and im sure that once told they can no longer claim they would seek to live else where.
    Our Gov is there because we say so pretty sure without the people there would be no Gov.
    Also PM sworn to do for the people yet why is this not being done how much longer will this have to go on. at what point will this Gov make a change thats for the people.
    I think our countries issues are slightly bigger then re-election.
    Why all the effort on EU this and that we have no control as it is massively due to migration and a walk free live for all other then our own.
    Who is here is the biggest issue right now but soon to be whom else is here numbers not the issue but then type of people but maybe when its a MP’s daughter that is (subject to criminal attack-ed)
    Just wondering what the Gov is doing about the mass of people we cant afford or control run free while WE THE PEOPLE have to pay there way and put up and live in fear for our familys.

    Many Thanks

    P.s As to my other post on housing for EX HMForces you are my MP but ill put the message in an Email.

    1. Phil P
      January 25, 2013

      Thank you for making my comment a little more PC or easier to pass by.
      But the qusetion stands What is going to be done to give us some protection and some of our own money? or is our Gov just going to let the cancer continue to spread (cancer being the diesase on our money and our homes and our jobs oh and our lives? feel free to correct my lack of PC or my grammar, punctuation, spellings even but please a striaght answer on what and when. i feel guilty as i voted for this goverment and im part of the cause so i will do something about it as i have morals what is our goverment doing?

  34. Linda Dubber
    August 30, 2013

    Mr Redwood – please can you explain your reasons for abstaining in the first vote on intervention in Syria? Was it because you didn’t want to vote against your party? Because I certainly do not believe that it was representative of your constituents’ views on the subject. The majority of people would not have said “I can’t be bothered either way on this subject” – I have to say I am very disappointed that, if you thought the majority of your constituents were against it, you didn’t just vote against it. For the record, I think the first vote should have gone through, however, I am fully aware that the second vote may not have done. Meanwhile, innocent Syrian children are being murdered and we’ve, effectively, as a country told them we won’t help them.

    Reply I have set out my views here and my reason for abstaining on the bland government motion. I made clear I would vote against a motion authorising the use of force. There will now not need to be one of those as the PM has accepted our view that there should be no UK military involvement. You might have written in to thank me for helping ensure a happy outcome, as I did by joining those who opposed arming the rebels, who called for Parliament to meet and who made clear we would not vote for the use of force.

Comments are closed.