Reform the Bail Act 1976

I believe that the following changes should be made to the Bail Act 1976: no person should be remanded into custody for a non-imprisonable offence under any circumstances, there should be a 28 day time restriction imposed on any remand into custody for breach of bail conditions, no defendant should be remanded into custody for a period exceeding the half maximum custodial sentence for the offence or 24 months (whichever comes sooner) under any circumstances. I also believe that any days spent on remand in a psychiatric hospital or similar treatment facility should count towards time served and that any days spent on remand should be deducted from both the custodial and licence portions of any custodial sentence imposed should the court subsequently impose such a sentence.

Why is this idea important?

I believe that the following changes should be made to the Bail Act 1976: no person should be remanded into custody for a non-imprisonable offence under any circumstances, there should be a 28 day time restriction imposed on any remand into custody for breach of bail conditions, no defendant should be remanded into custody for a period exceeding the half maximum custodial sentence for the offence or 24 months (whichever comes sooner) under any circumstances. I also believe that any days spent on remand in a psychiatric hospital or similar treatment facility should count towards time served and that any days spent on remand should be deducted from both the custodial and licence portions of any custodial sentence imposed should the court subsequently impose such a sentence.

Permanent ban on all wood burning and bonfires in UK

Bonfires and wood burning smokeless fuel are causing a lot if detrimental negative consequences to the environment and public health. PM2.5 is harmful amongst other toxic particles that are emitted when burning waste and the government is keeping this quiet and not educating the public about its harmful effects.

We need the government to step up and take appropriate action for this problem that is causing so much damage to the pollution levels and to the quality of life of residents who are subjected to it on a daily basis with little support or control over it happening.

If anyone is able to start a petition on change.org then please do so because it is the best way for this to be heard to help action to be taken.

Why is this idea important?

Bonfires and wood burning smokeless fuel are causing a lot if detrimental negative consequences to the environment and public health. PM2.5 is harmful amongst other toxic particles that are emitted when burning waste and the government is keeping this quiet and not educating the public about its harmful effects.

We need the government to step up and take appropriate action for this problem that is causing so much damage to the pollution levels and to the quality of life of residents who are subjected to it on a daily basis with little support or control over it happening.

If anyone is able to start a petition on change.org then please do so because it is the best way for this to be heard to help action to be taken.

Reduce traffic and pollution, introduce ‘local jobs for local people law’

The Government should introduce regulations to ensure that Companies give greater priority to employing people who live local to the place of work (when candidates are very closely or equally matched, the job applicant from the local area should get priority).

Why is this idea important?

The Government should introduce regulations to ensure that Companies give greater priority to employing people who live local to the place of work (when candidates are very closely or equally matched, the job applicant from the local area should get priority).

Stop the Gull Cull

I’ve learnt that people despise these “vermin like creatures” but in my opinion, I believe that the gull culling is wrong.
Having a passion for wildlife, and ornithology, I believe that no bird is different in terms of characteristics. The fact is, people also despise Feral Pigeons (Columba livia), but nobody has thought about calling a cull. What people don’t understand is that no matter the size, nor ferocity of a bird, they are just hunting for survival. It’s all well and good, that we spend £200 million (average spending in uk per year) on small, garden birds each year in the UK, to conserve birds, but the point is nobody cares to feed our common seabirds. Your intelligent people, and I’m sure you know that we shouldn’t ‘splashing the cash’ on seagull food, but that’s why we see them commonly, raiding through litter bins in schools and public areas. Think about this: take a Goldcrest for instance: without bird food, provided, the Goldcrest’s natural instincts are to forage (in fact they forage 80% of the day), which is exactly what the seagulls are doing.
Breeding season
It’s a fact that the aggressiveness of birds during the breeding season increases, it’s the same in Robins too. The breeding season runs from February into August, which in hotter months, people take trips to the seaside. I’m sure we all love to be by the sea, but it’s just chance that we run into these gulls, when their hunting and foraging for food, for their young. And since nobody feeds them, they become aggressive towards humans and steal food. And so what, we lose a chip or two, it’s not a big deal. But as I mentioned earlier, they become more aggressive when other birds come into their territory. It’s the same convention with humans.

Why is this idea important?

