Presumption of innocence with vehicle offences

Drivers or registered keepers of vehicles should not be presumed guilty after an alleged offence related to a vehicle. If they dispute the charges, they should not have to pay any money first and be forced to appeal in order to get their money back.

The person driving the vehicle is not necessarily the registered keeper or owner anyway, so if a vehicle is clamped or towed away, it is not right that the keeper should then have to pay a fee to be allowed their car back. This would remove any legitimate reason for clamping vehicles anyway, and vehicles should only ever be towed away if they are causing an obstruction that urgently needs unblocking.

Under this system, if a car is towed away, a fee can be requested at the time of retrieval, but payment at that time would not be compulsory. If the keeper refuses to pay, the case can then go to court and the driver of the car can be sued for the money, or the driver could pay at a later time. Compulsory payment first goes against the presumption of innocence. If the person driving is not the keeper, it should not be up to the keeper to pay up and get the money from the driver.

Vehicle offences (of any type) should relate to the driver at the time, not the keeper and there should be no presumption that it is the keeper that has committed an offence. The onus should be on the prosecutor to prove an offence had been committed and to prove who committed the offence.

Why is this idea important?

Drivers or registered keepers of vehicles should not be presumed guilty after an alleged offence related to a vehicle. If they dispute the charges, they should not have to pay any money first and be forced to appeal in order to get their money back.

The person driving the vehicle is not necessarily the registered keeper or owner anyway, so if a vehicle is clamped or towed away, it is not right that the keeper should then have to pay a fee to be allowed their car back. This would remove any legitimate reason for clamping vehicles anyway, and vehicles should only ever be towed away if they are causing an obstruction that urgently needs unblocking.

Under this system, if a car is towed away, a fee can be requested at the time of retrieval, but payment at that time would not be compulsory. If the keeper refuses to pay, the case can then go to court and the driver of the car can be sued for the money, or the driver could pay at a later time. Compulsory payment first goes against the presumption of innocence. If the person driving is not the keeper, it should not be up to the keeper to pay up and get the money from the driver.

Vehicle offences (of any type) should relate to the driver at the time, not the keeper and there should be no presumption that it is the keeper that has committed an offence. The onus should be on the prosecutor to prove an offence had been committed and to prove who committed the offence.

Stop funding “Faith” schools from our taxes

Religions exist to create "communities" who follow arbitrary laws just to stay "one of us". They are divisive in society, because they contradict each other, and encourage ignorance of proven facts such as evolution, or even violence against those not in their "community", or obeying their invented rules.

At least a third of all families now ask for a non-religious funeral when people they love die. When taxes are needed for public services for everyone, please will you insist that any "community" wanting a "faith" school pays for it themseves?

Thank you.

Why is this idea important?

Religions exist to create "communities" who follow arbitrary laws just to stay "one of us". They are divisive in society, because they contradict each other, and encourage ignorance of proven facts such as evolution, or even violence against those not in their "community", or obeying their invented rules.

At least a third of all families now ask for a non-religious funeral when people they love die. When taxes are needed for public services for everyone, please will you insist that any "community" wanting a "faith" school pays for it themseves?

Thank you.

Save the countryside from Industrial Wind Farms

This government is spending millions each year providing massive subsidies to the on-shore wind farm industry which are not even an efficient means of generating "green" electricity. Private "green energy" developers are now threatening to ruin huge swathes of rural England with monstrous industrial sized turbines which are over 130 metres tall (1.5 x the size of Big Ben) in completely inappropriate sites, which aren't even particularly windy and which are extremely close to thousands of local residents. Hundreds of local campaign groups are now springing up all over the country to fight these planning applications because these developers are just interested in one thing and that's MONEY. They have no consideration whatsoever for the people whose lives would be blighted by these massive Power Stations but becuase of the subsidies they receive they can bribe landowners with rents of £25,000 per turbine per annum. These turbines can be built just 800 metres away from hundreds of residents, even though in Scotland there is already a law that these turbines cant be closer than 2 Kms. This is completely outrageous and the goverenment should be ashamed if it doesnt legislate where these Power Stations can be built.

Why is this idea important?

