In the first in a new series of interviews with key figures in the Sevenoaks area, Chronicle Community Editor Ian Read locked horns with town MP Michael Fallon.

Scottish-born Conservative Mr Fallon, 56, was first elected as an MP in 1983, representing Darlington for nine years, during which time he was an education minister in the Thatcher and Major Governments.

In 1992 he lost his seat to Alan Milburn and moved down to take the safe Conservative seat of Sevenoaks from Mark Wolfson in 1997, where he has since built up a 12,970 majority. He is now the Conservative's Treasury spokesman and vice-chairman of the Treasury Select Committee.

Mr Fallon and his wife Wendy have two sons and live in Sundridge.

The interview took place at the end of a high-profile week for Mr Fallon in which four senior bankers were forced to apologise to the Treasury Select Committee for their role in the recession.

It also coincided with the day news broke of London Mayor Boris Johnson's expletive-ridden rant at Labour MP Keith Vaz.

IR: What's the mood within the Tories at the moment?

MF: The mood is mixed. People see how rapidly the economy is deteriorating and nobody wants that. We may benefit from it politically, but nobody wants to see the country suffering. So it's a very mixed mood and I think the party is sobering up as realisation that we are going to be having to dealing with the after-effects, we may still be in recession when the election next year, we might still be in recession and we will have to deal with all these problems. It will be us who sort out the banks, it will be us who have to tackle high unemployment, there is no elation on the Tories' side.

IR: You are speaking as though you are expecting the Tories to get in.

MF: Yes I am expecting the Tories to win.

IR: By a lot?

MF: Who knows. At the moment we are ahead in the polls, consistently ahead in the polls, and I think there is a real mood for change and so yes we are expecting to win, but we are not complacent about a majority.

IR: Do you expect to win because of Tory success or Labour failing?

MF: It's both, it's always both. Labour will have had a long run, they will have had 13 years and the electors like a change, but equally they see David Cameron as somebody fresh and attractive, always the right ideas for change.

IR: Is David Cameron all that different from previous Conservative leaders? You've worked under a few.

MF: I've worked under a lot. Yes.

IR: I didn't want to age you.

MF: Yes, he's made the party change, broadened its appeal, he's brought more women in, he's promoted women, he's encouraged more women to stand for parliament, more people with ethnic backgrounds. He's certainly changed the way the party looks, and he's focused on issues we've never really addressed before like climate change, social cohesion, and so on, so he has been a breath of fresh air.

IR: How does he compare to previous leaders?

MF: He's err.

IR: Is he up there with Thatcher yet?

MF: No, of course not, you can never really judge a leader until they are tested in action. Each one has been slightly different. Major was the great conciliator, Thatcher was tough, for tough times, so we will see.

IR: Who has been the worse Tory leader you have worked under?

MF: Who has been the worst? That's a very leading question. They've all had difficult circumstances to deal with. Some have done extremely badly and were probably always going to do badly. The 2001 election was a disaster.

IR: So Hague?

MF: It was under Hague, but it was probably not Hague's fault, people were always going to vote for Tony Blair, to re-elect Tony Blair who had a reasonable start at such goodwill after the long, long Tory periods.

MF: And Hague of course now is very respected.

IR: I think he would agree he got the job too young.

MF: This is a question which as been asked by The Daily Mail. Why are you not in the shadow cabinet, Michael?

MF: You will have to ask David Cameron that.

IR: He's not here. Would you like to be?

MF: Of course. Anyone on the back benches would like to be in the shadow cabinet because it's a unique chance to help shape policy for the next Government, as well as hold Government to account, but I do hold the Government to account through my job on the Treasury Select Committee, and I'm pretty active in the chamber, and doing a job for the party.

IR: OK, fair enough. I get the impression you enjoy the Treasury Select Committee, it has thrust you into the public consciousness more than you have been before.

MF: Yes, you get the chance to ask the questions that people want answered. They may be simple questions, but they are the kind of questions people ask, they ask on the train, in the pub: How is all this allowed to happen? How did all these bright people get it so wrong? Those kind of questions. It's a huge privilege to be able to fire those questions directly at the people responsible, and then when they try and evade to press them for an answer.

IR: Does that get us anywhere? It's been commented on this week that it's just a show court and nothing has actually come of it.

MF: The apologies were important, I think they needed to apologise. They've taken up an awful lot of public money and let a lot of people down, they needed to apologise. But also we are clearer now about the mistakes, the over-lending by HBOS in the property market, buying too many other expensive banks by RBS, we are clearer now about the actual mistakes and we can learn from that and tighten regulation as a result.

IR: Would we be in a different position now, economically, if the Tories had been in power?

MF: Oh yes, we'd have had a much better budget, we would not be in such deficit. Other countries, by the way, and they didn't have Conservative governments, they are in budget surplus at the moment - Ireland, Sweden, Canada - which they are using to help people through the recession. They built up the surplus in the good years. Blair started to do that in the first two or three years, but then he went into deficit and right through the boom years he stayed in deficit and built up this vast deficit so when it came to the tough recession he just didn't have enough money to help people through tax cuts, so we would not have been in that position.

IR: So the Tories wouldn't have been spending so much on public services?

MF: But we would have been spending what we could have afforded to spend. We wouldn't have been borrowing so much, we probably would have controlled spending better, there would have been less waste, some of the spending programmes would have grown more slowly. We would have financed it by what we could afford and Brown didn't do that so he now has this massive deficit that has to be financed by borrowing and by selling gilts, which of course as you know it now risks the currency as you can see.

