In his letter, Julian commented: I wanted both to express my support for the initiative, and also to suggest three particular areas which should be included in any review:

1) Could we extend the scope of permitted consultation on applications for licensed premises? At present, only those living immediately adjacent to the premises are allowed to be consulted. This is very unfair on people who live on access roads to pubs and city centres. In Canterbury, we have a problem of this kind in the Dane John Gardens. The gardens are used as an access route via a footbridge to one of Canterbury’s main night clubs, Club Chemistry, and the residents struggle with noise, unacceptable behaviour, vandalism and damage. They would not have been able to make any representations against the club being given a licence, but are the main sufferers at night when the club closes.

2) We need to restore the concept of a “fit and proper person” to hold a licence. Under Labour’s Act, as you know, this concept was abolished, and in considering an application, Councils are only allowed to take account of in-date convictions, whereas before they could also take account of both police intelligence and spent convictions. Nobody has a right to run a pub or club, and the law-abiding majority do not want to see people against whom reasonable suspicion exists of serious alcohol-related offences, operating in the trade.

3) Could I ask that we reduce the bureaucracy to churches and small clubs, and other bodies, who want one-off arrangements for fundraising functions? The bureaucracy on this is disproportionate.”

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mrs Theresa May): Since December 2001, successive British Governments have sought to deport Abu Qatada to Jordan, his home country, because he poses a serious risk to our national security. Qatada has a long-standing association with al-Qaeda.

I hardly need tell the House that the Government disagree vehemently with Strasbourg’s ruling. We believe that Abu Qatada should be deported.
(Hansard: 7 Feb 2012, Column 165)

Mr Julian Brazier (Canterbury) (Con): Does my right hon. Friend accept that, in our unwritten constitution, there is a distinction between the rule of law and the tyranny of lawyers? Does she also accept that the interaction between the European Court of Human Rights and the ruling by Justice Mitting on the question of bail has created a dangerous situation in which millions of people in this country are starting to lose confidence in our legal system?

Mrs May: I do not believe that millions of people are losing confidence in our legal system. I believe that they are concerned about the ability of the European Court to come to decisions that we do not believe to be in the best interests of the United Kingdom. This decision on Abu Qatada is clearly a case in point. That is why it is important for the Government to pursue the work that we are doing, not only in looking into the possibility of a British Bill of Rights but in trying to make changes to the way in which the European Court operates, so that in future we will be able to deport people who present a danger to us.
(Hansard:7 Feb 2012, Column 170 – 171)

After the Home Secretary’s statement Julian Brazier said,
“It is deeply concerning that Abu Qatada will remain in the UK given his terrorist links. The European Court of Human Rights decision to allow him to remain in Britain is denting the public’s confidence in our own legal system which ruled he should be deported. The UK currently holds the Presidency of the European Council which gives us the leverage to make lasting reform to the way legal judgements are made in the ECHR. The Prime Minister made a speech in Strasbourg in late January where he echoed the determination of the Government to get Europe to respect legal decisions made at a national level.”

“In the run up to the Olympic Games and Queen’s Diamond Jubilee, we cannot afford to allow terrorists to walk freely on our streets.”

The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague): The whole House will be appalled by the bloodshed and repression in Syria, which continues at this very moment. Over the last 11 months, more than 6,000 people have been killed. The Syrian regime has deployed snipers, tanks, artillery and mortars against civilian protestors and population centres, particularly in the cities of Homs, Idlib, Hama and Deraa. Thousands of Syrians have endured imprisonment, torture and sexual violence, including instances of the alleged rape of children, and the humanitarian position is deteriorating. It is an utterly unacceptable situation that demands a united international response.
(Hansard: 6 Feb 2012, Column 23)

Mr Julian Brazier (Canterbury) (Con): A very dear friend of mine and his five-year-old son were butchered by the Assad regime in the days when it controlled Lebanon, so may I both commend everything that my right hon. Friend is doing and urge him to take a particular interest in what is going on in that country, which the Assad regime continues to try to destabilise, both through its own proxies and through Iranian ones, such as Hezbollah and Amal?

