For some time, the European Union has had a firm commitment to medical research, and with some of the finest research scientists in the world, the United Kingdom was always going to benefit.

The EU has given a grant of £8m to Sheffield University to advance knowledge of stem cells and their potential.

As you may know, stem cells, when taken from an embryo, can be directed to grow into any part of the body, from bones to the brain. This technique could, in theory, be developed in to a new form of regenerative medicine which could cure a wide variety of diseases and disabilities.

I understand that this research is seen as controversial, and that is exactly why we need the tight regulations and ethical control placed upon it, but with this technology lives really can be saved and improved beyond measure – and Yorkshire scientists will be at the very heart of it.

British Sugar’s decision to close its factory in York down is obviously a blow to the region and particularly unwelcome to those who will be made redundant.

However, many people have been quick to blame the EU and the Common Agricultural Policy for the closure but as David Wilmott-Smith pointed out, in a letter to the Yorkshire Post, this is wide of the mark.

Godfrey Bloom and other opponents of the EU have consistently complained about surplus farm products as a consequence of high quotas yet, when the cuts are made - as they demanded - they are the first to condemn them.

The Common Agricultural Policy is problematic but it is an issue the EU is working hard to reform. To criticise the EU for making changes long called for is both hypocritical and insincere.

The Yorkshire Post has launched a campaign to have Wensleydale cheese given Protected Designation of Origin status by the EU. If awarded a PDO, Wensleydale will be afforded the same protection that the likes of champagne, parma ham and feta cheese currently enjoy. This means imitations would not be able to call themselves by the same name, indeed only cheese produced in Wensleydale could call itself Wensleydale.

You can read more about the benefits of a PDO and what it would do for Wensleydale cheese by reading the Yorkshire Post’s articles here.

As a country, and in particular a county, we have been slow to catch on to the benefits that the PDO offers, with France and Italy having hundreds more products protected than Britian. This is a very worthwhile campaign and one you can show your support of by signing the Yorkshire Post’s online petition here.

The immigration debate shows no sign of abating with even the Murdoch papers taking up wildly differing positions on the topic.

The Sun gives the Tories plenty of space to call for restrictions on EU immigrants, particularly if Romania and Bulgaria join in 2007, accompanied (at least online) by a picture of an apparently homeless EU migrant from one of the A-8 countries. This is a fine example of how the right-wing media works when discussing topics like immigration. To look at the picture you would think homelessness is an often-encountered problem for migrants who come to the UK. Yet,those who read the Sun from the day before will know that a mere 453 people out of 447,000 have been given homelessness assistance. So the picture is representative of 00.1% of the migrant population from the A-8 countries, or roughly one in every thousand! Predictably, the Sun fails to include this illuminating statistic alongside its emotive picture.

By contrast, the Times’ leader is stirringly positive about the benefits immigration has brought to the UK. It goes on to advocate extending the Workers Registration Scheme to Bulgarian and Romanian immigrants, as it has been such a success.

The Telegraphs’ David Rennie once again hits the nail on the head when discussing the issue on his blog. He points out that once Romania and Bulgaria join the EU, their citizens, like every other EU citizen, will be free to travel to whichever EU country they like.

What Britain can do is limit the amount of migrants that join the Workers Registration Scheme. As Rennie points out, if the government opts to do this it will simply encourage Romanians and Bulgarians to come here, as is there right, but stay to work illegally.

A black market in labour would encourage wages below the minimum wage and exploitation, something which the Workers Registration Scheme has helped immigrants largely avoid, as well as helping British workers avoid unfair competition.

The issue of immigration is dominating the front pages of the papers after government statistics revealed that 447,000 EU immigrants from former eastern bloc countries have come to live and work in the UK since 2004.

For the right-leaning media this number alone is enough to spark a plethora of “we’re full up” style stories and columns ahead of the expected accession of Bulgaria and Romania in January 2007.

Yet every other single statistic released about the Workers Registration Scheme demonstrates just how successful the immigration of such a large number of fellow EU citizens has been for the UK.

One of the most interesting was on Newsnight, where it was revealed that EU immigrants from former communist countries (known as the Accession Eight or A-8) currently make the biggest net contributions to the Treasury.

Over 80 per cent of A-8 immigrants are aged between 18 and 34. They are already educated and trained at no cost to Britain and almost all are healthy and working. This means that they are paying income tax, council tax, national insurance and VAT while claiming almost no money back from the government.

Indeed, the statistics (intriguingly printed by the Sun, though not in percentages) show, that out of 447,000 immigrants just 193 people have been awarded income support (0.04%), 574 people (after working for at least a year before losing their jobs) have been accepted for Job Seeker’s Allowance (0.1%), 110 have been given council houses (0.02%) and 453 awarded homelessness assistance (0.1%).Child benefit was awarded to 27,280 claimants but even this works out at a measly 6.1 per cent.

Of equal important is the amount of money being ploughed into local economies. Wages are not only being spent on obvious things such as rent and food but they are also providing welcome boosts to local infrastructures like public amenities and public transport.

