Benefit forms and changes

The form for claiming disability living allowance needs completely revising. I would suggest that instead of asking claimants to complete the form that  the claim is made by the consulting specialist who has access to all medical records. This would help prevent fraud and prevent benefits being paid to anyone other than genuine claimants. It would also avoid the need to complete the horrendous forms which cannot judge the reality of every day life and restrictions of claimants especialy those of genuinely long term disabled people.

Also if a claimant has a permanent disability for example cerebral palsy why should they have to keep going through the process when their lives are never going to change and they will never be able to live unsupported.

I also think that Child benefit should only be paid for the first child. If people decide to have more children that is their decision. Not the State's responsibility to provide for them.

We should not be providing homes for teenagers who have a baby to get a flat. This is not a stereotypical comment but an observation of what is happening every day. The excuse of lack of sex education no longer exists. Children have access to sex education on television through soaps and magazines as well in schools. We have a society of children bringing up children with the same I want so must have mentality.

Why is this idea important?

The form for claiming disability living allowance needs completely revising. I would suggest that instead of asking claimants to complete the form that  the claim is made by the consulting specialist who has access to all medical records. This would help prevent fraud and prevent benefits being paid to anyone other than genuine claimants. It would also avoid the need to complete the horrendous forms which cannot judge the reality of every day life and restrictions of claimants especialy those of genuinely long term disabled people.

Also if a claimant has a permanent disability for example cerebral palsy why should they have to keep going through the process when their lives are never going to change and they will never be able to live unsupported.

I also think that Child benefit should only be paid for the first child. If people decide to have more children that is their decision. Not the State's responsibility to provide for them.

We should not be providing homes for teenagers who have a baby to get a flat. This is not a stereotypical comment but an observation of what is happening every day. The excuse of lack of sex education no longer exists. Children have access to sex education on television through soaps and magazines as well in schools. We have a society of children bringing up children with the same I want so must have mentality.

say no to the tv licence

the bbc is in breach of its charter by accepting funding from the european union, to promote european membership and its "benefits". this is in direct contravention of its charter as it has been complicit in promoting the syphoning of uk soveriegn power to the eu.

write to the chairman and tell him this, recall your direct debit. stop paying!!

 

visit www.tpuc.org

Why is this idea important?

the bbc is in breach of its charter by accepting funding from the european union, to promote european membership and its "benefits". this is in direct contravention of its charter as it has been complicit in promoting the syphoning of uk soveriegn power to the eu.

write to the chairman and tell him this, recall your direct debit. stop paying!!

 

visit www.tpuc.org

Don’t let a few perverts strangle society

A mate of mine played Hockey for Redditch for 34 years and his son followed in his footsteps.  He and his whole family are  known to everyone in the club as part of the social fabric.  He would like to offer his services as a coach to the new breed of young hockey players but he can't without putting himself through some form of vetting procedure to ensure he is not a paedophile so he hasn't bothered.

My wife and I have 4 grandchildren.  The eldest will start school soon and naturally we will want to record the event on camera but we won't be able to in case we are actually more interested in all the kids around him for perverted reasons.  Oh by the way we haven't been able to record his first football lesson, visit to the library or swimming class.

In a Big Society as I understand it people know life has risks but we don't constrain the entirity of living for the worry of the very unlikely.

Don't accept the principle of fear that one childs death at the hands of a paedofile justifies laws or interpretation of laws that contrain the daily life of us all.  We will never stop perverts totally lets get back to living life for the benefit of the 99.9% rather than in fear of the .1%

Why is this idea important?

A mate of mine played Hockey for Redditch for 34 years and his son followed in his footsteps.  He and his whole family are  known to everyone in the club as part of the social fabric.  He would like to offer his services as a coach to the new breed of young hockey players but he can't without putting himself through some form of vetting procedure to ensure he is not a paedophile so he hasn't bothered.

My wife and I have 4 grandchildren.  The eldest will start school soon and naturally we will want to record the event on camera but we won't be able to in case we are actually more interested in all the kids around him for perverted reasons.  Oh by the way we haven't been able to record his first football lesson, visit to the library or swimming class.

In a Big Society as I understand it people know life has risks but we don't constrain the entirity of living for the worry of the very unlikely.

