Allow Asylum seekers to work until application processed

Give Failed Asylum seekers a Temporary NI number and allow them to work which would help reduce crime and the benefit cost until their application is processed.

Currently  Asylum seekers are entitled to claim support
from the UKBA. This is  £42.16 per
week for a person aged 25 and over, £33.39
per week for a person aged 18 to 24 and
£66.13 per week for couples.

A pregnant woman and children under three can claim
an extra £3 a week. A baby under one year
can claim an extra £5 a week.

Why is this idea important?

Give Failed Asylum seekers a Temporary NI number and allow them to work which would help reduce crime and the benefit cost until their application is processed.

Currently  Asylum seekers are entitled to claim support
from the UKBA. This is  £42.16 per
week for a person aged 25 and over, £33.39
per week for a person aged 18 to 24 and
£66.13 per week for couples.

A pregnant woman and children under three can claim
an extra £3 a week. A baby under one year
can claim an extra £5 a week.

Allow us to vote where our lottery grant money gets allocated and allow us to use to for more meaningful benefits such as NHS , Schools etc

Currently the lottery commision divie's up where the lottery grant money goes to and some of the grants are used to fund projects that are not necessary the best use of public money.

Given the current state of our finances and cuts which are due upon us , I feel this should be reviewed and it would be good if we could vote as to where we would like our money to be allocated.

I would like to see lottery grants going to more meaningful projects such as

1 – Cancer Research

2- Your Local NHS trust and hosptial

3- Your local school

4 – Your local police and fire service

Use the money for the geninue pressing causes , not waste it on stupid things

Why is this idea important?

Currently the lottery commision divie's up where the lottery grant money goes to and some of the grants are used to fund projects that are not necessary the best use of public money.

Given the current state of our finances and cuts which are due upon us , I feel this should be reviewed and it would be good if we could vote as to where we would like our money to be allocated.

I would like to see lottery grants going to more meaningful projects such as

1 – Cancer Research

2- Your Local NHS trust and hosptial

3- Your local school

4 – Your local police and fire service

Use the money for the geninue pressing causes , not waste it on stupid things

Benefits Proposal

1. The maximum amount of benefit should never exceed 55% percent the average National salary which is currently approx 26K (pre tax) apart from incapacity benefit which would be a top up (means tested ) and child benefit but this would be capped.

2. Child benefit should not all be cash but should include vouchers for School clothes and School dinners.

3. People should be able work for up to 20 hours per week to top up their benefit without fear of losing it completely , which would not only add money and tax into the economy but would also help in training people and getting them off benefit completely.

4. People should be offered subisded public transport to assist them when working or looking for work.

5. Benefits should be dreased over a period of time at intervals so the incentive is to contine working.

6. Housing benefit should also only be for a period of time and then it's incorpated in to the main benefits so people don't just assume their given right for free housing for the rest of their lives.

7. People moving from 20 hours per week to full time employment would get a lump sum …to help with the transition of coming off benefits. They would still recieve subsided public transport for a given time.

8. People on benefits not actively looking for jobs, going for interivews and not taking jobs without a good reason would have benefits penalised for a period of time.

9. Child Benefit should only cover the first 3 children up to the age of 13. Any more kids thereafter should be the parents responsibilty.

10. Immigrants should only be entitled to the basic benefit and not as much as fully fledged citizens but ideally I would like us to follow our European neighbours whereby you can't claim them for 6 months. In Return ,they should be given temporary NI Cards and allowed to work until their application is processed.

Why is this idea important?

1. The maximum amount of benefit should never exceed 55% percent the average National salary which is currently approx 26K (pre tax) apart from incapacity benefit which would be a top up (means tested ) and child benefit but this would be capped.

2. Child benefit should not all be cash but should include vouchers for School clothes and School dinners.

3. People should be able work for up to 20 hours per week to top up their benefit without fear of losing it completely , which would not only add money and tax into the economy but would also help in training people and getting them off benefit completely.

4. People should be offered subisded public transport to assist them when working or looking for work.

5. Benefits should be dreased over a period of time at intervals so the incentive is to contine working.

6. Housing benefit should also only be for a period of time and then it's incorpated in to the main benefits so people don't just assume their given right for free housing for the rest of their lives.

7. People moving from 20 hours per week to full time employment would get a lump sum …to help with the transition of coming off benefits. They would still recieve subsided public transport for a given time.

8. People on benefits not actively looking for jobs, going for interivews and not taking jobs without a good reason would have benefits penalised for a period of time.

9. Child Benefit should only cover the first 3 children up to the age of 13. Any more kids thereafter should be the parents responsibilty.