I’ve learnt that people despise these “vermin like creatures” but in my opinion, I believe that the gull culling is wrong.
Having a passion for wildlife, and ornithology, I believe that no bird is different in terms of characteristics. The fact is, people also despise Feral Pigeons (Columba livia), but nobody has thought about calling a cull. What people don’t understand is that no matter the size, nor ferocity of a bird, they are just hunting for survival. It’s all well and good, that we spend £200 million (average spending in uk per year) on small, garden birds each year in the UK, to conserve birds, but the point is nobody cares to feed our common seabirds. Your intelligent people, and I’m sure you know that we shouldn’t ‘splashing the cash’ on seagull food, but that’s why we see them commonly, raiding through litter bins in schools and public areas. Think about this: take a Goldcrest for instance: without bird food, provided, the Goldcrest’s natural instincts are to forage (in fact they forage 80% of the day), which is exactly what the seagulls are doing.
Breeding season
It’s a fact that the aggressiveness of birds during the breeding season increases, it’s the same in Robins too. The breeding season runs from February into August, which in hotter months, people take trips to the seaside. I’m sure we all love to be by the sea, but it’s just chance that we run into these gulls, when their hunting and foraging for food, for their young. And since nobody feeds them, they become aggressive towards humans and steal food. And so what, we lose a chip or two, it’s not a big deal. But as I mentioned earlier, they become more aggressive when other birds come into their territory. It’s the same convention with humans.

Remove First Time Simple Cautions at least after 10 years

A small mistake during university time is punishing me for a life time. The amount of stress it has caused is really unexplainable . It would be a great help by government if they remove 1 time cautions atleast after 10years time , not to get any benefit but it really removes all the stress and gives peace of mind.

Why is this idea important?

A small mistake during university time is punishing me for a life time. The amount of stress it has caused is really unexplainable . It would be a great help by government if they remove 1 time cautions atleast after 10years time , not to get any benefit but it really removes all the stress and gives peace of mind.

Stop and search

A lot of these idiots are driving around on a weekend night. What exactly are they doing? The ones round here spend a lot of time in the bus stops and parked up. Are they just hanging out? I doubt it.

Why is this idea important?

A lot of these idiots are driving around on a weekend night. What exactly are they doing? The ones round here spend a lot of time in the bus stops and parked up. Are they just hanging out? I doubt it.

Bus Lanes should not be operative on Bank Holidays

Motorists pay huge road tax for driving on roads which are becoming narrower with every passing day while the number of cars are increasing. It is the duty of the local government to facilitate the motorists and not loot them by issuing PCNs for driving in an empty bus lane on a bank holiday.

Why is this idea important?

Motorists pay huge road tax for driving on roads which are becoming narrower with every passing day while the number of cars are increasing. It is the duty of the local government to facilitate the motorists and not loot them by issuing PCNs for driving in an empty bus lane on a bank holiday.

Flexible use of agricultural land

Helps solve the housing crisis and boosts the economy at no cost to the government
The current restrictions on farm land are based on old concepts of land useage and do not take into account modern low carbon eco businesses that will boost the future economy

Why is this idea important?

Helps solve the housing crisis and boosts the economy at no cost to the government
The current restrictions on farm land are based on old concepts of land useage and do not take into account modern low carbon eco businesses that will boost the future economy

Robocaller & Telemarketer blacklist

Users of PBX telephone systems could then regularly update the currently used Robo/Telemarketer numbers, and remove false poisitives. Public would be assured that the listed numbers are current and that private subscribers and false positives are not being blocked.

The current system of collecting these numbers from diverse web databases means anyone can blacklist YOUR NUMBER.

Why is this idea important?

Users of PBX telephone systems could then regularly update the currently used Robo/Telemarketer numbers, and remove false poisitives. Public would be assured that the listed numbers are current and that private subscribers and false positives are not being blocked.

The current system of collecting these numbers from diverse web databases means anyone can blacklist YOUR NUMBER.

Reduce SMIDSYs

The Highway Code tells us not to park within 10 meters of a junction either side or indeed opposite one. This was at a time when in general vehicles were small I look at Morris minor or Austin A30 or ford Anglia 105s. Since then vehicles have got a lot larger and so consideration needs to be given to increasing the safe distances that vehicles can park at in relation to junctions and freely available vision. I would suggest that 45 ft or more should be considered.