Don't accept the principle of fear that one childs death at the hands of a paedofile justifies laws or interpretation of laws that contrain the daily life of us all.  We will never stop perverts totally lets get back to living life for the benefit of the 99.9% rather than in fear of the .1%

Wages should not be deemd proceeds of crime

                                               THE WAGES OF SIN

 

 

Twice I have represented illegal immigrants on sentence for money laundering charges, where the money they had supposedly laundered was their wages. In both cases Crown Court judges allowed them to vacate their pleas, expressing overt distaste that the legislation was being used in this way. In both cases the Crown ultimately, but reluctantly, conceded the point, in the latter case only after protracted legal argument.

 

The facts of that case are simple. The house in which the defendant lived was raided and the defendant found. He admitted being an illegal immigrant and alerted the officers to the existence of £7,000 of earnings. In addition he had sent £9,000 to his wife and children in Nigeria.

 

He was charged with two counts of money laundering (under s.327(1) and 329(1) of POCA). He had worked hard, paid his taxes and committed no crime other than getting a job. One might think that no one would deem this an appropriate use of the legislation. POCA is designed to penalise the camouflaging or concealing of dirty money and to catch the secondary party who launders another person’s ill gotten gains. The editor of Blackstone had commented some time ago that ‘the structure of the new money laundering offences appears to rely on the assumption that they will be applied sensibly and that prosecutors will not attempt to exploit the more bizarre or extreme possibilities that they create.’ Experience proves that such reliance is in vain where the CPS is concerned.

 

After my client’s pleas were vacated the Crown added a 3rd count of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception (giving false particulars in his job application). The prosecutor admitted that this was to ensure that they could still institute confiscation proceedings in relation to the £7,000 seized. They wanted, in effect to steal his money and to hell with the cost to the public in taking this matter through the courts. No one seems to have stepped back and considered whether what they were doing was either just or moral. It was obvious to anyone other than those mired in the CPS that it was neither. For tactical reasons the defendant pleaded not guilty to count 3 but made it plain that should the Crown give an undertaking not to institute confiscation proceedings, he would change his plea.

 

Before trial I argued that the statutory limitation in s.329(2) applied: ‘a person does not commit an offence if he acquired or used or had possession of the property for adequate consideration.’  The judge upheld that submission and the Crown offered no evidence on the first two counts. In addition I also successfully argued that any attempt to confiscate his earnings upon a guilty plea to count 3 should be stayed as an abuse on the grounds of oppression. This too the judge upheld in the strongest terms.

 

In arguing abuse I had relied heavily on the part heard case of Paulet, the facts of which were virtually identical to mine: an illegal immigrant, on a conviction for obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception had his wages filched in confiscation proceedings. The feisty appellant had drafted his own grounds of appeal. Not only did the Court of Appeal grant leave but it was heard in February before the LCJ himself.  The Court sympathised with the plight of the appellant and agreed he had an arguable case of abuse on the basis of oppression. In adjourning the case to await guidelines from the DPP the LCJ expressed the hope that by such guidance ‘the possibility of what on any realistic view would be rank injustice, and orders for confiscation which are utterly disproportionate to the offender’s criminal activity, or his benefits from crime, would be avoided.’

 

It was not until 28th May that they were issued. They are begrudging, and offer little protection from a zealous prosecutor to the illegal immigrant who works for a living. Referring to a situation existing ‘which might be susceptible to a challenge by a defendant to stay confiscation proceedings as an abuse of process, namely where a defendant has obtained paid employment by a false representation to his employer…. some cases will arise where the link between the criminality and the receipt of payment from dishonestly obtained employment is too remote, for example, where had the representation been corrected, the employment would have continued, or where after many years of otherwise lawful employment, a relatively minor previous conviction is discovered.’

 

Is this grudging concession really reflective of the view of Keir Starmer? I hope not. I have never been more incensed at the sheer immorality of a prosecution than by this and expect everyone else to feel likewise. That includes the CPS.

Why is this idea important?

                                               THE WAGES OF SIN

 

 

Twice I have represented illegal immigrants on sentence for money laundering charges, where the money they had supposedly laundered was their wages. In both cases Crown Court judges allowed them to vacate their pleas, expressing overt distaste that the legislation was being used in this way. In both cases the Crown ultimately, but reluctantly, conceded the point, in the latter case only after protracted legal argument.

 

The facts of that case are simple. The house in which the defendant lived was raided and the defendant found. He admitted being an illegal immigrant and alerted the officers to the existence of £7,000 of earnings. In addition he had sent £9,000 to his wife and children in Nigeria.

