Today in the House of Commons there will be an event that involves a local MP this afternoon and also tomorrow morning. That event is the Education Committee which involves Private Meeting discussions. The only Sussex person involved is Caroline Ansell who is the Conservative MP for Eastbourne. It is interesting to read the explanation of the group which states

The Education Committee scrutinises the work of the Department for Education, covering children’s social care, schools, colleges, the early years and higher education. The Committee also holds regular hearings with DfE’s arms-length bodies, including Ofsted, Ofqual and the Children’s Commissioner. You can follow the Committee on Twitter @CommonsEd

There is another Committee that is taking place this week which involves another Sussex MP and the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee is taking place on the Wednesday morning. It will focus on the Work of the Cabinet Office. The only Sussex member is Lloyd Russell-Moyle who is the Labour MP for Brighton Kemptown. The text for the group is stated as

The Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) is appointed by the House of Commons to examine: constitutional issues; the quality and standards of administration provided by Civil Service departments; and the reports of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO). It is chaired by William Wragg MP. You can follow the Committee on Twitter @CommonsPACAC

There do not appear to be any other Sussex MPs who are involved in any of the other Committees that are operating this week but no doubt some of them will be involved in future weeks when other of the Committees will take place in Parliament. Along with these two Committee meetings there is an important environmental petition that is taking place this week in Parliament and I hope some Sussex MP’s will participate.

The event is a discussion this afternoon which is being organised by Matt Vickers who is the Conservative MP for Stockton South and his event is entitled “relating to the use of swift bricks in new housing”. This is a reflection of a public e-petition referred as 626737 which was announced as “Make swift bricks compulsory in new housing to help red-listed birds”. The first part of the text was

Swifts have declined by over 50% in the UK. Adult swifts, known for site-fidelity, return to the same nests. We want swift bricks to be required in all new housing, to provide homes for these birds. Surveys show these are used by red-listed swifts, house martins, starlings and house sparrows. Swifts spend more time airborne than any other bird, sometimes only landing when returning to their nests in our walls, from Africa. They’re tidy and quiet neighbours but modern building methods block swifts out.

Apparently, the RSPB supported the petition and nearly 110,000 people signed it across the UK and nearly 4,500 people did so from Sussex. That makes it just over 4% of people and given that our 16 constituents represent 2.4% of the full list of the nation so our contribution was significant. Let us hope that some of our MPs will take part today in that discussion. 

Last week there were a few interesting events that took place some of them involved our MPs. Sadly, there were no Sussex representatives in the discussion for the petition that was expressed as “Approved Mileage Allowance Payment Rate” That was very disappointing. However, on the same day there was another theme which most Sussex MPs did connect with. It was entitled as “Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill”. The first person to contribute was Tim Loughton from East Worthing and Shoreham. His view began with

I agree with the Secretary of State that there is a particular problem to do with Israel and BDS, but the Bill is not country-specific. Nor is it specific on whether it applies to investment or disinvestment. Of all the Bills I have ever read, it is particularly woolly in its drafting.

A little later Lloyd Russell-Moyle stated in his entire comment

The hon. Lady has given a very good list of people that the Bill could undermine. Does she also recognise that it undermines many people in Israel who oppose the occupation in the occupied territories, and it would make their life harder when making the case in Israel in a democratic sense?

It was fascinating to observe the voting that took place following the discussion of this subject. The first vote endorsed 211 MPs who approved the Bill which included 155 Labour MPs including Lloyd Russell-Moyle and the SNP, Liberal Democrat, Plaid Cymru, two Conservatives and Caroline Lucas. However, 272 MPs rejected it who were Conservatives and a few DUP’s. The next vote was agreed by 266 MPs who endorsed the Bill which were Conservatives and DUP’s. There were 69 MPs who rejected it which were ten Labours, SNP, Liberal Democrats, Plaid Cymru, 2 Conservatives and Caroline Lucas. It was fascinating that nearly all of the Sussex Conservatives took part in the main group apart from the Peter Bottomley and Tim Loughton and it was also Peter Kyle who did not vote in the Labour responses.

I feel some strange voting decisions took place and it would be really helpful for many of us if we could understand why our MPs have voted as they did and to explain the reasoning behind their decisions which take place in our Parliament.