Animal Movements

Science demonstrates that infectious diseases develop within 21 days, and if you want to squeeze it down , maybe 7 days.. There is no logic for the animal movements licensing on the grounds that it might have an effect on public health, it might have been important 10 Years ago in the furore of Foot and Mouth, but it is not important now.We are stuck with a bureaucracy that issues licences for a long gone disease

Why is this idea important?

Science demonstrates that infectious diseases develop within 21 days, and if you want to squeeze it down , maybe 7 days.. There is no logic for the animal movements licensing on the grounds that it might have an effect on public health, it might have been important 10 Years ago in the furore of Foot and Mouth, but it is not important now.We are stuck with a bureaucracy that issues licences for a long gone disease

Stop the 3% Water Extraction Licence fee (tax) for Domestic Hydro Power

Currently domestic hydro electricity generators are assumes to loose 3% of the water used. This is just a stealth tax on hydro electric production. (commercial hydro schemes are assumes to have losses of only 0.3%)

The assumed 3% losses are probably about 10 times more than the real losses and as the hydro electric scheme will be next to a river then any water that escapes will quickly end up in the river. Losses should therefore be assumed to be zero.

This removes the need to have an extraction licence.

Why is this idea important?

Currently domestic hydro electricity generators are assumes to loose 3% of the water used. This is just a stealth tax on hydro electric production. (commercial hydro schemes are assumes to have losses of only 0.3%)

The assumed 3% losses are probably about 10 times more than the real losses and as the hydro electric scheme will be next to a river then any water that escapes will quickly end up in the river. Losses should therefore be assumed to be zero.

This removes the need to have an extraction licence.

No Brainer

I cannot believe the current government are even having to consult on this.  The whole idea of registration for dental professionals is an outlandish waste of time and money for both the government and struggling practitioners.  It is just another classic example of the nanny-state pyramid of regulation that under Labour seemed to be never-ending. The whole exercise will merely replicate the work done by the GDC, PCT's and Health and Safety bodies as well as independent organisations like Denplan who carry out their own quality care programmes.   If purely private practices are a concern (and I don't believe they are), then extend the powers of the PCT to inspect these practices.  

Why is this idea important?

I cannot believe the current government are even having to consult on this.  The whole idea of registration for dental professionals is an outlandish waste of time and money for both the government and struggling practitioners.  It is just another classic example of the nanny-state pyramid of regulation that under Labour seemed to be never-ending. The whole exercise will merely replicate the work done by the GDC, PCT's and Health and Safety bodies as well as independent organisations like Denplan who carry out their own quality care programmes.   If purely private practices are a concern (and I don't believe they are), then extend the powers of the PCT to inspect these practices.  

Abolish National Insurance, increase income and corporation tax accordingly

National Insurance revenue goes into the general exchequer and is no longer ear-marked for pensions and benefits. 

NI is an administrative burden on companies and the self-employed.

NI is subject to political manipulation (e.g. a recent promise not to raise taxes followed by an NI rate increase).

NI contributions are payable month by month so if your income is uneven, you may end up paying more than someone with the same annual income and this  cannot be claimed back. 

NI is unevenly applied with the poor paying disproportionately more than the wealthy (as it has a top end cap).

 

No government would ever dare introduce such a ridiculous, costly and unfair tax as National Insurance has slowly evolved into.

So why not simply abolish it ?  increasing personal income tax  by an appropriate amount to roughly balance the lost employees contributions and .increasing corporation tax by an appropriate amount to roughly balance the lost employers contributions. Pension entitlement could be tied to income tax instead of NI payments.

Why is this idea important?

National Insurance revenue goes into the general exchequer and is no longer ear-marked for pensions and benefits. 

NI is an administrative burden on companies and the self-employed.

NI is subject to political manipulation (e.g. a recent promise not to raise taxes followed by an NI rate increase).

NI contributions are payable month by month so if your income is uneven, you may end up paying more than someone with the same annual income and this  cannot be claimed back. 

NI is unevenly applied with the poor paying disproportionately more than the wealthy (as it has a top end cap).

 

No government would ever dare introduce such a ridiculous, costly and unfair tax as National Insurance has slowly evolved into.