The matter at present was made worse many years ago with the introduction of double yellow lines. which were put in place on certain junctions by local authorities. The purpose of such lines was I believe to give clear vision for drivers to exit at junctions onto main roads usually arterial ones. It would appear, however,by the number of smidsys [ Sorry mate I didn’t se you] collisions that in some order many have failed to do just that. The reason? Simply because they didn’t adopt the 10 meter distance previously mentioned. Some junctions have as little as 2 meters of double yellow lines and therefore we have a situation where drivers now believe that it is lawful to park where those double yellow lines end. That being much closer to the junction than previous legislation as ism advised in the H.C.
Its a danger that has been created by local authorities and one which is easy to recommend. Increase safe visibility particularly of oncoming traffic approaching from the right side of a junction. Increase the double yellow lines to now 45ft or more, taking into account the greater visual obstruction new larger manufactured vehicles cause. With greater clearer visibility and less need for drivers to pull out into oncoming traffic in order to gain a decent view of oncoming traffic there should be fewer accidents at junctions.

We must also remember that with the introduction of 20 mph areas it will have little or no effect on the number of such smidsy.s at junctions as the speed vehicles leave an exit at junctions will remain the same in all cases. and traffic on the main arterial roads will still be travelling at or close to the normal 30 mph speed I limit also.

Why is this idea important?

The Highway Code tells us not to park within 10 meters of a junction either side or indeed opposite one. This was at a time when in general vehicles were small I look at Morris minor or Austin A30 or ford Anglia 105s. Since then vehicles have got a lot larger and so consideration needs to be given to increasing the safe distances that vehicles can park at in relation to junctions and freely available vision. I would suggest that 45 ft or more should be considered.

The matter at present was made worse many years ago with the introduction of double yellow lines. which were put in place on certain junctions by local authorities. The purpose of such lines was I believe to give clear vision for drivers to exit at junctions onto main roads usually arterial ones. It would appear, however,by the number of smidsys [ Sorry mate I didn’t se you] collisions that in some order many have failed to do just that. The reason? Simply because they didn’t adopt the 10 meter distance previously mentioned. Some junctions have as little as 2 meters of double yellow lines and therefore we have a situation where drivers now believe that it is lawful to park where those double yellow lines end. That being much closer to the junction than previous legislation as ism advised in the H.C.
Its a danger that has been created by local authorities and one which is easy to recommend. Increase safe visibility particularly of oncoming traffic approaching from the right side of a junction. Increase the double yellow lines to now 45ft or more, taking into account the greater visual obstruction new larger manufactured vehicles cause. With greater clearer visibility and less need for drivers to pull out into oncoming traffic in order to gain a decent view of oncoming traffic there should be fewer accidents at junctions.

We must also remember that with the introduction of 20 mph areas it will have little or no effect on the number of such smidsy.s at junctions as the speed vehicles leave an exit at junctions will remain the same in all cases. and traffic on the main arterial roads will still be travelling at or close to the normal 30 mph speed I limit also.

Ban tax havens

The government needs to stop all companies who blatantly avoid paying their fair share of tax for example boots the chemist ,Starbucks etc. They need to get their act together and change the laws pronto. This would see a quicker end to the national deficit, which has gone up not down and an end to many cut backs for the elderly etc. If everyone went on like these companies  our country would soon go down the pan so why are the government letting this happen? It’s an absolute disgrace.

Why is this idea important?

The government needs to stop all companies who blatantly avoid paying their fair share of tax for example boots the chemist ,Starbucks etc. They need to get their act together and change the laws pronto. This would see a quicker end to the national deficit, which has gone up not down and an end to many cut backs for the elderly etc. If everyone went on like these companies  our country would soon go down the pan so why are the government letting this happen? It’s an absolute disgrace.

Rights to establish a static caravan as a permanent home on your own landW

We have bought a building plot but after establishing the services and servitude to access a private road and after paying solicitor, engineer re flood risk assessment and builder etc we cannot afford to do the new build. We can only afford to upgrade our static caravan to make it a permanent residence. My husband can make it look to blend in with our surroundings as he is a retired builder. However the council will not allow us to do this. We are so disillusioned by this as we have made the plot look neat and presentable where before it was a rough overgrown plot.

Why is this idea important?

We have bought a building plot but after establishing the services and servitude to access a private road and after paying solicitor, engineer re flood risk assessment and builder etc we cannot afford to do the new build. We can only afford to upgrade our static caravan to make it a permanent residence. My husband can make it look to blend in with our surroundings as he is a retired builder. However the council will not allow us to do this. We are so disillusioned by this as we have made the plot look neat and presentable where before it was a rough overgrown plot.

