Tenant Passport
Changes are needed to protect good landlords against rogue tenants or high risk tenants
Why is this idea important?
Changes are needed to protect good landlords against rogue tenants or high risk tenants
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.
English speaking
I would propose that all jobs within the UK must require the English Language to be clearly understood and spoken. Stop companies putting up signs in other languages.
Why is this idea important?
I would propose that all jobs within the UK must require the English Language to be clearly understood and spoken. Stop companies putting up signs in other languages.
Charity Shops should be assigned a Planning Class
Charity Shops should be assigned a building class under the Town and Country Planning Act.
This would allow towns to better control the location of charity shops within each “centre”.
Why is this idea important?
Charity Shops should be assigned a building class under the Town and Country Planning Act.
This would allow towns to better control the location of charity shops within each “centre”.
Rogue Freeholders
If Rogue Freeholders commit criminal acts they should be arrested and charged. This would make them think twice about breaching peoples leases, extortion, invalid insurance or bordereaux insurance rip offs. Also issuing false (fraud) invoices and threatening people if they question anything or stand up to them.
Criminal and fraudulent acts that are committed with the knowledge that they will be protected if found out and exposed.
Currently it is evident that these people can do as they choose and are protected – Councils/Police/LVT etc etc… the bigger the Landlord the more protection they have.
Why is this idea important?
If Rogue Freeholders commit criminal acts they should be arrested and charged. This would make them think twice about breaching peoples leases, extortion, invalid insurance or bordereaux insurance rip offs. Also issuing false (fraud) invoices and threatening people if they question anything or stand up to them.
Criminal and fraudulent acts that are committed with the knowledge that they will be protected if found out and exposed.
Currently it is evident that these people can do as they choose and are protected – Councils/Police/LVT etc etc… the bigger the Landlord the more protection they have.
Cheating UK
All the Indian it companies are bringing alot of professionals on intercompany transfers to UK.
1.they only pay allowance to them but in their work permit they show income nearer to 40k at the time of visa application,but they will not pay taxes to gov of UK
2.they are killing IT industry in UK.
3.if a guy comes on TCS intercompany transfer and works for one company in UK for 3 months then TCS is using the same person in another company for some other time.All the it companies are using intercompany transfer as tier1
4.intercomapny transfer should be specific for one company like TCS-VISA for 6 months not like TCS for 2 years
5.all intercompany transfer professional should pay taxes in UK.
Why is this idea important?
All the Indian it companies are bringing alot of professionals on intercompany transfers to UK.
1.they only pay allowance to them but in their work permit they show income nearer to 40k at the time of visa application,but they will not pay taxes to gov of UK
2.they are killing IT industry in UK.
3.if a guy comes on TCS intercompany transfer and works for one company in UK for 3 months then TCS is using the same person in another company for some other time.All the it companies are using intercompany transfer as tier1
4.intercomapny transfer should be specific for one company like TCS-VISA for 6 months not like TCS for 2 years
5.all intercompany transfer professional should pay taxes in UK.
Cats need to be controlled
For the government to remove cats from the protection of law such that householders can trap and destroy non-indigenous cats as a pest.
Why is this idea important?
For the government to remove cats from the protection of law such that householders can trap and destroy non-indigenous cats as a pest.
Remove NI182 (Satisfaction of Business with LA regulatory services
Remove National Indicator 182
Why is this idea important?
Remove National Indicator 182
LG returns to central government, CIPFA etc.
Streamline the information required so that it is in a standardised format and can therefore be reused.
Why is this idea important?
Streamline the information required so that it is in a standardised format and can therefore be reused.
Health and safety – Ladder register
I work in an office with c. 50 people in my building. I understand that we are required by health and safety rule or regulation to maintain a ladder register to record where our – 4 step – ladder is around the building. How unbelievably ridiculous! This has to go.
Why is this idea important?
I work in an office with c. 50 people in my building. I understand that we are required by health and safety rule or regulation to maintain a ladder register to record where our – 4 step – ladder is around the building. How unbelievably ridiculous! This has to go.
Scrap the ban
The thought of losing my local, relaible independent shop seems completely un-justified and unnecessary and after reading through some of The Retailers comments on this site it only re-inforces my view. Its is people's livelihoods at threat here and communities are formed around local shops!!!!