 

He was charged with two counts of money laundering (under s.327(1) and 329(1) of POCA). He had worked hard, paid his taxes and committed no crime other than getting a job. One might think that no one would deem this an appropriate use of the legislation. POCA is designed to penalise the camouflaging or concealing of dirty money and to catch the secondary party who launders another person’s ill gotten gains. The editor of Blackstone had commented some time ago that ‘the structure of the new money laundering offences appears to rely on the assumption that they will be applied sensibly and that prosecutors will not attempt to exploit the more bizarre or extreme possibilities that they create.’ Experience proves that such reliance is in vain where the CPS is concerned.

 

After my client’s pleas were vacated the Crown added a 3rd count of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception (giving false particulars in his job application). The prosecutor admitted that this was to ensure that they could still institute confiscation proceedings in relation to the £7,000 seized. They wanted, in effect to steal his money and to hell with the cost to the public in taking this matter through the courts. No one seems to have stepped back and considered whether what they were doing was either just or moral. It was obvious to anyone other than those mired in the CPS that it was neither. For tactical reasons the defendant pleaded not guilty to count 3 but made it plain that should the Crown give an undertaking not to institute confiscation proceedings, he would change his plea.

 

Before trial I argued that the statutory limitation in s.329(2) applied: ‘a person does not commit an offence if he acquired or used or had possession of the property for adequate consideration.’  The judge upheld that submission and the Crown offered no evidence on the first two counts. In addition I also successfully argued that any attempt to confiscate his earnings upon a guilty plea to count 3 should be stayed as an abuse on the grounds of oppression. This too the judge upheld in the strongest terms.

 

In arguing abuse I had relied heavily on the part heard case of Paulet, the facts of which were virtually identical to mine: an illegal immigrant, on a conviction for obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception had his wages filched in confiscation proceedings. The feisty appellant had drafted his own grounds of appeal. Not only did the Court of Appeal grant leave but it was heard in February before the LCJ himself.  The Court sympathised with the plight of the appellant and agreed he had an arguable case of abuse on the basis of oppression. In adjourning the case to await guidelines from the DPP the LCJ expressed the hope that by such guidance ‘the possibility of what on any realistic view would be rank injustice, and orders for confiscation which are utterly disproportionate to the offender’s criminal activity, or his benefits from crime, would be avoided.’

 

It was not until 28th May that they were issued. They are begrudging, and offer little protection from a zealous prosecutor to the illegal immigrant who works for a living. Referring to a situation existing ‘which might be susceptible to a challenge by a defendant to stay confiscation proceedings as an abuse of process, namely where a defendant has obtained paid employment by a false representation to his employer…. some cases will arise where the link between the criminality and the receipt of payment from dishonestly obtained employment is too remote, for example, where had the representation been corrected, the employment would have continued, or where after many years of otherwise lawful employment, a relatively minor previous conviction is discovered.’

 

Is this grudging concession really reflective of the view of Keir Starmer? I hope not. I have never been more incensed at the sheer immorality of a prosecution than by this and expect everyone else to feel likewise. That includes the CPS.

Common Sense Councils

Stop councils from harrassing pet owners who have put up posters locally to find a lost pet.

Many councils will demand that these posters are taken down as they are vandalism.

This is absurd and the definition of vandalism should be changed, with local people being able to decide what is acceptable on their streets and what is not.

Why is this idea important?

Stop councils from harrassing pet owners who have put up posters locally to find a lost pet.

Many councils will demand that these posters are taken down as they are vandalism.

This is absurd and the definition of vandalism should be changed, with local people being able to decide what is acceptable on their streets and what is not.

fluoride

fluoridation is enforced medication and that it denies you your human rights and that you want the water act 2003, section 58 to be repealed.

Why is this idea important?

fluoridation is enforced medication and that it denies you your human rights and that you want the water act 2003, section 58 to be repealed.

fluoride

fluoridation is enforced medication and that it denies you your human rights and that you want the water act 2003, section 58 to be repealed.

Why is this idea important?

fluoridation is enforced medication and that it denies you your human rights and that you want the water act 2003, section 58 to be repealed.

Cut Red Tape. Prune beaurocracy.Depopulate.Decentralise.

Or HOW TO REFLOAT THE SHIP !

