- Stay Connected
Socialize
Abraham Lincoln
If given the truth, the people can be depended upon to meet any national crisis...
Guildford news...
for Guildford people, brought to you by Guildford reporters - Guildford's own news service
Dragon Interview: Anne Milton – Guildford’s MP On Brexit, Local Transport Issues And More
Published on: 24 Aug, 2016
Updated on: 26 Aug, 2016
Rt Hon Anne Milton MP
The Rt Hon Anne Milton MP is our Conservative representative in parliament who is also the government’s deputy chief whip. It has been a tumultuous time in parliament with the EU referendum and its Brexit result which, in turn, triggered two party leadership elections. With a relatively slender working majority of 17 seats, Anne must have her hands full with government business.
Nonetheless, she found to time to speak to Harry Aldridge, a former UKIP member and Guildford parliamentary candidate about some topical issues both national and local…
A lot has changed in the past eight weeks. What have you been up to since the referendum?
It has been the busiest eight weeks I can remember. As a constituency MP I have spent a lot of time talking to ministers trying to get a deal on infrastructure. Both road and rail are at capacity.
Locally we need more houses, and affordable houses. The borough is prepared to take up the challenge but needs help from government with infrastructure.
In parliament I have been busy working with the opposition on legislation, helping to ensure the government can get legislation through the House of Commons. This is usually quite effective but is hard given the current situation in the Labour party. It doesn’t matter where in the political spectrum you are, most people recognise that government does need a good opposition.
Anne Milton, here on the town bridge, regularly cycles to Guildford station on her way to Westminster.
You mentioned road and rail infrastructure. You are a keen cyclist. What can be done to make life easier for cyclists in Guildford?
Oh, I have a long list of improvements. First, a safer route from the east of Guildford to the station. To encourage more cycling, we must have good cycling routes that take cyclists off the roads; routes that cyclists can use to get around town.
I get very frustrated with Surrey County Council who constantly tell me that some of the options for a cycle route to the station are not possible because they say it would be unsafe, however they fail to acknowledge how much less safe the gyratory system is.
You are a regular rail commuter. In recent years rail has been a success story with a massive increase in passengers, but you are lucky to get a seat near peak times. Do you think that the recent above inflation rise in fares that has been announced represents good value?
We are at capacity. I recently had a meeting with Network Rail who actively want to put two new platforms at Guildford station to add capacity. Any redevelopment plans for the station must allow for these new platforms.
At the moment commuters from Guildford will not feel happy about the fare increases because the service has remained the same for the past five years. Fare increases must be linked to an improvement in services.
During the referendum campaign we saw more women taking leading roles, such as Andrea Leadsom, Gisela Stuart, Priti Patel, Nicola Sturgeon, Leanne Wood, Amber Rudd.
Andrea Leadsom and Theresa May were both contenders in the Conservative party leadership contest that followed, and Theresa May became our second female Prime Minister. Is it important that this was achieved without quotas or positive discrimination, and what do you make of the strong female representation in the referendum?
I’m not a fan of quotas, but I can see why, when there is no change, that people want to introduce them. I think it is very positive that during the referendum campaign we saw so many women. I think it was a gender neutral campaign, and the media focused on the issue and did not draw attention to the women.
I’m delighted that we have Theresa May, first and foremost because she will do an excellent job. That she is a woman is secondary, although I do think it is important for people to see women in leadership roles.
In Guildford at last year’s general election we had an even 50/50 split of men and women standing.
Do you think there is any reason why the Conservative party has achieved, without positive action, what the Labour party has not yet managed to achieve despite measures like quotas and all women shortlists?
It is interesting, because Labour has a good record on equality and championing feminist causes. However, it is when gender ceases to be an issue that we know we have reached equality.
Theresa May is known for “getting on with the job”. Do you think substance has replaced the age of spin?
Yes I do. People are looking for somebody who is competent above all else. The public are fed up with spin doctoring of recent years and want somebody to get on with the job and hold the country steady as we go through uncertain times.
Theresa May has a difficult task ahead. The SNP are implacably opposes to Brexit, and the majority of MPs are opposed to Brexit. Can Theresa May deliver on the referendum?
