This week’s emails included about 50 from constituents urging me to attend a nutrition event at the House of Commons with Jamie Oliver. I was able to reply by saying that I had beaten them to it because last Thursday evening I had spoken at just such an event, and indeed had followed Jamie Oliver (albeit his contribution had been on video).

The event, at the Brazilian Embassy, was part of the ‘Road to Rio’ – passing leadership from the London Olympics in 2012 to the Rio de Janeiro Olympics in 2016. A critical initiative launched in London, which needs to be refreshed and re-energised at Rio, is about healthy nutrition.

Last month the world signed-up to the Global Goals at the UN General Assembly, including the commitment to eradicate hunger and under-nutrition by 2030. Notwithstanding the fact that this has halved since 1990, eradicating it remains a very challenging ambition.

We have delivered ourselves into an extra-ordinary situation. Whilst the entire planet is being slowly cooked, a significant minority of its population appears to be determined on eating themselves into oblivion – almost as if they were characters in that seventies cult film La Grande Bouffe.

At the same time the developing world seeks to emulate our ‘sophistication’ by abandoning breastfeeding and increasingly accessing cheap sugar sources. The obscenity is the most under-nourished babies turn out later to be most prone to obesity, with all the morbidity and mortality that follows.

The bright spot is that the focus and finance to deal with this problem has been transformed since 2010. UK has played a major role in this: our aid spending on improving nutrition is $840 million annually. We will need to do more to meet the goal that we have set: In particular, we will need to do more for women and adolescent girls; we will need to do more to collect and analyse data in order to drive improved policy; we will do more to achieve better nutrition from agriculture.

I was able to announce 2 new research projects in partnership with the Gates Foundation. We will provide $41.5 million to fund research into improved agriculture and food choice in the most under-nourished places.

We need more donors, more innovation, and more global thinking. It is vital that we use the Rio Olympics to increase momentum. It would be an abomination if we continue to get ever fatter whilst others go under-nourished.

I know the young man from The New Forest, Colm Lock, whose egg spattered face was all over the national newspapers last week. Whilst some might say it was his own contributory negligence for loitering in the vicinity of the Tory Party conference in Manchester, I told him that he should wear it as a badge of honour.

I am afraid that I missed all the demonstrators: these are folk who do not rise early, and as I was always up with the lark and into the secure zone before 9 AM, there were never any demonstrators about.

By all accounts however, when they did get there they thoroughly enjoyed themselves hurling abuse at almost any passer-by. There were a couple of left wing media commentators who were really quite hurt to be called ‘Tory scum’. When they hurled more than just abuse their aim was often no more accurate: Boris Johnson had the best line, demanding the reintroduction of ball games in schools to revive these essential skills, given that the mob had missed him with every projectile that they had thrown.

On that basis perhaps Colm Lock’s egg was just a luck strike. Nevertheless, he can be justifiably proud of it. I recall the pride that I felt when I was struck by an egg in Wednesbury Market when I was fighting the West Bromwich West constituency in the 1992 general election – it was on the same day that John Major also took a direct hit with an egg. I took the view that, whilst I was in no danger of actually winning the seat, if I was important enough for someone to take the trouble to buy an egg and throw it at me, then I really had made my mark politically.

The spectacle of the demonstrations does however, beg the question of what has happened to the ‘gentler’ politics which Jeremy Corbyn announced that he would be ushering in?

It has been fascinating to watch a body of Labour supporters retreat into their comfort zone, readopting the ideology and modus operandi that served them so ill in the early nineteen eighties, but at least they appear to be enjoying themselves – whatever the electoral consequences might turn out to be.

I’ve just been back to Iraq for the first time since 2003 when I served there in the Army. I announced a further £20 million for our humanitarian relief effort, taking our commitment to £70 million since the summer of last year – that is aside from our military contribution to the international coalition against Daesh (ISIL). Despite the primacy of the Syrian war, Daish’s genesis is principally Iraqi.