Cigarettes are still a completely legal product and surely by putting them 'under the counter' it will only make them more taboo?!
I like being able to pop to make local shop and like my freedom of choice and don't think that in this day and age that should be taken away.
Why is this idea important?
The thought of losing my local, relaible independent shop seems completely un-justified and unnecessary and after reading through some of The Retailers comments on this site it only re-inforces my view. Its is people's livelihoods at threat here and communities are formed around local shops!!!!
Cigarettes are still a completely legal product and surely by putting them 'under the counter' it will only make them more taboo?!
I like being able to pop to make local shop and like my freedom of choice and don't think that in this day and age that should be taken away.
Re Hiding the ciggies away
No this Must not happen. This wretched Governement are really nasty and could not give a monkies for the newsagents at all let alone larger stores. Its like these pubs that are closing because of no smoking. I have brought my self an electronic ciggie but its still NOT Allowed in a public place ! This is a real nanny state. And us smokers MUST all stick to gether on this matter and help these newsagents, before cameron and clegg ruin us all
Why is this idea important?
No this Must not happen. This wretched Governement are really nasty and could not give a monkies for the newsagents at all let alone larger stores. Its like these pubs that are closing because of no smoking. I have brought my self an electronic ciggie but its still NOT Allowed in a public place ! This is a real nanny state. And us smokers MUST all stick to gether on this matter and help these newsagents, before cameron and clegg ruin us all
Agreed Terms for HMRC Services
HMRC should have a statutory requirement to pay tax refunds within a set period of time. Paying interest on overdue refunds not made is a cop out.
Having waited over 3 months, phoned numerous times to be told that refunds are in progress is unacceptable. (Interestingly the HMRC will fine you £100 for late submission of tax return).
A proper customer service department that has the power to make decisions and enable action to be taken is required.
Wrong tax calculations from HMRC, MP expenses, pensions debacle how much more do we all have to take before the powers that be start to be accountable and provide a service to those who make the country tick?
Let's hope this website offers more than a cursory tick in the box!!
Why is this idea important?
HMRC should have a statutory requirement to pay tax refunds within a set period of time. Paying interest on overdue refunds not made is a cop out.
Having waited over 3 months, phoned numerous times to be told that refunds are in progress is unacceptable. (Interestingly the HMRC will fine you £100 for late submission of tax return).
A proper customer service department that has the power to make decisions and enable action to be taken is required.
Wrong tax calculations from HMRC, MP expenses, pensions debacle how much more do we all have to take before the powers that be start to be accountable and provide a service to those who make the country tick?
Let's hope this website offers more than a cursory tick in the box!!
Scrap VAT for Public Sector organisations
VAT is here to stay and that is a given, rates will change.
Scrap this tax for public sector bodies and all those pseudo organisations that are funded via the public purse.
What will this achieve?
Save on red tape and people resource. It is pointless the Government providing budget then charge VAT on all our services….. yes we can charge it out to those who provide a service but not pay it ourselves. This will save on budgets and allow the people used in running and policing this huge 'silo' to concentrate on other more fundamentally administration needs. Those people resources at the HM Revenue end can focus more resource on finding and catching benefit fraudsters etc.. The largest issue we face today is policing the system. By getting rid of buereaucratic red tape that just pushes wooden dollars around is wasteful.
In Univesities it is easily identified how much income is private and public. Public income should also include grants from research councils etc as it is fundamentally public money. Real private monies raised from the private sector or individuals counts against them to ascertain a %age to be paid on services bills for VAT. eg if a uni has true 20% private funding then they should pay VAT at 20% of the prevailing rate eg if VAT at 20% (Jan2011) then the uni would pay VAT of 4% on all of it's invoices. If a Uni has now private money then it pays no VAT at all. This does not affect the paperwork as companies supplying goods and services would still 'charge' VAT but the user would not pay the VAT just the ex VAT figure….
This would save huge amounts of rec tape all over the country and drive out waste in the administration structure.
Why is this idea important?
VAT is here to stay and that is a given, rates will change.
Scrap this tax for public sector bodies and all those pseudo organisations that are funded via the public purse.
What will this achieve?
