James Wharton MP: Conservatives should reject lazy left-wing generalisations about "the North East" being affected as one by government policies

James Wharton is the Member of Parliament for Stockton South.

Surely the most frustrating thing about being a Conservative in the North East is the fashionable belief that our values “do not sell” in the region. All too often we buy into the rhetoric of our opponents and allow them to set the terms of debate. Margaret Thatcher’s legacy is a powerful example; I have lost count how many times I have been told that people in the North East do not like her. Labour MPs throw around “back to the 80s” as a criticism of government policies they oppose and all too often we let them get away with it. Yet in 1987 Mrs Thatcher won five seats in the North East, when in 2010, after years of decontamination and social action, David Cameron won only two: Hexham and Stockton South. We need to think long and hard about why this is the case.

I could use this platform to argue for more cash with which to buy votes, whether through new roads or enterprise zones or whatever else takes my fancy. Of course I do often make the case for spending in my region, but not as a way of buying popularity. I make the case when I believe it is the right thing to do. We cannot buy our way out of this particular political challenge. For proof of this we need look no further back than the excellent Teesside and Tyne and Wear Development Corporations, which regenerated huge areas in the late 1980s and 1990s. In Stockton South alone the Teesside Development Corporation created the Tees barrage, Teesside Retail Park, Teesdale Business Park and Preston Farm Industrial Estate. It transformed acres of wasteland into vibrant commercial centres and in 1997 the sitting Conservative MP Tim Devlin, who had delivered so much for the communities he represented, was swept from office with a swing of over 16%.

James Wharton MP: On pensions, we mustn't allow our opponents to suggest promises are being broken where they are not

James Wharton has been MP for Stockton South since 2010.

The furore surrounding the Government’s plan to speed up the increase in State Pension Age to 66 reached a new height this week, with the Pensions Bill’s Second Reading in the House of Commons.  I do not intend to argue the merits or otherwise of the policy in this article, for by now we are all well versed in the dire state of the nation’s finances, and becoming increasingly aware of the longer-term but equally inescapable logic of demographic change.

What the controversy does illustrate, however, is a worrying tendency amongst Government MPs and Ministers to accept all opposition attacks and accusations as the necessary accompaniment of tough decisions in Government.  We cannot cave in to every campaign against our policies, of course, but nor should we simply brazen it out and allow repeated assertions of bad faith to become received wisdom by virtue merely of their repetition, not basis in fact.

There is, of course, a campaign against the provisions of the Pensions Bill, one driven particularly passionately by those who are worst affected.  Some of these campaigners are now arguing the Government’s plans breach the Conservative manifesto and, for that matter, the Coalition Agreement.  EDM 1402 highlights this - 23 Lib Dem MPs and a few Conservatives have now signed the unhelpful motion, which states:

“That this House welcomes the equalisation of the state pension age for men and women, but notes with concern the Government's proposals to accelerate the timetable for doing so; recognises that 300,000 women born between December 1953 and October 1954 will have to work an additional 18 months or more of which 33,000 will have to work an extra two years; further recognises that these women have less than the 15 years of preparation time recommended by the Turner Commission before the changes take place; and calls on the Government to take these issues into account and revise the timetable in order to maintain the commitment given in the Coalition Agreement.”