Until a General Election is called, no party can have a candidate for election, but parties normally chose to select a potential candidate in advance who will then act as the party’s parliamentary spokesman and campaign on parliamentary issues within the constituency.

Halifax Lib Dems regret the decision of previous PPC Diane Park to resign from the role and withdraw from party politics, and hope that the new PPC will be able to build on the work she carried out.

The Liberal Democrats believe that Gurkhas who were prepared to fight and die for this country should have the right to live here. They should be treated in the same way as their foreign and Commonwealth counterparts, who have a right to indefinite leave to remain after four years of service in the armed forces.

Under the Government’s new provisions, announced in April in response to Mr Justice Blake’s judgement that present policy was unlawful, Gurkhas who retired before 1997 and want to live here have to serve for five times as long as Commonwealth soldiers or Gurkhas who retired from service after 1997. This 20 year service rule effectively excludes most private soldiers, who normally serve for 15 years. This inequality is, in our view, unjust and intolerable.

The Government suggested that approximately 4,000 Gurkha soldiers would benefit from their new policy, leaving 10,000 in total once dependents are included. Lawyers working with the campaign believe that a much smaller number would be able to benefit, possibly even as few as 100. The Government has said that if all Gurkhas, including those who were discharged before 1997, wanted to come to the UK the total would reach 100,000 including their dependents.

This is fanciful. It is like estimating the potential migration from the rest of the European Union as the entire population, because every EU citizen can work anywhere in the EU. It takes no account of the high living standards enjoyed by most discharged Gurkhas in Nepal and hence the attractiveness of staying in their country. In fact, just 1350 Gurkha soldiers who retired before 1997 have lodged appeals to be allowed to stay in the UK. The figures released by the Government on the number of Gurkhas they expect to settle in the UK and the potential cost are highly dubious. Channel 4 News fact check gave the Government’s estimates a rating of 4, one below the rating for ‘the claim has no basis in fact.’

But the numbers are surely secondary. The Gurkhas have made an unconditional commitment to our nation, and we cannot repay that extraordinary service, bravery and dedication with a penny-pinching attitude. This is an issue about our own values as a people, as much as it is about the Gurkhas.

Wonderfully, we managed to defeat the Government by a vote of 267 to 246, the first success for any opposition motion for more than thirty years and only the third Government defeat in the Commons since 1997. It was a moment of great pride and elation, as it seems the Gurkhas will finally receive the respect they deserve.

The Government announced the increase which you mention in last year’s Pre-Budget Report to counter potential price reductions caused by the new 15% rate of Value Added Tax. The Liberal Democrats tabled amendments to the Finance Bill to try and prevent these increases because whilst the VAT cut is expected to be temporary the beer duty increase is not.

As with Post Offices, good pubs are an asset to the communities they serve. They are also important small businesses: they provide jobs and support our local economy. It is crucial therefore that we support them. My concern is that tax rises on beer will harm pubs which are already struggling in difficult economic circumstances and closing at a record rate. They will also damage smaller independent beer breweries.

The current Axe the Beer Tax campaign being led by the British Beer & Pub Association and the Campaign for Real Ale is attributing the financial difficulties experienced by British pubs solely to the rate of beer duty. Yet research by the Fair Pint campaign has revealed that pub companies are typically selling beer at twice the price a barrel that tenants could purchase it on the open market.

In addition many pub chains have been raising rent and other costs, forcing tenant landlords and publicans into heavy debt. I have been told by landlords in my constituency of the worries they face due to the increasing costs heaped upon them by the pub chains. Clearly the pub companies need to be held to account for the high price of beer.

There is genuine concern, about excessive alcohol consumption and the impact that it is having on behaviour in public places. But there is little evidence to suggest that the higher taxes in the Budget will have a significant impact on binge drinking, and the suspicion must be that the Government’s primary motivation was to raise additional revenue.

We need to see a broader and more intelligent response to binge drinking. This should include more being done to prevent alcohol sales to under-18s, the introduction of new social minimum pricing measures to stop irresponsible pricing by supermarkets and better enforcement of existing laws which prevent bars from selling alcohol to customers who are clearly drunk.