The meeting of the 1922 Committee with the Director General of the BBC on Wednesday evening was a private meeting and covered a wide range of topics before we had to vote in divisions. It led me to some more thoughts on the BBC and our media future which I would like to share more widely.

The BBC has an annual  turnover of just £ 5.7bn. Whilst it remains an important presence in UK media, with access to substantial tax revenue in the form of the licence charge for watching live tv, it is a small presence worldwide. The global non UK activities earned just £2bn last year  by charging users.

Netflix started up in 1997. It  now has a turnover of $32 bn or 4.5 times that of the BBC. Amazon Prime Videos business  is comparatively recent but already has a turnover larger than the BBC. Disney with a worldwide total entertainment turnover of $82 billion also has a tv turnover as large as the BBC without any preferential terms  or tax in a particular country.

The BBC assures us it has a fine reputation abroad and it has ambitions to  have a more influential world presence. To do so it needs to understand why the great US media corporations have been so successful at exploiting new technologies for dissemination of services and how they have captured the attention and the money of so many foreign viewers.

The BBC has a good back book of programmes and archival material from news to cultural events. It has plenty of expensive talent on its books. It commissions programmes from a range of independent producers. If it expanded its global business more rapidly this cost base could be defrayed over many more paying customers, and talent could be paid well out of the growing audience and revenue base.

Leaving aside the tax financed UK traditional business, the global/studios business could be expanded rapidly. To do so its ring fencing would need to be strong so  no subsidy was paid across from UK taxpayers. It can have its own balance sheet with arrangements for accessing the back materials and the talent held by the UK BBC to the mutual benefit of the two arms of the Corporation. There could be talent sharing and revenue sharing arrangements where they were working jointly.

Some say the world BBC is held back by lack of money. With its own ring fenced balance sheet and revenue stream from overseas  sales that should be easy to remedy. BBC Global could borrow against its talent, programmes and audience figures as it grows its own equity. It could bring in minority outside shareholders with equity contributions.

The UK has to earn its living. It should not sit and watch as Netflix, Amazon, Disney and the other US giants dominate the world media markets. With its reputation and established library the BBC should be able to help build one of the world giants of the new media age. Its immediate task should be to put another nought on the number for its non UK turnover. The UK has done well at building a bigger domestic film industry and has some competitive flowering in domestic tv and radio, but needs to add a media giant to the repertoire to make a difference to our balance of payments and living standards.

Now that government wants to help drivers get about there are ideas they can adopt to make the vision a reality.

Talking to Ministers, they say they do want highways authorities to review traffic light phasing and controls.

It would be good if all sets could be equipped with sensors so lights responded to different traffic conditions. At low use times lights should shift to green when any vehicle approaches a  red light when there is no traffic using the green. At normal times green time should be proportionate to traffic flows.

If these systems cannot be used the phasings should be adjusted to reflect normal use patterns.For example, the  lights at the junction of the Embankment with Vauxhall Bridge Road, a busy London junction, offer twice as long on green for traffic  approaching from  over Vauxhall Bridge. This produces unused green time in that direction and permanent queues on the other three. Why?

The government should allow traffic turning left at a light controlled junction to treat the red light as a Stop sign. Drivers should stop as now on red but if the turn was free of vehicles and pedestrians then they should be able to proceed.

Ministers approving schemes to alter road layouts and junctions should not approve or fund Council schemes which are designed to get vehicles off the road. Of course we need better routes for cycles and safe paths for pedestrians. Taking roadspace off vehicles on busy main roads is not the way to achieve this aim.

Roundabouts are usually better than light controlled junctions. They should usually be preferred.

Where right  turning traffic can easily get stuck Councils should be encouraged to widen the carriageway to create a right turning lane to free traffic going straight on or turning left.

Councils should exercise greater discipline over timings and duration of works that entail digging holes in roads. This should include their own Highways department.

Councils should move to getting utilities under verges and pavements in conduits with locked access  to avoid the continuing need to dig up roads to repair pipes and wires.

