remove the personal immunity of the monarch

Currently:

1. Civil and criminal proceedings cannot be taken against the Sovereign as a person under UK law.

2. Acts of Parliament do not apply to The Queen in her personal capacity unless they are expressly stated to do so.

I suggest making the Queen subject to the law in the same way as everyone else.

 

 

Why is this idea important?

Currently:

1. Civil and criminal proceedings cannot be taken against the Sovereign as a person under UK law.

2. Acts of Parliament do not apply to The Queen in her personal capacity unless they are expressly stated to do so.

I suggest making the Queen subject to the law in the same way as everyone else.

 

 

repeal section 12 of Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829

"2.Offices witheld from Roman Catholics.

Provided also, that nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed to extend to enable any person or persons professing the Roman Catholic religion to hold or exercise the office of guardians and justices of the United Kingdom, or of regent of the United Kingdom, under whatever name, style, or title such office may be constituted; nor to enable any person, otherwise than as he is now by law enabled, to hold or enjoy the office of lord high chancellor, lord keeper or lord commissioner of the great seal of Great Britain . . . ; or his Majestys high commissioner to the general assembly of the Church of Scotland."

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=Act+(UK+Public+General)&ActiveTextDocId=1030253

Why is this idea important?

"2.Offices witheld from Roman Catholics.

Provided also, that nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed to extend to enable any person or persons professing the Roman Catholic religion to hold or exercise the office of guardians and justices of the United Kingdom, or of regent of the United Kingdom, under whatever name, style, or title such office may be constituted; nor to enable any person, otherwise than as he is now by law enabled, to hold or enjoy the office of lord high chancellor, lord keeper or lord commissioner of the great seal of Great Britain . . . ; or his Majestys high commissioner to the general assembly of the Church of Scotland."

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=Act+(UK+Public+General)&ActiveTextDocId=1030253

repeal all Church Measures

There appear to be around 50 Church Measures still on the Statute Law database.  Whilst these rules may well be important to those who are part of the Church of England they have no place in the law of the land.

This could be done as part of disestablishing the Church of England would reduce bureaucracy in the British legal system.

Why is this idea important?

There appear to be around 50 Church Measures still on the Statute Law database.  Whilst these rules may well be important to those who are part of the Church of England they have no place in the law of the land.

This could be done as part of disestablishing the Church of England would reduce bureaucracy in the British legal system.

make publicly companies subject to the Freedom of Information Act

Make all companies owned 90 per cent. or more by any number of public authorities subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

There is a major loophole in the UK’s Freedom of Information Act which means that a company wholly owned by one local authority is subject to the Act but a company owned by two local authorities is not. Currently a company owned 95% or even 99.5% by a single public authority is not subject to the provisions of the act, as only companies owned 100% by a single authority are currently covered.  This just does not make any sense.

I propose closing this loophole to make publicly owned companies accountable to the public.

Why is this idea important?

Make all companies owned 90 per cent. or more by any number of public authorities subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

There is a major loophole in the UK’s Freedom of Information Act which means that a company wholly owned by one local authority is subject to the Act but a company owned by two local authorities is not. Currently a company owned 95% or even 99.5% by a single public authority is not subject to the provisions of the act, as only companies owned 100% by a single authority are currently covered.  This just does not make any sense.

I propose closing this loophole to make publicly owned companies accountable to the public.