So why not simply abolish it ?  increasing personal income tax  by an appropriate amount to roughly balance the lost employees contributions and .increasing corporation tax by an appropriate amount to roughly balance the lost employers contributions. Pension entitlement could be tied to income tax instead of NI payments.

Sack MSPs Welsh And Northern Irish Assembly Members

 Get rid of the Members of the Scottish Parliament, Members of the Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies and get the MPs in the respective countries to do their duties instead.

Nominate certain days of the week for devolved matters and MPs would sit in their own countries chamber to discuss and decide what is best for that country.

So MPs elected in Scotland would on devolved days sit in the current  Scottish Parliament, Welsh MPs would sit in the Welsh Assembly building, Northern Irish MPs would sit in the Northern Irish Assembly building and English MPs would sit in Westminster.

Why is this idea important?

 Get rid of the Members of the Scottish Parliament, Members of the Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies and get the MPs in the respective countries to do their duties instead.

Nominate certain days of the week for devolved matters and MPs would sit in their own countries chamber to discuss and decide what is best for that country.

So MPs elected in Scotland would on devolved days sit in the current  Scottish Parliament, Welsh MPs would sit in the Welsh Assembly building, Northern Irish MPs would sit in the Northern Irish Assembly building and English MPs would sit in Westminster.

Rubbish

Reintroduce weekely landfill collections or provide local facilities whereby food waste and the like is collected more regularly. There should be more equality between different authorities in respect of recycling.

On the continent there are community bins that are collected daily; this could be done here too.

Why is this idea important?

Reintroduce weekely landfill collections or provide local facilities whereby food waste and the like is collected more regularly. There should be more equality between different authorities in respect of recycling.

On the continent there are community bins that are collected daily; this could be done here too.

Reduce Council bureaucracy

Cut red tape in the planning system. Be able to submit  planning requirements in a detailed written statement to be reviewed on a case by case basis. Only bigger or more complex developments should be then required to submit more detailed plans etc and this should be sent as far as possible electronically to save paper.

Why is this idea important?

Cut red tape in the planning system. Be able to submit  planning requirements in a detailed written statement to be reviewed on a case by case basis. Only bigger or more complex developments should be then required to submit more detailed plans etc and this should be sent as far as possible electronically to save paper.

Spread out VAT payments

Instead of having to submit VAT returns and payments quarterly it would be helpful for cashflow to be able to spread the payments out monthly as is the case with paye submissions. I know that for smaller businesses there is a scheme in place but cannot understand  why it is not possible for all businesses to submit returns on a quarterly then spread the payments equally over the folowing 3 months

Why is this idea important?

Instead of having to submit VAT returns and payments quarterly it would be helpful for cashflow to be able to spread the payments out monthly as is the case with paye submissions. I know that for smaller businesses there is a scheme in place but cannot understand  why it is not possible for all businesses to submit returns on a quarterly then spread the payments equally over the folowing 3 months

CRB checks

Like many volunteers I am involved with  schools, vulnerable adults and am a foster grandparent.  All require seperate CRB checks , which have to be renewed quite frequently.( I believeits  every 6 months )

 

We recieve a CRB certificate so surely the one check and then presenting the certificate to the other agencies who ,if in doubt, could do an  e-mail check of the agency giving the relevant Reference Nos. from the CRB certificate . The Agency  should keep the records up to date with any latest offences and so be able to confirm or otherwise.

This would surely save money interms of admin staff and other peoples time.

Why is this idea important?

Like many volunteers I am involved with  schools, vulnerable adults and am a foster grandparent.  All require seperate CRB checks , which have to be renewed quite frequently.( I believeits  every 6 months )

 

We recieve a CRB certificate so surely the one check and then presenting the certificate to the other agencies who ,if in doubt, could do an  e-mail check of the agency giving the relevant Reference Nos. from the CRB certificate . The Agency  should keep the records up to date with any latest offences and so be able to confirm or otherwise.

This would surely save money interms of admin staff and other peoples time.

Pharmacy-PGDs should be national and not Local

PGDs should be nationally available rather than locally this includes service specifications and claims procedures. Many PCTs and trusts are dealing with the same issues and agenda facing healthcare and many PGDs are developed to adress these issues. By having generic PGDs nationally will allow continuity of care, allow those pharmacies/health providers to address patients living across PCT boarders, and play a part in reducing the burden facing the NHS. By doing this it would allow other services to be delivered in the same way. Chlymida is a national problem why does it have to be tackled through local policies and PGDs? This would most certainly reduce costs in so many ways e.g. Training by PCTs, drug budgets etc. This will also allow for effective competition which relates to a need from the white paper.