I am pleased to report one of the hotels being used for migrants in my constituency will be vacated by the Home Office soon. The Minister reported progress with stemming the flow. He argued that it was not fair that groups of young men sought to circumvent the legal ways of entry and to take more of the places available for asylum seekers by refusing to use the legal channels.

He was able to tell us that numbers  crossing from the continent are down by a fifth this year compared to last. The French authorities have co-operated more in stopping boats from departing French shores. The new arrangements with Albania have stopped most of the flow from there and have enables the return of many to that safe country. The government awaits the result of the appeal to the Supreme Court over sending people to Rwanda who seek illegal entry to the UK. The processing of claims has been improved.

They have intensified work to find, charge and prosecute the illegal gangs operating the boats.  It is good there has been some progress but clearly more is needed by pursuing all these options, and processing claims more rapidly.

If all goes as planned Parliament will  end the current session this week and prepare for a King’s speech and a State Opening.

Given the state of the polls and recent by elections I assume this Parliament has at least a year to run before the next election to give the PM more time to demonstrate the competence he talks about and to deliver his five pledges.

The main opportunities he has to show the change he says the public wants rest on the year’s legislative agenda to be set out in the  King’s speech, and changes made in the November and April budgets to come.  I will be presenting detailed proposals for the budget shortly. Today I am interested in your ideas for legislation.

My own priorities are unlikely to appear. I would like to see

1 A small boats Bill to make clear to UK courts that Parliament does not want Human Rights Law to impede decisions and removals of illegal migrants from the UK

2. The completion of the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill to remove the problems with the Windsor Framework,restoring UK government of NI.

3. Restoration of the full EU Retained Law Bill with more EU law repeals and amendments.

4 Tax Reduction and Simplification Bill

5. A Wider Ownership Bill setting out more ways to promote ownership of homes, shares and businesses

6. A public sector productivity Bill creating  opportunities for state employees to buy out their managerial and administrative tasks in government through an employee buy out.

7 A privatisation Bill to facilitate the sale of all remaining shares in Nat West and to sell Channel 4. Bill to be fast tracked to complete sales next year.

8. A People’s BBC Bill as discussed here before

I do not have a worthwhile view on the efficacy of the vaccines or of  the balance of good and harm from them . I have not read enough of the literature and have no medical training . Yesterday I reported the NHS line and the questions raised by some MP s over the vaccines.I have myself raised other big issues over the way government responded to the pandemic. At the time I raised queries about the statistics presented for infections and deaths.I did not presume to advise my constituents as some non medically qualified MP s did over getting vaccinated. If asked I suggested they talked to a medical adviser they trusted.

During the covid period I did have strong views on the economic damage done by extensive lockdowns. I worked with a small group of MP s to press for  Parliament to be up and running and then for the earlier return of an active in person Parliament. I saw the need for more scrutiny of the wide ranging actions being taken to direct the economy and to spend large new budgets on healthcare.  I argued for concentrating protections on the vulnerable and helping them safely avoid contact with possible disease carriers, rather than getting most of us to avoid contacts outside our own family or bubble. I voted and argued for less extensive lockdowns.

I also pressed for more work on the possible approval and use of existing medicines to blunt the virus and help with symptoms for those infected. I argued for isolation hospitals to be separate from other general hospitals, for the Nightingale capacity to be used, for more use of the private sector hospitals for non covid patients, for better air flow and air cleansing in hospitals and other public buildings. I have subsequently sent in these issues for the Covid Enquiry to consider when they can spare time from examining the issues over how Ministers behaved. To produce a good report they need to examine the scientific work, forecasts , NHS management of greatly increased resource and medical advice offered as it evolved during the waves of the virus.

I have not published all contributions from yesterday. The share prices of pharmaceutical companies generally have fallen this year for a variety of reasons. The  lawsuits I see raised as contributors to share declines are about infringement of patents, rather than  harms from covid vaccines. Governments often issued some exemptions from liability to speed introduction of vaccines that they thought would save lives.