Save on red tape and people resource. It is pointless the Government providing budget then charge VAT on all our services….. yes we can charge it out to those who provide a service but not pay it ourselves. This will save on budgets and allow the people used in running and policing this huge 'silo' to concentrate on other more fundamentally administration needs. Those people resources at the HM Revenue end can focus more resource on finding and catching benefit fraudsters etc.. The largest issue we face today is policing the system. By getting rid of buereaucratic red tape that just pushes wooden dollars around is wasteful.
In Univesities it is easily identified how much income is private and public. Public income should also include grants from research councils etc as it is fundamentally public money. Real private monies raised from the private sector or individuals counts against them to ascertain a %age to be paid on services bills for VAT. eg if a uni has true 20% private funding then they should pay VAT at 20% of the prevailing rate eg if VAT at 20% (Jan2011) then the uni would pay VAT of 4% on all of it's invoices. If a Uni has now private money then it pays no VAT at all. This does not affect the paperwork as companies supplying goods and services would still 'charge' VAT but the user would not pay the VAT just the ex VAT figure….
This would save huge amounts of rec tape all over the country and drive out waste in the administration structure.
Subtitled Foreign Films on Digital TV
Sorry if this in the wrong area but there's nowhere else to put it.
I'd like to see a Digital TV Channel set aside for foreign language films. If we can do it auction channels and porn I'm sure we can do it for culture.
Why is this idea important?
Sorry if this in the wrong area but there's nowhere else to put it.
I'd like to see a Digital TV Channel set aside for foreign language films. If we can do it auction channels and porn I'm sure we can do it for culture.
MCS and micro hydro
The recently released proposals for MCS accreditation of installers for small hydro is inappropriate and unworkable.
Proposed accreditaion standard is objected to by working hydro memebers of the Hydro Working Group – so much for an "industry led" process. How can an Installer Standard be issued with so much industry led objection to it?
In partcular the requirements in Appendix A are virtually impossible to fullfill.
I have 15 years experience as an engineer working in small hydro , and I could not fulfill the requirments of Appendix A. They are impractical, unnecesary and expensive.
Why is this idea important?
The recently released proposals for MCS accreditation of installers for small hydro is inappropriate and unworkable.
Proposed accreditaion standard is objected to by working hydro memebers of the Hydro Working Group – so much for an "industry led" process. How can an Installer Standard be issued with so much industry led objection to it?
In partcular the requirements in Appendix A are virtually impossible to fullfill.
I have 15 years experience as an engineer working in small hydro , and I could not fulfill the requirments of Appendix A. They are impractical, unnecesary and expensive.
Repeal the Tobacco Display Ban
The last government passed a regulation that would require shopkeepers to
hide tobacco products that they have for sale in their shops. As the
public affairs manager for the largest trade associations in the UK that
represents small independent shops, the National Federation of Retail
Newsagents, I know just how small retailers feel about this pointless
legislation. Our members are very hardworking people. Most own only one
store in which they and their families work for up to fourteen hours a day.
Most do not have the time to participate in internet debates such as this
and many do not use the internet at all. However, responsible retailers do
play a very important role in preventing young people from smoking. Every
day, the vast majority of retailers viligantly refuse minors who are trying
to buy cigarettes and often suffer verbal and physical abuse as a result.
They are at the front line when it comes to preventing underage smoking
which is now at a lower level than ever before.
This legislation will harm them in many ways without stopping one person in
the UK from smoking or starting to smoke. Here are the facts:
1. It will cost each shop £1000 to implement
2. Shopkeepers need to be consistently vigilent in monitoring their shops
or they risk getting robbed or assaulted. If they have to search for a
tobacco product in its hiding place everytime someone wants to purchase
them, they will be distracted and at risk. In short, retail crime will
increase
3. Our members are constantly under threat from the ever spreading Tesco
Expresses, Sainsbury's Local etc. This rule will put them at a further
competitive disadvantage to those big businesses who will be better able to
afford it and adapt to it.
4. There is not one shred of credible evidence that there is any need for
this legislation. It has failed to reduce smoking in every other country
that has introduced it. In fact, in Canada and Ireland, smoking has
increased since display bans were introduced. This could be because,
minors become more interested in things that they see adults hiding away.