Why is this idea important?

PGDs should be nationally available rather than locally this includes service specifications and claims procedures. Many PCTs and trusts are dealing with the same issues and agenda facing healthcare and many PGDs are developed to adress these issues. By having generic PGDs nationally will allow continuity of care, allow those pharmacies/health providers to address patients living across PCT boarders, and play a part in reducing the burden facing the NHS. By doing this it would allow other services to be delivered in the same way. Chlymida is a national problem why does it have to be tackled through local policies and PGDs? This would most certainly reduce costs in so many ways e.g. Training by PCTs, drug budgets etc. This will also allow for effective competition which relates to a need from the white paper.

Make The EU Play Fair.

Britain was a proud nation, were we could live our lives in peace and have freedom of speech and freedom to express ourselves. Our traditions were our own and we didn't have to watch everything we say or do for fear of being taken to court over just living our lives how we want to live them.

Now we have an interfering EU that cannot keep their noses out of Britain's affairs at all. We have had the stupid banana rule, that they have to be a certain size and shape. We have had to change all our weights system with fresh fruit and bread, as well as other foods.

Now the tradition of buying a dozen eggs or  a dozen bread rolls is under threat, because EU have made another ruling.

We have had all the rules of open borders for trade, yet France totally does everything in their power to make sure they hinder us. For instance everytime that their lorry drivers, farmers, ferries etc have a dispute, they block the channel tunnel and the ports so that British Lorries that carry British goods cannot get through which affects the livehoods of British companies.

Our country is being overrun by illegal immigrants, and economic migrants, so that British people are not being given a chance.

Why is this idea important?

Britain was a proud nation, were we could live our lives in peace and have freedom of speech and freedom to express ourselves. Our traditions were our own and we didn't have to watch everything we say or do for fear of being taken to court over just living our lives how we want to live them.

Now we have an interfering EU that cannot keep their noses out of Britain's affairs at all. We have had the stupid banana rule, that they have to be a certain size and shape. We have had to change all our weights system with fresh fruit and bread, as well as other foods.

Now the tradition of buying a dozen eggs or  a dozen bread rolls is under threat, because EU have made another ruling.

We have had all the rules of open borders for trade, yet France totally does everything in their power to make sure they hinder us. For instance everytime that their lorry drivers, farmers, ferries etc have a dispute, they block the channel tunnel and the ports so that British Lorries that carry British goods cannot get through which affects the livehoods of British companies.

Our country is being overrun by illegal immigrants, and economic migrants, so that British people are not being given a chance.

stop wasteing surgery time for highcost no improvement

Let dentist do what they do best , treat patients with , care .respect and good service , ticking boxes will not acheive this we have the GDC and PCT why duplicate with more red tape , time is money , let us treat our patients not become pen pushers , with more red tape the time is right. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !!!"!

Why is this idea important?

Let dentist do what they do best , treat patients with , care .respect and good service , ticking boxes will not acheive this we have the GDC and PCT why duplicate with more red tape , time is money , let us treat our patients not become pen pushers , with more red tape the time is right. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !!!"!

Abolish the legal requirement to submit Animal Movement Documents

Movement licences were introduced during the 2001 outbreak of Foot & Mouth Disease. No animal was permitted to be moved without a licence. Extra staff had to be employed by Local Authorities to deal with the enormous quantity of paperwork generated. I doubt if these civil servants have ever been laid off and, to keep themselves busy, Movement Documents have not been scrapped.

Anyone moving sheep or goats is required to submit a form, in quadruplicate (yes – really…FOUR copies), to the appropriate Local Authority within three days of the animal movement. I seriously doubt if any use has ever been made of the staggering amount of data that has been collected on sheep and goat movements and I doubt if it ever will.

The fact is that, prior to the 2001 Foot & Mouth Disease outbreak, animals were moved around freely, without any associated bureaucracy and without any problems. Diseases such as Foot & Mouth will be spread by animal movements but they are not caused by animal movements. Therefore, there is no justification for the government to monitor movements when no disease is present in the country. The refusal of the government to remove this ‘red tape’ is an example of politicians’ mania for absolute control and desire to micro-manage every aspect of the agricultural industry.