Stop all benefits to immigrants

stop all forms of benefits being cliamed by non british people jsa esa child benefit tax credits housing benefits free health care and also just stop eu immigration fullstop as it has ruined most east midland towns as non british workers being employed by gang agencys and stoping british people from finding work

Why is this idea important?

stop all forms of benefits being cliamed by non british people jsa esa child benefit tax credits housing benefits free health care and also just stop eu immigration fullstop as it has ruined most east midland towns as non british workers being employed by gang agencys and stoping british people from finding work

SAFE SPACE CAMPAIGNER none aggressive driving techniques

Information re safe stopping distances and speed limits should to my mind be at the beginning of general information at 103 and not at 126 half way through. Speed, safe distance and stopping distances are all important right from the beginning and not how to give signals. etc. Sect 126 the 2 second rule is ambiguous and should be more factual and start at 2 seconds but go up at speeds shown in the safe stopping distances appropriately. So if the stopping distance at 60 miles per hour is 240ft [HC}and the distance travelled per second is 90ft then its more appropriate to have a 3 second gap and not a 2 second one. 3 seconds at 60mph.meaning a distance travelled of 270ft. a much safer distance than the 2 second gap of only 180ft. .

A safer distance on a motorway would again be the 3 second rule… at 70 mph a vehicle travels at 105ft per second and thus in 3 seconds it will travel 315ft or basically the 100 mtrs. The distance of the little white marker posts painted blue and red. on the side of the hard shoulder. Also of the 3 blue exiting off signs when driving towards a slip road off the motorway.

The 2 second rule is difficult for drivers to make that calculation finding an object and then counting 2 seconds correctly. What I suggest is that as street lighting in towns at 30 and 40 mph mph varies between 90 and 120 ft it is easy to be that distance between oneself and the vehicle in front. By doing so they are no longer tailgating at say 30 or 40ft but the fuller safer full stopping distance should that vehicle in front come to a sudden stop. On country roads at 50 and 60 mph. the Safer Space would be 2 lamp posts apart. Where no lamp posts exist then by allowing that space previously drivers would begin to be able to determine that space themselves.

Many driver believe that they are safe at that shorter distance because they have miss read the HC about sudden slowing and stopping. They allow something like only the thinking distance and when they see the brake lights of the vehicle in front come on they brake also in tandem so to speak. They fail to recognise that if the vehicle in front does stop suddenly in a short distance having hit something then they will have no chance to avoid a collision and generally will complain that it was not their fault as they had no time to brake. Many accidents of this nature occur on the motorways where insufficient space is given in relation to the speed or in town urban scenarios with heavier traffic.

So I believe for modern day driving a change of attitude towards Safe Space is Necessary and forget the now overated attitude that we have with speed .
It needs tidying up and bringing forward to the beginning of driving and drivers awareness., To have Safe Space in front of one is to be driving alone with fewer dangers.

PS the two chevron rule on a motorway is not the full stopping distance at 70 mph and so can be dangerous if followed./adopted.

Why is this idea important?

Information re safe stopping distances and speed limits should to my mind be at the beginning of general information at 103 and not at 126 half way through. Speed, safe distance and stopping distances are all important right from the beginning and not how to give signals. etc. Sect 126 the 2 second rule is ambiguous and should be more factual and start at 2 seconds but go up at speeds shown in the safe stopping distances appropriately. So if the stopping distance at 60 miles per hour is 240ft [HC}and the distance travelled per second is 90ft then its more appropriate to have a 3 second gap and not a 2 second one. 3 seconds at 60mph.meaning a distance travelled of 270ft. a much safer distance than the 2 second gap of only 180ft. .

A safer distance on a motorway would again be the 3 second rule… at 70 mph a vehicle travels at 105ft per second and thus in 3 seconds it will travel 315ft or basically the 100 mtrs. The distance of the little white marker posts painted blue and red. on the side of the hard shoulder. Also of the 3 blue exiting off signs when driving towards a slip road off the motorway.

The 2 second rule is difficult for drivers to make that calculation finding an object and then counting 2 seconds correctly. What I suggest is that as street lighting in towns at 30 and 40 mph mph varies between 90 and 120 ft it is easy to be that distance between oneself and the vehicle in front. By doing so they are no longer tailgating at say 30 or 40ft but the fuller safer full stopping distance should that vehicle in front come to a sudden stop. On country roads at 50 and 60 mph. the Safer Space would be 2 lamp posts apart. Where no lamp posts exist then by allowing that space previously drivers would begin to be able to determine that space themselves.

Many driver believe that they are safe at that shorter distance because they have miss read the HC about sudden slowing and stopping. They allow something like only the thinking distance and when they see the brake lights of the vehicle in front come on they brake also in tandem so to speak. They fail to recognise that if the vehicle in front does stop suddenly in a short distance having hit something then they will have no chance to avoid a collision and generally will complain that it was not their fault as they had no time to brake. Many accidents of this nature occur on the motorways where insufficient space is given in relation to the speed or in town urban scenarios with heavier traffic.

