I recently received an email from a local Conservative who wrote:
 
"This week the discredited Labour government have called upon the Royal Navy after successive years of turning their backs on the British armed forces and a Ministry of Defence that it has intentionally starved of cash at a time of multiple overseas commitments. 

A question that remains - which the Labour government have failed to answer - is this: with a fleet of transport aircraft as below, why are these not running a shuttle service to and from Gibraltar?

• C-17 Loadmaster - 5
• Hercules C1/C3 - 50*
• Hercules C4/C5 - 25*
• Tristar - 9
• VC10 - 15

It should be noted that 75 of these aircraft (72%) as indicated by the * in the list above would not be effected by the volcanic ash cloud in the upper atmosphere. Each of these aircraft can bring ~500 people with their luggage back to the UK meaning that - using the IATA estimate of 150,000 UK taxpayers overseas - means that in four shuttles back and for (achievable in less than 24 hours) all of the UK citizens overseas could be back in the UK. Another failed effort by the Labour government? 

On May 6th the people of the country have the opportunity to decide: do we re-elect the shysters who are interested in style over substance (e.g., running HMS OCEAN and HMS ARK ROYAL to Calais, rather than the RAF to Gibraltar) or do we elect a government who will be able to take the country forward?"

 
On a national level, Conservative Policy is clear and reinforces the views that we hold locally.  Our national policy states: 
 
"Labour have let down those who wear the uniform with such pride. Our Forces sacrifice and risk so much to do their duty by us. The least we can do in return is to do our duty by them. That is why we are today launching our Armed Forces Manifesto, which outlines how we will repair the Military Covenant and rebuild the bonds between the Forces and the people. We will:

• Give the Armed Forces clear leadership – we’ll hold a Strategic Defence and Security Review to make sure resources match commitments. In the meantime, we’ll protect the defence budget for 2010/11.
• Equip our Armed Forces properly – we’ll reform procurement so our Forces get the equipment they need when they need it, at a reasonable cost to the taxpayer.
• Support our servicemen and women – we’ll double the operational allowance, improve rest and recuperation leave and establish a tri-Service Military Covenant.
• Support service families and children – we’ll give Forces children extra support in school through the pupil premium, and provide college and university bursaries for the children of Forces personnel who have been killed.
• Support our veterans – with a new mental health screening process and a new ‘Troops for Teachers’ programme to get ex-service personnel into teaching."

Conservatives to scrap Labour’s jobs tax on NHS and use savings for cancer drugs
 
Cancer patients in Greenwich and Woolwich will get access to drugs that they are currently denied under Labour if the Conservatives win the general election, Cllr Spencer Drury, Parliamentary Candidate for Greenwich and Woolwich announced today.
 
Under the bold new plans, the NHS would save £200 million because Conservatives will stop Labour’s jobs tax on employers. This NHS saving would be used to pay for drugs which have been blocked by the Government’s quango, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). In the South London Healthcare NHS Trust (including the Queen Elizabeth Hospital) which employs 7,111 staff, the cost of Labour’s increase in Employers’ National Insurance contributions – the jobs tax – is estimated to be £1,066,650.
 
·            The Labour Government has failed to provide patients with the cancer drugs they need – drugs which are widely available in Europe. Britain has more cancer deaths per head than Buglaria. The current system lets Ministers off the hook. They blame bad decisions on unaccountable bureaucrats in NICE, the agency which approves drugs for the NHS.
·            Under the Conservative blueprint, the money that would have been eaten up by Labour’s jobs tax would go straight to a new Cancer Drugs Fund. No cancer patient will be refused access to drugs that have been licensed since 2005 if their doctors say they need them.
·            Conservatives will also change the way that drug companies are paid for NHS medicines. Effective treatments for all conditions, not just cancer, would become available on the NHS, with drug providers paid according to the value of their new treatments.
 
Spencer said:
 
“There is a clear choice at this election: Labour and their jobs tax that will take £200 million out of the NHS budget; or the Conservatives who will stop the jobs tax and use the savings in the NHS budget to create a Cancer Drugs Fund.
 
“The NHS is our number one priority. We are committed to helping our NHS become truly world-class. Giving Greenwich and Woolwich’s patients access to cancer drugs widely available in Europe is a key part of our plan for change and making the NHS even better.”
 

