I want to start off this week by congratulating my Conservative neighbour Richard Benyon - the MP for Newbury - on his promotion from the Opposition Whips’ Office to the post of Shadow Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Fisheries, Wildlife, and Rural Affairs. Like myself, Richard is a keen fisherman and a member of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Angling, but unlike me he is also a farmer - all of which makes him an ideal candidate for the job. However, I should add that my congratulations to Richard don’t extend to wanting to see the word “Shadow” removed from his job title!

Contrary to some of the spin and nonsense you may have read, the post of Parliamentary Under Secretary is higher up the ministerial ladder than merely being a Whip and attracts a higher salary. Richard is therefore quite right to describe his appointment on his website as a promotion. The Whips office is traditionally the “ante room” to and from a Ministerial job. It is often the place where ambitious politicians start their climb up the greasy pole and it is also a convenient place to provide a soft landing for former Ministers and Shadow Ministers who were simply not up to the job.

On Monday we saw, at long last, the introduction of the new law outlawing the possession or downloading of images of violent internet pornography. This followed a lengthy campaign by Reading mum Liz Longhurst in the aftermath of the horrific murder of her daughter Jane at the hands of a self-confessed addict of extreme internet porn. Our new law does not seek to extend the definition of what is and is not obscene. This is already covered by the Obscene Publications Act (OPA) so we are not seeking restrictions on public taste or morality as our critics have tried to claim. It merely closes a gap in the law caused by the internet which has allowed people to view and possess electronic images of rape, torture, and bestiality which are already illegal under the OPA.

Hopefully, Parliament is sending out a strong signal to those who might be tempted to act out some of their wilder and sicker sexual fantasies. I don’t particularly care what the critics have to say on this issue anymore. If the Jane Longhurst campaign saves the life of just one person who would have otherwise fallen victim to an assailant inspired by extreme imagery then it will have been all worthwhile.

This week I am hoping to be called to make a contribution in the important debates on humanitarian aid to Gaza, the funding of Thames Valley Police and the decision to press ahead with a third runway at Heathrow Airport. On Tuesday I intervened in a short debate on the Gaza situation to criticise the absurd decision of the BBC not to screen the Disasters Emergency Appeal (DEC) for the 50,000 civilians who have lost their homes. I am usually a strong supporter of the BBC but on this occasion we are witnessing a truly stupid and unbelievable decision by the BBC bosses. Given that the Chief Executive of DEC has confirmed that monies from their appeal will go to help victims on both sides of this conflict, what possible reason is there left for the BBC not to screen this vital appeal? It seems to me that the BBC is out of step not just with public opinion but with almost every other major media outlet and indeed its own reporters and commentators.

The Heathrow debate took place on an Opposition Motion on Wednesday and I had already informed the Government and Whips office that they should not count on my vote. Once again it’s an airport issue that gets me in trouble!