This week, Dr Phillip Lee, MP for Bracknell signed a Book of Commitment in the House of Commons, in doing so pledging his commitment to Holocaust Memorial Day and honouring those who died during the Holocaust.

Friday January 27th will mark the 67th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau, the Nazi concentration and extermination camp which is the site of the largest mass murder in history – and in the weeks running up to the day, the Holocaust Educational Trust placed a Book of Commitment in the House of Commons, giving MPs the chance to honour those who were persecuted and killed during their Holocaust and encouraging constituents to actively speak out against prejudice and bigotry today.

 In signing the Book of Commitment Dr Lee paid tribute to the extraordinary men and women who having survived the Holocaust, work to educate young people about what they endured, through the Holocaust Educational Trust’s Outreach programme.

In the weeks around Holocaust Memorial Day, thousands of commemorative events will be arranged by schools, faith groups and community organisations across the country, remembering all the victims of the Holocaust and subsequent genocides. This year, people will also be encouraged to take a stand against racism and prejudice today – and to speak out against hatred wherever they encounter it.

Last year, Dr Lee joined a visit to Auschwitz in Poland with students from The Brakenhale School in Bracknell and Wellington College in Crowthorne. The trip was part of the Holocaust Educational Trust’s Lessons from Auschwitz (LFA) project. Having students visit and understand the horrors that took place during World War II, will encourage work is done to ensure that future generations will never again allow racism or discrimination to go unchallenged.

Dr Lee commented: “Holocaust Memorial Day marks the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau – and is an important opportunity to both remember the victims of genocide. I encourage all constituents to mark the day and to commit to ‘speaking up and speaking out’ against prejudice today.”

Karen Pollock MBE, Chief Executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust, said: “We are proud that Dr Lee is supporting Holocaust Memorial Day this year. It is vitally important that we both remember and learn from the appalling events of the Holocaust – as well as ensuring that we continue to challenge all forms of bigotry.”

Waitrose donate £1000 every month to three chosen charities. Customers are invited to apply for their Charity of Choice to be selected to receive funds raised in store. Shoppers are offered a token every time they shop in the store. These tokens can be then inserted in one of three boxes – one for each organisation. At the end of the month the tokens for each organisation are counted, and the beneficiaries receive a corresponding proportion of the funds.

Mr Cameron called the Community Matters scheme “entrepreneurial” and “exciting” and said: “I think it is a really great advert for what a great business can do to support local charities and local people. It sums up what the Big Society is all about. It gives me huge pleasure to give Waitrose this award.”

Dr Lee commented: “It is a very long time since a Prime Minister of this country visited the Bracknell constituency (outside of the obvious regular visits to the RMA at Sandhurst). Indeed, I have found no one who can recall such a visit. I was honoured to join the PM at such an important occasion. I would like to congratulate Waitrose for being such a successful and responsible business. The “Community Matters Scheme” offers a great opportunity to help raise people’s awareness and personally contribute to some chosen charities. I am pleased that Waitrose are doing such a great job in making our society better off by helping people to engage in community activities that will benefit our society and economy as a whole country.”

Dr. Phillip Lee, MP for Bracknell, announces that the Government will do everything necessary to restore order to Britain’s streets and to make them safe for law abiding citizens.

Police officers have shown incredible bravery confronting the gangs. Dr Phillip Lee urges to place more police on the streets and ensure more robust police action. Leave within the Metropolitan Police has been cancelled and the Met have indicated that many more police will be on the streets of London in the coming hours than previously. Already several hundred people have been arrested and the Government is making sure that court procedures and processes are speeded up.

Dr Phillip Lee commented:

“Those who are responsible for this wrongdoing and criminality should be clear; they will feel the full force of the law. If they are old enough to commit these crimes, they are old enough to face the punishment. I am glad that Parliament will be recalled for a day on Thursday and I will be returning to Parliament myself. The Prime Minister will make a statement and a debate will be held so that the House can come together in condemnation of these crimes and stand together in determination to rebuild these communities.”

“I am sure that the people of Bracknell share my disgust of these appalling events. The roots of this behaviour go back many many years. The failures of our education system, the dependency by our welfare state, the breakdown of our families and spiritual life and the tendency over the years for politicians to provide excuses of poor behaviour. The solutions to these obvious problems will not be easy. However, I intend to play my part in bringing about a safer and more responsible society in Britain.”

