Richard Spring MP
Member of Parliament for West Suffolk

There has been a lot of recent comment about Heathrow airport, and BAA defending it by saying that the problems arise out of the sheer weight of passenger numbers.

This is nonsense. Arriving back into Terminal 4 from Tel Aviv (a new immaculate, very clean airport) we waited and waited for the luggage to arrive. We had plenty of time to look at the carousel. The carpeting on the top of the carousel was filthy, and the large sign about customs allowances had a sizeable stain on it. It was an appalling welcome to the United Kingdom.

We now hear from business people that such is the unattractiveness of Heathrow, on top of the various delays there, that they have day meetings in places like Amsterdam or Frankfurt instead.

Airports are seen by many as the window on a country. Yes passenger numbers are enormous and growing, but the appearance of parts of Heathrow is a disgrace.

“A new dawn has broken….has it not?” were the famous words of Tony Blair after becoming Prime Minister back in 1997. His words to mark his departure yesterday seemed suitably bereft of such optimism and hope: “That’s it. The end.” It gave the impression that after a decade of toiling away at Number 10 and seeing so many of his policies go wrong, notably Iraq, he is happy to, in his oft-quoted way, simply draw a line under the matter and move on.

However, in the chamber for his last Prime Minister’s Questions, there was a feeling that his tenure of 10 years as PM ought to be recognised and on all sides of the House, appropriate tributes were paid to him, especially for his work on the Northern Ireland peace process. On a fitting note, it was Dr Ian Paisley who asked him his last ever question and spoke kindly of their working relationship during the sometimes fraught negotiations.

David Cameron was right to encourage Tory MPs in rising for Blair’s standing ovation. The departure of a Prime Minister and his final appearance at the despatch box, ought to be appropriately marked, and on this occasion the courtesy and civility of the House of Commons was clear for all to see.

Whilst we can appear to be rowdy, passionate and sometimes vitriolic in debates and arguments between the opposing parties, MPs do have a sense of occasion. Yesterday was such a moment.

In the years since Tony Blair first became Prime Minister there has been no enduring progress in resolving the Israel-Palestine problem. Quite the reverse. Britain’s reputation in the region has suffered greatly, not only because of Iraq. Our ability to sell ourselves as the influential bridge to the United States has been shown to be one of virtually non-existent influence. Everybody, in Israel or the Arab world, knows this to be true.

Tony Blair is no longer a head of government. Without the real will and determination of Washington, nothing will happen. Northern Ireland’s problems were not resolved by charisma, charm or eye-catching initiatives, but by patient hard work over many years. All the members of the Quartet carry baggage in varying degrees. One country which has universal credibility is Turkey, secular yet Islamic, which enjoys excellent relations with Israel and its neighbours. If there is going to be a broker, it should be Turkey, backed by all those who do not want to see civil wars engulfing the region.

I suspect that if any outside influences can be successfully deployed, this route will yield much better results.

Meanwhile, so long, farewell, auf wiedersehen, good bye Tony.

Willy Brandt once observed that politicians come into politics to resolve a given set of problems, and once resolved, they cannot move on.

So the EU, for all its success in helping to achieve peace and stability, has indeed also failed to move on. As David Cameron said, in a speech at the Movement for European Reform launch in Brussels, it “needs to change if it is to be fit for the challenges of the new century, not stuck haggling over the debris of the last.”

There are indeed huge challenges such as the economic problems and opportunities of globalisation; the environmental impact of climate change and the issue of world poverty.

All of this is true. However there remains the question of the actual architecture of the EU, in the face of the revived and revised constitution.

Let us step back a bit. The Laeken Declaration, signed in 2001, in response to the expansion of the EU, pointed out that the EU was at a crossroads, and actually asked many of the right questions on how best to proceed.

It sought to highlight the so-called democratic deficit, calling for European institutions to be brought closer to its citizens by their becoming more democratic, more transparent and more efficient.  It called for the clarification and simplification of the division of competences between the EU and its Member States.  It asked how to ensure that a redefined division of competences does not lead to a creeping expansion of the competence of the Union or to encroachment upon the exclusive areas of competence of Member States.  It called for a simplification of the EU’s legislative instruments, and the restoration of tasks to member states.

The creation of a constitution was not a clearly expressed instruction. However, under the strong personality of the chairman, Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the Convention on the Future of Europe was driven on to draw up a constitution which effectively undermined the basic premises of the Laeken Declaration.

Since then nothing has been done on the declaration’s commitments to reassess the distribution of powers between the member states and the EU.

As we saw again yesterday, the Blair government has never laid out a clear vision of how the EU should work, or defined the structure of the EU in the spirit of Laeken. Yet again, it has been carried along in the slipstream of others, and then tried with mixed success to reverse the momentum. It has been a huge failure of leadership. Unless and until we find a structure which will give the people of Europe some sense of ownership and control, dissatisfaction with the EU will continue to grow.

The constitutional agreements agreed at the weekend do not remotely begin to address this.

How we got to this position is beside the point, and how we resolve the terrible situation in Gaza is a matter for debate. What we have is a simple reality – a town of 20,000 (previously 24,000) Israelis very close to Gaza lives in fear.

Last week I saw it for myself. Khassam rockets have been landing on the town effectively ever since the Israelis withdrew from Gaza. Since Hamas very recently took control there, the rocket firing into Sederot itself has stopped, at least at the time of writing. It was very moving to visit a primary school whose outer walls had only been partially reinforced. Teachers were dealing with the situation with extraordinary humour, forethought and professional dedication.  The level of protection was clearly inadequate. It is difficult to understand whether this is because of bureaucracy or cost. Talking to Israeli MPs did not provide clear answers. In Gaza itself I read that many young children are traumatised.