IR: Is it not easy now to sit here and say Labour messed us up? Is it not just the Tories making hay out of this?

MF: No. Brown told us this was all to do with sub-prime which is something that happened in the States. What we learned this week was these were mistakes in Britain. Halifax Bank of Scotland, 40 per cent of its lending was to the British property market, it was commercial property, and they simply assumed the property boom bubble would go on further. That's a British mistake, nothing to do with sub-prime in the United States. RBS paid £10billion more than they should have done for a Dutch bank. That's nothing to do with sub-prime, it's nothing global, these were British mistakes made by British banks under British supervision.

IR: Much has been made of Brown not seeing this coming. Did you see it coming?

MF: Quite a few people saw that the housing market could not grow 10, 15 per cent every year, there's just no logic to that. All these bubbles come to an end and quite a few people warned that we were in for a house price correction other people in the City were concerned at the amount these two banks were lending. For example, HSBC does not lend more out than it has on deposit, never has, doesn't do that in any country in the world. HBOS was lending out twice what it had on deposit.

IR: Yet HSBC was seen as being a little bit safe wasn't it, while everyone else was spending and enjoying themselves.

MF: Absolutely and so was Lloyds so this wasn't something that affects all our banks, but two or three of them. Northern Rock, Bradford & Bingley, Alliance & Leicester, HBOS and RBS made mistakes. They were reckless, others weren't. So we need to look again at the system of regulation, which Brown set up by the way.

IR: So, did you see it coming?

MF: I realised it wasn't going to go on for ever. Did I see a crash of this kind coming? No, I didn't think it would be as dramatic as it has been.

IR: I would suggest three people have come out of the credit crunch pretty well: (BBC business editor) Robert Peston, (Lib Dem Treasury spokesman) Vince Cable and you. Would you agree with that?

MF: Very kind, it's an honour to be in that company. I'm reminded you that you only exist in your story. Somebody came up to the painter Whistler and said "Mr Whistler, I just wanted to say that you are the greatest painter since Valascus" and Whistler turned round and he said "why drag in Valascus?"

IR: I'm sure Mr Peston and Mr Cable would love to hear you say that.

MF: By the way, Peston didn't predict the crunch…

IR: No he broke the news of it.

MF: He broke the news of it. Vince Cable has been consistently good, he realised much earlier than anyone else that in the end banks like Northern Rock would have to be nationalised, he's been consistently good.

IR: There's no argument that your profile has been raised exponentially by your role in the select committee.

MF: I get recognised more on the train, not always a good thing.

IR: You knew Tony Blair quite well didn't you?

MF: Yes I did. We have adjoining constituencies in the north east and we were elected together and we used to travel up and down together with the same council area.

IR: Were you glad to see him go as Prime Minister?

MF: I think yes, you overstay your welcome; you can accuse Mrs Thatcher of that. Being Prime Minister is such a demanding job, probably 10 years is enough and he was right to go when he did.

IR: As a Tory were you glad to see him go? Was there a relief, you thought 'phew he was hard work'?

MF: He was a formidable opponent and he understood the concerns of Middle England wherever Middle England was, whether it was part of Sevenoaks or part of Sedgefield. He understood those concerns, he was able to articulate them. In retrospect he now appears a bit of a chancer, he certainly misled us over the Iraq war and there are other question marks about how deeply he really reformed the public services.

IR: And Brown? What do you make of Brown?

MF: Brown? Brown's a charlatan, he's been dishonest about his stewardship of the finances, he's been dishonest about the public finances right from the start, and personally I think he is a highly intelligent, very thoughtful man, but politically he's a bully.

He will not engage with opposing views and I think he fell into the fatal trap as Chancellor of simply believing his own publicity. I think he began to think he had created the boom himself and that it would, because he had created it, go on forever.

IR: When Blair went and we knew Brown was coming in, because we had no choice, Brown was portrayed as a kind of bruiser behind the scenes who you wouldn't argue with, what he said went.

I think it was kind of refreshing to know he was coming in and you thought 'OK, we haven't elected this guy but Blair was a bit laidback and so now we've got someone who's going to get the job done'. But his public persona, since changing from Chancellor to Prime Minister, he has become more relaxed and more jovial and that's not what, after 10 years of Chancellor, we were led to think he would be like. Frankly in front of the cameras he looks weak and a bit wishy-washy.

MF: I think this illustrates my previous point that you can't really tell how people are going to do these jobs until they do them, as with Blair. It is such an individual job and I don't think Brown is particularly well suited to it. What he was good at was focusing on particular issues, he didn't always get the right answers, but was really focused and as Prime Minister it's very hard to focus. You are constantly distracted by foreign policy, domestic policy, economic policy. Your diary is completely crowded with people who just have to spend time with you. The Prime Minister of Montenegro arrives and has to take a full hour of your morning and I think that probably suits somebody like Blair better than Brown.

IR: Would Labour win the next election with a different leader?

MF: Yes, err, I don't think they would win it but they could reduce the damage by presenting a new image, by choosing one of their younger people, they've got some very bright young people.

IR: Is it all about image these days then?

MF: It's partly about image which is a sad thing, people don't actually read the words, they see a blur on television so it's show as much as tell.

IR: What's your image?

MF: My image? (laughing – very long pause) I must leave that up to you.

IR: It's been suggested to me that you are Cameron's economic attack dog. Would you go along with that?

MF: Well my job is to hold Government to account, yes and I have been doing this as vigorously as I can and to be fair to George Osborne it is more difficult for a shadow chancellor because he will have to deal with this mess and he has to be as constructive as possible all the time and he has to deal with a lot of these people I'm criticising.