1. Make it illegal for private enterprise tolabel people or collect information on the grounds of ehnicity.race.creed.adult age.etc

2.Make it illegal for both public and private sectors to use unwarranted unecessary amounts of paper or send the same either electronically or via post

3. Rate every business public or private, and every household by energy consumption. Limit to necessary only. Cut supplies when limits reached unless life is threatened

4. Strictly cull the use of piped music and options to both public and private agencies re telephone communications . Fine or tax any agencies on an "unecessary red tape" basis

5. Require each Uk citizen to take a literacy test, written and oral, in English. Individuals wishing to take a further optional intelligence test to be allowed.

6.Ban pornography on the internet and any tv channels. Legalise prostitution.

7.Limit petrol consumption in a similar way to the limitation of household energy. dependent on needs ..each vehicle to have a petrol allowance..

8. Consider  some sort of prohibition

9. Reraise the "adult" age to 21

10. Impose a curfew on the underage poulation after daylight hours

11.Change schooltimes to evenings and weekends..emphasise good education..impose 2 hrs voluntary attendance at evening school to adults also

12. All youngsters over 10 be required to work (private enterprise encouraged) during the day

13. Fine all offspring who do not support aged needy parents.Fines collected to support the aged who have no offspring

14. All Uk citizens obliged to participate in three hours voluntary work per week

15.Reimpose limitations on the export of Sterling for entertainment purposes. hol;idays and overseas internet shopping for example to be limited under this criteria

16. Fine or tax all supermarkets re. unecessary  use of packaging, plastic bags, and cut their stranglehold over the farmers

17. Use the large amounts of money normally paid to NHS managers to create "preventative health" clinics which would also include an emphasis on birth control and supply of birth control products,

18.Disband and recreate social services on the basis that it is to be run by the society itself in a demographic decentralised manner. Let each street or area vote in a social representative from the general public

19. Go all out to level the balance of payments. Stop all foreign aid immediately and reinvest the monies saved in domestic UK institutions.etc

20. Any plot of land not given over to agriculture but left to waste to be seized by the government and then passed to voluntary organisations or educational facilities.

21. Consider illegalising some aspects of speculation.

22. Once the balance of payments is levelled. Rewrite the statute book from scratch.

23. Put industry into the prisons. Prisoners judged not just on good behaviour but how productive they are and or what contribution they make

24. legalise eusthanasia for paedophiles,  drug addicts and  alcoholics

25.send minor criminals to do voluntary service in needy third world countries (to be counted as an aid package)

26 consider debate and take a democratic vote on reinstating corporal and capital punishment

27. Allow each borough or county borough to decentralise wherever possible

 

 

 

 

Why is this idea important?

Or HOW TO REFLOAT THE SHIP !

1. Make it illegal for private enterprise tolabel people or collect information on the grounds of ehnicity.race.creed.adult age.etc

2.Make it illegal for both public and private sectors to use unwarranted unecessary amounts of paper or send the same either electronically or via post

3. Rate every business public or private, and every household by energy consumption. Limit to necessary only. Cut supplies when limits reached unless life is threatened

4. Strictly cull the use of piped music and options to both public and private agencies re telephone communications . Fine or tax any agencies on an "unecessary red tape" basis

5. Require each Uk citizen to take a literacy test, written and oral, in English. Individuals wishing to take a further optional intelligence test to be allowed.

6.Ban pornography on the internet and any tv channels. Legalise prostitution.

7.Limit petrol consumption in a similar way to the limitation of household energy. dependent on needs ..each vehicle to have a petrol allowance..

8. Consider  some sort of prohibition

9. Reraise the "adult" age to 21

10. Impose a curfew on the underage poulation after daylight hours

11.Change schooltimes to evenings and weekends..emphasise good education..impose 2 hrs voluntary attendance at evening school to adults also

12. All youngsters over 10 be required to work (private enterprise encouraged) during the day

13. Fine all offspring who do not support aged needy parents.Fines collected to support the aged who have no offspring

14. All Uk citizens obliged to participate in three hours voluntary work per week

15.Reimpose limitations on the export of Sterling for entertainment purposes. hol;idays and overseas internet shopping for example to be limited under this criteria

16. Fine or tax all supermarkets re. unecessary  use of packaging, plastic bags, and cut their stranglehold over the farmers

17. Use the large amounts of money normally paid to NHS managers to create "preventative health" clinics which would also include an emphasis on birth control and supply of birth control products,

18.Disband and recreate social services on the basis that it is to be run by the society itself in a demographic decentralised manner. Let each street or area vote in a social representative from the general public

19. Go all out to level the balance of payments. Stop all foreign aid immediately and reinvest the monies saved in domestic UK institutions.etc

20. Any plot of land not given over to agriculture but left to waste to be seized by the government and then passed to voluntary organisations or educational facilities.

