The mission of the modern Conservative Party is to improve the quality of life for everyone, and local councils have a leading role to play in doing just that… Our message is simple: Vote Blue, Go Green

Tomorrow’s local elections are being seen by the media and political parties as an important guide to the state of play in British politics. It is widely expected that the Labour Party will get somewhat of an electoral kicking. Indeed, I think it has been a rather good Labour tactic to pre-announce the Prime Minister’s departure – i.e. Brown’s arrival at No. 10 becomes the story, not the Labour losses. For the Conservatives, however, particularly in the South of England, the Liberal Democrats’ performance will be more closely analysed. Traditionally, the Liberals are disproportionately represented in local elections. My local district council, for example, is Lib Dem-controlled (Windsor & Maidenhead), and yet, there is not a Liberal Democrat MP in Berkshire (or Buckinghamshire). For it is the Liberal target seats that are most likely to be the toughest for us Tories to win back. And one of the main issues for residents’ in these seats will be the environment, not in a narrow ‘climate change’ way, more likely, it will encompass the broad concept of ‘quality of life’.

Since being elected as Conservative leader, David Cameron has, as promised, concentrated strongly on a ‘Quality of Life’ theme. This, he has argued, includes not just environmental issues but also effective policing and more policies to support the family. He has also highlighted links between grime and crime, emphasising that cleaner streets lead to reductions in crime and less anti social behaviour. He has promised policies in the future to deal effectively with these problems.

Before waiting for the next General Election, however, local Conservative Councillors have followed their leader’s direction. Up and down the country, Conservative Councils have been introducing locally-determined policies to improve residents’ living environment. Interestingly, of the top ten councils for recycling and composting in England, six are Conservative-controlled, none are Liberal Democrat or Labour controlled. In Conservative-controlled Hampshire, for example, Project Integra, a partnership between local authorities and a private waste contractor, has successfully provided an integrated solution to Hampshire’s waste management. As a result of this ground-breaking partnership, Hampshire now has some of the best waste infrastructure in the UK. Furthermore, local Conservative councillors have set themselves a target of a 50% recycling rate for the county by the year 2010. I believe it is this local concentration on effective, quality of life policies that will in the longer term reap electoral benefits for the Conservatives at a General Election.

By coincidence, Hampshire hosts quite a few Liberal Democrat-Conservative marginal seats. Portsmouth South, Winchester, Meon Valley (notional Tory marginal), Romsey & Portsmouth North and Eastleigh will all return to the Tory fold, if we can achieve a 7.5% swing at the next General Election. Indeed, if they do all return, then the entire County (with the exception of Southampton) will have become Conservative. Not only would that be good news for Hampshire residents and the Conservative Party, it would be catastrophic for the Liberal Democrats. For not only would they lose a strong foothold in Southern England, they would also lose one of their effective communicators, Chris Huhne. Ironically, by concentrating on the environmental issues, the Conservatives could very well guarantee the removal of the Liberal Democrats’ Environment Spokesman. Now there’s an incentive.

I would like to add my support to any organisation that seeks to protect whales. More information about this particular campaign can be obtained here.

MALLORY And we went to the moon. Do we really have to go to Mars? SAM Yes. MALLORY Why? SAM ‘Cause it’s next. For we came out of the cave, and we looked over the hill, and we saw fire. And we crossed the ocean, and we pioneered the West, and we took to the sky. The history of man is hung on the timeline of exploration, and this is what’s next. (West Wing II, Ep. 9)

The release yesterday of more stunning photographs of the surface of Mars reminds us once more of the relative insignificance of Earth. On a day when concerts to highlight the realities of climate change are announced, we must remember that Man has yet to set foot on another planet. Furthermore, the scientific endeavour and bravery of those previous generations who dared to contemplate space travel now allows us to look at our Earth from afar, to fully realise the damage we humans are doing to the global environment.

Man is nothing without endeavour. I have written previously on the importance of science. The desire to travel and discover contributes greatly to what makes us all human. For me space travel is truly inspirational. I firmly disagree with those people who think space exploration is too higher a cost to pay. For example, there are undeniably many hungry people in the world. However, I do not believe their plight has been exacerbated by Man going into space. Indeed, if we take the example of Bangladesh, one can see that Man’s ability to see the coastal erosion has vividly illustrated the urgent need to address climate change. The exploration of Space has benefitted the human race.

