THE Easter Recess began on April 2, a week earlier than originally planned. The only reason that I could learn for this was the incredible theory that the House of Commons had run out of work.

A partial explanation for this could be that Bills are delayed in the House of Lords by detailed scrutiny and frequent disagreement with Government intentions.

Thus there is a bottleneck before business returns to the Commons for debate on the Lords' amendments.

I have already drawn attention to the Government's habit of not even amending a Bill reasonably before it passes to the Lords, a technique that allows bargaining room on Lords' amendments. Surely House of Lords work might be reduced by debate more sympathetic to change in Commons' Standing Committees.

A letter published in The Times on April Fools Day recognised delay by the Lords as a problem for the Government.

"Reform of the relative powers of the Lords and the Commons is essential if the Lords is to fulfil its proper function of scrutiny and revision and the elected government is to secure its programme of legislation."

This paradox was expressed by an ex-chief government whip in the Lords. How can you have scrutiny without adequate time and revision if the Government has no intention of accepting it?

To me a second chamber with real power to scrutinise and revise is essential and reform of the Lords, whatever form it takes, must not weaken this function although I suspect this is exactly the Government's motive for reform.

The report stage and third reading of the Top-up Fees Bill were passed last week without real alarm for the Government.

Many from many parts of the country, including Wyre Forest, came to Westminster to lobby their MPs before the vote. It was disappointing for them because, although students recognise the universities' need for greater resources, they believe, as I do, that there are other ways of raising the extra money.

It is encouraging that already many operations are being performed in the treatment centre at Kidderminster - over 200 in one week.

Hopefully, as more work is done here there will be less stress on staff at other county hospitals.

This is the key to improving hospital care for all of us.

At a recent meeting with the chief executive of our Primary Care Trust I heard of exciting plans for expansion of work at the hospital.

These include more beds and a large rehabilitation unit probably in a new block.

There are active plans to reduce the number of emergency patients that have to travel unnecessarily to Worcester.

These so far fall short of our aim of a doctor-led emergency reception centre but we will continue to press towards this.