10. Immigrants should only be entitled to the basic benefit and not as much as fully fledged citizens but ideally I would like us to follow our European neighbours whereby you can't claim them for 6 months. In Return ,they should be given temporary NI Cards and allowed to work until their application is processed.

Criminals & Terrorists… Do they have to many rights ?

Everyone says… It would be Un-British to do this or do that?.. Would it really or is it me thinking that everryone is tip toeing around the problem and not just using common sense with these laws we have on the rights of criminals and terrorists.

Why is this idea important?

Everyone says… It would be Un-British to do this or do that?.. Would it really or is it me thinking that everryone is tip toeing around the problem and not just using common sense with these laws we have on the rights of criminals and terrorists.

Ban on wearing the Burka in Public

Garments like the burka and niqab are worn by many Muslim women out of choice and are not required by Islamic law.

I feel that wearing these in public places should be banned.  It also adds a security risk as well.

 

 

 

Why is this idea important?

Garments like the burka and niqab are worn by many Muslim women out of choice and are not required by Islamic law.

I feel that wearing these in public places should be banned.  It also adds a security risk as well.

 

 

 

Children Benefit being sent home by foreigners

I don't think it's fair that Child Benefit can be claimed by EU nationals and sent home to their country for children that don't even live here. What makes it worse, is that they need little proof if any of how many children they have and the amount of money claimed is more than the child benefit they would recieve in their own country.

Why is this idea important?

I don't think it's fair that Child Benefit can be claimed by EU nationals and sent home to their country for children that don't even live here. What makes it worse, is that they need little proof if any of how many children they have and the amount of money claimed is more than the child benefit they would recieve in their own country.

House of Lords Expenses Scandal

We all know about Baroness Uddin who got away with what I would say is a mamouth expenses fraud.

Uddin claims on her House of Lords Expenses that a flat in Maidstone, Kent is her main residence on which she has claimed £30,000 per annum in tax-free expenses since 2005. This is said to have allowed her to also claim the second home allowance on her London property, a scheme that ostensibly exists to compensate politicians living outside London for the cost of accommodation close to Parliament. Residents living near the flat in Maidstone reportedly said they had not seen any occupiers in the flat since Uddin purchased it and that it has remained completely unfurnished,[14][15] but Uddin claims: “The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there”.[16] Uddin’s husband even denied having a property in Kent when questioned on the issue by the Times, and she appeared on the electoral roll at her London address from 1996 to date. Additionally her Facebook page states how she has lived in the East End of London for over 30 years.[14]

Uddin claimed a total of £29,675 for accommodation in 2007/8, a time when the maximum daily accommodation claim was £165 a day. Her bill represents a claim at the maximum possible rate for 179 days, more days than the Lords actually sat that year.[17]

Scottish National Party MP Angus Robertson called for an investigation on the report to the House of Lords authorities and the police.[18] Based on Land Registry records, it shows Uddin bought the two-bedroom flat on the first floor in central Maidstone in September 2005 for £155,000. Neighbours living near Uddin’s other property in Wapping have insisted they have seen her daily coming and going, she is known as ‘auntie’ by the Bangladeshi community.[19] Uddin said, “I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules.” She stated “I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it”.[18][20]

Uddin has in fact claimed her main home has been outside of London since 2001, earning an extra £83,000 as a result. Despite repeated questioning she has refused to state the location and details of her main home between 2001-2005 for which expenses were also claimed.[21]. In January 2010 The Times newspaper revealed the property she had claimed for during this period was owned and occupied by her brother and his family, with Uddin’s sister in law stating she couldn’t recollect the Peer ever living there.[22] She also has one of the highest claims for overnight subsistence of any member of the Lords.[

The Crown Prosecution Service announced on 10 March 2010 that Baroness Uddin would not face any charges on the grounds that a senior parliamentary official ruled that a Peers “main house” might be a place they visit only once a month. There were no indications that the expenses wouild be paid back.

Why is this idea important?

We all know about Baroness Uddin who got away with what I would say is a mamouth expenses fraud.