IR: The difficulty the Tories have got as far as I see is that, you've got Cameron and Osborne. Cameron, he's winning people over, though he's still a bit of a, frankly, Tory boy. Osborne, I don't think he's got the respect of the public and I think the two of them together, they look like they're two kids playing at it a bit. They have some senior people around them, such as yourself, William Hague and others, but the two of them leading the country I think would be a concern.

MF: I don't think the public really know George Osborne yet. It takes a long time for below the rank of leader to really come across. People are only just getting to grips with David Cameron, he's been there three years. (Long pause) George Osborne is highly intelligent and will be a super Chancellor.

IR: Do you think he may be too young? He looks young, I don't know how old he is.

MF: I think he's nearly 40. I don't think that's too young to be chancellor. Pitt was Prime Minister in his twenties. Hague was in the cabinet in his thirties. I don't think that's too young.

IR: Yes but Hague was a mistake as we established earlier.

MF: He wasn't a mistake in the cabinet.

IR: Just as leader? You didn't want Cameron as leader did you?

MF: No, I voted for David Davis.

IR: Why David Davis?

MF: Because I knew him. He's the one I knew best, I hardly knew Cameron, he had only just arrived in the House. I knew David Davis since student days. He was the one I knew best.

IR: Has he always been a loose cannon, even in student days?

MF: He's a tough operator, he won't be pushed around by other people, he knows his own mind, Davis, and I've rather admired that.

IR: I can't see you resigning over a single issue.

MF: That's fairly insulting. If I felt strongly over something I would, he felt very strongly over 42 days (the proposed timescale for detention of terror suspects). If I felt very strongly about something, yes I would.

IR: Which Labour MP would you most like to have on your side?

MF: Frank Field.

IR: Why?

MF: Because he thinks deeply about social issues and welfare, he understands the way in which the tax benefit system makes life harder for people on low incomes. He understands that probably better than anybody in the House. We need that sort of knowledge on our side. Also he's fearless, he's not intimidated by the whips.

IR: Which Lib Dem would you like to have?

MF: Which Lib Dem? Oh I'd go with Vince Cable. I think he ought to come over to us to join us.

IR: Would that not put your nose out of joint because you sort of do his Treasury role don't you?

MF: No, I know Vince very well, we would love to have him, but he'd have to join us. It wouldn't be a coalition, he would have to come over and join the party.

IR: Is that likely?

MF: Well he's been in two parties, he used to be in the Labour Party, now he's Lib Dem so there's only one more to go.

IR: It's been said that he would be the best next Chancellor but obviously his current party wouldn't allow him to get there.

MF: No, I think this is getting fanciful.

IR: He was very praising of you when he was down here in Sevenoaks.

MF: Was he?

IR: He basically said the Lib Dems have no chance of winning the next election in Sevenoaks.

MF: They had no chance anyway, this hasn't been Lib Dem for nearly 100 years.

IR: What do you make of Boris Johnson and his expletive-athon this morning?

MF: Unfortunate, unfortunate, but that was a private conversation.

IR: We're having a private conversation and you haven't sworn at me yet.

MF: No but have you never sworn in a private conversation?

IR: Oh I swear all the time …

MF: Well there you are, well there you are.

IR: I'm not representing the people, I'm not elected.

MF: I'm quite sure the Prime Minister swears as well.

IR: Do you swear in private, Michael?

MF: That's leading question.

IR: It is a leading question. Do you swear in private, Michael?

MF: That's a leading question.

IR: I'll take that as a yes. What's the most common question that crops up in your post bag?

MF: The current issue is trains, commuting, the reduction of capacity on the railways and people now are really quite angry that they are paying all this money, £3,000 a year for a season ticket and they can't get a seat. If you really need to sit down it's really hard to get a seat at almost any time of the day. So that's probably the major current issue.

The issue that's creeping up on us is, of course, the recession. Unemployment has doubled here, now it's now over 800 in my constituency and businesses around the town are really feeling the pinch. I've had a number of them in touch with me about the various different support schemes.

IR: How long do you think it's going to be affecting Sevenoaks?

MF: Well we could be affected in two ways for some time. First, the general business climate as businesses start running out of cash and there's a shortage of credit and cash in the economy, but secondly because so many people here work in the City and in the financial services, which have also contracted. So there could be pressure from two different sides, so it's something I'm worrying about and talking to the Chamber of Commerce and the district council about.

IR: What tangibly can be done about it?

MF: There are things we can do here to help ourselves locally. For example I have urged people, it's a very simple thing, to pay their bills on time. If you commission work with a local trader and the bill comes in a few weeks later and you put it at the back of your desk, if everybody paid their bills immediately or in a few days, that would make an enormous difference to the cash flow of some of these small businesses.

Secondly, we can buy locally wherever possible. We can back Sevenoaks businesses instead of driving miles and miles to buy stuff further afield. You don't have to go to Bluewater, there's an awful lot here in this town so buy locally.

Thirdly, I want the council to look again at business rates. The Government's got some proposals for deferring the payment of business rates over an eight-year period if the business is in trouble. I would like to see a scheme like that.

IR: Is that something that a local council has the power to do?

MF: It's quite a grey area as to how much scope they have and also how much scope they have for levying business rates on empty property, which the Government increased last April and has been very damaging for shop owners and the owners of small business units that can't relet them quickly and are still stuck with the rates.

IR: It's difficult for local councils because they are up against it financially anyway so to lose business rates is difficult.