For these reasons, we call on the coalition to repeal Section 21 of the Health Act 2009 and related regulations – something
that both coalition parties promised to do before the election. We also
call on the coalition to instead work with, not against, retailers in
stopping young people from starting to smoke
Why is this idea important?
The last government passed a regulation that would require shopkeepers to
hide tobacco products that they have for sale in their shops. As the
public affairs manager for the largest trade associations in the UK that
represents small independent shops, the National Federation of Retail
Newsagents, I know just how small retailers feel about this pointless
legislation. Our members are very hardworking people. Most own only one
store in which they and their families work for up to fourteen hours a day.
Most do not have the time to participate in internet debates such as this
and many do not use the internet at all. However, responsible retailers do
play a very important role in preventing young people from smoking. Every
day, the vast majority of retailers viligantly refuse minors who are trying
to buy cigarettes and often suffer verbal and physical abuse as a result.
They are at the front line when it comes to preventing underage smoking
which is now at a lower level than ever before.
This legislation will harm them in many ways without stopping one person in
the UK from smoking or starting to smoke. Here are the facts:
1. It will cost each shop £1000 to implement
2. Shopkeepers need to be consistently vigilent in monitoring their shops
or they risk getting robbed or assaulted. If they have to search for a
tobacco product in its hiding place everytime someone wants to purchase
them, they will be distracted and at risk. In short, retail crime will
increase
3. Our members are constantly under threat from the ever spreading Tesco
Expresses, Sainsbury's Local etc. This rule will put them at a further
competitive disadvantage to those big businesses who will be better able to
afford it and adapt to it.
4. There is not one shred of credible evidence that there is any need for
this legislation. It has failed to reduce smoking in every other country
that has introduced it. In fact, in Canada and Ireland, smoking has
increased since display bans were introduced. This could be because,
minors become more interested in things that they see adults hiding away.
For these reasons, we call on the coalition to repeal Section 21 of the Health Act 2009 and related regulations – something
that both coalition parties promised to do before the election. We also
call on the coalition to instead work with, not against, retailers in
stopping young people from starting to smoke
better regulation of winter fuel allowances
A bone on contention with most people is the fact that people are getting the winter fuel allowance who do not need it – people living abroad, people with large properties etc.
Could this allowance not be "means tested" by being linked to Council Tax?
For example:
Council Tax is paid by people in this country when they live in a property. So as an example, someone who is living in spain would not be paying council tax on a property in England, or if they are still registered, would be getting a discount such as "second home". If they are getting this discount, they would not be allowed the winter fuel payment, as they are not living in the property.
Also council tax bands – most elderly people live in a property in bands A, B, or C. a property with a band D is normally a large family property. Winter fuel payments could be linked to the property band, so as those in Bands A – C get the payments. Those who live in the larger properties shouldn't need it, therefore would not qualify. That would allieviate the millionaire pensioners who still get the payment.
As local government already have this data, it could be shared with the DWP (as other information currently is) so would not cost a great deal to implement.
Why is this idea important?
A bone on contention with most people is the fact that people are getting the winter fuel allowance who do not need it – people living abroad, people with large properties etc.
Could this allowance not be "means tested" by being linked to Council Tax?
For example:
Council Tax is paid by people in this country when they live in a property. So as an example, someone who is living in spain would not be paying council tax on a property in England, or if they are still registered, would be getting a discount such as "second home". If they are getting this discount, they would not be allowed the winter fuel payment, as they are not living in the property.
Also council tax bands – most elderly people live in a property in bands A, B, or C. a property with a band D is normally a large family property. Winter fuel payments could be linked to the property band, so as those in Bands A – C get the payments. Those who live in the larger properties shouldn't need it, therefore would not qualify. That would allieviate the millionaire pensioners who still get the payment.
As local government already have this data, it could be shared with the DWP (as other information currently is) so would not cost a great deal to implement.
Move Out Bad Tenants
Enable private landlords to move tenants with anti-social behaviour issues out of a property in a very short time period.
Why is this idea important?