Uddin claims on her House of Lords Expenses that a flat in Maidstone, Kent is her main residence on which she has claimed £30,000 per annum in tax-free expenses since 2005. This is said to have allowed her to also claim the second home allowance on her London property, a scheme that ostensibly exists to compensate politicians living outside London for the cost of accommodation close to Parliament. Residents living near the flat in Maidstone reportedly said they had not seen any occupiers in the flat since Uddin purchased it and that it has remained completely unfurnished,[14][15] but Uddin claims: “The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there”.[16] Uddin’s husband even denied having a property in Kent when questioned on the issue by the Times, and she appeared on the electoral roll at her London address from 1996 to date. Additionally her Facebook page states how she has lived in the East End of London for over 30 years.[14]

Uddin claimed a total of £29,675 for accommodation in 2007/8, a time when the maximum daily accommodation claim was £165 a day. Her bill represents a claim at the maximum possible rate for 179 days, more days than the Lords actually sat that year.[17]

Scottish National Party MP Angus Robertson called for an investigation on the report to the House of Lords authorities and the police.[18] Based on Land Registry records, it shows Uddin bought the two-bedroom flat on the first floor in central Maidstone in September 2005 for £155,000. Neighbours living near Uddin’s other property in Wapping have insisted they have seen her daily coming and going, she is known as ‘auntie’ by the Bangladeshi community.[19] Uddin said, “I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules.” She stated “I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it”.[18][20]

Uddin has in fact claimed her main home has been outside of London since 2001, earning an extra £83,000 as a result. Despite repeated questioning she has refused to state the location and details of her main home between 2001-2005 for which expenses were also claimed.[21]. In January 2010 The Times newspaper revealed the property she had claimed for during this period was owned and occupied by her brother and his family, with Uddin’s sister in law stating she couldn’t recollect the Peer ever living there.[22] She also has one of the highest claims for overnight subsistence of any member of the Lords.[

The Crown Prosecution Service announced on 10 March 2010 that Baroness Uddin would not face any charges on the grounds that a senior parliamentary official ruled that a Peers “main house” might be a place they visit only once a month. There were no indications that the expenses wouild be paid back.

Benefits shouldn’t be a LifeStyle Choice

There are currently about 50 different types of benefits people can claim. The current system is so flawed and open to abuse that the people who really need it , don't get enough and the people who don't , play the system and get more.

In alot of cases, The average family living on benefits has more disposable per month than the average working person. They also get housing, no council tax and all the other goodies thrown in.

My proposal :

1 – There should be a cap on the maximum amount any person can claim.

2 – Anyone claiming benefit must do x number of hours per week community work to get the entitlement. Alternatively , they can attend apprentership classes in order to claim it. No turn up…no money.

3 – When going for interviews , use Feedback from potential employers to see whether the applicant was genuine in trying to get a job or being rude so they don't get the job and stay on benefits. This can help determine whether their benefit should be cut.

4 – Having more kids shouldn't be a god given right for a bigger house and more money. If you can't afford kids, then don't have them. Why should the tax payer always pick up your bill !.

5 –  Child Benefit should either be for the first 2 kids only or only up until the age of 13.

6 – We should create zones because Job Seekers allowance would be more needed in areas where there is genuinely no work and more help should be given to the people here to find jobs. People in bad zones whereby there is no jobs, should get the help more than those in areas where the jobs are there, but people just wont do them.

7, In good zones – Job seekers allowance should be cut after a period of time extending to nothing at all if the applicant is blatantly not looking for work. 

8 – I was pleased to see the tax threashold go up but I think it needs to be more like 12K tax free or people just won't come off benefits.

 

 

 

Why is this idea important?

There are currently about 50 different types of benefits people can claim. The current system is so flawed and open to abuse that the people who really need it , don't get enough and the people who don't , play the system and get more.

In alot of cases, The average family living on benefits has more disposable per month than the average working person. They also get housing, no council tax and all the other goodies thrown in.

My proposal :

1 – There should be a cap on the maximum amount any person can claim.

2 – Anyone claiming benefit must do x number of hours per week community work to get the entitlement. Alternatively , they can attend apprentership classes in order to claim it. No turn up…no money.

3 – When going for interviews , use Feedback from potential employers to see whether the applicant was genuine in trying to get a job or being rude so they don't get the job and stay on benefits. This can help determine whether their benefit should be cut.

4 – Having more kids shouldn't be a god given right for a bigger house and more money. If you can't afford kids, then don't have them. Why should the tax payer always pick up your bill !.

5 –  Child Benefit should either be for the first 2 kids only or only up until the age of 13.

6 – We should create zones because Job Seekers allowance would be more needed in areas where there is genuinely no work and more help should be given to the people here to find jobs. People in bad zones whereby there is no jobs, should get the help more than those in areas where the jobs are there, but people just wont do them.

7, In good zones – Job seekers allowance should be cut after a period of time extending to nothing at all if the applicant is blatantly not looking for work. 

8 – I was pleased to see the tax threashold go up but I think it needs to be more like 12K tax free or people just won't come off benefits.