MF: Well they would lose the cash flow, these aren't easy issues but it's something we need to keep looking at and see whether the council has got any discretion.

IR: How often do you find that Sevenoaks' reputation actually works against it?

MF: We miss out on quite a bit of Government spending, of Kent County Council spending, because it goes to poorer areas in Kent. There are flows of spending everywhere, there are flows from the south east to the north. There are flows from west Kent to east Kent. There are probably flows from Sevenoaks to Swanley. There will be flows from south Sevenoaks to north Sevenoaks. There are flows that depend on the kind of implicit consent that we are part of one community and we help the poorer bit of that community, and it's not true to say that Sevenoaks is universally upward. We have areas of deprivation in north Sevenoaks, we have areas of deprivation in Swanley.

IR: Working on a very basic level I would assume that if there was some grant bid landing on the desk at Government and they see it's from Sevenoaks and they've got something from the north then they are going to say 'Sevenoaks is well off' and give it to someone else.

MF: You see that a bit, you also see a discrimination against Conservative areas. We saw that with the Dartford Tunnel (when the Government gave free crossings to nearby residents). The gain went to the two marginal Labour constituencies of Dartford and Thurrock either side of the river and we lost out because we used to benefit from some of the tolls that were redistributed through Kent, used on general transport infrastructure and Sevenoaks got its share of that, theoretically. Now that's gone, all the revenue from the tolls being redistributed goes just to residents of Dartford or Thurrock.

IR: It's easy to say now because you are in opposition, but if you do get in, in a year or so's time …

MF: We didn't do that, usually the civil service stopped you from doing that, making decisions that were inherently political so I'm concerned about that.

IR: If the Tories got in how would it change Sevenoaks? What could you do for Sevenoaks? What would we notice that was different?

MF: First of all start getting the country out of the recession, and getting people back to work by focusing on backing small businesses, the small businesses that are running short of cash at the moment, that's why we advocated the loan guarantee scheme in October and this Government's finally getting round to it, they announced it last month we haven't got the full details yet but they're finally implementing it. We would put a lot of help into that because in the end it's small businesses, and indeed the self employed, who are going to help get the country out of the recession. So we would do that.

Secondly we would be far more efficient about the way in which we spend public money. You know here, too many of these public sector organisations are constantly merged and pay bloated salaries and have bureaucracy at the top. If you look at the NHS trusts and other organisations like that, we would take a razor to all that and ensure that when we gave money to the health service it got through to Sevenoaks Hospital and wasn't spent on directors of this and directors of that. Director of Civic Engagement is my favourite, paid £90,000 a year.

IR: Nice work if you can get it.

MF: You can get a lot of nursing jobs for £90,000 a year.

IR: Our Primary Care Trust is constantly changing its name.

MF: I think every year I've been here some context or another has changed. The primary care trust, the community care trust, the ambulance trust, the health authority. Every year we've had this upheaval of the organisation.

IR: If the Tories get in would they break it all up and make it all local again?

MF: No but we would reduce the bureaucracy and get the money through to the front line, and the same is true of education, and the same is true in social services. So many of these organisations, the Learning and Skills Council for example, has been endlessly reorganised. Whereas where you want to spend the money is at the colleges, a place like West Kent College not great bureaucracies wherever it is up in Medway so we would be smarter about Government and that would help Sevenoaks.

IR: You touched on education, the academy project is trundling along. Now you have been pressing for a grammar school in Sevenoaks, which this isn't …

MF: A grammar school element.

IR: Yes, but this looks about as close as we are going to get to it. Are you behind the academy project?

MF: I've had serious questions about the academy project. I'm concerned that it will be too large. It will be much larger for example then the big independent schools of Tonbridge and Sevenoaks and they have house systems, where the pupils are in units of 50 or 60 looked after by a house master or two house tutors. There are three members of staff doing nothing else but looking after the welfare of 50 or 60 boys or girls. Now some of those are boarding but what's proposed is a very large school, I am concerned on the pastoral side how it's possible for the head to know so many pupils and make then feel part of it so I'm worried about the size of it.

Secondly I'm worried about the loss of single sex education, particularly for the younger girls. People have chosen Bradbourne School because it offers single sex education and there isn't any other school like it for a long way, so that will reduce parent choice. And thirdly an academy like this needs consent, it needs to have parents behind it and I need to be satisfied that that's the case. There are a number of parents who are still unhappy about it.

So there are a lot of questions to be argued. As I think your leader (column in the Chronicle) put last week, it was no bad thing that we've got another year to think about it and who knows, a Conservative Government may come in in time to add a small grammar school element to it.

IR: Really?

MF: (Smiling) Who knows? It may not be in time.

IR: Let's talk about your diary. I see you're going to an Otford Conservative sherry tasting on Saturday morning.

MF: Yes.

IR: Wow, rock and roll.

MF: This time of year all the branches have AGMs. Tonight it's the Ide Hill one, tomorrow it's Swanley surgery and then I'm canvassing the Swanley by-election, it's becoming quite a nervy by-election. We've got the BNP there.

IR: Really? They're actually turning up are they?

MF: There's a candidate.

IR: Interesting because frankly I thought they were just hot air.

MF: Well this is Labour's safest ward which the BNP have decided to attack, but we want to run a strong campaign as well because the people are very fed up with Labour, and certainly don't want to vote BNP, so I shall be up there tomorrow afternoon..

IR: The BNP is threatening to challenge you at the next election. Does that concern you?

MF: Extremist parties do concern me, yes. They are a warning sign that the main stream parties have to keep raising their game they have to understand why people are attracted to extremist parties.