21. Consider illegalising some aspects of speculation.

22. Once the balance of payments is levelled. Rewrite the statute book from scratch.

23. Put industry into the prisons. Prisoners judged not just on good behaviour but how productive they are and or what contribution they make

24. legalise eusthanasia for paedophiles,  drug addicts and  alcoholics

25.send minor criminals to do voluntary service in needy third world countries (to be counted as an aid package)

26 consider debate and take a democratic vote on reinstating corporal and capital punishment

27. Allow each borough or county borough to decentralise wherever possible

 

 

 

 

How the British Parliament victimizes Englishmen in England but not Scotsmen in Scotland, or Welsh and N Irish in Wales and N Ireland

Why is it illegal in England to employ an Englishman in preference to any other applicant of the same qualifications?  How does this help unemployed Englishmen?  Is this British Law or European?  Why isn't this regarded as racist and sexist in this day and age?

Why is this idea important?

Why is it illegal in England to employ an Englishman in preference to any other applicant of the same qualifications?  How does this help unemployed Englishmen?  Is this British Law or European?  Why isn't this regarded as racist and sexist in this day and age?

Stop the abuse of the British Army.

Celtic fans and also Radical Muslims abuse our soldiers on a regular basis.  This is treason and should not be taken so lightly.  We need to bring back laws for treason.  Any body who abuses the British Army should face large fines and removal of welfare.

Why is this idea important?

Celtic fans and also Radical Muslims abuse our soldiers on a regular basis.  This is treason and should not be taken so lightly.  We need to bring back laws for treason.  Any body who abuses the British Army should face large fines and removal of welfare.

Limit child benefit to 2 children and social housing to 3 bedrooms max.

Too many people are sitting on the dole and breeding and being rewarded for their feckless behavoir. They get large houses and loads in welfare. More than they could ever get if they worked.

see xymalf.co.uk/freeload.htm

Why is this idea important?

Too many people are sitting on the dole and breeding and being rewarded for their feckless behavoir. They get large houses and loads in welfare. More than they could ever get if they worked.

see xymalf.co.uk/freeload.htm

Education Qualifications

The Government should cease and desist from using spurious full time education to hide the lack of productive job opportunities in the economy and should focus instead on supporting innovators and start ups.

Why is this idea important?

The Government should cease and desist from using spurious full time education to hide the lack of productive job opportunities in the economy and should focus instead on supporting innovators and start ups.

Reparations should be made when the justice system imprisons the innocent

 

No amount of financial compensation can ever be any consolation for the time stolen from an innocent person's life when they have been falsely accused and wrongfully convicted. A huge amount of money of course will help to re-establish a life; it can pay for somewhere to live outright and it will enable the released prisoner to purchase whatever is needed before finding suitable employment. This monetary compensation is therefore necessary but can in no way make up for the lost and stolen years.

On average in the UK, it takes an innocent person twelve years to overturn a wrongful conviction when imprisoned. What if that innocent person was you? Think about it… that's twelve long years deprived of your freedom for crimes you never committed – a murderer will only get fourteen years at the most nowadays.

During that time you may miss your children's entire childhood, friends and family may abandon or forget you or even worse they may start to disbelieve you. The world will move on without you and you are languishing in jail paying for a crime someone else committed or perhaps one that didn't happen at all. Twelve years battling through legal paperwork to prove your innocence.

Twelve years of being called an offender when you have done nothing wrong and twelve years of being browbeaten into admitting guilt for something you haven't done because the justice system does not like to admit it makes mistakes.

It's a sad but little known fact but it is far easier to get released from prison if you are guilty than if you are innocent. After all a jury has found you guilty and a judge has convicted you. Who's going to believe you now? The prison and probation officials will not hear the pleas of the innocent as they can only abide by the Court's decision so you are well and truly stitched up.

Your only hope is to find a good legal representative who believes in you. If you are mega rich, then money could be your saviour but for the poor, innocent prisoner on legal aid, you can bet your bottom dollar you will be in prison for a very long time.

