There are loads of downsides with the way MEP constituencies work in the UK - the patches are huge, proportional representation depersonalises the relation ship with voters - BUT the great thing about representing an area like the East of England is that I am continually finding out more of the great things that happen in this part of the UK.

Some recent photos...
Tasting the next generation Magnum at Unilever's research facility near Bedford... like Willy Wonka's factory but for Ice Cream... and much more. Issues - why EU is so much slower at approving new products than practically every other major economic area, pros and cons of EU research funding.
Joining a boat trip in Cambridge to hear about work to be done to clean up our rivers and water. Experts included water companies, the environment agency, fishermen, farmers and foresters. Issues - the Water Framework Directive, invasive species, pollutants, CAP funding for environmental programs.

Opening an IT suite at a small rural school in Norfolk. Rural broadband is a big concern in Norfolk. I am hoping to host a workshop bringing together industry, user groups and local government at the end of the month. Issues - the benefits of broadband access for isolated communities. How to share best practive.
Visiting the Vauxhall van factory in Luton. This is one of the most efficient factories that General Motors own and I was impressed by the commitment of workers to continual improvements. Issues - providing a level playing field for UK businesses and state aid rules, upcoming legislation for reducing CO2 in van emissions and why this is different to the car market.

Also in Luton Nigel Huddleston took me to the Dallow Community Centre in one of the most deprived parts of town. Here an incredible group of volunteers took on the task of building and setting up a community facility that is now used by over 50,000 people each year. I arrived on Friday - after the Muslim community's weekly prayers but before the Friday evening gospel choir and Saturday hockey games. Even our most diverse, deprived communities can be very vibrant.

No wonder those outside the Brussels/Strasbourg bubble find EU legislation so confusing. This week has kicked off some horse trading that even the fastest tic-tac bookie would struggle to keep up with.

Firstly the debate on the EU commissioners has continued. The 25 men and women who have been nominated by their countries to become supreme commanders of the EU Commission have now been cross examined at length by the various committees of the Parliament. In principal this is meant to be a transparent public process whereby MEPs decide whether they think the nominees.

In practice this has been wheeler dealing behind closed doors. In the corridors and coffee bars MEPs have exchanged stories about what they have witnessed. Some nominees are no doubt able, one (Jeleva) was so woeful that she has already resigned not only as a commissioner designate but also as Bulgaria’s foreign minister. At best, among the others there are some square pegs in round holes. Suffice to say that the main federalist parties don’t want to criticise the EU publicly and it looks as if all the secret exchanges of letters will result in a stitch up deal that means the rest of these Commissioners get rubber stamped through. MEPs like me will only get a vote on the whole bunch – not individuals – very transparent NOT.

Today is also the final deadline for submitting amendments on the latest EU directive on financial services – the “Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive”. Those who follow Westminster style systems are totally flummoxed when I explain how MEPs can totally re-write a piece of legislation by amendments. So far I counted well over 500 amendments that have been tabled and I haven’t even spoken to half the committee. My Conservative colleagues have submitted over 100 and have been working on alliances with other parties on theirs. This directive, which was meant to target systemic risks building up in hedge funds, must be significantly redrafted or it could also be very damaging to innovative companies, pensions and investment in developing countries. Whilst I hope that we will be able to negotiate a workable solution - I have just tabled one amendment - calling for a full review after 2 years. So hopefully this at least gives us an insurance policy if the whole thing ends up as a disaster.

Photos from recent trips across the region would also be attached – if I hadn’t left the leads for my camera in the UK so here is just one of when I went to visit the local Ambulance service during the snow-season – I learnt even they need my help to fight back against other poorly crafted pieces of legislation, I can feel some more amendments coming.

Today is only day two of the start of the New Year in the European Parliament but it has started with a bang. The questioning of new EU commissioners and subsequent debate is already going on long into the evenings.

The mood of European MEPs seems to have changed over the holiday and many continental MEPs appear much more concerned about the state of public finances than they were before Christmas. This should be a good thing as debate over tax-tax vs. spend-spend that has already started back at home in the UK is now being faced up to by some of our Continental colleagues.