So I believe for modern day driving a change of attitude towards Safe Space is Necessary and forget the now overated attitude that we have with speed .
It needs tidying up and bringing forward to the beginning of driving and drivers awareness., To have Safe Space in front of one is to be driving alone with fewer dangers.

PS the two chevron rule on a motorway is not the full stopping distance at 70 mph and so can be dangerous if followed./adopted.

Loophole in HC re overtaking on single or double white lines generally on bends.

The Hc makes mention when you can overtake and pass over the solid white lines such as a horse or a cyclist or a road maintenance vehicle. and that’s all. what happened to cattle sheep, cows, pedestrians. Also apparently you can overtake a horse or horses if ridden or walked but if its part of a cart or carriage then you CANT OVERTAKE if its a gypsy caravan say or a rig. now that seems silly. Also all things that can be overtaken must be doing less than 10 mph. so if its say a tractor fully loaded going uphill AT 20 mph then more fool you if you attempt an overtake.

I do feel that there are to many limitations and the regulations and/or advise should be looked at.

Why is this idea important?

The Hc makes mention when you can overtake and pass over the solid white lines such as a horse or a cyclist or a road maintenance vehicle. and that’s all. what happened to cattle sheep, cows, pedestrians. Also apparently you can overtake a horse or horses if ridden or walked but if its part of a cart or carriage then you CANT OVERTAKE if its a gypsy caravan say or a rig. now that seems silly. Also all things that can be overtaken must be doing less than 10 mph. so if its say a tractor fully loaded going uphill AT 20 mph then more fool you if you attempt an overtake.

I do feel that there are to many limitations and the regulations and/or advise should be looked at.

Publication of cautions / minor offences and equal opportunities employment law

Is The Law Requiring The Publication Of Cautions / Minor Offences When Applying For A Job Incompatible With Equal Opportunities Employment Law?

Is the government’s policy or UK law requiring the publication of any cautions for minor offences when applying for a job incompatible with equal opportunities employment law which makes it illegal for a prospective employer to discriminate based on race?

For example, if a UK citizen with a caution for a minor offense will show up on DBS check for up to 6 years when applying for certain jobs in the UK. A German citizen, with exactly the same minor offence, committed at the same time will only have to declare that offense for 3 years when applying for the same job as the UK citizen. After the first 3 years there is a 3 year period when the UK citizen would be discriminated against. The German doesn’t need to declare, indeed his/her record has been deleted, whereas the UK citizen would have to declare.

No matter how much the government insists companies should not discriminate on this, and be fair when assessing such situations, there is undoubtedly a human reaction to knowing a candidate has a criminal record which will affect many employment decisions.

Why is this idea important?

Is The Law Requiring The Publication Of Cautions / Minor Offences When Applying For A Job Incompatible With Equal Opportunities Employment Law?

Is the government’s policy or UK law requiring the publication of any cautions for minor offences when applying for a job incompatible with equal opportunities employment law which makes it illegal for a prospective employer to discriminate based on race?

For example, if a UK citizen with a caution for a minor offense will show up on DBS check for up to 6 years when applying for certain jobs in the UK. A German citizen, with exactly the same minor offence, committed at the same time will only have to declare that offense for 3 years when applying for the same job as the UK citizen. After the first 3 years there is a 3 year period when the UK citizen would be discriminated against. The German doesn’t need to declare, indeed his/her record has been deleted, whereas the UK citizen would have to declare.

No matter how much the government insists companies should not discriminate on this, and be fair when assessing such situations, there is undoubtedly a human reaction to knowing a candidate has a criminal record which will affect many employment decisions.

Equal rights to fine councils back

Common people should be able to fine the council for potholes, broken glass shards, over grown bushes etc. Much like the Council fines people that parks slightly carelessly, yes sometimes parking carelessly is unsafe, but so is poorly maintained roads and paths.

Why is this idea important?

Common people should be able to fine the council for potholes, broken glass shards, over grown bushes etc. Much like the Council fines people that parks slightly carelessly, yes sometimes parking carelessly is unsafe, but so is poorly maintained roads and paths.

