LET me explain why I don't sign Early Day Motions, the formal motions submitted in principle for debate in the House of Commons.

However, very few EDMs in the last decade have actually been debated. Instead, they are used to publicise the views of individual MPs on a wide range of topics. But that's as far as it goes.

Here's a taster of some of the 'views' tabled on the official Order Paper, the printing and publishing of which are met by the taxpayer:

"That this House commends the black pudding makers of Stornoway for their distinctive and high quality Black Pudding" — EDM 2411.

"That this House applauds the X Factor programme and its contestants for the Song for Heroes single release" — EDM 2374.

"That the House congratulates the UK Fragrance Foundation… on organising the 16th Annual Fifi Awards" — EDM 1463.

There were even two congratulating Lewis Hamilton on his victory (EDMs 2404 and 2396 great job though that he did).

In 2005-2006 the printing and publication cost of EDMs to the taxpayer was £627,000 and this didn't include the cost of editorial preparation and electronic publication costs.

The range of ridiculous to incredulous doesn't stop there. Here are some of my favourites:

THE definition of a pint of beer — EDM 988

THE work of Dolly Parton — EDM 453

LATIN in the Park — EDM 2016

Beatles Day — EDM 1965

Such ludicrousness has warranted EDMs being described as 'parliamentary graffiti' littering the record of the House.

In the words of a former deputy Speaker, EDMs have lost all credibility.

And then there's the sheer volume of EDMs tabled: 2,485 on the Order Book in the last session alone.

It is not fair to say all motions are trivial though. Many raise important and valuable points to which the House ought to pay serious attention.

However, the volume combined with the 'silly' element means EDMs are now considerably devalued.

They sit, largely unnoticed on a parliamentary database and only very occasionally, on very contentious issues, attract Government's attention.

Yet no day goes by without my receiving letters and emails asking me to sign such and such an EDM (which I admit I have done on the odd occasion in a moment of weakness).

When I say I just don't sign them, I get mixed reactions, largely because no one quite understands exactly what EDMs are and why unfortunately they are next to useless in providing answers to anything.

It would be best if they were as extinct as the Dodo; it would save thousands of pages of paper and thousands of trees as well. But sadly far from going out of fashion, they have become even more popular.

Perhaps one of the reasons is the Government has become more centralised and the Commons more prescriptive.

EDMs remain one of the few ways MPs can express their views on a diverse range of topics. But should the House be expressing an opinion on the quality of black pudding?

When I first came to the Commons there were precious few EDMs printed.

Those which were, were taken very seriously. There were around 50 a year and when 200 Members had signed a particular EDM, the Government was obliged to hold a debate. That was the objective of the Motion's sponsors. That is not the case now, unfortunately.

Why, then, do MPs go on signing them or even bothering to put them down in the order book?

The reason is largely to demonstrate to constituents, who are unaware of the insignificance of EDMs, that their MP is doing something about their concerns.

It's no skin off the MP's back if he or she signs, and as that pleases constituents so much the better.

Everybody is happy because they believe they are contributing to raising an issue and hopefully getting the problem solved. But it will not.

EDMs also give MPs an opportunity to curry favour with their local newspapers, which in turn helps them fill column inches.

EDMs are a kind of smokescreen. You think you see them, then you don't. They do little, mean little and achieve little.

I don't sign them simply because I believe I should not intentionally mislead. I feel there are better ways of achieving more.

The Hope Cove lifeboat debacle is a good example — no EDM tabled or signed, but a wealth of parliamentary questions, two meetings with the Minister in the Lobby and an official meeting scheduled at the end of this month when I shall be confronting the Minister armed with the Hope Cove crew.

This could produce the kind of result which EDMs can never achieve.

So the next time you write asking for my signature on an EDM; remember, I'm happy to take up the cudgels where possible, but you will understand why I won't be signing.