Mr Hague: Absolutely; we always take a close interest in what is happening in Lebanon, and Syria has indeed been, a great deal of the time, a malign influence in events there. In addition, events in Lebanon and what may happen in the future there are an important consideration in how we handle this crisis in Syria—this is one reason why it is quite different from the Libyan crisis, for instance. So my hon. Friend is right to point out the horrors of what has happened before and I am very conscious of the point that he makes.
(Hansard: 6 Feb 2012, Column 33 – 34)

After the statement on Syria Julian said,

“Assad has caused great hardship for the people of Syria as the loss of innocent civilian life continues. I am disappointed that both Russia and China vetoed UN action on Syria. The Government was right to recall our Ambassador and diplomatic staff from Damascus. The Foreign Secretary is right to keep up the pressure on Assad’s regime.”

“Through the Assad regime and support from Iran, Lebanon has also faced continued assault. The international community is rightly concentrating its efforts on Syria with the Arab League. But we must not forget the atrocities Assad has committed in neighbouring countries.”

The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Chris Grayling): …we have to seek to replicate the realities of working life as closely as possible in the benefits system. If we are paying for people to live in a part of town that they could not afford to live in if they were in work, we are trapping them in a way that will prevent them from getting back to work.
(Hansard: 1 Feb 2012, Column 877)

Mr Julian Brazier (Canterbury) (Con): Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the question put to him just now by Government Members? Does he or does he not accept that it is wrong in principle in the long term for a family to live indefinitely in an area where they could not afford to live if they were in work?

Mr Byrne: The principle on which we both agree and which we have advanced reforms to put in place is this: people should be better off in work than on benefits.
(Hansard: 1 Feb 2012, Column 879)

After the Welfare Reform debate Julian said,
“Nobody should starve in this country but it cannot be right that some workless households receive thousands of pounds more in benefits than the average working family receives in take-home pay.”

“The Government proposes to cap the amount of benefits that a workless household can receive to £26,000, which is the equivalent to someone earning £35,000 before tax. This is a salary that many working families would be happy to receive and their taxes are helping to pay for it.”

The Prime Minister (Mr David Cameron): We want the eurozone to sort out its problems, which are having a chilling effect on our economy. Tackling them is one of the best ways in which we can help to secure growth in Britain and right across Europe. As I have said repeatedly, short-term steps—the so-called October package—must be taken, and taken properly. Europe’s banks must be recapitalised properly, the uncertainty in Greece must be brought to a decisive end, and the firewall that needs to be constructed must be big enough to deal with the full scale of the crisis and the potential contagion.
(Hansard: 31 Jan 2012, Column 677)

Mr Julian Brazier (Canterbury) (Con): My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister outlined in his speech at the Council several criteria needed for a successful monetary union, none of which have really been met by the changes, however welcome, outlined there, so may I urge him to continue to plan, while doing everything that he can to co-operate constructively, for the likely eventual break-up of the eurozone?

The Prime Minister: We have to plan for all eventualities, but I would make two points. As I have said, I think we have to respect the fact that the countries of the eurozone want to make it work. They have taken quite a number of steps that are painful and difficult for individual sovereign countries to take, and it must be in our interests, because we want the European economy to grow, for them at least to take the short-term measures to take the heat out of the crisis. There were some signs of the crisis easing at the beginning of this year, as Italian and other bond spreads have come down, but we are far from through it.
(Hansard: 31 Jan 2012, Column 697)

After the Prime Minister’s statement Julian Brazier said,
“The fiscal pact of 25 European countries is failing to come up with the big measures to contain the Eurozone debt crisis. Germany is not willing to provide huge subsidies for Southern Europe and Southern Europe cannot compete because they are tied to the same currency as Germany and it is too strong for them. The weaker countries must devalue”

“As the economic climate worsens, UK businesses need certainty so they can invest to generate growth in our economy and the financial markets need confidence in our future. We do indeed need to plan for a Europe without the current Eurozone – and that makes government measures to help companied build export markets outside the Eurozone.”

Mr Julian Brazier (Canterbury) (Con): Does my right hon. Friend agree that more aircraft carrier capacity is not a huge priority in an area with plenty of available land bases? Much more important is the potential threat of terrorists sowing mines along the shallow waters of the western Gulf using fishing vessels, for which Britain’s naval contribution of mine-clearing vessels is pre-eminently central.

Mr Hague: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Indeed, our principal military contribution in the Gulf is the minehunters based in Bahrain. They are enormously respected in the region and are extremely expert in what they do. They are a very important part of our presence there.
(Hansard: 24 Jan 2012, Column 178)

“The Royal Navy are on the front line protecting key shipping lanes. The fact that we lead on Mine clearing capability illustrates the respect other nations have for the professionalism of our Navy who are doing a vital job, in the sea lanes which carry one fifth of the World’s oil.”