This government is spending millions each year providing massive subsidies to the on-shore wind farm industry which are not even an efficient means of generating "green" electricity. Private "green energy" developers are now threatening to ruin huge swathes of rural England with monstrous industrial sized turbines which are over 130 metres tall (1.5 x the size of Big Ben) in completely inappropriate sites, which aren't even particularly windy and which are extremely close to thousands of local residents. Hundreds of local campaign groups are now springing up all over the country to fight these planning applications because these developers are just interested in one thing and that's MONEY. They have no consideration whatsoever for the people whose lives would be blighted by these massive Power Stations but becuase of the subsidies they receive they can bribe landowners with rents of £25,000 per turbine per annum. These turbines can be built just 800 metres away from hundreds of residents, even though in Scotland there is already a law that these turbines cant be closer than 2 Kms. This is completely outrageous and the goverenment should be ashamed if it doesnt legislate where these Power Stations can be built.

Flashing Amber at traffic lights

As a truck driver making deliveries in the early hours of the day, I am frequently frustrated when approaching a red light at a junction, only to sit there with no other traffic anywhere around.

My suggestion is that between the hours of say 01.00-05.00 (this could be varied according to local conditions) traffic lights display a flashing amber which would meen proceed across the junction in a controlled manner.

I came across this when visiting Rome where in the city they do not have lights at some junctions and  proceed in a form of give and take and merge which seemed to work quite well. This being done during a busy day not in the night

Why is this idea important?

As a truck driver making deliveries in the early hours of the day, I am frequently frustrated when approaching a red light at a junction, only to sit there with no other traffic anywhere around.

My suggestion is that between the hours of say 01.00-05.00 (this could be varied according to local conditions) traffic lights display a flashing amber which would meen proceed across the junction in a controlled manner.

I came across this when visiting Rome where in the city they do not have lights at some junctions and  proceed in a form of give and take and merge which seemed to work quite well. This being done during a busy day not in the night

THAT POLLUTERS SHOULD BE THE ONES TO REMOVE POLLUTION AND NOT THE INNOCENT (PARTICULARLY AS IT APPLIES TO THE SMOKING BAN).

It is a commonly accepted practice that people who create pollution are the ones required by law to stop the pollution. Thus, the clean air acts required factories etc to stop issuing smoke which polluted the atmosphere. The people required to enforce these acts were government inspectors and not the owners of shops, churches, football stadiums, railway stations or, indeed, ordinary people walking about in the streets. It is not a question of the polluters PAYING; it is a question of the polluters STOPPING POLLUTING.

This principle is critical to our understanding of just laws.

 POLLUTERS MUST STOP POLLUTING – ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO DO NOT POLLUTE, OUGHT NOT TO BE THE PEOPLE TO ENFORCE THE CESSATION OF POLLUTING.

Why is this idea important?

It is a commonly accepted practice that people who create pollution are the ones required by law to stop the pollution. Thus, the clean air acts required factories etc to stop issuing smoke which polluted the atmosphere. The people required to enforce these acts were government inspectors and not the owners of shops, churches, football stadiums, railway stations or, indeed, ordinary people walking about in the streets. It is not a question of the polluters PAYING; it is a question of the polluters STOPPING POLLUTING.

This principle is critical to our understanding of just laws.

 POLLUTERS MUST STOP POLLUTING – ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO DO NOT POLLUTE, OUGHT NOT TO BE THE PEOPLE TO ENFORCE THE CESSATION OF POLLUTING.

Educate against Propaganda

Put education in critical thinking onto the political agenda, prevent monopolies on the press, preserve and support politically independent sources of information (e.g. BBC), remove sites like this that are open to abuse and manipulation, and encourage in depth analysis and the use of genuinely independent experts to inform policy rather than public opinion, which is so very easily manipulated.

Why is this idea important?

Put education in critical thinking onto the political agenda, prevent monopolies on the press, preserve and support politically independent sources of information (e.g. BBC), remove sites like this that are open to abuse and manipulation, and encourage in depth analysis and the use of genuinely independent experts to inform policy rather than public opinion, which is so very easily manipulated.

Mental Health Abuse

Mental Health and the legal body supporting it needs to be overhauled: it is detrimental to patient health through its self governing that is in conflict with the Acts that govern it. It is also an example of the state being robbed of its coffers. The government  should also stop inplementing a social services policy of tolerating the employment of pathalogical liars that have so much influence over decissions made by Judges.

Why is this idea important?

Mental Health and the legal body supporting it needs to be overhauled: it is detrimental to patient health through its self governing that is in conflict with the Acts that govern it. It is also an example of the state being robbed of its coffers. The government  should also stop inplementing a social services policy of tolerating the employment of pathalogical liars that have so much influence over decissions made by Judges.