A persistent band of internet trolls bombard me with emails purporting to prove that Daesh’s bestiality stems directly from the teachings of the Koran, and that the only true Muslims are – quite properly – violent jihadists. I have used this column previously to refute this nonsense. The reality is that Daesh, however efficiently organised and disciplined, is no more an homogenous phenomenon than any other terrorist group. It does, of course, consist of a significant proportion of religious nutters. It also contains gangsters, psychopaths, opportunists and – particularly in the higher echelons – plenty of Iraqi former regime loyalists. It is from this element that I believe the propensity for such extreme violence stems. These were men who served Saddam Hussein, and they learned their gruesome trade at the feet of the true Master.

Iraq has only a quarter of a million Syrian refugees (by comparison with over 2 million in nearby Turkey, and over a million in tiny Lebanon) but over three million of its own people have fled their homes and need help, which the government and the UN are asking for.

The difficulty is this: Notwithstanding the fall in the price of oil, were it not for Iraq’s rampant corruption; dysfunctional sectarian politics; bloated public sector; economic mismanagement – and free electricity, then Iraq ought to be able to weather the crisis from its own resources. It is difficult to touch the UK taxpayer for more, given the blood and treasure we have already shed there.

On the other hand, news of German and European generosity has reached the millions who have fled their homes to other parts of Iraq. Social media is alive with discussion of the prospects for more ambitious travel. We have to consider what more we need to do that might send the signal that remaining in Iraq still offers fair prospects.

Ben Carson the Republican presidential hopeful may have blown it by saying that it would be unconstitutional for a Muslim to be president of the USA, attracting the opprobrium of liberal commentators. He was, of course, wrong and ignorant of his own US Constitution which specifically excludes any religious bar to the office of President. It was pretty mild fare by comparison with the anti-Muslim propaganda that a number of my constituents continue to bombard me with. This is usually stuff they have picked up from dodgy websites and chain emails. In effect, they insist that the only authentic interpretation of Islam is as a totalitarian and violent ideology, ignoring the experience of over a thousand years of, for the most part, tolerant and peaceful co-existence.

The interaction of politics and religion has been an important factor in our own constitutional development. Lord Halifax in his Letter to a Dissenter sought to point out to Protestants opposed to the Anglican establishment, the dangers of making common cause with the papist tyrant James II, against the Church of England. Warning them that “infallibility and liberty are the two most contrary things in the world”. In this respect, returning to US politics for a moment, it is interesting to note that John F Kennedy, when he ran for president, made statements disavowing his Roman Catholicism, and insisting it would not unduly influence him as President.

Our own nation, notwithstanding its established Protestant religion, has evolved to be perhaps the most tolerant in the world of religious diversity. Equally, the USA, despite its Constitution defining itself as a ‘Nation under God’, is also a haven of toleration and diversity. I think that this earns us the right to comment critically on regimes that are failing to protect the rights of religious minorities, whether they be Islamic states accommodating increasing conservatism, or those in Israel wanting to define it as a Jewish state, with an aggressive settler movement determined to turn Palestine into a biblical theme park.

Most religions are benign, and all of them are a bit wacky, even my own. As Origen, one of the early church fathers pointed out ‘the more absurd it is, the more I believe it’. When it comes to the wacky stakes however, there is plenty of competition: Scientology; the Moonies; but is there anything to beat Mormonism?

Well, perhaps Atheism?

Last week I received a delegation of charities and voluntary organisations, many respected and well known household names, who came to complain about conditions in Gaza, and the restrictions which hamper their attempts to bring relief. In addition, they gave vent to their frustration about what they percieve as Israel’s increasingly brutal occupation of the Palestinian territories, with illegal settlements, demolitions, and collective punishments.

I responded by pointing out just how much we, as a government, are spending to demonstrate our support for the Palestinian people, it runs into hundreds of millions of pounds, and we are second only to the USA as a bilateral donor.

Notwithstanding the ever present terrorist threat, there is no getting away from the fact that, for staunch allies and supporters of Israel like ourselves, it is becoming increasingly difficult to defend some Israeli actions. As I said to ministers when I visited Israel recently, they aren’t giving us much to work with.

There are however, individuals and organisations in Israeli civil society who have the same concerns that were shared with me last week. This, at least, is an encouraging sign in what has been a bleak period for any prospect for peace.