CONSERVATIVES today accused the Greenwich Labour Party of hypocrisy following their decision to raise rents for Council tenants by above the rate of inflation. 
 
The decision, which was taken at the monthly Cabinet meeting, means that rents will rise by 1.6%. If Labour had stuck to the rate of inflation, then rents would have fallen this year. At the same time as this policy of inflation busting rent hikes, Labour’s literature claims that it is in fact, Conservatives, who will raise rents and end secure tenancies.
 
Part of the increase is because of the Labour Government’s policy of raising rents for Council tenants to the same as those for Registered Social Landlords by 2012/13. Last year in Greenwich, Labour voted through a rise of nearly 6% but following protests, and a Conservative campaign, Labour eventually reduced it to only around 3%.
 
Conservative Councillor and Parliamentary Candidate for Greenwich and Woolwich Spencer Drury has written to many residents to reassure them that it is completely untrue and that it is NOT Conservative policy in Greenwich to raise their rents.
 
Spencer said “Labour is resorting to scaring residents to get votes and many are truly worried by the false descriptions of our policies. One of my residents had sleepless nights over this scaremongering. I can assure them that Greenwich Conservatives have no plans to increase rents to market levels and as someone whose family lived for many years in Council accommodation in Eltham, I can assure them that while I am leader, I would not support an end to secure tenancies in our borough.
 
“I hope residents will punish Labour at the ballot box for their hypocritical tactics. Not only have they got a policy of raising rents above inflation, the Labour government is going to end all subsidy for Council housing. Despite this they are muddying the issue by claiming it is the Conservatives’ policy. This is simply treating people like idiots.
 
“Democracy is supposed to be about parties competing to provide the best way of serving the people, but Labour seems to think it is just about winning and that this justifies them misleading and scaring the voters. I am shocked and disgusted at their tactics.
 
“In Greenwich, Labour’s policy of raising rents above the rate of inflation, the fact that nationally they built less social houses than the previous Conservative government and that housing waiting lists have risen by 75% suggests that their policies on housing, as in other areas, are a failure. I urge voters to use the election to remove them from power.”
 
A good summary of the different national policies can be found at http://simonemmett.net/2010/01/28/sinking-to-a-new-low/
 

In response to enquiries from local resdients about problems with the changes to the train timetables at Blackheath Station, Parliamentary Candidate for Greenwich and Woolwich and Leader of Greenwich Conservatives Cllr Spencer Drury commented:
"Local Conservatives have been raising issues over these changes for some time, but South East Trains (SET) did their best to hide the true impact at Blackheath by distorting the amount of trains moving from one time (peak or off-peak) to another, which made it difficult to figure out exactly what the impact would be.
 
We have already raised it with Gareth Bacon (a London GLA member) and he has asked TfL about it, although I understand that they have no specific jurisdiction as this has been changed as a result of government requirements. I have been told that Mike Gibson, SET’s Public Affairs Manager when justifying the changes stated that:
 
‘A rail franchise is a form of contract set by the DfT specifying the service pattern, subsidy levels, performance targets and other determinants it (the DfT) wishes to see on the network to which the franchise relates.  The franchise is a legally binding document and any change has to be agreed by the DfT. Our draft timetable for December this year is based upon the Integrated Kent Franchise (IKF) draft service specification we inherited as a contractual commitment from the DfT when awarded the franchise in 2006.  The draft service specification was itself the outcome of a consultation exercise carried out by the DfT and the former Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) in 2003/04 and consultees included the former London Transport Users Committee, (now London TravelWatch), Transport for London and the London boroughs of Greenwich and Lewisham. Included in this specification was a requirement to operate an all day Orpington to London Service via Lewisham.  
 
Lewisham is an interchange with the Docklands Light Railway and there is a demand for more stops at stations offering a DLR connection to meet the needs of those travelling on to Canary Wharf. As you may know over the last decade employment in London has been gradually shifting eastwards to Canary Wharf and in southeast London and north Kent demand for stops allowing interchange with the DLR has increased significantly. When we took over the franchise we commissioned an in depth demand validation study (the results of which were shared with stakeholders) to see if the assumptions on which the SRA/DfT had based the draft service specification were still operationally valid in light of revised demand forecasts and subsequent developments such as the Thameslink programme. The results revealed that as a result of infrastructure constraints, Lewisham station is at its maximum capacity for train movements during peak periods and the only way for the DfT’s specification for more peak DLR connecting services to be achieved was for some services to be re-routed away from Lewisham to Greenwich (which also has an interchange with the DLR). We consequently looked at all the routes which serve Lewisham, and the only trains which could be re-routed away are the North Kent semi fast trains from Charlton. So to meet the DfT’s objective our proposal is for these trains to run via Greenwich, so passengers for Lewisham can change onto the DLR.  Blackheath passengers can either do the same interchange as the Lewisham people or alight at Charlton and catch a bus to Blackheath.
 