The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Chris Grayling): …I am keen to get information out there that we are looking at ways to ensure that that can happen, despite the rules about national statistics, which we have to obey very carefully. If the hon. Gentleman wants some statistics about employment programmes, let me share a set with him. The flexible new deal, to which he referred, cost the taxpayer £770 million and delivered 50,000 six-month job outcomes. He can do the maths on that—it amounts to approximately £14,000 per six-month job outcome. That is one failure of the welfare-to-work programmes we inherited, and that is why the welfare-to-work package that we have put together through the Work programme will be better value for the taxpayer and do a better job for the unemployed.

Mr Julian Brazier (Canterbury) (Con): Following that robust answer, does my right hon. Friend agree that when we are able to publish these data, they are likely to show the success of putting work out to contract when we see that organisations such as the Shaw Trust are much better at providing work for disabled people than the work done in-house by the Benefits Agency?

Chris Grayling: When I visit Work programme providers —I have now visited most of them—I certainly find a great deal of enthusiasm, a sense of purpose and successful progress. I hope that that will show through in the official statistics when the time arises. I am not in the business of burying good news, and I very much hope that we will be getting the good news about the Work programme out there as soon as we possibly can.

(Hansard: 23 Jan 2012, Column 1- 2)

After Work and Pensions Questions Julian said,

“Tackling unemployment urgently needs to be addressed because not only is it bad for taxpayers, who have had to pay the bill for a welfare budget that has risen by 40 per cent, but it is also bad for the families caught in the welfare trap. It is no coincidence that families who are out of work or reliant on benefits are significantly more prone to higher levels of debt, family breakdown, alcohol and drug addiction and crime.”

“The Government is clear that it wants to help people who can work get back into employment and that disabled people who need unconditional support will continue to receive it. I believe that it is vital that we support people who were written off to a lifetime on benefits into jobs and the new Work Programme will help them overcome the barriers they face to get back into work.”

When William Hague likened the single currency to a burning building with no exits, he was hardly exaggerating. Thanks to the huge borrowings under the last government, we share the same problems of ‘sovereign’ – that is government – debt. But, unlike the countries in the Euro, our currency is our own so it has settled at a level where we can compete in international markets. The weaker countries of Southern Europe, however, cannot compete. This is because they share a currency with the powerful German economy, so the Euro makes their goods and services too expensive to export.

Furthermore, many banks in the Eurozone have lent heavily to Eurozone governments, so they are heavily exposed to the sovereign debt crisis. French banks for example have lent five times more money to Greece than their British counterparts. Yet negotiations on rescheduling Greece’s debts have broken down. It is my belief that the Eurozone will break up, with the weaker countries devaluing, so they can compete.

That said, Britain needs the European Union. We are a trading nation and need access to, and a voice in, the EU’s single market – millions of jobs depend upon this. What we do not need is the tidal wave of red tape – especially for our largest industry, financial services – hence David Cameron’s veto.

In a crisis, Britain thinks out of the box and does things better. America’s top World war Two General, Douglas MacArthur, once said, “There is no such thing as security, only opportunity”.

The Euro club cannot grasp this important moment in history. Bureaucrats are now increasingly running Eurozone countries. In contrast we are cutting borrowing and ministers are working hard to help exporters to sell beyond Europe.

Dave, whose name is synonymous in Canterbury with the pantomime, was a larger than life person, in many ways. He not only starred in Canterbury’s panto for over 15 years, but he had a big heart – his charity, Dave Lee’s Happy Holidays – raised more than £2 million for sick and disabled children in Kent. His work was rewarded by an MBE.

It is sad to think that the new Marlowe Theatre will not echo with the sound of his jokes and the laughter of theatregoers, but he will be remembered with gratitude by children whose lives were enriched by holidays paid for by his charity.

“That this House notes that the former Royal Yacht Britannia played a major role in British diplomacy and trade promotion, as well as providing a suitable transport for her Majesty on visits to Commonwealth and foreign nations; believes that a replacement Royal yacht could further play a valuable role for Sea Cadets and other youngsters for sail training and science projects; notes that Britain is a premier builder of both motor and sailing vessels, exporting them all over the world; calls on the Government to appoint a Minister to examine options, through sponsorship and donation, for producing a suitable royal yacht in this jubilee year, without recourse to public funds, as a tribute to the Queen, an asset for our overseas influence, an engine for exports and an opportunity for young people.”

EDM 2612 Royal Yacht Replacement for Diamond Jubilee.