The Berkshire Credit Union has grown rapidly over the past year and has increased to nearly 900 members with savings of over £400,000.  Savings are re-invested in local community projects.  CSL loan book has grown from £107,000 to £235,000 at July 2011 a growth of 119%.  The impact of this lending is highly significant as the union pays a dividend to lenders – in effect a profit share.  This compares favourably with mainstream institutions, since there are no “hidden criteria” or other “conditions” to restrict the customer group.  The aim is to create a climate that empowers local people and communities in building a big society that will take power away from politicians and give it to people.

Bracknell has greatly benefited from CSL projects.  The Berkshire Credit Union delivered presentations and activities to the District Council and a range of community groups including mobile home users at Warfield Park and offered a range of services to Bracknell Forest Housing Ltd.  They have also undertaken negotiations with the local volunteer centre and Citizens Advice Bureau to seek an operating base in the town for September.

Dr Lee commented: “I am pleased that CSL is doing such a great job in making our society better off by helping people to engage in entrepreneurial activities that will benefit our communities and economies as a whole country.”

Dr Lee had the pleasure of attending the relaunch of the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Boxing in Westminster this week. He was very pleased to do so because he firmly believes that the sport brings massive benefits to young people, especially those from tougher backgrounds. He had been asked to take the role of Vice Chairman by Charlotte Leslie, MP for Bristol North West, the new Chair of the APPG.

Dr Lee said: “The launch was a fantastic event. Not only did it showcase the talents of boxers of the past, such as Barry McGuigan (pictured above), it also featured the young boxers hoping to be part of Britain’s Olympic boxing team for 2012. Furthermore, a number of the boxers talked passionately about the social benefits of boxing and how the sport had ‘saved’ them from taking the wrong paths in life. All round, the event was an outstanding advert for the sport of boxing.”

He went on to say, “Boxing is a tough sport that teaches the importance and value of self-discipline and hardwork. In an increasingly challenging world for our young people, any sport that provides them with the opportunity to enhance their personal fitness, improve their self-esteem and increase their self-confidence must warrant strong support.”

Dr Lee is now looking forward to contacting and visiting the amateur boxing clubs on his patch in Bracknell and Pinewood Starr in Wokingham Without.

The Indianapolis motor-racing circuit in the American Mid-West was constructed in the early 20th century originally ‘brick by brick’. In fact, for that reason, the finish line today remains of brick construction. Yesterday, Britain’s Lewis Hamilton crossed that line first, thereby securing the second F1 victory of his career. A remarkable achievement for a man so young.

The meteoric rise of the young Englishman is the summer story of British sport. All informed sports commentators are in awe of his driving skill, wondering how he has climbed to first place in the World Championship so soon. The answer appears to be in the McClaren team’s driver-development programme. The team’s supremo, Ron Dennis, planned for Hamilton’s success many years ago. With his driver’s talent and the team’s hardwork, patience and dedication, Mr Dennis has now delivered the finished article. Laying a firm foundation a few years ago appears to have now provided ample returns for the McClaren team.

Conservative commentators could easily draw a parallel between Hamilton’s burgeoning career and David Cameron’s bid for Number 10. Today, I was fortunate enough to be at the Shadow Leader’s keynote speech in Tooting, South London. It had been billed, somewhat sensationally, as a ‘make or break’ speech for Mr Cameron. If it was, then I believe it succeeded in solidifying the foundations the Cameron team have been laying over the last 18 months.

David Cameron’s message was simple: “The British people have a clear choice. A choice between two different approaches to running the country”. By saying this, he has clearly drawn the battle lines for the next General Election. On one side stands the dour Scot, the old politician, the ‘top-down’ centralist. On the other side stands the new politician, the young man who trusts people’s decisions about their own lives and understands the limitations of government, the leader who is a true localist. Mr Brown trumpets state control whilst Mr Cameron advocates social responsibility.

By applying Conservative principles to the challenges of this new century, David Cameron has proved that his Party understands and is ready to lead this country. By emphasising security and opportunity for all he has successfully moved his Party firmly into the political centre ground. For he knows that it is there that the next General Election will be won or lost.

The Conservative leader, like the McClaren boss, has carefully built a new reputation ‘brick by brick’. Consequently, that reputation has got firm foundations. Today, those of us who were lucky enough to be present, witnessed the product of that dedicated and patient preparation. Ample returns at the ballot box should deservedly follow.