Have a wider option of forms of identification

most places in the UK e.g ( pubs,shops etc) only (mostly) accept a drivers licence or a valid passport as id but there are other cards such as young Scot cards , citizen card etc which have the PASS logo on them but most shops don’t except them which is bad for 16 years old because most people don’t or cant afford a passport and they want to buy lottery tickets or scratch cards but they don’t have either passport of drivers licence 🙁

Why is this idea important?

most places in the UK e.g ( pubs,shops etc) only (mostly) accept a drivers licence or a valid passport as id but there are other cards such as young Scot cards , citizen card etc which have the PASS logo on them but most shops don’t except them which is bad for 16 years old because most people don’t or cant afford a passport and they want to buy lottery tickets or scratch cards but they don’t have either passport of drivers licence 🙁

Introduce New Land use – Permaculture

Allow for small parcels of land to be sold for the sole purpose of setting up a permaculture smallholding to be farmed by a family/community expressly to grow food in accordance with permaculure techniques that are sustainable and environmentally friendly. The land use will also include off grid environmentally friendly dwellings.

Why is this idea important?

Allow for small parcels of land to be sold for the sole purpose of setting up a permaculture smallholding to be farmed by a family/community expressly to grow food in accordance with permaculure techniques that are sustainable and environmentally friendly. The land use will also include off grid environmentally friendly dwellings.

Land cut of by roads to small to farm

Land that has been cut by pass’s and other roads and then to small to farm should be made available for Eco living and perhaps for locals at affordable prices this could be done all most straight away instead of letting the land go to waste. Let’s make land work

Why is this idea important?

Land that has been cut by pass’s and other roads and then to small to farm should be made available for Eco living and perhaps for locals at affordable prices this could be done all most straight away instead of letting the land go to waste. Let’s make land work

Reduction and Simplification of the welfare bill by granting certain rights to Veterans

This information deals with another matter that if implemented would go some way towards helping veterans of all ages but in particular those of the Pre-1975 era, and as a by product go some way towards simplifying and therefore reducing the overall welfare ‘bill’

I am a member of a group of Veterans group from all Three services that are concerned with Veterans pensions, in particular the Pre-1975 era. And as a group we are considering raising a petition as a step towards having the matter discussed at government level.

This document is not meant to supersede or replace any petition / document being produced by any group that is currently in the process of getting support.

INFORMATION TO SUPPORT THE GRANTING CERTAIN ‘RIGHTS’ TO VETERANS OF ALL AGE’s AND LENGTH OF SERVICE. (In Brief)
1.
At this time if you left military service after 1975 and served for a minimum of 5 years you were eligible for a military pension, this later changed to 2 years, but was not applied retrospectively there are certain age limits, there are several official documents covering this subject.

2.
If you left military service before 1975 you do not get a military pension unless you served for 22 years (for other ranks)and 18 years for officers. Many of those who were serving before 1975 may have served, for example up to 20 years of a 22 year term
before being made redundant under a defence cuts and so did not qualify for a pension.

3.
Many of these ex-servicemen and women were unable to ‘sign on’ to complete the required time period of 22 years for a variety of reasons,
defence cut backs, specialty no longer required, too senior, etc..It should be noted that all defence cuts etc. were published in the national press and considered to be in the public domain, however a large number of service personnel were unaware of this for a variety of reasons such as being on overseas duty.

4.
Many of these ex-servicemen and women are what are now called ‘Cold War Warriors’ having served in Korea, Malay, Kenya, Cyprus, Aden,
Malaysia, Northern Ireland and many other of the conflicts that the United Kingdom was involved in during period from 1946 to late 1970’s.

5.
Many of these ex-servicemen and women are ‘walking wounded’ and are supported by organisations such as COMBAT STRESS, SOLDIERS OFF THE STREETS, and SSAFA to mention a few.To many of these ex-servicemen and women the cost of medication (Prescriptions)and housing is a large expense and in some cases puts them on the streets, the idea of granting certain rights similar to Pension credits to Veterans would go some way to easing this. They do NOT SHOW UP IN OFFICIAL figures as they are dealt with by charities

6.
Pension Credits, if you qualify, it is a means tested benefit , it entitles you to FREE MEDICAL (Prescriptions) FREE DENTAL CARE, FREE
LEGAL COSTS and other benefits such as HOUSING SUPPORT. Granting of similar benefits as A RIGHT to a member of the armed forces ON DISCHARGE would go a long way to reducing the number that become reliant on the state and charities, it would also ease their transition to civilian life.Further granting the automatic right to a monetary sum similar to that given as ‘Pension Credits’as a top to the National minimum for survival’ as laid down by the Government would reduce the numbers claiming various benefits, this could be implemented at Military retirement age or 60 years which ever is earlier. It could be granted when proof of military service is proved.