Governments and medical experts continue to recommend a range of covid vaccines, and have made decisions now about which ones they prefer to use. Anyone thinking of having vaccinations can now find plenty of information about side effects and about what has happened to a small proportion  of people who have experienced greater harm than a sore arm and feeling a bit under the weather for a few days. Those who do dislike these vaccines can make their own decisions as they are free to do and can study outcomes so far from using these treatments.

On Friday Parliament debated the issues surrounding vaccines and in particular the various covid vaccines. Christopher Chope  produced a private members bill to improve payments to anyone badly affected by vaccine. The Minister reminded the House that anyone can claim a one off £120,000 payment if they have proof of disability and harm from taking an NHS vaccine. This applies to any vaccine including one against covid. The government added the anti covid treatments to the list of those items covered. The Minister explained that the one off payment does not exclude benefit payments for disability and sickness which may be necessary for anyone badly affected by a vaccine as well as by other more usual  causes of disability and ill health. The one off payment is  not compensation.  The Minister argued that such incidence was unusual for covid and for other approved vaccines. It is unlikely the Bill will pass as it seems that the government and the Opposition disagree with it, thinking current arrangements to make payments are sufficient subject to admin improvements to ensure prompt payment.

The Adjournment debate is a half hour debate at the end of the day’s business when a single member can be allotted the time to make a case they think important and  hear a Minister’s reply. Andrew Bridgen secured this slot to point out  that there were too many excess deaths continuing in the UK and to argue these were related to the covid vaccination of most people.

The Minister drawing on her NHS medical  advice agreed that excess deaths were continuing at higher levels than before covid, but denied this resulted from the vaccinations. She argued that because 93.6% of the population had been vaccinated it was true most people dying were those who had the vaccine. It did not prove or mean  the  vaccine  caused those deaths. Nor did she detect a lower death rate amongst the minority who had not been vaccinated. She said there was some inconclusive  evidence that non vaccinated people suffered a higher death rate than vaccinated.  She argued that there were a  variety of  causes of continuing excess deaths, including the backlog of treatments, bad outbreaks of flu, and a range of other killers running higher.

Work on the sudden death of young people from blood clots we are told has revealed  a small number of  cases brought on by vaccines, but we are told more people die of blood clots from contracting covid.  The Opposition supported the government in the debate of the Chope Bill and made clear their belief in the efficacy and success of the vaccines administered by the  NHS.

I set this out as I know some constituents and readers are concerned about these matters. I have  no medical knowledge or evidence to challenge the NHS/Ministerial view that these vaccines like all such treatments adversely affected a small number of people per million injected but are  not the main  cause of the current continuing spate of excess deaths. I offer people the chance to debate this further but will not publish contributions that potentially libel the NHS or drug companies based on coincidence or circumstantial evidence with  no  proof of causation. It was of course open to people not to take the vaccine if they did not like what was said about possible side effects, or about the balance between possible harms and possible benefits of taking it. The authorities  always said there could be some side effects and put in place a reporting system to monitor them.  The issue for some Health staff is  different if they had to take it. Everyone was aware these vaccines were developed at pace and approved to offer some defence against the virus when understanding of it was evolving.

I followed the debate carefully but did not contribute as I do not  have any special knowledge or evidence to present to  disagree with the NHS view. The argument that excess deaths today result from the vaccine need to show strong evidence of  more excess deaths for the vaccinated than the unvaccinated and to show causes of death are clearly linked to the vaccine impact rather than resulting from higher levels of death from a range of causes from dementia to flu.

The main messages from the two by elections are that many Conservative voters do not like what the government is doing or not doing,  nor do they want to vote Labour.

The secondary message is if frustrated  Conservatives vote Reform they can tip the balance between a Conservative and a Labour MP but they are miles off winning a seat even  in by election conditions.

It confirms my view that the government needs to cut taxes urgently, control spending better, make a substantial reduction in legal migration and follow through on its pro drivers pro personal freedoms policies.

The government needs an urgent  budget to expand business and supply, cut the rising prices of energy with temporary tax cuts all the  time oil is over $75 a barrel and help more people into work. Reverse the IR 35 changes and up the small business VAT threshold for starters. This is all affordable given the way this year tax revenue is well ahead of OBR forecasts.