I warned colleagues, excited at the prospect of the first Prime Minister’s questions with Jeremy Corbyn, that these things usually disappoint. It gave me no satisfaction to be proved right.

I do not recall a single PM or leader of the opposition in the last 18 years that hasn’t begun by announcing that they will do prime minister’s question time differently. Mercifully however, they all revert to type within a couple of weeks. Let’s hope Mr Corbyn follows the same pattern.

Every year a couple of people will write to me to complain about the lack of decorum at PMQs, but they are dwarfed by by the enormous number asking me to secure them tickets.

I think we are fortunate to have something with a bit of theatre to it, something of a gladiatorial contest. It is in stark contrast to the dullness of our continental neighbours. Now, if you want a really exciting parliamentary floor show, I can recommend Japan, which really can be authentically gladiatorial.

Da’ish is the grizzliest phenomenon of the modern world. Having specialised in finding the most shocking ways of carrying out public executions. It is now manufacturing and using chemical weapons with ghastly mass effect. Those of our disordered citizens who join this cult of death, declaring themselves to be the Queen’s enemies, should be given no quarter. They deserve to be targeted with whatever appropriate weapon systems we possess. Properly targeted and deployed, drones are an entirely satisfactory means with which to pursue them, after all…they had it coming.

To those of us brought up on Cricket and Christianity – giving us a C of E ‘middle and leg’ approach to most of life’s great questions – religious fanaticism is an incomprehensible phenomenon: we can entirely understand that men and women can be crazed and wicked.

It is impossible however, to understand their claim to be doing the will of God. The certainty with which Dai’sh terrorists believe that – should they die whilst massacring innocents – they will be welcomed to paradise with the gift of 72 virgins, is perhaps the most bizarre belief of all.

I understand, that now, scholars believe that it all comes down to a mistranslation: the offer is raisins, not virgins. Boy, are these guys going to have to handle disappointment.

I was listening to some of the coverage of the continuing refugee crisis on the wireless. They were asking refugees where they had fled from. Thus far, the focus has been on Syria and, in particular, Syrian families.

Actually, we estimate that only between one and three percent of Syrian refugees currently move beyond the countries bordering Syria. What is now apparent, is that there has been a rush of other migrants prompted by the signal that Europe is planning to accommodate them with a mandatory quota system.

I was not surprised to hear so many young men admitting that they had come from the Punjab – what sort of war zone is that?

This is exactly what the Prime Minister warned, about the European mandatory quota proposal.

I make no apology for returning to the subject of migration yet again: it is the chief source of my correspondence and it dominates the headlines.

The purpose of the international conventions on asylum to which we are a party, is to give sanctuary.

The migrants currently making their way through Europe are seeking a better life, and who wouldn’t, given what they have experienced. They should not be blamed for their desperate search for something better. They have suffered horribly, they invested heavily by paying criminal gangs of traffickers to bring them to Europe’s shores. They have braved perilous journeys, which for too many have proved fatal, including 3 year old Aylan Kurdi, his brother and his mother.

They all have however, passed through safe countries where sanctuary was available. Having seen the refugee camps in the region, I do not blame them for seeking a new and better life, but Europe would offer a better life than is currently available to three quarters of humanity. The EU plan for every member state to take a quota of refugees who arrive in Europe would send a powerful message to millions of other migrants to follow. It would be a bonanza to the traffickers and would multiply the number of deaths.

Britain is doing the right thing by the people of Syria: the Royal Navy is rescuing thousands in the Mediterranean. We are the second largest donor by a mile: we have committed £1 billion, more than we have given in any other such crisis, ever. We are funding shelter, healthcare, food, water, sanitation, counselling, protection, and education for the children so that there is ‘no lost generation’. In the region our money goes much further, helping so many more.

Of Course, the Prime Minister is right to respond to the public mood. The right way to do so, is to do more of what we are already doing: by working with the United Nations agencies to take the vulnerable and most deserving cases in the refugee camps – people who couldn’t possibly afford the charges of the traffickers. This way we can avoid so many more bodies on the beaches.