7.
If you are an LEGAL immigrant to this country and you reach the age of 60 you are automatically are eligible to receive Pension Credits, and if you qualify, ( it is means tested ), it entitles you to FREE MEDICAL (Prescriptions) FREE DENTAL CARE, FREE LEGAL COSTS and other benefits such as HOUSING SUPPORT.
The government states that you must have a minimum income every week, this is currently running at around £230.00 per week, so if you are
a ex serviceman surviving on a state pension of between £100 to £200 a week you must apply for Pension credits, it is means tested and not always granted.

8.
This seems to be an injustice where a person who served his / her country must apply for what should be theirs by right, it is proposed that a petition be raised to make it a right that all ex-servicemen / women who qualify be given the same rights as those who get Pension credits.

9.
A House of commons briefing document ( No. SN1151 dated 14.05.14 ) Produced for the business and transport section stated that, QUOTE
“Successive governments have argued that discretionary changes to improve the benefits from public service pension schemes should be
implemented from a current date for future service only. Improvements are not applied retrospectively, as to do otherwise would “make any worthwhile improvements unaffordable.” (Perhaps an unfortunate choice of words).
This implies that giving pensions to ex -military personnel who served prior to 1975 would be unaffordable. It should be noted that it was not considered unaffordable when they were asked to put themselves in harms way when serving.

10.
The scheme roughly outline above would almost certainly not be UNAFFORDABLE as most are probably in receipt of some form of benefit and this would replace any benefit if correctly implemented say via the new Universal credit.Additionally it would be seen by most as an earned right and not charity, making it a right and not means tested would go some way to helping those who are currently ‘disabled’ and unable to adjust to Civilian life. It would also go some way to addressing the ‘Duty of Care’ the military has to it’s former employees.
To address the idea of it being unaffordable it should be noted that due age this will be a declining expense. But the purchase of ‘DUCK PONDS’ is an increasing one.

11.
Further this should be seen as a first step to a study into the provision of a pro-rata pension to the same conditions as those serving after 1975.
Any such study should involve Veterans and Veteran’s organisations, as to being an UNAFFORDABLE expense, due the age of most of the veterans concerned it would be a decreasing expense.

Why is this idea important?

This information deals with another matter that if implemented would go some way towards helping veterans of all ages but in particular those of the Pre-1975 era, and as a by product go some way towards simplifying and therefore reducing the overall welfare ‘bill’

I am a member of a group of Veterans group from all Three services that are concerned with Veterans pensions, in particular the Pre-1975 era. And as a group we are considering raising a petition as a step towards having the matter discussed at government level.

This document is not meant to supersede or replace any petition / document being produced by any group that is currently in the process of getting support.

INFORMATION TO SUPPORT THE GRANTING CERTAIN ‘RIGHTS’ TO VETERANS OF ALL AGE’s AND LENGTH OF SERVICE. (In Brief)
1.
At this time if you left military service after 1975 and served for a minimum of 5 years you were eligible for a military pension, this later changed to 2 years, but was not applied retrospectively there are certain age limits, there are several official documents covering this subject.

2.
If you left military service before 1975 you do not get a military pension unless you served for 22 years (for other ranks)and 18 years for officers. Many of those who were serving before 1975 may have served, for example up to 20 years of a 22 year term
before being made redundant under a defence cuts and so did not qualify for a pension.

3.
Many of these ex-servicemen and women were unable to ‘sign on’ to complete the required time period of 22 years for a variety of reasons,
defence cut backs, specialty no longer required, too senior, etc..It should be noted that all defence cuts etc. were published in the national press and considered to be in the public domain, however a large number of service personnel were unaware of this for a variety of reasons such as being on overseas duty.

4.
Many of these ex-servicemen and women are what are now called ‘Cold War Warriors’ having served in Korea, Malay, Kenya, Cyprus, Aden,
Malaysia, Northern Ireland and many other of the conflicts that the United Kingdom was involved in during period from 1946 to late 1970’s.