I have now listened to the grillings being given to three of the potential commissioners - those for Economic Affairs, Fraud/Tax and just now Competition. There are grumblings in corridors that various Commissioner Candidates appear to be avoiding answering the questions, or ill briefed - plus ca change. The proposed Competition commissioner Joaquin Almunia has at least tried to give more detailed and informed answers even though he is a Socialist so I don't necessarily agree with all his answers! A classic moment was when one of the tri-lingual French MEPs pointed out that one of the candidates described his priority as "Growth" when speaking English, "Employment" when speaking French and then in German this became the "Social Market"... I must add paying closer attention to translations to my list of New Years Resolutions.

I am writing this on the long train to Strasbourg. Leaving home at 7.45 am on a Monday morning I will get to my desk about 5.30 pm this evening – when I started this job there was a direct flight from City Airport but since that has been stopped I have been trying out the train route via Paris. Whilst I moan a lot, it uses less energy than flying (mentally as well as fuel wise) and a good chance to catch up on reading the wedge of papers in my case measures up to about 5 inches.

I have found that the Copenhagen summit has been a good time to focus on Energy use. Last week I joined a group from the European Parliament to visit one of Belgium’s nuclear power stations. In Belgium over 50% of electricity comes from nuclear power and given the UK’s recent commitment to replacing our Nuclear power station I thought it would be useful to see how it works in a country that is so nuclear dependent.

It really was a once in a lifetime experience. The plant was on shut down whilst having its massive steam generators replaced so we were allowed to go right into the heart of the operations. “Kicking the tyres” on a site visit is incredibly helpful. I had gone with 3 questions in mind – Security, Safety, and what to do with the Waste. Security was tight, I eventually lost count of the number of secure locks that I passed through. I expected Safety procedures to be very high – they were, we were each scanned for radiation many times on the way in and out to absolutely make sure that no one risked exposure – it was interesting to learn that there are actually more incidents of over exposure to radiation in the medical world than in the power arena due to medical applications like radiotherapy. However our guide left us in no doubt that politicians need to be very focused on the Waste issue. Even if no more power stations were ever to be built, nuclear waste exists today. Decisions need to be made and we learnt a lot about the options but it was quite depressing that even on this very detailed opportunity to visit a plant just an hour from the Parliament only two MEPs had joined the tour group.

This week in Strasbourg we will be voting on the EU budget. It is incredibly frustrating that there appears to be very little concern in the European Parliament for keeping costs under control. The budget has increased considerably from its initial drafts back in September – for some good reasons – but it appears that the amendments are always upwards and never down. At a time when our national finances are under such strain I would have thought Brussels could tighten its belt.

I spent the last two days of this week in Spain with a group of MEPs considering Economic Affairs. Unemployment in Spain has rocketed to nearly 20%. Whilst the country’s temporary workers are almost all not working , the unionised permanent workers have negotiated large wage rises. In an early morning walk around the block I saw a person wrapped in a blanket holding out a paper cup begging on nearly every doorstep.

The traffic was terrible – the governments “fiscal stimulus” (i.e. spending money) seems to be paying for relaying of pavements everywhere, and everyday travellers were often brought to a halt by siren blasting motorcades of visiting politicians preparing for Spain to take over the rolling presidency of the European Union next month.

Our own bus (with no outriders) took us to meet the Central Bank as well as insurance and market regulators, the employers' union (CBI equivalent) the bankers' association and Spain’s largest bank Santander. Despite their economic woes Spain survived the financial crash well thanks to their conservative regulatory approach in recent years. Part of our visit was to discuss the new European Authorities for financial services that have been causing in Brussels a stir in the UK press this week. Unanimously the Spanish experts said that whilst the European wide Authorities will be helpful for sharing information and setting guidelines they also stated firmly that regulation of individual financial institutions should remain a national concern not an EU concern.

Back at home people have asked me why my office in Brussels and Strasbourg are so busy. Part of this is because of the new group that the Conservatives have helped form in the Parliament. The committee structure of the EP means that every bit of legislation is scrutinised in detail by one member from each political group. Whereas before the Conservatives sat within the very large EPP with over 200 members now our group is 54 members. This means we have a much stronger voice and can be involved in every issue.