IR: Is part of the difficulty because people just can't tell the difference between the parties? You tell me, what's the difference between Labour and the Conservatives at the moment?

MF: Oh there are huge differences. We are far more responsible in handling the economy, we will be tackling issues of social breakdown, we will be encouraging social mobility, we would be focusing on long-term issues, environment and the security of our country, in a way that this Government hasn't been, it's been frittering around doing initiatives here, initiatives there.

IR: In terms of policy that's very difficult for your average voter to understand. You are saying the same sorts of things we hear coming out of Labour.

MF: No that's not right. We're saying Britain has to change, we can't go on the old way. We've run out of money, public money and we seem to have run out of money in our banking system, now we can't go on like that, we've got to look at all these things again, and run our economy far more effectively. It has recently been dominated by either housing or financial services and we've got to run our public finances much more responsibly. Britain's got to change.

IR: We are still waiting for a list of policies for the Conservatives and a list of policies from Labour. I'm struggling to see the difference.

MF: Go on the Party website. Go on the Party website and you will see a whole section called policies. There was a huge education statement last week in detail on what we are going to do on education. There has also been one on health, there's one on police, they're there if you look on the website, in some ways we've got too many policies.

IR: Do you see the problem though in the public that they can't distinguish between the parties? Okay you may have subtle differences in policy phrasing...

MF: I think people said that a few years ago, but I think they are clearer now about the way in which Cameron wants to change Britain, and they certainly will be when it comes to the election. People will be able to distinguish between Gordon Brown and David Cameron pretty clearly.

IR: With Vince Cable saying the Lib Dems haven't got a chance is there much point you even campaigning in Sevenoaks? You can just sit back and get re-elected cant you?

MF: No, I want to match Mark Wolfson's record of four consecutive wins, and I want to increase the majority.

But we shall also be helping out in Dartford, we have a system of mutual aid, we shall be giving some help to Dartford which is a seat we have to win if we are going to win the Government, but certainly I will be campaigning hard here.

IR: Why is Kent Highway Services not capable of maintaining the roads in Sevenoaks? They are riddled with potholes. (Question from Maggie Miles, Riverhead)

MF: They are and the recent frost hasn't helped. Kent County Council are the first to admit that the Kent highways needed improvement. This is a joint arrangement between the district and county council and it does. It's based up in Gravesend and that wasn't working so they've reorganised it now and I deal with Kent Highways probably two or three times a week and they still need improving, I think they need to be faster in response, but potholes are not unique to Sevenoaks.

IR: They're not, no they're not.

MF: I noticed a huge one on my way in actually.

Yes I have to endure them on my way in, but what can be done about that? I remember last time there was a heavy frost the county council came out and said they were going to throw X number of millions into sorting out the potholes and frankly botched the job just to fill them in to keep people quiet and now they have all emerged again.

MF: I'm not an expert on potholes, but it's quite interesting when you go abroad to countries where they have lots of snow and ice, like Switzerland, you don't see all these potholes, but there you are.

IR: Another road based question. When are we going to get quieter road surfaces on the major roads? (Question from Maggie Miles, Riverhead)

MF: We are getting quieter road surfaces on the M25, we are about to get it on the M26, as you know on the carriageways there it's been a long battle, we had quieter road surface put in on the slip road on the A21. The honest answer is, you'll get the quieter road surface when the road needs resurfacing. Then they will spend money putting the quieter asphalt in, but they wont put it in until the road needs doing anyway.

IR: OK. So in terms of roads you don't have that much influence, it's mainly KCC is it?

MF: No, it's not just KCC, it's the Highways Agency for the motorways and the major roads.

IR: But potholes in Sevenoaks is KCC?

MF: Potholes in Sevenoaks is.

IR: Are you going to have a quiet word with Mr Carter? (KCC leader Paul Carter)

MF: Oh I do, I do.

IR: How do you get on with Mr Carter?

MF: Very well.

IR: Better than I do I'm sure.

MF: Well, he's let me down on something yesterday which is the reorganisation of Adult Social Services, which is the alignment of the boundaries. (Sevenoaks District Council chief executive) Robin Hales and I were concerned that Swanley is being carved up to go in with Dartford and Gravesend.

IR: You campaigned quite heavily several years ago on the police station, to have it based in the town centre. I'm aware of plans to close that police station and base it at the council offices on Argyle Road. What are your views on that?

MF: I've heard the office here is very overcrowded, that there are too many officers working out of it, which is great.

IR: Not a bad problem to have.

MF: Not a bad problem to have, but that's the whole point, the officers should be based here patrolling our communities but I can't otherwise comment on the detail of that, because I haven't seen it.

IR: But in principle if the police station is not going to be in the town centre where you need it …

MF: You mean it's too far away in Argyle Road?

IR: … in Argyle Road, yes I'd say so.

MF: Possible, but what's really important is that people should know where it is, and I've been chivvying this office for example on opening hours. very occasionally the front desk has been shut, and constituents have complained, that again is a good sign because they know it should be open at whatever it is, 8am or 8.30am, and expect it to be open then. You want a station that's accessible and people know the hours.

IR: Are you happy with the job our local police do?

MF: Yes, I think they work extremely hard, the new area makes sense and I've a lot of admiration for (district chief inspector) Gill Ellis for the way that she sees the district as a whole and is tackling some of the issues.

IR: There's a problem with fear of crime though. As the police are always saying this district is the safest in Kent, but there is undeniably fear of crime.

MF: Fear of crime has increased, some crime itself has increased, violent crime has increased.