5.
Many of these ex-servicemen and women are ‘walking wounded’ and are supported by organisations such as COMBAT STRESS, SOLDIERS OFF THE STREETS, and SSAFA to mention a few.To many of these ex-servicemen and women the cost of medication (Prescriptions)and housing is a large expense and in some cases puts them on the streets, the idea of granting certain rights similar to Pension credits to Veterans would go some way to easing this. They do NOT SHOW UP IN OFFICIAL figures as they are dealt with by charities

6.
Pension Credits, if you qualify, it is a means tested benefit , it entitles you to FREE MEDICAL (Prescriptions) FREE DENTAL CARE, FREE
LEGAL COSTS and other benefits such as HOUSING SUPPORT. Granting of similar benefits as A RIGHT to a member of the armed forces ON DISCHARGE would go a long way to reducing the number that become reliant on the state and charities, it would also ease their transition to civilian life.Further granting the automatic right to a monetary sum similar to that given as ‘Pension Credits’as a top to the National minimum for survival’ as laid down by the Government would reduce the numbers claiming various benefits, this could be implemented at Military retirement age or 60 years which ever is earlier. It could be granted when proof of military service is proved.

7.
If you are an LEGAL immigrant to this country and you reach the age of 60 you are automatically are eligible to receive Pension Credits, and if you qualify, ( it is means tested ), it entitles you to FREE MEDICAL (Prescriptions) FREE DENTAL CARE, FREE LEGAL COSTS and other benefits such as HOUSING SUPPORT.
The government states that you must have a minimum income every week, this is currently running at around £230.00 per week, so if you are
a ex serviceman surviving on a state pension of between £100 to £200 a week you must apply for Pension credits, it is means tested and not always granted.

8.
This seems to be an injustice where a person who served his / her country must apply for what should be theirs by right, it is proposed that a petition be raised to make it a right that all ex-servicemen / women who qualify be given the same rights as those who get Pension credits.

9.
A House of commons briefing document ( No. SN1151 dated 14.05.14 ) Produced for the business and transport section stated that, QUOTE
“Successive governments have argued that discretionary changes to improve the benefits from public service pension schemes should be
implemented from a current date for future service only. Improvements are not applied retrospectively, as to do otherwise would “make any worthwhile improvements unaffordable.” (Perhaps an unfortunate choice of words).
This implies that giving pensions to ex -military personnel who served prior to 1975 would be unaffordable. It should be noted that it was not considered unaffordable when they were asked to put themselves in harms way when serving.

10.
The scheme roughly outline above would almost certainly not be UNAFFORDABLE as most are probably in receipt of some form of benefit and this would replace any benefit if correctly implemented say via the new Universal credit.Additionally it would be seen by most as an earned right and not charity, making it a right and not means tested would go some way to helping those who are currently ‘disabled’ and unable to adjust to Civilian life. It would also go some way to addressing the ‘Duty of Care’ the military has to it’s former employees.
To address the idea of it being unaffordable it should be noted that due age this will be a declining expense. But the purchase of ‘DUCK PONDS’ is an increasing one.

11.
Further this should be seen as a first step to a study into the provision of a pro-rata pension to the same conditions as those serving after 1975.
Any such study should involve Veterans and Veteran’s organisations, as to being an UNAFFORDABLE expense, due the age of most of the veterans concerned it would be a decreasing expense.

Silly Restrictions on buying Lemsip Max from Chemists in Atherstone. UK

Today the 9th June 2015 I tried to purchase three boxes times ten of Lemsip Max cold and flu treatment from two chemists in Atherstone. one would only let me have two and another chemist said that he he could let me buy one at a time, that the chemist offering me two was breaking the law.

I take quite a large number of prescription tablets of varying types during the course of the week which also consists of a box of a hundred a time paracetamol, which I take only when in severe pain.

I would have to be pretty stupid to abuse myself by taking excessive amounts of Lemsips when I already have a hundred or more Paracetamol tablets to hand,
What is the purpose of these stupid laws, and what moron passed them?

If this is law then it is very easy to exploit it by going to various shops or chemists and buying the max amount that they will sell you, so what is the purpose of this law, it serves no purpose what so ever.

Why is this idea important?

Today the 9th June 2015 I tried to purchase three boxes times ten of Lemsip Max cold and flu treatment from two chemists in Atherstone. one would only let me have two and another chemist said that he he could let me buy one at a time, that the chemist offering me two was breaking the law.

I take quite a large number of prescription tablets of varying types during the course of the week which also consists of a box of a hundred a time paracetamol, which I take only when in severe pain.

I would have to be pretty stupid to abuse myself by taking excessive amounts of Lemsips when I already have a hundred or more Paracetamol tablets to hand,
What is the purpose of these stupid laws, and what moron passed them?

If this is law then it is very easy to exploit it by going to various shops or chemists and buying the max amount that they will sell you, so what is the purpose of this law, it serves no purpose what so ever.