Why is this idea important?

Movement licences were introduced during the 2001 outbreak of Foot & Mouth Disease. No animal was permitted to be moved without a licence. Extra staff had to be employed by Local Authorities to deal with the enormous quantity of paperwork generated. I doubt if these civil servants have ever been laid off and, to keep themselves busy, Movement Documents have not been scrapped.

Anyone moving sheep or goats is required to submit a form, in quadruplicate (yes – really…FOUR copies), to the appropriate Local Authority within three days of the animal movement. I seriously doubt if any use has ever been made of the staggering amount of data that has been collected on sheep and goat movements and I doubt if it ever will.

The fact is that, prior to the 2001 Foot & Mouth Disease outbreak, animals were moved around freely, without any associated bureaucracy and without any problems. Diseases such as Foot & Mouth will be spread by animal movements but they are not caused by animal movements. Therefore, there is no justification for the government to monitor movements when no disease is present in the country. The refusal of the government to remove this ‘red tape’ is an example of politicians’ mania for absolute control and desire to micro-manage every aspect of the agricultural industry.

Repeal Town and Country Planning act and use Zoning make it easier to build your own home

Get rid of the Town and Country Planning Act and introduce Planning Zoning as they do in Germany and throughout the rest of the world.

Why is this idea important?

Get rid of the Town and Country Planning Act and introduce Planning Zoning as they do in Germany and throughout the rest of the world.

knicholson

I work within general dentistry and i disagree that there will be any clinical benefit to our patients if we register with the CQC.  We have no ideas still about what it will entail and all the information we can get is that the press are scaremongering us into believing they have more power than the DoH and Radiological Protection Board in the ability to close us down.  All the CQC gets at the minute is negativity which is not suprising. 

Why is this idea important?

I work within general dentistry and i disagree that there will be any clinical benefit to our patients if we register with the CQC.  We have no ideas still about what it will entail and all the information we can get is that the press are scaremongering us into believing they have more power than the DoH and Radiological Protection Board in the ability to close us down.  All the CQC gets at the minute is negativity which is not suprising. 

Licensing Act 2003

Whilst the Act (and practice) is on the whole better than the previous system, there are some unneccessary hoops within the current system. For example – when applying for a new premises licence the overlong form has to be copied umpteen different times to different departments within the council and to other interested bodies- a complete waste of paper and increase of storage costs all round. It also builds in a beauracracy – creates a need for different departments.  Why cant the forms be submitted electronically to the licensing unit – they then liaise with other departments as necessary and the application viewed by all the necessary departments online?

The premises form could be much reduced. The need to set out how you satisfy the licensing objectives just creates a template mentality – this could be filled in at an interview with the licencing unit who can assess the applicant at the same time – and act as a gate keeper.

Why is this idea important?

Whilst the Act (and practice) is on the whole better than the previous system, there are some unneccessary hoops within the current system. For example – when applying for a new premises licence the overlong form has to be copied umpteen different times to different departments within the council and to other interested bodies- a complete waste of paper and increase of storage costs all round. It also builds in a beauracracy – creates a need for different departments.  Why cant the forms be submitted electronically to the licensing unit – they then liaise with other departments as necessary and the application viewed by all the necessary departments online?

The premises form could be much reduced. The need to set out how you satisfy the licensing objectives just creates a template mentality – this could be filled in at an interview with the licencing unit who can assess the applicant at the same time – and act as a gate keeper.

Review Employment Law to Scale Burden According to Size of Business

Employment law should be simplified and its burdens, both practical and complance cost related, should be eased for small companies.

Businesses employing less than 50 employees should not be subject to the same onerous and costly rules which apply to those with hundreds of employees and access to armies of employment law specialists.

Ideally, compliance derogations should exist on a sliding scale, according to the number of employees in an enterprise.

Why is this idea important?

Employment law should be simplified and its burdens, both practical and complance cost related, should be eased for small companies.

Businesses employing less than 50 employees should not be subject to the same onerous and costly rules which apply to those with hundreds of employees and access to armies of employment law specialists.

Ideally, compliance derogations should exist on a sliding scale, according to the number of employees in an enterprise.