My own office is leading on the new European Banking Authority, Bank Capital (yes and bonuses) and new rules to tighten up on Tax havens. Through my second committee I am looking at dodgy drugs (well actually counterfeit medicines) and we have recently completed work on Energy requirements for buildings – helping to bring the rest of the EU close to UK standards. I am also helping colleagues with their scrutiny of legislation on alternative investments, which if we get it wrong will have a huge impact not only on UK pensions but on investments in innovative start-ups and in developing countries. The devil is in the detail on all of this with sometimes hundreds of amendments proposed by the parliament to any given paper – it’s fascinating, stimulating and yes sometimes a mountain of paper work.

I have been a bit rushed off my feet over the past fortnight in manning the front line in Europe (with a stinking cold) but I thought I had to blog about today.

This morning there was the open debate about the court of auditors opinion on last year's EU accounts. As I sat listening in the chamber it was clear that whilst some members are willing to brush aside the controversial issue of 15 years of "qualified" accounts, there were also members from all parties with strong and critical views. There were also a number of suggestions of how the situation could be improved. Many others made good suggestions of areas they think could be improved. I heard socialists, liberals, greens, centre-rightists raise questions that deserve answers. No time was given for answers.

Is the EU trying to hide the MEP's voices in this debate?

The first thing that raised my (now very cynical) antennae is that the debate on the accounts happened today whereas the vote was yesterday. (I voted against). The second issue is just how long the secretariat of the parliament took to post the video on the website. Whereas normally the video record of parliament appears almost immediately - this debate took until the end of the day. Other debates have quite clear labelling on their subject matter but this debate is just labelled as "2008". Who will ever find this on a google search in years to come? Will our questions be answered or are they just being brushed under the carpet?

If you want to watch the whole debate you could spend hours searching the internet or you could perhaps find it here.. My contribution is about an hour in.

Britain’s next aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth, due to enter service with the Royal Navy in 2016, is still years away from being completed, let alone battle ready. On Friday, in a damning testament to our defence procurement system, I saw the final touches being applied to the fridges that will stand in her galleys. As I stood at my own village war memorial this morning I listened to the familiar family names in the roll of honour and I wondered what our British soldiers in Afghanistan would think about the money that has been spent on un-needed fridges.

Actually I was very impressed by the fridge company. Based in deepest Norfolk they are Europe’s leaders in commercial refrigerators. Every product is hand finished and environmentally of the highest standards. Even with the recession their sales have held up – declines in domestic sales helped by increased exports especially to France and Germany. In a week when Britain has ceded so much control to Europe this reminded me that it was to help companies like this that we went into the common market in the first place. On the other hand the company also explained that the last thing they need is the “Agency Workers Directive” – the vast majority of their staff are permanant but to be competitive they need to employ agency staff when they have bigger orders. This was a real world example of the opt out of Employment law from Brussels is so important.

Negotiations in Brussels are often more complicated than they first seem. I have been looking at the plans to create new European Authorities for banks, financial markets and insurers. Everyone agrees that we need a new form of regulation and must not go back to the risk taking that led to the financial crisis. We need better ways to share information across borders and to manage not only national but global risks. But these new authorities potentially go much deeper – the current drafts cede powers from the FSA/Bank of England to Europe to manage emergency failures in the future. With Britain being home to the world largest financial centre and such a vast amount of British tax-payers’ money currently on the line with our banks I believe the current draft crosses a red line.

To date the principal has been upheld that if national taxpayers are affected then national regulators (not Europe) should make the decisions. Gordon Brown’s step this weekend to propose a “transaction tax” on all financial trades starts to move into a potential grey area. Whilst I totally agree that financial institutions need to show some austerity and pay back the tax payer for the pain they have caused, I also know that if trading is more expensive in Europe then financial market business will just be driven overseas. But if Europe starts to set up a “pool” for future bail outs then Europe will argue for central decision making and ultimately wrench control of financial institutions from National regulators. Is the UK really ready to see the Bank of England subservient to the European Central Bank, the European Commission, or majority votes of the other 26 member states?

It may be easy to brush Gordon’s proposal of a transaction or “Tobin” tax away as pre-election posturing (the first reactions from the US are so negative that it’s unlikely to happen globally and therefore maybe not at all) but it does open up the possibility of another set of very difficult negotiations with Brussels.