Many of those calling for limits on immigration often argue that Britain’s resources simply can’t cope with the number of immigrants arriving. It is a given that immigrants will sometimes need the NHS, and the seven per cent who have brought their children here will use our schools, but all the evidence suggests that immigration will actually help improve public services, as their contributions will be greater than their demands.

With many of the A-8 immigrants expected to return home before they retire, the tax contributions they are making now and in the future will also help pay for our pensions.

I’m sure I am not the only one who can remember doom-laden leaders from the right-wing papers claiming that immigrants from new EU countries would travel to Britain to exploit the benefits system.

And the same newspapers are now rehashing the same old stories to print similarly inflammatory articles on the imminent arrival of immigrants from Bulgaria and Romania, should their accession go ahead in 2007, and should they be granted equivalent access.

The right has long called for a serious debate on immigration and now it is here all they can do is point to one big number, whilst ignoring the startling facts that prove immigration of EU citizens to the UK has been a resounding success.

My letter to UEFA has caused quite a stir in the local media. Within five minutes of a press release being sent out, Radio Leeds were on the phone asking for an interview. As I was was on holiday I ended up speaking to them live on air from a remote beach on a nuture reserve in Sicily.

More radio interviews followed with the BBC website, teletext and the YEP devoting space (and pictures) to the story. Plenty of unofficial Leeds United websites also covered it, including one in the Czech Republic!

I have also received a variety of letters, many offering me support and thanking me, while a couple accused me of wasting tax-payers money by focussing on an insignifcant issue.

In the wider scale of things the issue is clearly insignificant but I wrote the letter on the beach (Blackberrys can be very useful) on my holiday. So, the real cost to the taxpayer was the price of a postage stamp. I think that most people would agree that 44p spent opposing corruption in sport is hardly excessive!

Equally irritating and illuminating, is the fact that this story earned such news coverage. Even a quick peak at my website illustrates the different subjects I have spent far more time working on over the past year. Yet, whether it is helping to make the EU more efficient, consumer protection, the environment, education or a myriad of other matters none are given anywhere near the media coverage a minor story about football receives!

I have written to UEFA’s Chief Executive, Lars-Christer Olsson, to protest against the decision to allow A.C.Milan to play in this season’s European Champions League.

Milan, along with Juventus, Lazio and Fiorentina were found guilty by the Italian Football Federation (IFF) of fixing or attempting to fix the outcome of games during the past two seasons. All were banned from competing in Europe but on appeal the IFF allowed Milan entry to compete in the Champions League, despite finding their actions severe enough to warrant a Serie A points deduction.

Milan will start the 2006/2007 Serie A season with minus eight points but with UEFA refusing to ban them from Europe because of an "insufficient legal basis in the regulations", they will effectively escape any punishment. (And, with Fiorentina and Lazio deducted 19 and 11 points respectively and Juventus relegated, Milan’s path to the next season's Champions League as well, has in fact been made easier).

The Italian Football Federation have also rightly stripped Juventus of their past two Serie A titles and this is something I have urged UEFA to take great heed of. UEFA should ensure that at European level too, if a club is found guilty of match fixing, then they should lose any honours they won during the corrupt period.

This is not the first occasion Italian clubs have been involved in match fixing (indeed, A.C. Milan were relegated in 1980 for their part in a bribery scandal) and it instantly brought back memories of some deeply suspicious results English teams have suffered. The one which sticks in my mind most is Leeds’ defeat to A.C. Milan in the 1973 Cup Winners’ Cup final, where the referee, Christos Michas, performed so dubiously he was suspended for life!

UEFA can show they take any form of corruption in the game seriously by stripping clubs of trophies won thanks to match fixing. Such action would dramatically demonstrate a commitment to fair play and help restore faith in UEFA as a strong but fair governing body. And it is never too late to correct an injustice: if Milan did indeed bribe the referee in that match, then the winners medals should belatedly be given to Peter Lorimer and his Leeds team-mates.

I also think that the lenient treatment of the Italian clubs is in striking contrast with the five-year long ban UEFA imposed on all English clubs following the Heysel disaster in 1985. There was no talk then of an “insufficient legal basis in the regulations” impeding vigorous UEFA action! Furthermore, the ban was imposed because of the actions of hooligans that took place despite the efforts of the clubs involved, not because of them as is the case now where the clubs themselves have been found guilty. And the ban on English clubs included those who had no history of hooliganism.

It’s certainly an issue that has brought up a lot of questions and I will let you know if UEFA provide me with any answers.

You can read the letter I sent to UEFA by clicking here.

The Daily Mail is outraged by the government’s plans to teach school children the benefits of the EU. Predictably, and right on cue, Christopher Brooker accuses Europe Minister Geoff Hoon of attempting to brainwash our children.

Of course there is no mention of the veritable mountain of lies the Daily Mail (and the rest of the Eurosceptic media) has published in its efforts to deride the EU, which far more justifiably deserves the term brainwashing.

And, of course, on closer inspection, all the government is suggesting is that the school curriculum should not just teach children how national and local government functions, but also how the EU functions. Now, why would anyone want be against that? Unless, that is, they want to hide how it works so that people continue to believe the myths and lies that they spread.