Use contracts not legislation-Quality Accounts

2009 Health Bill included a requirement for primary care to produce Quality Accounts. These have to be produced by community pharmacy by June 2011.

Instead of using legislation to impose quality, we should use contracts.

Why is this idea important?

2009 Health Bill included a requirement for primary care to produce Quality Accounts. These have to be produced by community pharmacy by June 2011.

Instead of using legislation to impose quality, we should use contracts.

STOP REFUNDING VAT TO OVERSEAS VISITORS

You asked for money-saving ideas. I should like to ask the cost to H.M.R.C. of refunding VAT  to overseas visitors, and (supplementary question) why we do it.

When I pay VAT in France or Germany, or the various sales tax equivalents in the U.S.A. there is no refund available to visitors.

The answer to my first question is the sum you can save straight away by removing this unnecessary concession

Why is this idea important?

You asked for money-saving ideas. I should like to ask the cost to H.M.R.C. of refunding VAT  to overseas visitors, and (supplementary question) why we do it.

When I pay VAT in France or Germany, or the various sales tax equivalents in the U.S.A. there is no refund available to visitors.

The answer to my first question is the sum you can save straight away by removing this unnecessary concession

Remove holiday home restrictions in Norfolk

Removing holiday home restrictions on a large number of properties in the Norfolk area would help the local government facilities the housing shortage in the area, allow current owners to live in them as their primary home the whole year round and also for those wishing to move would make it easier for propsective or first time buys get a mortgage.

With a large number of the properties under this restriction do not warrant the need for holiday home stipulation and are built meeting building regulation requirements.

Why is this idea important?

Removing holiday home restrictions on a large number of properties in the Norfolk area would help the local government facilities the housing shortage in the area, allow current owners to live in them as their primary home the whole year round and also for those wishing to move would make it easier for propsective or first time buys get a mortgage.

With a large number of the properties under this restriction do not warrant the need for holiday home stipulation and are built meeting building regulation requirements.

Mandatory Use of Architects for Planning Applications

The UK Planning System is unusual in relation to other European Countries in not requiring the involvement of an architect at any stage of the planning process.

Although planning policy is well-endowed with requirements to maintain visual amenity etc. – there is no mandatory requirement to use a trained professional to achieve these requirements.

If it is a requirement to use a doctor if you have an operation in hospital for example – it seems strange for there to be no requirement to use an Architect for any type of planning application.

Across Europe, an Architect is required to sign-off the plans before submission, and often the Local Authority will use an Architect to review the plans. In some countries, a second review is undertaken by the Local Chamber of Architects, particularly if the site is in an historic area or is a large, complex application.

The UK is blighted with many sub-standard buildings which received no input from any architect.

But the issue is not just aesthetic – an architect can help ensure that low-energy and sustainable standards are being adhered to or even exceeded.

An architect can help ensure that the quality of living and working spaces is maximised to the benefit of the occupants.

An Architect can often see the potential to realise commercial value to a client which may not be apparent to un-trained persons.

Only an architect has this wide range of skills.

Idea: Mandatory use of an Architect for all planning applications above a sensible size-threshold (for example – 75m2 upwards + all applications in historic areas or to listed buildings). Proposed use of Architects to reinforce planning teams in local authorities and to assist in the decision making process.

Why is this idea important?

The UK Planning System is unusual in relation to other European Countries in not requiring the involvement of an architect at any stage of the planning process.

Although planning policy is well-endowed with requirements to maintain visual amenity etc. – there is no mandatory requirement to use a trained professional to achieve these requirements.

If it is a requirement to use a doctor if you have an operation in hospital for example – it seems strange for there to be no requirement to use an Architect for any type of planning application.

Across Europe, an Architect is required to sign-off the plans before submission, and often the Local Authority will use an Architect to review the plans. In some countries, a second review is undertaken by the Local Chamber of Architects, particularly if the site is in an historic area or is a large, complex application.

The UK is blighted with many sub-standard buildings which received no input from any architect.

But the issue is not just aesthetic – an architect can help ensure that low-energy and sustainable standards are being adhered to or even exceeded.

An architect can help ensure that the quality of living and working spaces is maximised to the benefit of the occupants.

An Architect can often see the potential to realise commercial value to a client which may not be apparent to un-trained persons.

Only an architect has this wide range of skills.