Nobody is clear yet what legislation is needed to follow through the vote to leave. Clearly there are groups in the House of Commons, like the SNP, who are likely to vote down legislation which brings about departure from the EU. However, it is also not clear what the Labour Party or individual Labour MPs will do when it comes to a vote.
The key issues will be free trade and freedom of movement of labour. Some people voted leave but will accept free movement, or a degree of free movement, but for others it is a red line issue.
Have you been surprised at all in the weeks since the referendum by anything playing out differently than you had anticipated?
No, I’ve not been surprised by anything. I was slightly surprised that more people in Guildford didn’t vote to remain. Only 56% voted to remain, which was lower than I had expected.
I have not been surprised by the reaction from EU leaders, who are obviously keen for other countries not to follow the UK.
The lower value of the pound will be good for exporters, but there will be an equal number for whom it is not so good.
I have never thought that leaving would be a disaster, which is why I did not declare which way I was voting [Anne voted to remain]. It was for the voters to decide.
What does the vote say about politics? We are a country divided, politically and geographically. Was it a revolt against the establishment?
The result has laid bare a lot of the splits in the country, North and South, young and old, rich and poor, skilled workers and unskilled workers, and the fears and aspirations of those groups.
I think there were several reasons for voting leave. For some it was about immigration, but for others it was about control and sovereignty, and for others it was a vote against the elite, the establishment and big business.
Will failure to deliver Brexit destroy any remaining trust in politicians?
The negotiating team need to be honest and clear with the public about any deals that are done and any compromises that are made in order to get the best exit strategy for the UK. I don’t think the public will put up with anything less than that.
If compromises are made, do you think the public would accept them if they believe the spirit of the referendum result has been delivered?
Different people have different ideas as to what Brexit means. However, there has to be a single answer as to what the final deal means. Any fudges will not be acceptable to the public.
Share This Post
Responses to Dragon Interview: Anne Milton – Guildford’s MP On Brexit, Local Transport Issues And More
Leave a Comment Please see our comments policy. All comments are moderated and may take time to appear. Full names, or at least initial and surname, must be given.
See: Tumbling Bay Footbridge: National Trust Says It Is ‘Committed to Finding a Resolution’
>
Paul Stevenson
August 24, 2016 at 1:28 pm
Practically every “question” starts with a statement as if it were fact. Incredible. This is not in any sense an interview.
Bernard Parke
August 24, 2016 at 4:53 pm
There is no pleasing some people.
We are very fortunate to have such a conscientious MP.
We are very fortunate that contributors such as Harry Aldridge give their time freely to contribute to The Dragon. Ed.
Stuart Barnes
August 25, 2016 at 9:09 am
Regarding the implied suggestion that MPs might try to vote against the clearly expressed democratic instruction from the people to get out of the hated EU, all I can say is that the chairmen of all local political parties should be getting ready to start re-selection procedures.
Any MP (I do not even consider the ridiculous Scottish Nationalists) who defies the people and tries to hold up or prevent Brexit should be removed asap.
The people have spoken – now get on with Brexit.
Colin Cross
August 25, 2016 at 11:54 pm
Actually the people voting for Brexit were around 37% of the electorate overall. Therefore the people as a whole have not spoken clearly at all, have they?
They have mumbled, rather incoherently, that they are not happy for one reason or another, it’s not clear to anyone exactly where this is all leading to, is it?
It certainly will not mean no more immigration or an end to European-wide laws.
Jim Allen
August 26, 2016 at 8:55 am
Everyone had a chance to vote. If they didn’t vote they don’t have reason to complain. As for the numbers voting – all knew it was a simple majority that was required, and as we do not force people to vote it is irrelevant what portion of the electorate actually voted. The vote was ‘out’ and this must be honoured.
If the result had been a similar majority for remain would they be calling for a second referendum etc. I think not.
There is no certainty in this world and no one has ever said they wanted to end all Europe-wide laws’. Who would want our motor vehicles to have all different components than the rest of Europe, or the world – or the removal of sensible gas and electrical safety regulations.
It is simply the irrational proposition that allowing migration at its current levels, .3 million extra people each year, into our country without the services, infrastructure, and finite resources being assessed for capacity and availability.
I still can’t see the source the 2.8 million litres of water needed each day ‘for ever’ in Guildford Borough to meet the requirement for the new 13,000 homes proposed to be built in the draft Local Plan.