Abolish Thirdy Party Motor Insurance

Uninsured drivers are a menace. These criminals are causing law abiding citizens much bother and increased costs and are a drain on the public sector via the work of the police and courts.

The aim is to reduce the number of uninsured drivers, the number of accidents and the cost of motor insurance for the average driver.

Abolish Third Party Motor Insurance and start licensing individual drivers for a broader range of vehicles and adding the cost of what was paid in third party premiums to driving licenses.

Accidents are caused by specific drivers in specific cars. Men are more motor accident prone than women, young people more prone to accidents than the middle aged.

The more powerful the car, the more likely the heavier cost of damage in an accident.

The idea is each driver would have an annual driving license, a copy of the summary to be shown on the windscreen and displayed by each driver when using the vehicle, a copy with a photograph of the driver to be on the driver at all times when driving to match the number of the license on the windscreen.

There would be a range of licenses and insurances available at different costs depending on the specific age of the driver, the gender, previous driving record, power of car (under 1 litre, under 2 litres etc) annual mileage etc.

The scheme could be operated by the government or the private sector. The government could award contracts for issuing the licenses / insurances and take a percentage of the revenues earned by the insurance companies.

Why is this idea important?

Uninsured drivers are a menace. These criminals are causing law abiding citizens much bother and increased costs and are a drain on the public sector via the work of the police and courts.

The aim is to reduce the number of uninsured drivers, the number of accidents and the cost of motor insurance for the average driver.

Abolish Third Party Motor Insurance and start licensing individual drivers for a broader range of vehicles and adding the cost of what was paid in third party premiums to driving licenses.

Accidents are caused by specific drivers in specific cars. Men are more motor accident prone than women, young people more prone to accidents than the middle aged.

The more powerful the car, the more likely the heavier cost of damage in an accident.

The idea is each driver would have an annual driving license, a copy of the summary to be shown on the windscreen and displayed by each driver when using the vehicle, a copy with a photograph of the driver to be on the driver at all times when driving to match the number of the license on the windscreen.

There would be a range of licenses and insurances available at different costs depending on the specific age of the driver, the gender, previous driving record, power of car (under 1 litre, under 2 litres etc) annual mileage etc.

The scheme could be operated by the government or the private sector. The government could award contracts for issuing the licenses / insurances and take a percentage of the revenues earned by the insurance companies.

Abolish Road Fund License

Abolish Road Fund License and increase petrol duty.

The nature of a license is to give special permission to a small group of people.

With around 20 million cars on the road this is no longer appropriate.

Taxing a big car at a higher rate as a potential polluter is silly as many big cars do little mileage.

 

Why is this idea important?

Abolish Road Fund License and increase petrol duty.

The nature of a license is to give special permission to a small group of people.

With around 20 million cars on the road this is no longer appropriate.

Taxing a big car at a higher rate as a potential polluter is silly as many big cars do little mileage.

 

TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON MOTORWAYS

Allow traffic to flow freely on all lanes of the moterway, overtaking should be allowed on any lane, this works perfectly well in the US.  Allowing all lanes to be fully used would increase space and stop the frustration caused by slow vehicles in the middle and outside lanes.

Why is this idea important?

Allow traffic to flow freely on all lanes of the moterway, overtaking should be allowed on any lane, this works perfectly well in the US.  Allowing all lanes to be fully used would increase space and stop the frustration caused by slow vehicles in the middle and outside lanes.

that airlines ought not to be allowed to charge ‘payment’ and ‘booking’ fees on the tax content of their fares.

There is something wrong with the idea that airlines can charge 'booking' and 'payment' fees to a person using a debit card to  pay government taxes when these taxes have to be paid as part of an on-line payment for a flight. The collection of these taxes is an obligation placed by Government of THE AIRLINES. Customers of airlines have to pay to the airline the tax content of their flight cost. The Airline then passes the tax content to the Government. There is no justification for the Airlines to charge customers a fee for collecting this tax, either in cash, by cheque, by debit card or by credit card. 

Why is this idea important?

There is something wrong with the idea that airlines can charge 'booking' and 'payment' fees to a person using a debit card to  pay government taxes when these taxes have to be paid as part of an on-line payment for a flight. The collection of these taxes is an obligation placed by Government of THE AIRLINES. Customers of airlines have to pay to the airline the tax content of their flight cost. The Airline then passes the tax content to the Government. There is no justification for the Airlines to charge customers a fee for collecting this tax, either in cash, by cheque, by debit card or by credit card. 