IR: Are you talking nationally or locally?

MF: Both, locally as well as nationally. When there is violent crime that fuels fear of crime. People worry if they challenge somebody they're going to get beaten up, if they intervene they're going to get beaten up and so on. So tackling violent crime is important, violent crime needs tackling.

IR: Why has violent crime gone up?

MF: It's gone up pretty well everywhere. Why has it gone up? I suspect it's gone up because sentencing isn't tough enough. Slowly a sense of power has been taken away from magistrates' courts locally and sentencing has become more remote and people are being let out of prison too early.

IR: So what can be done about that then?

MF: Well, we would change that, I've been given local examples here by magistrates who have sentenced somebody to jail and met them in the street within a few days or within a few weeks because they have been taken down to Maidstone prison and then released early by the governor, simply because it is full and he's got to get rid of people and he's released them early. That completely undermines the court and undermines the reputation of the court.

IR: Is there anything you can do about that, because that's a political thing.

MF: In government we would change that. We'd give power back to magistrates to impose longer sentences …

IR: Tougher sentences?

MF: Longer sentences, back up from six months to one year, and ensure those sentences are thoroughly carried out, and not released early.

IR: But have we got the space in our cells any more? We've got overcrowding as it is?

MF: If you look at our policies on our website you will see how we are going to fund new prison places. There's a detailed explanation about how we are going to transfer money within the Home Office to the Justice Department budget to fund new prison buildings. It's all there on the website, not my website, but the official Party website. But we do need more prisons, we are sanguine about that, it can't be done without creating new places.

IR: Would that be building new prisons or expanding existing ones?

MF: We are building new prisons, but sometimes on the sites of the existing ones. You can have a look at the details on the website.

IR: The problem with new prisons is where do you put them? I would like to think you would campaign against a prison in Sevenoaks.

MF: Well, we don't need a prison in Sevenoaks. We don't contribute to a large part of the prison population.

IR: But crime has gone up you're saying.

MF: Yeah, but we don't contribute a large part of the population, a lot of the violent robberies around here have been committed by outsiders, so I don't think there's any case for a prison in west Kent.

And we've got prisons don't forget on the Isle of Sheppey and a prison at Maidstone, and various proposals for Dover I think, floating around so I think we've probably got our fair share.

IR: So apart from making the train service worse, how could we stop London criminals coming here to target Sevenoaks because we do suffer from being a stone's throw?

MF: Yeah we're very exposed, but there's better technology now on vehicle identification plates for the motorways that track cars in the sort of crime where people are just coming off the motorway to raid the nearest cash point or whatever. The police have to keep developing those techniques, but it isn't easy and they are overstretched.

IR: If the Tories got in would we see more police on the streets in Sevenoaks?

MF: Oh yes, we've got plans to reduce police paperwork, to cut down the various forms, particularly the various custody reports and some of the form filling that takes so much time. When I went to the Swanley (police station_ reopening which I had campaigned for for a long time, as well as the constables' and sergeants' room I was shown the report writing room. They do have to write an awful lot of reports and we are going to tackle that to free up more police time, so yes you would see more police more visibly.

IR: So more police, tougher sentencing?

MF: Tougher sentencing, more police, more patrolling, more prison places.

IR: So back to basics, dealing with criminals and being seen to deal with criminals.

MF: Yeah, well justice has to been seen, as well as done.

IR: How come you never get involved in planning issues? It is the biggest issue, arguably, in Sevenoaks.

MF: Well I try not to get involved in individual planning issues, whether someone should build a wall at the bottom of their garden or not, bathroom extension or whatever, because that's what we elect the district council for. I do take a very close interest in the huge planning, in the bigger planning applications, for example West Kent Cold Store, the redevelopment of Fort Halstead.

IR: Are they still going ahead in the current economy as far as you are aware?

MF: Well the Cold Store permission is there, Halstead they are not through the planning process yet so we'll see.

We elect district councillors to take these decisions and it's a mistake for other people to get involved too early.

IR: Can you get involved when it goes to appeal?

MF: Yes, the appeal is to the Secretary of State when it's a major application, yes certainly I get involved there.

IR: Are you in favour of the big developments at the Cold Store and Fort Halstead?

MF: Generally no. The development at West Kent Cold Store, the housing element to it has been reduced and I think it's a compromise, it's not ideal but it's a compromise. The proposal at Fort Halstead I'm not in favour of, it's still far too many homes and in a village where the infrastructure simply isn't strong enough to cope.

IR: It will bring you in more voters.

MF: But err, it will inconvenience a larger number of other voters.

IR: Is Sevenoaks Hospital safe?

MF: I've been told it's so, but I've learnt over the years never to believe wholly what I'm told by officials. When Tonbridge Police Station was opened we were told Sevenoaks Police Station was safe, but in a few years they decided to close it. The health service is a process of review, continuous, continuous review. So we've got to get money spent on it and get more people to use it.

MF dashes off to top up his parking meter.

IR: Parking, as you have been experienced just now, what can be done about parking in Sevenoaks?

MF: There was a lot of uproar when the new restrictions were put in, it has settled down and a few constituents are still unhappy, but a lot more who think it's an improvement so not everybody is complaining which has made life easier.

There are quite a lot of people who live at the top of the town, it's made life a bit more difficult for local businesses and shops.

IR: The fundamental problem in Sevenoaks is it's too small for the number of cars in it, going through it, trying to park in it.

MF: Yeah, there are 33million registered drivers in this country and we now have 31million cars. We are not immune from that.

