Date added: Wednesday 14th March 2012
With the Prime Minister reportedly signalling his support for putting a minimum unit price on alcohol, debate continues as to whether such proposals are illiberal or necessary when considering the harmful effects of excessive alcohol consumption.
In the 3rd of the CPS' new Debate series, we offer the chance for two leading voices from either side of the argument - Dr Sarah Wollaston MP and Philip Davies MP - to set out their case.
Is it right to introduce a minimum alcohol price to tackle alcohol-related problems? We want to know your thoughts!
Read the debate and then get involved in the comments section below. We will be running a poll on our Facebook page and highlighting the best responses on our Twitter feed.
Dr. Sarah Wollaston
Dr Sarah Wollaston MP was elected Member of Parliament for Totnes in May 2010 and lives in South Devon with her husband Adrian and three children. Previously a GP, then police forensic examiner and finally a teacher of junior doctors; Sarah first entered politics through the first open primary and has sought to bring ‘real life’ experience to politics. Sarah was spurred into Politics by her opposition to the threatened closure of Moretonhampstead Community Hospital.
Sarah was voted onto the Health Select Committee in the summer of 2010 and has continued to speak out about the NHS reforms. Sarah continues to speak out about the cost of alcohol related for the end of the month. Other issues that Sarah has spoken about in the House are; the threat Bovine TB, Fuel costs, Water rates, reform of the Commons, equitable life and women’s rights.
Philip Davies
Philip graduated from the University of Huddersfield with an Upper Second honours degree in Historical and Political Studies and before being elected, Philip worked for Asda for 12 years, working his way up from the bottom to be a Senior Marketing Manager.
Philip was elected to parliament for Shipley in 2005 with a majority of 422 and was re-elected as the MP for Shipley in 2010 with a majority of 9,944. He was also elected onto the Executive Committee of the 1922 Committee of backbench Conservative MPs in 2006 and has been re-elected back onto it every year since. He has also served on the Culture, Media and Sports Select Committee since 2006
Philip is also a member of the newly established Backbench Business Committee and is on the panel of Chairmen for Westminster Hall Debates and the Committee stage of Bills. Philip became the first MP to publicly call for Britain to withdraw from the European Union and is a member of The Freedom Association's 'Better Off Out' campaign. He is also the Parliamentary Spokesman for the Campaign Against Political Correctness. In 2011, Philip won an award at the Spectator Parliamentary Awards as Readers Representative of the Year.
1 - 3 of 3 Debates
Page: [1]
Date added: Tuesday 14th February 2012
None of the pledges made by the Coalition upon coming to power in May 2010 were more striking than the following two:
The argument has raged amongst Conservatives about whether green jobs are the future of the economy and a path to economic prosperity, or the misguided policy of those following a bad science that damages Britain's hopes for financial recovery and heaps cost and misery on the bills of energy company customers all over the UK.
In the 2nd of the CPS' new Debate series, we offer the chance for two leading voices from either side of the argument - Tim Yeo MP and Lord Lawson - to set out their case.
Is there a valid economic case for ‘going green’ in an ‘age of austerity’? We want to know your thoughts!
Read the debate and then get involved in the comments section below. We will be running a poll on our Facebook page and highlighting the best responses on our Twitter feed.
Date added: Tuesday 15th November 2011
In September 2011, the Centre for Policy Studies published the book ‘Guilty Men’ by journalist and author Peter Oborne.
The book claimed to hold to account the politicians, institutions and commentators who had sought to tie the fortunes of Britain to the Euro. Oborne and co-author Frances Weaver highlighted what they felt were unscrupulous and vicious personal attacks on opponents of the Euro and called for a radical reappraisal of recent British political history.
The book caused much political reaction, both for and against the conclusions, and fervent debate over the issues raised. The Centre for Policy Studies is proud to present the first in our re-launched ‘Debate’ series – ‘DO THE CRITICS OF CONSERVATIVE EURO-SCEPTICS HAVE ANYTHING TO APOLOGISE FOR? – featuring Telegraph journalist and Guilty Men author Peter Oborne arguing that they do and author, broadcaster and Times journalist David Aaronovitch arguing against. To give the debate added spice, Oborne named Aaronovitch as one of the ‘guilty men’ in his work.
Read the debate and then get involved in the comments section below. We will highlight the best responses on our Twitter feed.
Date added: Friday 23rd September 2011
Are free markets a necessary and sufficient condition for free minds, or do they leave us prey to over-powerful corporations?
At the Inaugural Margaret Thatcher Lecture on 22 October 2010, Rupert Murdoch praised the “iconoclastic and the unconventional" and criticised entrenched interests for curbing the enthusiasm and energy of our vigorous nation of entrepreneurs. But Murdoch's detractors might argue that his heavy-handed approach to free markets has curbed free thought by threatening to create a stranglehold on British media.
His words will surely re-enliven the age old debate between competition and regulation, untrammelled free markets and the protection of both individuals and national assets. Over to our debaters....
1 - 3 of 3 Debates
Page: [1]