Man should be about pushing back frontiers. We should be about seeking new knowledge. It is for that reason that the absence of Britain at the forefront of Space exploration has always puzzled me. The ‘Great’ of Great Britain was established on the back of exploration and technological advance. It was because we went to new places first that we established an Empire. It was because we had the first industrial revolution known to Man that we became so powerful. That revolution was firmly based upon inventions such as the combustion engine, and our confidence to take on the next challenge. When did we lose the desire to be first?

Britain should make a firm commitment to explore Space. Public and private funds should be made available to put Britain back at the front of human exploration. Obviously, I recognise that we are no longer a superpower, however, that is no excuse. We should be joining with our international friends in the pursuit of putting man further into Space. So where should we go now? It has to be a planet, so therefore, it has to be Mars. Why Mars? Well, as Sam Seaborn said in my favourite political TV drama, “‘Cause it’s next”.

The WHO Roll Back Malaria partnership was founded in 1998. Its programme is planned to last the first decade of this century. Today’s announcement by George Osborne to allocate £500 million annually to fight malaria in Africa indicates the Conservative Party’s genuine commitment to both support this programme and international development in general. An economically successful Africa is a goal worth striving for. It would benefit not only Africans, but also the wider world.

The annual economic cost of malaria in Africa has been estimated to be more than US$ 12 billion in lost GDP. The frustration is that the disease could be controlled for much less than that. If the world community is serious about fighting world poverty, in particular within Africa, it must be serious about fighting malaria. It is a disease that causes, and is of, poverty. Annual economic growth in countries with high malaria transmission has been historically lower than in countries without the disease. Economists believe that in some sub-Saharan countries malaria leads to a growth penalty of over 1% per year¹.

Malaria is a preventable and curable disease. Despite this knowledge it kills more than one million people each year. The great majority of those deaths are to vulnerable African children. Wealthy Western governments share a moral responsibility to deal with this infectious disease promptly. Not only because it is needlessly killing Africans, but with on-going climate change, it may very well become our health problem soon.

And I want farmers and all those interested in the countryside to know that I care passionately about its future and success. – David Cameron

Yesterday, David Cameron spoke at the Oxford Farming Conference. He rightly highlighted the importance of the role of farmers in the maintenance of the English countryside. Today, Clive Aslet wrote an interesting article in the Telegraph, indicating what he thinks a future government needs to do to address the lack of confidence in the rural community.

The future of the rural economy is not any easy political subject. The majority of Britons only interact with the countryside for rest and relaxation. Consequently, few of them can be expected to have any real understanding of the daily challenges facing those who work within the rural economy. They do, however, all have the right to vote.

In the last decade, the Labour government has nakedly displayed the politics of envy. They have allowed poorly-drafted anti-hunting legislation to be passed, created the debacle of the rural payments agency and ineptly overseen the management and ramifications of both BSE and foot & mouth crises. All of these events have understandably contributed to a sense of impending doom within rural communities.

The political difficulty is that the metropolitan elite that controls the Labour Party runs the country. They have never hidden their distaste for ‘country people’. They do so knowing that their Parliamentary majority is hardly touched by offending country people. For example, major strategic planning decisions have often ridden roughshod over the wishes of those who have lived in the countryside for decades. Their disregard for rural heritage and contempt for the wishes of the country-dwelling minority, however, belies their ignorance of our need as a nation to have a long-term sustainable rural economy.

For rural concerns to be heard and addressed we need a Conservative government. That Conservative government must, however, be consistent and fair in its policy-making. Consistent in supporting subsidy-free industry and guarding against monopoly abuse. And fair in the application of government legislation in the countryside. In yesterday’s speech, David Cameron called for a “paradigm shift”. He emphasised the need for the farming industry to serve the customer: to build value instead of volume. He also, just as importantly, indicated his determination to deal with the supermarkets abusing their monopoly position. By stating these two goals, David Cameron is seen to be sympathetic to both farmers and customers. It is a political direction that is right for the long-term health of the rural economy, and one that I wholeheartedly support.