IR: Are you keen for some sort of multi-storey car park in Sevenoaks?

MF: Yes, multi-storey car parks don't pay for themselves, it's a simple economics. There aren't companies going round building multi-storey car parks and making money out of them. Multi-storey car parks have to be financed either by a supermarket or big retail store or by councils. They are not self financing, that's the problem. They can't recover, there's not business, you can't recover the capital cost and make a profit, so it has to be subsidised and the council doesn't have that sort of money. Now there are proposals to add more spaces further out to have more spaces closer to the station, which may take some of the pressure off.

IR: Are you confident that Southeastern will make investment to deck the car park down at the station?

MF: Well they promised to improve the station. I've been pressing for these for a long, long time now, so I hope they will. Unfortunately the trains are more overcrowded.

IR: Yes. What can be done about that? They can't make trains longer because you can't have trains longer than 12 cars because they can't turn it round at Tunbridge Wells.

MF: I'd like to see a differential parking charge. I would reduce cost of parking at the station for local residents, for people who live in TN13, 14, 15 postcodes.

IR: So charge more to those coming from outside?

MF: Charge more for those who drive a long way who have stations of their own but choose to drive a long way to take advantage of the addition services from Sevenoaks.

IR: That's discouraging business from Sevenoaks though, people are coming here to use our services because they are so sought after. Turning them away seems a little bit harsh.

MF: But they don't spend money. They get in their car at 6pm and drive back to Hastings or wherever they came from. We can't go on overloading our trains like this, it gets dangerous.

IR: Well they must buy their papers from the shop, pop into one of the pubs down there!

MF: Maybe. We can't go on overloading our trains like this, it's dangerous.

IR: Back on parking there was, as you know, quite a push by the district council to get rid of the Stag and put in some multi-storey parking. Where do you sit on that issue?

MF: These are matters for the council but it's got to be financed. What the council can't afford to do is take on something that it can't finance properly.

IR: Would you rather have a theatre in the town or more parking?

MR: I wanted the theatre to survive if at all possible and it will.

IR: You are confident it will?

MF: I hope it will.

IR: It's been going for a couple of weeks so we'll see.

MF: The first movie is this weekend isn't it?

IR: Today, yeah.

MF: Today?

IR: Should be about an hour in.

MF: It's great to see it open again and I'm looking forward to going on Sunday (to the Sevenoaks Symphony Orchestra performance).

IR: Do you use the cinema down there at all?

MF: Down where?

IR: There (pointing at the Stag).

MF: What here? No I haven't, I haven't for a while. It hasn't been open for a while.

IR: When it was open have you used the cinema?

MF: Yes I have.

IR: I ask because that's been the problem because people go to the theatre but the building is made viable by people using the cinema.

MF: Yes, clearly a lot of people have been lured away by the screens down at Pembury.

IR: Yes. Can we expect to see you as a regular at the cinema then?

MF: I have very little time to go to the cinema in the evenings. All my evenings are spent in the Commons or out in the constituency. I wish I had the time, I wish I had the time you have to go to the movies.

IR: I'll ignore that. Touching back on the Treasury Select Committee and the bankers and the highly contentious bonuses issue, should bankers be receiving bonuses?

MF: Not from public money.

IR: No?

MF: And not bonuses that are not properly aligned to shareholder value. In other words they shouldn't be paid bonuses for just doing deals, or just for getting sales up.

IR: They have to earn them?

MF: Not just for getting sales up, they have to create long-term value for shareholders.

IR: I think the difficulty people have is the vast majority of people work in jobs where you don't get bonuses. You get paid to do a job and for succeeding in that job, your salary is your reward. So to see bankers being paid to do their job and then being paid on top without doing extra work just seems odd.

MF: It seems odd, but in financial services it's quite common for people to have quite low salaries and earn very big bonuses when they do well.

IR: Like a waitress with tips.

MF: And very big bonuses when times are good but then of course they don't get a bonus when they have bad years.

IR: But they are having bonuses, therein lies the problem.

MF: Yes, the problem is if it's public money then the rules certainly ought to be different, you can't be paid for failure.

IR: Does that include your constituents? We have a lot of bankers here who travel to the City and come back.

MF: I think most banks in the City are looking again now at their bonus structures. As I said I'm looking for proposals on the table from the FSA (Financial Services Authority) and the US Treasury about how remuneration strategies should discourage excessive risk taking and as I've said be properly aligned with creating shareholder value. So the bonus culture I think will change.

IR: Do you get letters from your constituents who are bankers on the issue saying 'we've seen you on the Treasury Select Committee this that and the other …'

MF: Go easy on the bonuses?

IR: Yes.

MF: No, I don't.

IR: No?

MF: No (laughing). All the letters and emails have been the other way, entirely the other way. People are very angry with that bankers at the moment.

IR: Are you?

MF: Yes, it's a huge amount of public money. They've taken £20billion for one bank, £17billion for another bank. That's the entire defence budget by the way, £37billion, so you know, I am angry yes.

IR: You know Duncan Bannatyne don't you?

MF: Yes, I worked in two or three businesses, three businesses with him.

IR: There are a lot of Scots in power in this country, I include yourself in that as you were born in Scotland. Why is that? There seems to be a disproportionate number of Scots in Government, in business.

MF: Scotland's 10 per cent of the country. Are there more than 10 per cent in politics?

IR: With Cabinet members, there are.

MF: Yes that's right it is, it is.

IR: Why's that?

MF: I've no idea Ian, I've no idea. Traditionally the Scots were very entrepreneurial, if you went to the far flung parts of the British Empire you found Scottish traders, Scottish administrators. They had an entrepreneurial flair. There's certainly too many in Government.