Idea: Mandatory use of an Architect for all planning applications above a sensible size-threshold (for example – 75m2 upwards + all applications in historic areas or to listed buildings). Proposed use of Architects to reinforce planning teams in local authorities and to assist in the decision making process.

Simplifying Public Sector PQQs for SMEs

Simplifying Public Sector Pre-Qualification for Local / Central Government Contracts for Small to Medium Sized Businesses

Many small to medium enterprises are missing out on winning public sector contracts – and the Public Sector is missing out on the chance to gain more innovative, customer focused and often cheaper, locally based services.

There are two main problems – the first is that most of the PQQ points are awarded at Pre-Qualification Stage only if the enterprise can demonstrate past experience in a particular, specific area – even though they may operate in the right industry. This is very difficult for some businesses – eg an architect's practice may have much experience in housing, but little or none in education – so it is effectively excluded from this sector, even if it has staff with education experience and offers the lowest tender price.

The second is the wide ranging and often irrelevant and absurd requirements for company policies and credentials e.g: staff ethnic monitoring policies (even if the firm has only ten people or less), membership of third party organisations with their own rigid and costly entry PQQ criteria e.g. Health and Safety Organisations, Investors in People etc. 

Some PQQs (e.g. ODA) award points if companies exceed the minimum standards for maternity pay – a worthy incentive – but how many SMEs can afford this? 

These requirements for pre-qualification present barriers to SMEs joining in with Public Sector Contracts.

The result is that the same, larger companies win most of the work, time and time again.

The idea:

1. Simplify and reduce PQQ requirements to the absolute minimum required to do the job – nothing more, nothing less.

2. Do not dis-qualify companies at the first PQQ stage who are operating in the right market sector, just because they have not had specialist experience of the exact type of contract offered.  

Why is this idea important?

Simplifying Public Sector Pre-Qualification for Local / Central Government Contracts for Small to Medium Sized Businesses

Many small to medium enterprises are missing out on winning public sector contracts – and the Public Sector is missing out on the chance to gain more innovative, customer focused and often cheaper, locally based services.

There are two main problems – the first is that most of the PQQ points are awarded at Pre-Qualification Stage only if the enterprise can demonstrate past experience in a particular, specific area – even though they may operate in the right industry. This is very difficult for some businesses – eg an architect's practice may have much experience in housing, but little or none in education – so it is effectively excluded from this sector, even if it has staff with education experience and offers the lowest tender price.

The second is the wide ranging and often irrelevant and absurd requirements for company policies and credentials e.g: staff ethnic monitoring policies (even if the firm has only ten people or less), membership of third party organisations with their own rigid and costly entry PQQ criteria e.g. Health and Safety Organisations, Investors in People etc. 

Some PQQs (e.g. ODA) award points if companies exceed the minimum standards for maternity pay – a worthy incentive – but how many SMEs can afford this? 

These requirements for pre-qualification present barriers to SMEs joining in with Public Sector Contracts.

The result is that the same, larger companies win most of the work, time and time again.

The idea:

1. Simplify and reduce PQQ requirements to the absolute minimum required to do the job – nothing more, nothing less.

2. Do not dis-qualify companies at the first PQQ stage who are operating in the right market sector, just because they have not had specialist experience of the exact type of contract offered.  

Who actually wants to work?

Employers should be able to choose who works for them based on the merits of individuals without being accused of discrimination against dyslexics (for example). If this person can't work for whatever reason there are always benefits. If they don't want to work that's their fault and they shouldn't complain about it!

Why is this idea important?

Employers should be able to choose who works for them based on the merits of individuals without being accused of discrimination against dyslexics (for example). If this person can't work for whatever reason there are always benefits. If they don't want to work that's their fault and they shouldn't complain about it!

reform the cqc for dentistry

Having seen the CQC in action in my fathers residential care home, certainly all the boxes are ticked in the right column, BUT the standard of actual care has dropped enormously as the staff are too busy  "ticking boxes". I think this will happen in dental surgeries too as we strive to provide a high standard of care using someone else's template.

Why is this idea important?

Having seen the CQC in action in my fathers residential care home, certainly all the boxes are ticked in the right column, BUT the standard of actual care has dropped enormously as the staff are too busy  "ticking boxes". I think this will happen in dental surgeries too as we strive to provide a high standard of care using someone else's template.