The recent furore over Channel Four’s decision to include a photographic image of the late Princess of Wales dead in her Mercedes car in Paris, as part of a documentary about her death, has raised a number of issues. Concerns have been aired about the appropriateness of showing her dead (or close to death). Indeed, my own Party has called for Channel Four to change its decision and remove the offending image from the final cut of the documentary, citing concerns over the adverse impact upon Princes William and Harry.

On June 8th, 1972, almost exactly 35 years before the date scheduled for the showing of the Channel 4 documentary about the death of Diana, the picture above was taken by Associated Press (AP) photographer, Nick Ut. It earned him the Pulitzer Prize. The photograph showed Phan Kim Phúc, a naked 9 year old girl, running towards the camera fleeing a napalm attack near Trang Bang during the Vietnam War. Phúc sustained third-degree burns to half her body (mainly her back) and was not expected to live. But thanks to the assistance of Nick Ut, and after surviving a 14-month hospital stay and 17 operations, she became an outspoken peace activist. Interestingly, an editor at the AP initially rejected the photo of Kim Phúc running down the road without clothing because it showed frontal nudity. Pictures of nudes of all ages and sexes, and especially frontal views, were not then allowed at the Associated Press. Eventually, after much argument, the New York photo editor, Hal Buell, agreed that the news value of the photograph overrode any reservations about nudity. This chilling, yet impressive, photograph encapsulated the awful reality of the war in Vietnam. It was taken at a time when public opinion had shifted firmly against continued American involvement. Undeniably, it contributed further to the deep unease felt about the military engagement. On reflection, to have not published the photograph would have been a further crime.

The power of this photograph to change minds in a pre-24 hour news media age was truly remarkable. It is that very power that can lead to photographic censorship. There are many arguments against showing images of the dead Princess of Wales. The most persuasive have concentrated on respecting the privacy of her death. Those pleas to protect her family are, sadly, less convincing. Neither Kim Phúc herself, nor her family, were asked about the use of Ut’s photograph. Arguably, it was more intrusive. However, to have not published the image would have been to sanitise the reality of that dreadful incident. And this is the nub of the issue. Who decides whether the publication of a particular picture is justifiable? Who determines the public interest? Who can predict the impact of a photograph upon public opinion?

I, for one, wish that images of Princess Diana trapped in her car did not exist. They do and are easily accessible on the net. An argument could be made that they were taken in an attempt to satisfy the public’s insatiable demand for images of this woman. For those that had chased her to her death to have taken such photos is difficult to stomach, however, before we become too morally judgemental about the paparazzi’s behaviour, we must ask ourselves why there was such a demand for pictures of her with her new boyfriend? What does it say about our society?

Censoring the images may be more about assuaging our own collective guilt for her death than about protecting the Princes from the awful reality of their mother’s end. By airing the images, Channel Four may aid those of us who want to see more decency, respect for individual privacy and less emphasis on celebrity culture. Rather like the awful photograph of a burning Vietnamese child, the terrible images of the last moments of the Princess may bring about positive change through a re-evaluation of our society’s moral standards.

The natural aristocracy I consider as the most precious gift of nature for the instruction, the trusts, and government of society.

– Thomas Jefferson

The on-going grammar school debate is about much more than a few academic state schools in Kent, Buckinghamshire and elsewhere. Judging by the anger and frustration shown by Conservative MPs across the spectrum of the party, it would appear that access to good education, in particular, access to a selective academic education for those children from more modest backgrounds, is an important defining issue for natural Conservatives. And this is because social mobility matters to people who are Conservative by experience. The BBC’s Political Editor, Nick Robinson, in his blog a few days ago, neatly encapsulated the present tensions within the Conservative Party generated by the recent education policy announcement.

It is widely believed that Margaret Thatcher’s electoral success was firmly based upon appealing to the ‘aspiring class’, to those people who believed that merit and hard work should be rewarded with success in life. Mrs Thatcher’s political gift was realising that a large section of the British electorate agreed with that famous American politician, Thomas Jefferson, who had argued in favour of a ‘natural aristocracy’. For Jefferson believed, that the development of such a social framework would benefit not only those that had the ability and application to succeed in life, but would also greatly aid the ‘common good’ by improving the overall governance of his country.