IR: You're Scottish.

MF: I was born there.

IR: That means you are Scottish.

MF: Does it? Neither of my parents are Scottish, I may be an honorary Scot. But two banks that failed were Scottish. That worries me. Great traditional Scottish banks, they were great banks built up over a couple of centuries.

IR: You're talking about the Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS. Is there a link there between their failure as banks and the fact that they are Scottish?

MF: (Long pause) Probably not, probably not, Crosby (Sir James Crosby, former HBOS chief executive) wasn't Scottish, Hornby (Andy Hornby, another former HBOS chief executive) wasn't Scottish, so probably not. It was Englishmen running Scottish banks. The Royal Bank of Scotland was run by Scots but no, probably not.

IR: I thought you were going to have a Jeremy Clarkson 'Scottish one-eyed idiot' moment then.

MF: No.

IR: Is Brown an idiot?

MF: No he's not an idiot, he certainly isn't. He lost an eye earlier on and has trouble with the other eye so it's a bit mean to start criticising him for his sight.

IR: I was looking through your voting stats. They show you as immensely loyal to your party: you've rebelled only one per cent of the time since 2005 and 1.2 per cent between 2001 and 2005. Are you a Tory yes man?

MF: Well we're not in government so we don't have nearly as many splits as Labour.

IR: But you will when you get in power will you?

MF: Well they are doing things like privatising Royal Mail and putting a runway at Heathrow, to be fair when you are in government you have to take very close decisions and you are bound to upset some of your members so this is really a thing for Government. There have been very few occasions when any Tories have voted against the whip, very few.

IR: Would you expect to vote against more often as and when you are in government?

MF: It depends on the issue, if it's something I feel strongly about then yes, I've voted against the government before. I did back in the 80s.

IR: On which issue?

MF: That was a local issue, a complicated local issue about the restructuring of Leyland. The government chose one option which I didn't agree with.

IR: So how confident are you at being on the cabinet if the Tories get in?

MF: Well I wont be, I'm not in the shadow cabinet.

IR: Within a few years though do you think? There are all sorts of reshuffles.

MF: Yes, but I haven't been included. There are lots of bright young people coming up the ladder so Cameron wants to make the party look younger.

IR: You're not counting yourself as young any more?

MF: well there are a lot of young people in our party, very bright young people...

IR: But you need experience as well.

MF: ...and he also of course wants to bring more women forward so it's not something I'm worried about.

IR: But you can't bring in more women and ethnic minorities just to look good on the face of it, you need the people there to get the job done.

MF: You need to bring in good wood. Good people.

IR: So do you think you're missing out because you're middle aged and white?

MF: Somebody will have to as the party changes, yes. Some people will lose out, but there you are.

We have a bright female candidate here in Kent. Helen Grant from Maidstone.

IR: That ticks those boxes then does it?

MF: And now we are going to have a female candidate for Chatham and Aylesford, Tracey Crouch and a female candidate for Thanet South. Where we are losing Ann Widdecombe we will have three female Tory MPs for Kent, one of whom is from an ethnic minority.

IR: Is it important though? As we've said we need people who can do the job. You've proven you can do the job, you're not a woman or black.

MF: The party has to look like the country. You can't have a party that's entirely white, entirely male, entirely middle-aged.

IR: I will just press on the shadow cabinet issue because you have been an MP for a long time, you were in Government. As you said your profile has been catapulted into the limelight by the recession and you seem to be seen as a safe pair of hands.

MF: That's all very flattering.

IR: I haven't finished yet. I refer to you as an attack dog but you don't come across as unnecessarily aggressive or riding on public opinion, you make measured comments. It is surprising, therefore, that you haven't got on the shadow cabinet. Are you surprised?

MF: You must ask David Cameron.

IR: Especially as you've got Greg Clark (Tunbridge Wells MP) who's been around five minutes and been elevated pretty quickly.

MF: He's exactly an example of the new kind of bright type…

IR: He's not a woman or black.

MF: … no but he's young, he's the new kind of talent that David Cameron's been attracting. He's a very good example of the kind of person who should be promoted.

IR: I hope you're not referring to yourself as dead wood here.

MF: I'm not, I didn't say that.

IR: Next election in Sevenoaks. Looking forward to it?

MF: Absolutely, I told you I want to match Mark Wolfson's record for four successive victories and I want to increase my majority. I work very hard for Sevenoaks and I hope that will be endorsed.

IR: Would you win the election because you are Michael Fallon or because you are Conservative?

MF: Both, because I've worked hard for the constituency and because people want a change of Government, that's that.

IR: When's the last time you were ashamed to be Conservative?

MF: (Long pause) I've not been ashamed, I've always been a Tory.

IR: Even through all the scandals?

MF: (Long pause) No all governments go through crises and do things they don't really like doing. It happens to any government., so no, I'm happy on that one. Nice try through.

IR: Just asking. You were never immortalised in Spitting Image.

MF: I was a junior minister.

IR: Do you think you would make a good leader of the Conservatives one day?

MF: No.

IR: No? Why not?

MF: Because of the search for youth. The Liberals have made that mistake, they went for Clegg instead of Vince Cable.

IR: But Cable didn't want it, he didn't want to be leader of the party.

MF: He said he didn't want to, but then Michael Howard didn't want to and he came back and was pressed into service.

IR: Yeah, well that was a mistake wasn't it.

MF: I think the leader of any party is a really big job. You have no time to yourself at all. I'm quite happy.