Meeting this DfT specification obviously impacts on the number of North Kent line trains stopping at Blackheath.  At present during the morning peak period there are six North Kent trains and these are being reduced to three. However we are offering two additional Charing Cross trains at Blackheath which at present run past Blackheath non stop, these trains will be calling at London Bridge, thereby offering interchange opportunities for Cannon Street passengers. Therefore the actual reduction in trains at Blackheath during this period is just one. This was explained to the DfT nearly two years ago when we set out the operational implications of the IKF draft service speciation and all parties agreed that this was a necessary consequence of meeting the DfT’s aspiration for operating the Orpington service via Lewisham.  The specification detailing future services to London from Blackheath and elsewhere from December 2009 compared to what is on offer today was shared with stakeholders and posted on our website in December last year.
 
I accept that for Blackheath passengers travelling to Cannon Street, the new timetable may be inconvenient.  However, it’s perhaps worth pointing out that Blackheath passengers commuting to Charing Cross, Waterloo East and Victoria will have additional services.  For passengers travelling in off-peak periods, there will also be an uplift in service levels from four to six trains an hour’.
 
This appeared to me to be a lengthy and not very informative response, but at the December Council meeting, Cllr Geoff Brighty (Blackheath Westcombe) raised the issue in Council and received a similar reply to that one laid out above. However, in a supplementary, I did raise the fact that I was aware that there had been a Transport Liason Committee meeting in December and the Deputy Leader of the Council agreed to send me the minutes of that meeting. The relevant bits are laid out below:
 
"Southeastern Trains
 
MG:           Train performance was back up to 93% following the four week ‘leaf drop’ period.
From 2nd January, Pay As You Go Oyster would be live on the network allowing passengers the cheapest fare option for journey. There will be a fare increase freeze in Jan 2010, although Kent will unfortunately experience a 1.6% fare increase. 
                 
The new timetable comes into operation on 13th December and although the borough has a net increase in services SET were still receiving complaints form customers, especially in the Blackheath area, about a reduction in local services
 
SET had given an undertaking that from January they would monitor overcrowding on services and if levels were unacceptable they would use the information to renegotiate the local element of the service specification with the DfT
 
 
KS:            Requested information on SET’s publicity on the time table changes, and Andrew Stern in GC’s Comms could place all changes on the LBG web site.
 
Action:      Kim to send e-mail to MG re Andrew Stern contact details so that MG can liaise).
 
MG:           Said publicity on the timetable changes included:

• announcements on their current train services
• a leafleting campaign at stations
• posters at stations
• on Monday 14th December they will have all available frontline and back office staff out on the network to offer advice and information

 
There had been site meetings regarding additional station access at Maze Hill station, which formed part of a Section 106 obligation. Assurances had now been given to SET by the developer and they were now hopeful of a way forward in the New Year.
 
The installation of new lifts at Blackheath station was scheduled to commence in early 2010 following the resolution of a long term tenancy dispute.”
 
(Kim Smith (LBG) [KS]
Mike Gibson (South Eastern Trains) [MG])
 
I understand that the next major timetable change is for December 2010, so it is absolutely essential that the Council lobbies to achieve a better deal for the users of Blackheath Station. In addition, those users of Westcombe Park, Maze Hill and Greenwich who have lost direct services to Charing Cross need to have their strongly represented. 
 
As a Parliamentary Candidate for Greenwich and Woolwich and Leader of the Conservative Group, I will be campaigning to reverse these changes which seem to be a side-effect of a set of central government requirements to run an all day Orpington service via Lewisham. In the short term, the more feedback that we have about people’s difficulties, the more we can use to sort out the problems, so please encourage everyone to feedback their problems and we will use this to back up our views during the timetable review next year.
 
I do hope that this sums up the position adequately – as you can see we have been active on this, but please do let me know if you think there is more we can be doing."