As an innocent person wrongly convicted, it's as if you have been a God- fearing Christian all your life and have been thrown into Hell by mistake on the day you die, so how can money in the form of compensation ever make reparation for that?

Guilty prisoners know they have been incarcerated for a reason and they have to make amends for the harm they have done to society. They have their debt to pay in years and liberty, but what can an innocent prisoner do other than endeavour to prove that innocence?

The current justice system should be changed so that more help is given to those prisoners who claim they are morally innocent of all they have been accused of. Whilst in prison they should be given every resource available to help them with their case so that it is resolved swiftly and they are not caught up for many years in a system designed for the guilty.

This would be beneficial to all concerned and would perhaps dispense with the need for vast amounts of compensation at the end of a long and unnecessary sentence.

 

Why is this idea important?

 

No amount of financial compensation can ever be any consolation for the time stolen from an innocent person's life when they have been falsely accused and wrongfully convicted. A huge amount of money of course will help to re-establish a life; it can pay for somewhere to live outright and it will enable the released prisoner to purchase whatever is needed before finding suitable employment. This monetary compensation is therefore necessary but can in no way make up for the lost and stolen years.

On average in the UK, it takes an innocent person twelve years to overturn a wrongful conviction when imprisoned. What if that innocent person was you? Think about it… that's twelve long years deprived of your freedom for crimes you never committed – a murderer will only get fourteen years at the most nowadays.

During that time you may miss your children's entire childhood, friends and family may abandon or forget you or even worse they may start to disbelieve you. The world will move on without you and you are languishing in jail paying for a crime someone else committed or perhaps one that didn't happen at all. Twelve years battling through legal paperwork to prove your innocence.

Twelve years of being called an offender when you have done nothing wrong and twelve years of being browbeaten into admitting guilt for something you haven't done because the justice system does not like to admit it makes mistakes.

It's a sad but little known fact but it is far easier to get released from prison if you are guilty than if you are innocent. After all a jury has found you guilty and a judge has convicted you. Who's going to believe you now? The prison and probation officials will not hear the pleas of the innocent as they can only abide by the Court's decision so you are well and truly stitched up.

Your only hope is to find a good legal representative who believes in you. If you are mega rich, then money could be your saviour but for the poor, innocent prisoner on legal aid, you can bet your bottom dollar you will be in prison for a very long time.

As an innocent person wrongly convicted, it's as if you have been a God- fearing Christian all your life and have been thrown into Hell by mistake on the day you die, so how can money in the form of compensation ever make reparation for that?

Guilty prisoners know they have been incarcerated for a reason and they have to make amends for the harm they have done to society. They have their debt to pay in years and liberty, but what can an innocent prisoner do other than endeavour to prove that innocence?

The current justice system should be changed so that more help is given to those prisoners who claim they are morally innocent of all they have been accused of. Whilst in prison they should be given every resource available to help them with their case so that it is resolved swiftly and they are not caught up for many years in a system designed for the guilty.

This would be beneficial to all concerned and would perhaps dispense with the need for vast amounts of compensation at the end of a long and unnecessary sentence.

 

Scrap the qualifying time of 2 years ownership for lease extension

The Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993  is legislation which provides an opportunity for an additional term of 90 years,  plus the present unexpired term.

To be a Qualifying leaseholder you must own a ‘long lease’, and have owned it for the past two years and not be a business or commercial tenant.  You do not need to have lived in the property for this period, merely owned the lease for two years or more.

The clause of the Law that requires this qualification can be easily scrapped.

Why is this idea important?

The Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993  is legislation which provides an opportunity for an additional term of 90 years,  plus the present unexpired term.

To be a Qualifying leaseholder you must own a ‘long lease’, and have owned it for the past two years and not be a business or commercial tenant.  You do not need to have lived in the property for this period, merely owned the lease for two years or more.

The clause of the Law that requires this qualification can be easily scrapped.

Remove “Irish” as a racial group on ethnic monitoring forms

One in ten people in this country have an Irish grandparent, and one quarter of our population have Irish ancestors, with probably a similar sort of proportion of Irish people who have British ancestors. There has been a constant ebb and flow between our 2 countries for at least the last thousand years – both good and bad.  The countries are different political entities, but as a people the British and the Irish are no more different than the English and the Welsh or the Welsh and the Scottish.  We are the same people, but different tribes, with shared histories, families, cultures and (of course) rivalries.