I have written previously on my own views about grammar schools. The “do we, don’t we” argument about grammar schools, however, should not be the real issue for us Tories. It should be more about our views regards the value of meritocracy in society. Jefferson felt strongly that an “artificial aristocracy” founded on “wealth and birth, without either virtue or talents” was a “mischievous ingredient in government”. I believe that for the Conservative Party to be electorally successful, it needs to re-establish its meritocratic credentials. Our education policy goes to very core of that task. If we allow ourselves to be charactured as appealing solely to those who are already successful in life, we will only guarantee ourselves electoral defeat.

Drug addicts need help, not condemnation. They need to be understood, not locked up. It would follow, therefore, that to encourage crime amongst addicts would make little sense. Or, that is what you might think would be government policy. However, it is not.

Apparently, if a drug addict is arrested, he is entitled to immediate treatment for his addiction (that is, within 24 hours) only if the offence he has committed is NOT drug-related. Hence, if he has mugged an elderly lady, for example, he will be treated immediately. Perversely, if he is picked up in possession of a banned substance, he will have to wait up to 10 days to receive treatment. Now, I do not know why this odd situation has arisen. It is, however, indefensible. I care for some drug addicts in the Thames Valley. The last thing that these individuals need is time in prison – a place not known for preventing drug abuse.

This government, and indeed any future Conservative government, must get its drug policies right. To not do so, is socially irresponsible. All of us must recognise that drug addiction is a problem that needs to be dealt with maturely and calmly. In particular, politicians must resist the temptation to resort to empty sound-bites about being “tough on drugs”. Young people – for let us remember the majority using these drugs are under thirty years – will see through the charade of this fake toughness. Interestingly, it is these young people that all parties need to encourage to vote. Maybe if we addressed this issue appropriately (and sensibly) younger people might consider voting for us? Proper policy implementation in the realm of drugs use may lead to both better treatment of addicts and less apathy on voting day.

Polly Toynbee’s column in the Guardian today is a typical rant about uncaring Conservatives cutting local services to the poor. She also took time to restate her support for Gordon Brown, remarkably claiming that he had achieved his economic ‘golden rule’ thoughout his tenure, “with only minor goal-post shunting”!

I try to read Ms Toynbee’s political rants as often as possible, if only to reaffirm my belief that it is the centre right of politics that truly (and honestly) serves the interests of all Britons. Ms Toynbee’s target today was the honourable endeavour of Conservative-run councils to lessen the burden of local taxation, a burden shared by the great majority. I have written on the subject of council tax previously. Ms Toynbee attacked the desire to lower taxes as being indefensible, since in her eyes, any cut in tax would lead to a cut in essential services, citing examples from Hammersmith and Croydon.

According to Polly, the Conservatives do not care for the poor, disabled and elderly. In Polly’s world, caring equates to state spending, even though the last ten years have given us all ample evidence of the ineffectiveness of state intervention, e.g. the NHS, reduced social mobility, etc.. What actually works are policies that encourage and support personal responsibility and local activism. Many Conservative Party members are actively involved in local charities and are members of school boards. It is this community participation that effects real change in communities and provides the service and care that Ms Toynbee so wants for the poor and disadvantaged. Just because the money (and time) comes from individuals, as opposed to the state, does not make it any less worthy.

I could accept Ms Toynbee’s constant rants against Conservatism if she practised what she preached. Like her, I was educated at a selective school. Like her, if I had children, I might choose a private education for them. And what is more, if I had the personal wealth to afford a second home in the Mediterranean like Ms Toynbee, I might very well choose to own one. The difference is that I am member of a political party that encourages that choice. I am a member of a party that truly believes in rewarding merit, and one that honestly accepts that because of the inherent competition between people, that there will always be winners and losers in life. That honesty also explains why we Conservatives believe that lowering the tax burden on the poorest and less successful in society is a moral good. Hence, my support for any council that lowers local taxation.

Ms Toynbee is clearly a hypocrite. She does, however, serve one purpose – to highlight the need for the Conservative Party to be actively seeking policies that will benefit the less well-off in our country. Conservatives have a moral duty to create a society in which these people can live securely, safe in the belief that with hard work and talent, rich rewards will follow. If a future Conservative government sets about improving social mobility levels, it will have gone a long way to proving that the poor in society will always be better off under a Conservative administration. The Labour Party’s raison d’etre will have then been removed. Where will you go then Ms Toynbee? Your villa?