All Government Websites to work in all browsers

Any website operated by or for the government or other public body should be written to web standards so they can be viewed in any browser.

Example being this site – Voting only works in IE from what I can tell.

I'm not sure how it could be enforced … maybe a name and shame website.

There is bound to be some time where a feature is created that can only work on certain devices which is fair enough, but it should state clearly that this is the case.

Why is this idea important?

Any website operated by or for the government or other public body should be written to web standards so they can be viewed in any browser.

Example being this site – Voting only works in IE from what I can tell.

I'm not sure how it could be enforced … maybe a name and shame website.

There is bound to be some time where a feature is created that can only work on certain devices which is fair enough, but it should state clearly that this is the case.

Polygamous, time limited civil partnerships

Since it is now usual for 2 people in a marriage or civil partnership to work, it has raised the bar so that 2 people prettymuch have to work.

If you have children then this creates a problem of neglect – what is needed is someone to stay at home.

If you had 3 people in your partnership then either one could stay at home or work shifts can be arranged so the child can be better looked after.

But it doesn't just apply to when a child is involved – some people would like so say that they are financially tied to each other and eg. want the rights of a spouse in a hospital or just to show their love to the ones closest to them.

So I suggest that people should be able to form a partnership with anyone they like and any number of people. Perhaps not call it marriage as that comes with too much baggage.

This partnership should be time-limited at the start for perhaps 20 years at which point it can be renewed, or if there is a serious problem before this time then a "divorce" is possible but shouldn't be easy.

Some restrictions would be needed to ensure dangerous cults are not created or that people are not forced into this. Also if the partners are closely related this doesn't give them any more right to biologically create children given the likelyhood of defects.

Of course those wishing to go for their "Till death us do part" marriage is perfectly OK still.

Why is this idea important?

Since it is now usual for 2 people in a marriage or civil partnership to work, it has raised the bar so that 2 people prettymuch have to work.

If you have children then this creates a problem of neglect – what is needed is someone to stay at home.

If you had 3 people in your partnership then either one could stay at home or work shifts can be arranged so the child can be better looked after.

But it doesn't just apply to when a child is involved – some people would like so say that they are financially tied to each other and eg. want the rights of a spouse in a hospital or just to show their love to the ones closest to them.

So I suggest that people should be able to form a partnership with anyone they like and any number of people. Perhaps not call it marriage as that comes with too much baggage.

This partnership should be time-limited at the start for perhaps 20 years at which point it can be renewed, or if there is a serious problem before this time then a "divorce" is possible but shouldn't be easy.

Some restrictions would be needed to ensure dangerous cults are not created or that people are not forced into this. Also if the partners are closely related this doesn't give them any more right to biologically create children given the likelyhood of defects.

Of course those wishing to go for their "Till death us do part" marriage is perfectly OK still.

Repeal the Dangerous Images Act

This appears to be a scary law where you can be forced to have your computer inspected and if they find something they don't like sitting in your temporary internet files, you can end up in jail.

Doesn't even matter if it was sent to you or a hacker put it there – a single image of tony the tiger  in an uncompromising position sent by a unknown person can land you in court.

The requirement of the law is often that it's sexually arousing – which as this varies from person to person is a thought crime.

It too often seems that the people who like this law are raging perverts who think everything is sexual and want the law to protect themselves from themselves.

We don't need nannying like that.

Why is this idea important?

This appears to be a scary law where you can be forced to have your computer inspected and if they find something they don't like sitting in your temporary internet files, you can end up in jail.

Doesn't even matter if it was sent to you or a hacker put it there – a single image of tony the tiger  in an uncompromising position sent by a unknown person can land you in court.

The requirement of the law is often that it's sexually arousing – which as this varies from person to person is a thought crime.

It too often seems that the people who like this law are raging perverts who think everything is sexual and want the law to protect themselves from themselves.

We don't need nannying like that.

Scrap Copyright for personal/non-profit use

Be it Art, Music, Film, Software, reports.. it's all data in one way or another which whilst the creator should have a right to make money from it and control usage by business, all data should be free for personal use.

That doesn't mean eg.  you aren't allowed to put shareware restrictions on software but if you do get hold of a full version via P2P then it shouldn't be illegal.

If someone is profiting (eg. selling DVDs in the pub) then this should be punished harder

Why is this idea important?

Be it Art, Music, Film, Software, reports.. it's all data in one way or another which whilst the creator should have a right to make money from it and control usage by business, all data should be free for personal use.

That doesn't mean eg.  you aren't allowed to put shareware restrictions on software but if you do get hold of a full version via P2P then it shouldn't be illegal.

If someone is profiting (eg. selling DVDs in the pub) then this should be punished harder

Scrap Copyright for personal/non-profit use

Be it Art, Music, Film, Software, reports.. it's all data in one way or another which whilst the creator should have a right to make money from it and control usage by business, all data should be free for personal use.

That doesn't mean eg.  you aren't allowed to put shareware restrictions on software but if you do get hold of a full version via P2P then it shouldn't be illegal.

If someone is profiting (eg. selling DVDs in the pub) then this should be punished harder

Why is this idea important?

Be it Art, Music, Film, Software, reports.. it's all data in one way or another which whilst the creator should have a right to make money from it and control usage by business, all data should be free for personal use.

That doesn't mean eg.  you aren't allowed to put shareware restrictions on software but if you do get hold of a full version via P2P then it shouldn't be illegal.

If someone is profiting (eg. selling DVDs in the pub) then this should be punished harder

Prevent deliberate dangerous road design

Many roads appear to be either designed badly on purpose to try and slow people down to either cause congestion to prevent car use, or to slow down in the name of safety.

Added to this is then clutter like pedestrian barriers and removing the far traffic lights at a crossroads.

It should stop. Roads should be clear from obstructions so that the flow and visibility is much better.

Why is this idea important?

Many roads appear to be either designed badly on purpose to try and slow people down to either cause congestion to prevent car use, or to slow down in the name of safety.

Added to this is then clutter like pedestrian barriers and removing the far traffic lights at a crossroads.

It should stop. Roads should be clear from obstructions so that the flow and visibility is much better.