Either the Irish are British – in which case they're on a par with English, Welsh and Scottish who should have their own nationalities on forms, or they're foreign – in which case they're on a par with French, Italians and Americans (none of whom get their own ethnicity on forms).

Why is this idea important?

One in ten people in this country have an Irish grandparent, and one quarter of our population have Irish ancestors, with probably a similar sort of proportion of Irish people who have British ancestors. There has been a constant ebb and flow between our 2 countries for at least the last thousand years – both good and bad.  The countries are different political entities, but as a people the British and the Irish are no more different than the English and the Welsh or the Welsh and the Scottish.  We are the same people, but different tribes, with shared histories, families, cultures and (of course) rivalries.

Either the Irish are British – in which case they're on a par with English, Welsh and Scottish who should have their own nationalities on forms, or they're foreign – in which case they're on a par with French, Italians and Americans (none of whom get their own ethnicity on forms).

Remove the rule that prevents students choosing their own snacks!!!

In our 6th form college cafe, we are no longer allowed to have a vending machine for snacks.

The reason, apparently, is because we are considered part of the school which we 'came from' and they wanted a 'healthy schools' status.

Firstly, in what world does removing snacks from a place where people are for less than 1% of their week (their lunch/break times) make them magically become healthy?

Secondly, how does removing snacks from the 6th form make the younger student (hence, the school) healthy?

Thirdly, the cafe is used only by students aged 16-19 and occasionally staff as well (who, believe it or not, are adults) who should be permitted to choose whether to buy chocolate from the vending machine every day, or salads and fruit etc from the cafe.

Why is this idea important?

In our 6th form college cafe, we are no longer allowed to have a vending machine for snacks.

The reason, apparently, is because we are considered part of the school which we 'came from' and they wanted a 'healthy schools' status.

Firstly, in what world does removing snacks from a place where people are for less than 1% of their week (their lunch/break times) make them magically become healthy?

Secondly, how does removing snacks from the 6th form make the younger student (hence, the school) healthy?

Thirdly, the cafe is used only by students aged 16-19 and occasionally staff as well (who, believe it or not, are adults) who should be permitted to choose whether to buy chocolate from the vending machine every day, or salads and fruit etc from the cafe.

Scrap emotional abuse as an excuse for removing children


 
 
The cold facts are as follows:-
1;-Thousand of young children and even babies at birth are taken by social workers for a prediction of "risk of emotional abuse" .Far more than those suffering physical abuse who are like baby P often left to die.
2:-The judges agree with social services 99% of the time and allow these children to be given away to strangers for adoption against the will of parents who fight to no avail in countless expensive court cases.
3:-If the parents protest publicly with names they are jailed "to protect their own privacy !".Journalists can name parents in criminal cases but cannot name any parties or witnesses in family court cases so they rarely bother to go!
4:-Adoptions are closed (adopters are secret) in spite of research showing that open adoptions where parents know where their children are work better. Parents who manage to locate their children after adoption are jailed if they dare to wave at them in passing or send a birthday card !
5:-Lord Justice Wall (The Senior family court judge) said that the determination of some social workers to place children in an "unsatisfactory care system" away from their families was "quite shocking".In a separate case on which Sir Nicholas Wall also sat, Lord Justice Aikens described the actions of social workers in Devon as "more like Stalin's Russia or Mao's China than the West of England" !
6:-The remedies are simple .When permanent or long term separation of parents from children is envisaged parents should have the same rights as a burglar or libelled person and demand to be heard by a jury.(Most judges are NOT like Lord Wall or Lord Aikens) Hearsay,(testimony from absent witnesses) must be banned as it already is in "normal" UK courts.
Lastly the gag must be removed from parents (not necessarily the press)who like rape victims should always be allowed to talk freely about their own case if the choose to do so, and to converse freely with their children at "contact" without censorship !

Why is this idea important?