Enable private landlords to move tenants with anti-social behaviour issues out of a property in a very short time period.
single double summer time
align the clocks to central european time eg double summer time from current arrangements & single summertime in the winter months
Act immediately by continuing British summer time throughout this winter & move clocks forward one hour in March 2011
Why is this idea important?
align the clocks to central european time eg double summer time from current arrangements & single summertime in the winter months
Act immediately by continuing British summer time throughout this winter & move clocks forward one hour in March 2011
Complaints Burden on Small TV Channels
Some small TV channels are blitzed by malicious complaints that Ofcom fully investigates. Sometimes these complaints are not upheld, sometimes they are, but either way the channel has a cloud over it for the 6 months it takes Ofcom to decide even the simplest thing, and the channel incurs significant internal and external costs for each complaint.
The complaints in question are widely believed to be malicious, from rival broadcasters seeking commercial advantage. In some cases the complaint is technically correct, but it comes from a rival showing comparable material – they cannot genuinely claim to be offended. Some complaints relate to obscure channels that complainants claim to have been watching at 3am!
At best channels incur unreasonable costs and suffer months of uncertainty, at worst they are fined £30,000 or even £250,000 for "material likely to cause offence" where there has been no actual offence. Broadcasters have gone out of business as a result, others are marginal.
1. Complaints from 1 or 2 people should not be given the same weight as genuine complaints for 20 or 30 independent people.
2. Broadcasters should be able to insist that Ofcom checks the credentials of a complainant, rather than relying on emails from fake addresses.
3. What is the complainants genuine address (this should be verified but need not be disclosed).
4. Does the complainant have links to rivals?
5. Why was the complainant watching a clearly signposted channel with offensive material at 2 or 3am?
Why is this idea important?
Some small TV channels are blitzed by malicious complaints that Ofcom fully investigates. Sometimes these complaints are not upheld, sometimes they are, but either way the channel has a cloud over it for the 6 months it takes Ofcom to decide even the simplest thing, and the channel incurs significant internal and external costs for each complaint.
The complaints in question are widely believed to be malicious, from rival broadcasters seeking commercial advantage. In some cases the complaint is technically correct, but it comes from a rival showing comparable material – they cannot genuinely claim to be offended. Some complaints relate to obscure channels that complainants claim to have been watching at 3am!
At best channels incur unreasonable costs and suffer months of uncertainty, at worst they are fined £30,000 or even £250,000 for "material likely to cause offence" where there has been no actual offence. Broadcasters have gone out of business as a result, others are marginal.
1. Complaints from 1 or 2 people should not be given the same weight as genuine complaints for 20 or 30 independent people.
2. Broadcasters should be able to insist that Ofcom checks the credentials of a complainant, rather than relying on emails from fake addresses.
3. What is the complainants genuine address (this should be verified but need not be disclosed).
4. Does the complainant have links to rivals?
5. Why was the complainant watching a clearly signposted channel with offensive material at 2 or 3am?
Ban CQC in dentistry
The Care Quality Commission is yet another quango dreamt up by the previous government and as such requires scrutiny as to its validity. As with all these quangos they start pervading aspects of our lives that we never intended. I suspect this is driven by the fact that this sitting body will find it impossible to ever say that their job is done. They are born to legislate and therein lies the problem. They need a strict and narrow remit at best or preferably, disband these beaurocrats to find a more meaningful purpose.
Why is this idea important?
The Care Quality Commission is yet another quango dreamt up by the previous government and as such requires scrutiny as to its validity. As with all these quangos they start pervading aspects of our lives that we never intended. I suspect this is driven by the fact that this sitting body will find it impossible to ever say that their job is done. They are born to legislate and therein lies the problem. They need a strict and narrow remit at best or preferably, disband these beaurocrats to find a more meaningful purpose.
Stop ludicrous “family friendly” employment policies that are costing businesses £10’s of Millions
Many business people know what a one-sided joke employment has become. Politicians have failed to grasp the fact that introducing more legislation makes employing people, particularly Women, unviable.
When someone starts a family, it is a lifestyle choice. Contraception and Abortion are also available as choices, if not taken – a choice is made.
A business owner pays taxes twice – personally and business-wise – including National Insurance, Rates etc so, therefore, already pays a high proportion of the cost of lifestyle choices.
Yet when someone in their employ has children already or decides to start a family, they are still expected to pay and deal with further disruption.