These very young, very innocent fellow human beings are paying a price for something well beyond their comprehension. It is a tragic by-product of the violence which is besetting the region. I am glad I saw something of this for myself.

Surveying the current political landscape, with the divide becoming clearer between David Cameron’s vision for a more green, local and family-friendly Government, and the centralist rehashed ideas of the brooding Prime Minister-in-waiting, one noticeable difference is in the parties approach to using the internet to communicate with the electorate.

I have been regularly blogging now for eight months and during that time more and more MPs, candidates, journalists and others interested in politics have started up their own blogs. However, it seems that the Conservative Party, generally, is more willing to interact using the internet to exchange ideas, opinions and their thoughts and views.

Now this has been taken to its logical conclusion with David Cameron’s call to “Stand up, Speak up”, through encouraging the public to play a role in policymaking by discussing the Policy Reviews. I believe this idea has real merit. If we are to return to Government, we must take note of what the public think of our policy themes, as we are formulating them, not after the whole process is completed. Anyone will be able to sign up and give their views, vote in online polls and make their feelings known on any or all of the issues. This is genuine interaction.

Compare this with the many mock-consultation ideas we have seen under this Government. Does anyone remember “The Big Conversation” which turned out be more of a muffled whisper! Everything is controlled from the centre with little room for internal disputes, let alone public involvement.

Trusting the people makes you stronger in politics, not weaker. David Cameron understands that, Gordon Brown does not.

The poor Liberal Democrats do seem to be a having a rather torrid time at the moment. Not so long ago, Sir Ming was again having to suppress leadership speculation and a certain amount of jostling behind the scenes from the next generation impatient for the crown, at a time when their Party is slipping further into the political abyss.

Their plight has not been helped by reports this week that Gordon Brown had talks (sadly not at the now defunct Granita) with Sir Menzies about a possible deal between the Liberals and Labour, and also offered the Lib Dem peer and former leader, Lord Ashdown, the post of Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in his new Government. Ashdown refused and Campbell has made it clear to the senior figures in his party not to enter into discussions with the Brown camp. Many in his party are furious about the whole fiasco with one Lib Dem MP describing the farce as ‘politically toxic’.

It may appear that Ming currently finds himself in the same position as the ageing, respectable CEO of a struggling company, valiantly fighting off a hostile takeover bid from a much larger and somewhat tarnished organisation soon to be headed Gordon ‘clunking fist’ Brown.

However, this analogy slightly misses the point that the damage to the Liberal Democrats comes not from external factors, but their own internal haemorrhaging. Under the surface, they are suffering from many of their Parliamentary candidates and councillors across the country defecting to the Conservative Party. Under David Cameron, we have a real chance of winning the next election and this has not been lost on the Lib Dems who now see their own Party floundering.

Is it any wonder many are slipping out of the back door?

Some visiting friends wanted to see the shop in the House of Commons. One of the items on sale was a fridge magnet which said “Politicians complaining about the press, are like captains complaining about the sea.” I pointed this out to a Labour MP, who suggested that it could be a farewell present to Tony Blair. Truly it is the ultimate spin for a Prime Minister who has been at the epicentre of the greatest political spinning operation in our history, to have made such a fatuous observation.

However, the wonderful thing about our Tony is that he probably believed it.

We can take some pride in the fact that, of all the many attractions in London, Parliament and the beauty of its buildings have an enduring appeal to young and old. Tourists from all over the world, as well as people living in other parts of the UK, come to see Big Ben and the famous Gothic architecture of our Parliament. However, in recent years this experience has been blighted by one or two protestors in Parliament Square. I am referring, in particular, to the foul and offensive tirade of abuse that pours forth from a megaphone every day in full view of visitors, tourists, school children and the police.

We have an enviable tradition in this country of free speech, liberty to form pressure groups and to come and protest for a particular cause. There are hundreds of different groups ranging from local hospital campaigners to organisations like Amnesty International who arrange to protest outside Parliament every year. It gives MPs a chance to listen, meet and discuss their concerns and gives individuals the opportunity to make their voice heard.

Yet, this is very different. Using their megaphone, obscenities such as “B******s!”, “A load of s**t”, and before Prime Minister’s Questions, the cry of “you f*****g b*****d!” can be heard loudly outside the Houses of Parliament. Imagine a group of young schoolchildren being taken on a visit to Westminster and returning home after hearing such foul-mouthed and unpleasant language. It would not be allowed on daytime television, and yet in takes place in view of police officers who are powerless to intervene, and deeply embarrassed. If they try to intervene directly they are shouted down with the megaphone.

I am investigating along with others to see what action can be taken to stop this offensive behaviour.

My children rather teasingly always say Father’s Day is commercial nonsense, which is undoubtedly true. However, I lost my own father at the age of nine. That year I did poorly at school and I was really quite upset and nonplussed about this, until a kindly teacher gently told me why – it had simply never occurred to me.

Being cheerful by nature, at no point did I feel disadvantaged or different because I had no living father, and in due course I acquired a stepfather. It was only later that I truly began to miss him. It would really have been good to have discussed with him matters like which university to go to, what to study, and what career path to choose. This was compounded by the fact that we look so alike. Somebody who knew him well told me that we even have exactly the same voice.

On high days and holidays, I wear a pair of his cufflinks, and I always wear his signet ring.

As a politician I am sometimes asked who I would most like to meet. Yes it would be fascinating to talk with Mahatma Gandhi, John F Kennedy, Napoleon, Elizabeth I or some other historical figure. However in due course and in the hopes that I shall not be experiencing the eternal hell fires or a million years in purgatory, the person I should most like to meet up with is my own father.

We would have much to talk about.