Offensive Weapons Bill and restrictions on knives delivery

Thank you for contacting me regarding the Offensive Weapons Bill and its restriction on the delivery of knives and blades sold online to a private residential address.

I appreciate that this is naturally an issue of concern to someone who would like to purchase knives and blades but is housebound.

The Offensive Weapons Bill forms a key part of the Government’s Serious Violence Strategy, in response to recent increases in serious violence, especially in knife crime, in England and Wales.

Under the new provisions of the bill, knives sold online must only be delivered to and collected - by the person who made the purchase - at a place where the age of the purchaser can be checked.

The primary motivation underpinning this new measure is the need to provide additional safeguards to current legislations that already make it an offence to sell knives to under-18s, as many online retailers have been struggling to implement age checks for online sales.  

While it is important that we are able to prevent teenagers and children from purchasing and obtaining knives online, I share your concerns that this measure might disproportionately affect adult users of knives that are housebound and members of rural communities, who have comparatively less access to the proposed collection points and also have a more diverse range of legitimate uses for specialist knives, which can often only be readily sourced online. 

The Bill received its second reading on 27 June and is now moving to committee stage. I note your concerns about section 15 of the Bill and will be seeking to raise them when it receives further scrutiny before Parliament in due course. 

Getting a say on trade 38 Degrees campaign

I am just a little sceptical that 38 Degrees are all too often at odds with the government. On everything. So it is reasonable that I view this latest campaign with that in mind.

Suggesting that highly complex trade negotiations some of which will have commercially sensitive data or involve security issues should be subject to the scrutiny suggested is completely impractical. It would delay and bog down talks. Further it would likely weaken our hand in our negotiations as competitors would inevitably be privy to matters best kept private during those negotiations.

Our parliamentary system, where the government is routinely held to account for the decisions it makes is in good working order. I see no reason to move away from that.

Newspaper column 4 July 2018 - the Cornwall & Isles of Scilly Investment Fund

I am sure we have all been enjoying the heatwave we have been experiencing. There really is nowhere better than Cornwall when the weather is like this. It is certainly much better than being in London and having to cope with the oppressive heat in Parliament.  

Last week I spoke in Parliament about some owners of holiday lets who exploit loopholes to get away with not paying the rates they should, penalising other taxpayers in the process, in a debate called by my fellow Cornish MP Derek Thomas.

I also welcomed Cornish bee keeper, Andrew Brown, to Westminster to talk about his plans to increase the numbers of bees in Cornwall. I also met with Cornwall Air Ambulance to continue to support their vital work.

At the end of the week I was delighted to welcome more funding for Cornwall with the launch of the £40 million Cornwall & Isles of Scilly Investment Fund.

The Cornwall & Isles of Scilly Investment Fund (CIOSF) will boost the local economy by providing debt and equity finance to help growing small businesses, of which we have so many of in Mid-Cornwall, across the region.

The fund has been established in partnership with the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP), the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and UK Government to provide local businesses with more funding options to help them grow and create jobs.

CIOSIF has been designed following input from local business groups, funders, business advisers and the LEP and will provide debt and equity finance from £25k to £2 million. It is expected to unlock a further £40 million of private investment.

I am pleased to have worked with the LEP and Cornwall Council to ensure this important fund is now available to support our local economy.

This is something I have worked long and hard, with all levels of the Government to bring about, and will unlock millions of pounds of investment for our hardworking small businesses in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly.

The programme had stalled due to EU red tape last year and I met with Business Minister Andrew Griffiths to discuss the problems and the importance of the fund to Cornwall, and I am pleased, a short while later, to see this launch.

I look forward to seeing how this fund will positively impact on our businesses and continuing to do all I can to ensure Cornwall gets the funding we need to grow and prosper.

My team and I are here to serve the whole constituency and work hard to make a real difference to the lives of everyone needing support. The office is open to the public Monday – Friday 10.00am – 4.00pm (no appointment necessary). If there is an issue you would like my assistance on then please, either visit the office or contact me on either 01726 829379 or office@stevedouble.org.uk. Additionally, I hold regular, appointment only, advice surgeries across the constituency. Dates of these can be found at: www.stevedouble.org.uk/events

End the caging of pheasants and partridges

I rarely sign EDM's as apart from costing tax payers huge amounts of money they never achieve anything.

The points you raise are of concern. Whilst we need to recognise that UK farming methods and welfare standards are amongst the highest in the World that should not preclude efforts to ensure continuing improvement.

I note the points you raise and will be sure to mention them when next I see the Minister.

An independent public inquiry into UK complicity in torture and rendition.

Torture and rendition are serious matters. The UK stands firmly against the use of torture. We do not participate in, solicit, encourage or condone the use of such techniques for any purpose and we have robust oversight arrangements in place.

With regards to the demand for a new inquiry, the Government has made clear that a balance needs to be struck between the “transparency that accountability normally entails and the secrecy that security demands” in the investigatory work carried out by agencies and courts.

I will certainly bear your comments in mind and carefully consider them should this issue come up for debate in Parliament again.

I hope this is helpful in outlining my position and thanks once more for getting in touch.

Respecting the will of the people

Regarding the need for politicians to respect the will of the people as expressed in the referendum on European Union membership by ensuring that we do leave the European Union in March 2019. 

I voted to leave the European Union in the June 2016 referendum. Since becoming your Member of Parliament in 2015, I have always made my Eurosceptic views clear. I believe that by leaving the European Union, the British people will be taking back control of our borders, laws, trade policy and avoid being part of an ever-closing union, which has yield nothing but social and economic disaster for many of its members.

I, along with vast majority of my colleagues in Parliament, are of the opinion that the referendum on the UK’s membership of European Union was a clear and fair vote, demonstrating that we as a nation are in favour of leaving the European Union. 

To delay, reverse or force a second referendum on the British public would therefore not only be a betrayal of will of the British people, but also undermine trust in our nation’s democratic institutions.

Like you, I am a democrat and I believe that in order to safeguard our democracy we need to implement the will of the nation, as expressed in the results of the referendum, by leaving the European Union. I will continue to do whatever I can to ensure we leave the EU in March 2019 and will be voting against any bills or amendments that seek to undo the results of the EU referendum.

The ‘hostile environment’ immigration policy

We have a proud history in the UK of welcoming people into this country, and we value their vital contributions to our economy, culture and society. We certainly do not wish to see anyone who has a right to live and work in the UK being refused a tenancy or a job opportunity based on their race, religion or belief.

I agree with the Home Secretary when he said in his first statement before Parliament that the phrase hostile environment sends a message this “is unhelpful and it doesn’t represent our values as a country”. 

With Brexit fast approaching, we have been given a once in a lifetime opportunity to learn from past mistakes and build a fair and non-discriminatory immigration system that works for everyone. We have to send clear a message to discourage illegal migration, and indeed previous governments have made great strides in tackling illegal migration. At the same time, this new immigration system needs to be fair and humane to people legally seeking to enter or remain in this country.

I believe there needs to be a change of culture at the heart of the Home Office, because the focus has been on policy and process and not people. We must never lose sight of the fact that at the heart of these polices are people: individuals and families who deserve to be treated fairly, with dignity and respect.

I agree that where there are cases of mistreatment that has resulted in undue harm or wrongful denial to employment, housing, or services, we need to ensure that individuals are given the proper channels to seek redress and compensation for these mistakes. However, I do not believe that calling for a wholesale review of immigration policies and practices is a sensible option going forward.

Such an exercise would only impose unnecessary costs on taxpayers and distract government officials from carrying out the vital work required to right wrongs. There needs to be a change in Home Office policy and culture, not a review or an inquiry.