The following should be implemented:
People should have to answer honest questions upon interview, their childcare arrangements (including in emergencies) are totally relevant to an employer who has requirements for a vacancy. A primary requirement will be that of turning up.
Emergency family leave should be capped to a low number of days a year, it is the responsibility of a parent to have arrangements in place to enable them to fulfil their contractual arrangements – not an employers responsibility to suffer yet again.
An employer should not have give paid time off to someone to attend Doctors appointments during pregnancy – the NHS already has a huge budget – evening appointments should be available.
An employer should not have to pay out "money for nothing" to those on maternity or paternity leave – holiday pay, other perks etc are a waste of money – they offer no return for an employer.
Time off should not count towards time employed, for example in calculating redundancy payments – the time off is a lifestyle choice.
It is not feasible for an employer to hold a job open when someone is off long-term, when their self imposed sabatical ends, the person is free to see if they are still required and negotiations can commence about part-time etc if mutually acceptable. As an employer, it is my right to decide if I wish to spend my money on having someone back, or not!
These ideas may not be popular with many of you but remember – when you order at a restaurant, Im sure you wouldnt pay for something on the bill that you havent actually had!
Why is this idea important?
Many business people know what a one-sided joke employment has become. Politicians have failed to grasp the fact that introducing more legislation makes employing people, particularly Women, unviable.
When someone starts a family, it is a lifestyle choice. Contraception and Abortion are also available as choices, if not taken – a choice is made.
A business owner pays taxes twice – personally and business-wise – including National Insurance, Rates etc so, therefore, already pays a high proportion of the cost of lifestyle choices.
Yet when someone in their employ has children already or decides to start a family, they are still expected to pay and deal with further disruption.
The following should be implemented:
People should have to answer honest questions upon interview, their childcare arrangements (including in emergencies) are totally relevant to an employer who has requirements for a vacancy. A primary requirement will be that of turning up.
Emergency family leave should be capped to a low number of days a year, it is the responsibility of a parent to have arrangements in place to enable them to fulfil their contractual arrangements – not an employers responsibility to suffer yet again.
An employer should not have give paid time off to someone to attend Doctors appointments during pregnancy – the NHS already has a huge budget – evening appointments should be available.
An employer should not have to pay out "money for nothing" to those on maternity or paternity leave – holiday pay, other perks etc are a waste of money – they offer no return for an employer.
Time off should not count towards time employed, for example in calculating redundancy payments – the time off is a lifestyle choice.
It is not feasible for an employer to hold a job open when someone is off long-term, when their self imposed sabatical ends, the person is free to see if they are still required and negotiations can commence about part-time etc if mutually acceptable. As an employer, it is my right to decide if I wish to spend my money on having someone back, or not!
These ideas may not be popular with many of you but remember – when you order at a restaurant, Im sure you wouldnt pay for something on the bill that you havent actually had!
Amend requirements to advertise planning and highway etc matters
There are a number of planning and highways applications/decisions which have to be published in local newspapers (sometimes in 2 successive weeks); some notifications even have to be in London Gazette. This is costly (including cost of staff arranging it to be published).
Instead of taking away the right for local authorities to produce their own newspapers the various rules should be amended to allow advertisement in those papers instead. It will greatly reduce cost and (in my view) increase the likelihood of them coming to the attention of the area's inhabitants (because few local newspapers are delivered to every house in an area). This could be done perhaps by a single provison in legislation stating that any reference to publishing in a newspaper circulating in the area etc would be met by inclusion within a local authority newspaper.
Such papers can also provide a vehicle for voluntary organisations and charities to advertise what they are doing, events which will be taking place and to provide feedback through photos taken at the events. It can re-engage communities, reduce costs and effort for community and charity organisers, increase the likely support at the events and provide members of the public with ideas (such as where to take the kids for an ebnjoyable afternoon to avoid them sitting in front of the TV), thereby increasing well-being of the area.
They could also be used as a means to engage the community in lcoal determination of planning matters as per the suggestions from the Coalition Government.
Such papers shouldn't be used to push political influence, but they should explain what the Authority is doing because that is also vital to engage with the community. Central Government gets such publicity for free through press statements, national TV and journalists seeking stories and Parliament (which you can watch on TV).