 
 
The cold facts are as follows:-
1;-Thousand of young children and even babies at birth are taken by social workers for a prediction of "risk of emotional abuse" .Far more than those suffering physical abuse who are like baby P often left to die.
2:-The judges agree with social services 99% of the time and allow these children to be given away to strangers for adoption against the will of parents who fight to no avail in countless expensive court cases.
3:-If the parents protest publicly with names they are jailed "to protect their own privacy !".Journalists can name parents in criminal cases but cannot name any parties or witnesses in family court cases so they rarely bother to go!
4:-Adoptions are closed (adopters are secret) in spite of research showing that open adoptions where parents know where their children are work better. Parents who manage to locate their children after adoption are jailed if they dare to wave at them in passing or send a birthday card !
5:-Lord Justice Wall (The Senior family court judge) said that the determination of some social workers to place children in an "unsatisfactory care system" away from their families was "quite shocking".In a separate case on which Sir Nicholas Wall also sat, Lord Justice Aikens described the actions of social workers in Devon as "more like Stalin's Russia or Mao's China than the West of England" !
6:-The remedies are simple .When permanent or long term separation of parents from children is envisaged parents should have the same rights as a burglar or libelled person and demand to be heard by a jury.(Most judges are NOT like Lord Wall or Lord Aikens) Hearsay,(testimony from absent witnesses) must be banned as it already is in "normal" UK courts.
Lastly the gag must be removed from parents (not necessarily the press)who like rape victims should always be allowed to talk freely about their own case if the choose to do so, and to converse freely with their children at "contact" without censorship !

Payment of council tax by instalments.

  At the moment instalments are calculated by dividing the total council tax bill by ten and paying ten instalments starting from 1st April. I'm a pensioner who at the behest of the government has my annual retirement pension paid by thirteen instalments over the year.  Why can't I pay my council tax by the same token i.e. thirteen payments over the year.

   I've tried to get an answer from my district and county councils but there is no one so deaf who as those who won't hear!  What other organisation gets 10% of its income in advance, even before the tax year starts and is paid in full after nine months and one day?

Why is this idea important?

  At the moment instalments are calculated by dividing the total council tax bill by ten and paying ten instalments starting from 1st April. I'm a pensioner who at the behest of the government has my annual retirement pension paid by thirteen instalments over the year.  Why can't I pay my council tax by the same token i.e. thirteen payments over the year.

   I've tried to get an answer from my district and county councils but there is no one so deaf who as those who won't hear!  What other organisation gets 10% of its income in advance, even before the tax year starts and is paid in full after nine months and one day?

Stop penalising middle income families.

Do not take away the child benefits of those on middle incomes. Middle income families need the child benefit to help pay towards child care costs and necessities. Middle income families are not scroungers. They are hard working people with jobs, who pay mortgages, etc. They don't receive any benefits apart from the child benefit, which is a god send to them. If you want to cap or means test child benefit, do it for those whose household incomes are over £55,000 a year. The child tax credit should have been capped at £50,000 not £40,000.

Why is this idea important?

Do not take away the child benefits of those on middle incomes. Middle income families need the child benefit to help pay towards child care costs and necessities. Middle income families are not scroungers. They are hard working people with jobs, who pay mortgages, etc. They don't receive any benefits apart from the child benefit, which is a god send to them. If you want to cap or means test child benefit, do it for those whose household incomes are over £55,000 a year. The child tax credit should have been capped at £50,000 not £40,000.

make full time jobs, not 16 hour a week jsa replacement positions!

Stop allowing big companies like tescos building supermakrets then filling them with staff who can only get jobs at 16 hours a week! this is obviously some con the government has with these companys to get people off their dole figures. 16 hours a week is  maximum hours you can work on jsa before it is stopped. its clear that they are doing this as a way of getting people off dole, but its an underhand way of keeping people stuck in poverty! how r people suposed to be independent from benefits when they cant get full time work? make full time jobs and give people proper jobs where they can get a proper wage!

Why is this idea important?

Stop allowing big companies like tescos building supermakrets then filling them with staff who can only get jobs at 16 hours a week! this is obviously some con the government has with these companys to get people off their dole figures. 16 hours a week is  maximum hours you can work on jsa before it is stopped. its clear that they are doing this as a way of getting people off dole, but its an underhand way of keeping people stuck in poverty! how r people suposed to be independent from benefits when they cant get full time work? make full time jobs and give people proper jobs where they can get a proper wage!

Freedom of Movement in Europe

The UK should immediately opt into the Schengen Zone of passport/ID card free travel across most EU countries, Norway and Switzerland. It can do this at any time under the EU treaties.

Why is this idea important?

The UK should immediately opt into the Schengen Zone of passport/ID card free travel across most EU countries, Norway and Switzerland. It can do this at any time under the EU treaties.