Bibhas Neogi
August 27, 2016 at 2:16 pm
Quoting from the National Rivers Authority (NRA) paper of 1994 on water resources, it says under the heading LOCAL OR ‘TACTICAL’ RESOURCE DEVELOPMENTS:
“In addition to managing growth in demand, the NRA need to be sure that the best use is being made of existing licensed resources… The strategy identifies a number of potential local schemes throughout the area, together with
the need for further investigations. These investigations include detailed environmental studies and impact assessments… Where practicable, the NRA will try to ensure that water abstracted is used and returned as highly treated effluent to the river upstream of the point of abstraction in order to sustain and protect water resources.”
Perhaps Jim Allen could write to the NRA for an update?
Jim Allen
September 3, 2016 at 8:47 am
Having just had a water leak in the road outside my property – I had an interesting conversation with the ‘tidy up lad’ the modern equivalent of ‘the tea lady’ who ‘knew all’ while doing her rounds. His response to the question, why do water company react faster to leaks in the Guildford Area compared to the London, was: “Unlike London, which has adequate supplies, Guildford and surrounds has so little water storage and such low pressure – any leak seriously compromises water supply to the area.”
I would put more faith in his response than a redacted report some 22+ years old.
Though for the sake of thoroughness I’ll write to the NRA (or its replacement quango) and ask them….
John Lomas
August 26, 2016 at 10:22 am
One cannot, surely, use non-participants in calculations of voting preferences, though some would have you believe that they can be presumed to be generally for the status quo.
I believe 1931 was the last occasion on which the winning party amassed over 50% of the popular vote in a general election, so our course is virtually always dictated by the largest minority.
Stuart Barnes
August 26, 2016 at 5:51 pm
A very clear majority voted to get out of the failed EU.
Brexit had better mean no more immigration and an end to Europe-wide laws, unless we, the people, give our consent, if the current MPs want to keep their nice jobs.
George Potter
September 2, 2016 at 1:24 pm
52% voted to leave the EU, 48% didn’t.
However, it is utterly mendacious to try and claim that every single vote for Leave was a vote for no more immigration.
The Leave campaign (and now the Conservative government) failed to outline what form of Brexit they wanted.
One form of Brexit would involve staying in the single market, which would require continuing to sign up to free movement.
Another form would involve leaving the single market, triggering a severe recession, and ending free movement.
There are other forms of course but those are the two most plausible types of Brexit available.
Therefore it is a statistical impossibility that every Leave voter was voting to leave the single market for the sake of ending immigration; at least some of them will have hoped to stay in the single market without being a full EU member.
So, in reality, it is highly likely that there is a majority in favour of staying in the single market which, in turn, means accepting free movement.
That petty xenophobes are now trying to claim a democratic mandate for “no more immigration” doesn’t make their claim true.
Fortunately the likes of Mr Barnes who want to dispense with immigration completely do not represent more than an exceedingly vocal minority. If more people shared his view then I’m sure that Ukip would have won more than one seat at the last general election.
Jim Allen
September 2, 2016 at 5:09 pm
I doubt anyone wanted to stay in the single market unless they had shares in multinationals or run an export company – for ‘The single market’ means absolutely nothing to the majority – all they want is a fair price for their sale goods (as high as possible) and to pay a fair price (as low as possible) for the things they buy – the technical way this is facilitated is beyond the majority and irrelevant to the man in the street.
As for immigration – if one would not allow that person into one’s own home why would one agree to allow them into our country without making substantial checks on them?
John Perkins
September 2, 2016 at 7:00 pm
Two correspondents have explicitly stated that immigration was not the only issue and only one has implied otherwise. Nobody has even suggested that every ‘Leave’ voter wanted only to end it. So where is the mendacity here?
I don’t understand the requirement to outline the exact form that the UK must take to leave the EU. That is surely a matter for negotiation, albeit from the stance of the UK actually leaving. The suggested ‘plausible’ forms are merely one man’s opinion.
The claim that “it is highly likely that there is a majority in favour of staying in the single market” is not supportable.
“Petty xenophobes” is an easy jibe and unworthy of debate.
If Ukip only won one seat for the votes they received then Mr. Potter’s party, the Liberal Democrats, did very well indeed, garnering seven times as many seats for less than two-thirds as many votes.