Such issues are often not so compelling for TV (even regional) and journalists (even at local newspapers) when it is at local government level because much of the news would be considered by them as not news-worthy or not sufficiently sensational. Nevertheless if you want people to be more engaged with democracy (as all parties profess to be) then people need access to the less "sensational" day to day information as well.
At some stage I am sure it will move to just electronic copies when the vast majority are all connected to broadband but until then I would expect that Authority newspapers can still be produced in a way which ultimately adds more value than it costs.
Whilst Mr Pickles attack may be understandable at some level, I believe he has failed to consider what such "newspapers" might offer in terms of the coalition government's stated objectives.
Why is this idea important?
There are a number of planning and highways applications/decisions which have to be published in local newspapers (sometimes in 2 successive weeks); some notifications even have to be in London Gazette. This is costly (including cost of staff arranging it to be published).
Instead of taking away the right for local authorities to produce their own newspapers the various rules should be amended to allow advertisement in those papers instead. It will greatly reduce cost and (in my view) increase the likelihood of them coming to the attention of the area's inhabitants (because few local newspapers are delivered to every house in an area). This could be done perhaps by a single provison in legislation stating that any reference to publishing in a newspaper circulating in the area etc would be met by inclusion within a local authority newspaper.
Such papers can also provide a vehicle for voluntary organisations and charities to advertise what they are doing, events which will be taking place and to provide feedback through photos taken at the events. It can re-engage communities, reduce costs and effort for community and charity organisers, increase the likely support at the events and provide members of the public with ideas (such as where to take the kids for an ebnjoyable afternoon to avoid them sitting in front of the TV), thereby increasing well-being of the area.
They could also be used as a means to engage the community in lcoal determination of planning matters as per the suggestions from the Coalition Government.
Such papers shouldn't be used to push political influence, but they should explain what the Authority is doing because that is also vital to engage with the community. Central Government gets such publicity for free through press statements, national TV and journalists seeking stories and Parliament (which you can watch on TV).
Such issues are often not so compelling for TV (even regional) and journalists (even at local newspapers) when it is at local government level because much of the news would be considered by them as not news-worthy or not sufficiently sensational. Nevertheless if you want people to be more engaged with democracy (as all parties profess to be) then people need access to the less "sensational" day to day information as well.
At some stage I am sure it will move to just electronic copies when the vast majority are all connected to broadband but until then I would expect that Authority newspapers can still be produced in a way which ultimately adds more value than it costs.
Whilst Mr Pickles attack may be understandable at some level, I believe he has failed to consider what such "newspapers" might offer in terms of the coalition government's stated objectives.
CIS monthly returns
please review the CIS monthly return deadline. My husband and I run a small building buisiness where we employ subcontractors on a regular basis. Each month we are required to send in a monthly return for the CIS tax. if we are late we get fined. however for a small one man office this means restictions i have had to plan house/office moves, illness! and holidays around this deadline so as not to incurr a fine.
we work hard during the spring to autumn season and take holidays and time off when we are naturally quiet. however we have to plan these breaks around the monthly tax deadline even if we have a £0 return, still needing to submit the relevant paperwork. this also means that we can spend no more than 4 weeks away from the computer and accounts. (i know this sounds a lot but we work continuously for 8 months of the year without break)
i use sage to generate my accounts and there is a 6 month opt out button but this is too long. please make this more small business friendly. we do not have the luxury of office cover.
Why is this idea important?
please review the CIS monthly return deadline. My husband and I run a small building buisiness where we employ subcontractors on a regular basis. Each month we are required to send in a monthly return for the CIS tax. if we are late we get fined. however for a small one man office this means restictions i have had to plan house/office moves, illness! and holidays around this deadline so as not to incurr a fine.
we work hard during the spring to autumn season and take holidays and time off when we are naturally quiet. however we have to plan these breaks around the monthly tax deadline even if we have a £0 return, still needing to submit the relevant paperwork. this also means that we can spend no more than 4 weeks away from the computer and accounts. (i know this sounds a lot but we work continuously for 8 months of the year without break)
i use sage to generate my accounts and there is a 6 month opt out button but this is too long. please make this more small business friendly. we do not have the luxury of office cover.