THERE are two ways of getting called to put a question to the Prime Minister. The first is to put your name in a ballot to appear on the order paper, the second is to 'catch the Speaker's eye'.

Round about 250 MPs put their name forward every week. The ballot opens at 1pm on a Thursday and remains open for seven days for a question to be put the following Wednesday. Fifteen names are randomly picked and they appear on the order paper in the sequence that their name comes out of the bag.

Two other people are certain to be called, one is David Cameron, who has up to six questions, and Nick Clegg has two.

Technically there is a written question and a supplementary. The written question can be specific like "will the PM visit 'X' in my constituency" but MPs usually opt for the open question 'What are the Prime Minister's engagements for the day." This is abridged to the letter 'E' on the form requesting the question. The Speaker will call the name of the first member who will say 'Number One Mr Speaker' and the Prime Minister will then state broadly what he is doing: "After meeting my colleagues etc..".

The Speaker will then balance the questions from Government to Opposition benches fitting in Clegg and Cameron. Members stand to catch the Speaker's eye when two members on the same bench follow each other on the order paper, hoping to be called as the Speaker balances the debate.

Last week I was number 10 in the ballot and after consulting my email contacts, selected a question on Wet Macular Degeneration which leads to sight loss and the refusal of NICE to approve funding for its treatment until the eyesight is almost gone.

Most weeks we get down to number 10 on the order paper, but not this week, the House only reached number nine. This is only the third time that my name has appeared on the ballot paper and each time the questions have stopped one question short of mine. Thankfully I have caught the Speaker's eye a few times.

LISTENING to the radio on a further update of the Chilcot Inquiry into the war in Iraq, I was disappointed to hear history rewriting itself — not in the evidence given, but in the comments of the politicians commenting on the radio.

I will save my comments on the evidence until Tony Blair has given his, but what shocked me is the number of MPs now saying, and yes, I did underline now, that they never believed weapons of mass destruction existed in Saddam's Iraq. Yes they did and they told me so. We all believed it was likely they existed.

The difference between those who supported the war and those who opposed it was simple. Some believed they existed as a matter of faith and did not care that any invasion would be illegal and the others — every Lib Dem MP (myself included), a handful of Tories and a good number of Labour — who said there is no evidence and there is no legal justification.

The war happened because Bush wanted it and we joined in because David Cameron and most other Conservative MPs voted for it.

I have worked hard to support our troops since they went in because (1) they are our troops and (2) we created the mess, we need to sort it out. All this is the simple truth and is verifiable. The victor always writes history, but first let us remember we have not won yet for there is yet to be peace in Iraq.

OLD battle lines are being drawn in the election campaign. Should married couples receive a tax break?

I believe in marriage, I believe we should promote it but are tax breaks the answer? The Conservatives argue that extra money for married couples will keep them together. Nice idea but there is absolutely no evidence for this. Divorce soared in the 1950s, settled down for a while and soared again in the 1980s, all when couples had a tax break.

Often people do not get married because they cannot afford it. This is helping drive up the number of unmarried couples who never quite get round to making their vows . So would not a one-off grant, repayable if they divorce in five years, not be the better answer to promote marriage rather then an incentive for a ruined marriage to limp on?

Marriage is good and helps people stay together but our money is best spent protecting and helping children and helping these people prosper.

I WAS approached by Newton Abbot councillor Ken Purchase, along with county councillor Gordon Hook to look at road safety in Keyberry Road near Sainsbury's.

I met them and local residents a couple of months ago. They were concerned that, firstly, trees and hedges make it hard for drivers to see pedestrians, particularly school children who use the crossing regularly and, secondly, as the bridge is single lane, vehicles speed up to get through before meeting possible oncoming traffic.

Gordon's and my representations have worked and the county engineers are now to put in temporary traffic lights to see if this works and to cut back the foliage.

JANUARY and February 1855 were exceptionally cold with the Exe nearly freezing over.

On February 9 there was a series of hooved footprints running from Exmouth to Teignmouth across fields, roads and over buildings. There were many theories at the time as to what caused them — a large bird, a kangaroo, even a donkey. How the latter cleared a 14ft high wall being ignored! Many, however, saw this as having a more sinister source and they are to this day still known as the devil's footprints.