Jordan's Journal

I am proud of the NHS.

I am proud that our country offers a system of health care free at the point of need, where everyone is treated fairly and equally regardless of their ability to pay.

I'm proud of a system that means my grandparents arn't forced to remortgage the family home to afford a hip replacement; a system that means my friends don't have to check their bank balances before seeking medical treatment; and a system that means some one like me - with a long term health condition - wouldn't be put at the mercy of insurance companies.

President Obama is attempting some welcome reform of the US health care system, including some plans to model part of it on the NHS. However, his critics have used the NHS as an example of how not to run healthcare and have made some extraordinary claims about the care, support and services we recieve in Britain.

In an interview on Sky News, US political commentator Charlie Wolf said most people in Britain could afford health insurance. I would argue, the situation could not be more converse. Indeed, maybe Mr Wolf can afford it because he currently lives and works in UK and therefore benefits from our free health care.

In Britain, we like to grumble about things especially the NHS. I don't believe the system is perfect, however great advances and extra investment has made all the difference over the past ten years.

Comments made by the Tory MEP Dan Hannan, not only insults the 60 year legacy of our National Health Service, but it also insults the thousands of doctors, nurses and healthcare professionals who provide the best care they can to millions of people across the country. Sadly, despite David Cameron's protestations, Mr Hannan's views are shared by many Conservatives. To simply dismiss his comments as "eccentric" is beyond belief.

This week, the Labour Party has launched a new campaign highlighting our achievements since 1997. We're asking members and supporters to submit photos of examples of Labour investment under the slogan "Change We See".

Thinking about Colchester's contribution to the “Change We See” campaign, I was surprised to realise just how much our town has benefited from the past twelve years of a Labour Government. The investment in our hospital, the building of a new Primary Care Centre, the development of local Sure Start centres across the town, the rebuilding of our schools and the newly built Colchester Garrison show that a lot has been invested in Colchester since Labour came to power.

Labour has changed Britain, and there is no more striking example than the new buildings at Colchester Sixth Form College. An impressive, modern education facility that dominates Balkerne Hill. Maybe I appreciate this sight more, not because I know it was achieved through Labour investment, but because I was a student there in the days when we were taught in porta-cabins on the exact same site.

If you need out-of-hours health care or treatment as well as a range of other health services, Colchester has a new Primary Care Centre and Colchester General Hospital has been transformed by extra investment in the NHS. Anyone who believes the Government is failing to give support to our armed forces should pay a visit to Colchester Garrison. The newly redeveloped garrison site has seen an investment of over £500 million and has provided our soldiers with a twenty-first century place to live and work offering state-of-the-art facilities for training, medical care and sport.

None of this could have happened without a Labour Government, its members and supporters. To say otherwise is to deny the huge successes we have had since 1997.

A year ago, Georgia and Russia went to war over the disputed territory of South Ossetia. The crisis dominated the summer months, and certainly put the small South Caucasas nation on the map. At the onset of the crisis, I well remember people thinking Russia had gone to war with America over the US state of Georgia.

Since last August though, nothing has changed and relations between the two nations remain cold. Indeed, South Ossetia remains a 'breakaway' territory, under Russian protection and not officially recognised by any other Government. In Georgia - despite mass protests - President Mikhail Saakashvili remains in office. Russia's stand off with Ukraine over gas supplies in the Crimea also remains largely unresolved.

The only change has been a new US administration, with a White House more focused on finding a diplomatic solution and using improved relations with Russia to influence its "sphere of interest". However, at the same time the US wants to reassure Ukraine and Georgia that it will not undercut its relations with them as it tries to develop relations with Russia.

Washington has a balancing act: it must not turn a blind eye to Russian actions in pursuit of its policy of 'resetting' relations with Moscow. But while supporting Georgia broadly, US Vice President Joe Biden (who visited Georgia last month) warned Mr Saakashvili against military action to regain his lost provinces. Indeed, Georgia could learn lessons from other internal territorial disputes like Northern Ireland and show South Ossetia that it can be part of a Georgia where the people are free and where communities can side by side.

Yet Georgia must accept its part in the conflict. Exaggerating Russian intentions and rushing its troops up to the border have all but destroyed the countries chances of joining NATO in the foreseeable future. While the US is helping Georgia economically and the EU provides a small peace monitoring mission, NATO's involvement in the state has remained on a small-scale.

Then and now, I supported Georgia and the need for her territorial integrity to be protected and ensure the stability of the region. But in managing this diplmatic balancing act, the United States must ensure Moscow knows that it will not have a free hand in dominating its neighbours.