I am a Conservative, so I don't wish to be seen as a rebel, particularly, at all.

I came into parliament to do things, so I don't particularly relish being a rebel.

I would like to think that I have followed in the proper tradition of attorneys-general, providing good quality advice to my colleagues in government and have taken on their needs and concerns.

We have to look at levels of migration. We are in a world that is quite chaotic. Some people are really frightened about it. Some people are quite despairing. They don't believe our country is capable of providing a good quality of life. That feeds into why people voted Ukip and induces a culture of despair.

I do worry about population growth and the preservation of the green belt space but I don't think these are insurmountable problems.

It's difficult to see how the U.K. can be a member of the E.U. if it's not adherent to the principles set out in the convention.

Ultimately, any government is one which enjoys the majority of support of members of Parliament to carry out a policy.

It's very nice to be a rebel saying, 'I stand on my principles,' but if in fact that's not going to have any impact on the policy, it may be principled, but it doesn't deliver the better outcome that the country needs.

I think politicians should express their faith. I have never adhered to the Blair view that we don't do God, indeed I'm not sure that Blair does.

Some of the cases which have come to light of employers being disciplined or sacked for simply trying to talk about their faith in the workplace I find quite extraordinary. The sanitisation will lead to people of faith excluding themselves from the public space and being excluded.

I worry that there are attempts to push faith out of the public space. Clearly it happens at a level of local power.

Of course we should harness IT to strengthen public protection and public service delivery.

The state is there to serve the citizen, not the reverse.

The inexorable rise of the Internet and the citizen journalist presents us all with challenges for the future.

It is not always easy to balance freedom of expression with the needs of the justice system.

Believing in and practising the principles of the rule of law is, with our liberty and democracy, among the most powerful weapons we have. It is less effective if we blur its clarity and we should do this as sparingly as possible.

As has been the case throughout the history of terrorism, government anxiety centres on what to do about those against whom there may be intelligence but no usable evidence.

Whether it be the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 or the Terrorism Act 2000, there is no shortage of offences with which to prosecute those who go abroad to fight or train and who may threaten us on their return.

As one of the principal responsibilities of the government is to safeguard its citizens, it is entirely reasonable that it should look at what more might be done to improve security.

We need to understand why there is a void of participation in public life from the Muslim community and why it is a growing issue, and we need to understand the impact of this on wider civil society.

It is this desire to see civil society remain a strong and united force within the U.K. that has encouraged me to chair Citizens U.K. Commission on Islam, Participation and Public Life.

We do ourselves as politicians no favours if we are seen to peddle unachievable moonshine.

From the immediate abandonment of the promise of an extra £350m for the NHS, the history of Brexit is already littered with discarded and unfulfillable promises.

All the main parties accept that the stated wish of the United Kingdom electorate to leave the E.U. must be respected. That must place on us collectively a responsibility to work together to find a solution.