Bring Back the Nit Nurse

simple bring back the nit nurse.

my children suffer constantly from nits dispite daily going through hair.  I have 4 girls who do not have long hair for girls, but it is thick.

Nits are a social problem and need to be dealt with accordingly.

You can't even get nit lotion on prescription anymore,

my childrens lives are controlled by the infestation and are unable to go to restuarants or cuddle relatives with the closeness they desire.

and all the 'they do grow out of it' comments don't help stop the abuse these little critters inflict on my children.

e nit nurse to primary schools

Why is this idea important?

simple bring back the nit nurse.

my children suffer constantly from nits dispite daily going through hair.  I have 4 girls who do not have long hair for girls, but it is thick.

Nits are a social problem and need to be dealt with accordingly.

You can't even get nit lotion on prescription anymore,

my childrens lives are controlled by the infestation and are unable to go to restuarants or cuddle relatives with the closeness they desire.

and all the 'they do grow out of it' comments don't help stop the abuse these little critters inflict on my children.

e nit nurse to primary schools

smoking ban repeal

the smoking ban is the worst example of peoples freedom, smoking is now being blamed for just about every illness in society, people are scared stiff to being next to a smoker, as there fear there will get cancer, it dose not entry there minds about pollution from cars, which pours out from the exhaust pipe, 100% poison, & there are millions of cars, or where there work ect, i have worked in factories all my life, & seen the pollution in factories, which nothing can be done 100%. i go to northern spain a lot & have seen how there cope with smoking in there environment, in bilbao in the top store there, in the restaurant, the have a restaurant in a restaurant for smoker, it is all glassed of, & as air vent machine not sure what, but you cannot smell smoke anywhere, it was fantastic, so if the spanish can do it why cant we, give pups & clubs a choice not a blanket ban, & why is it now that more people die of lung cancer, who have never smoked, than when most people smoked in the past, the answer is there if people care to find out about it, its in your genes, you can live your life health if you want but you will still die of whats in your genes, that's life, all theses anti smoker need to read the evidences that is out there, 

Why is this idea important?

the smoking ban is the worst example of peoples freedom, smoking is now being blamed for just about every illness in society, people are scared stiff to being next to a smoker, as there fear there will get cancer, it dose not entry there minds about pollution from cars, which pours out from the exhaust pipe, 100% poison, & there are millions of cars, or where there work ect, i have worked in factories all my life, & seen the pollution in factories, which nothing can be done 100%. i go to northern spain a lot & have seen how there cope with smoking in there environment, in bilbao in the top store there, in the restaurant, the have a restaurant in a restaurant for smoker, it is all glassed of, & as air vent machine not sure what, but you cannot smell smoke anywhere, it was fantastic, so if the spanish can do it why cant we, give pups & clubs a choice not a blanket ban, & why is it now that more people die of lung cancer, who have never smoked, than when most people smoked in the past, the answer is there if people care to find out about it, its in your genes, you can live your life health if you want but you will still die of whats in your genes, that's life, all theses anti smoker need to read the evidences that is out there, 

Curtail the power of the Health Dept to worry us all to death.

I am not quite sure whether or not there is a law or regulation which permits the Health Dept to exaggerate potential health problems to the extent that very minor ailments (such as ‘catching a cold’) are seen by the public to be life-threatening. Certainly, some people will die if they ‘catch a cold’, but these people are in a very, very small minority. There is no reason that the vast majority should believe that their lives are at risk if they catch a cold. We see the Health Dept, more and more, spreading rumours that ALL the people’s lives are at risk from ANY ailment, whether it a great or a small risk. It seems to me to be true that the Health Dept has built itself into a MAGNIFICENT EDDIFICE on the basis of possible but minor risks. There are many examples, but one or two will suffice.

 

Every year, I get a letter from my doctor asking me to go for a flu jab. I am old, but not unhealthy. I believe that my body is quite capable of fighting the flu. The only effect of the letter is to scare me and to keep me scared. I do not want to live what is left of my life in a state of perpetual fear. I therefore bin the letter and try to forget it. I have also had letters asking me to go for prostate checks and other things. The same applies.

 

I believe that whatever law or regulation permits the Health Dept to waste billions of taxpayers’ money only to scare people to death and keep them scared should be repealed/amended.

Why is this idea important?

I am not quite sure whether or not there is a law or regulation which permits the Health Dept to exaggerate potential health problems to the extent that very minor ailments (such as ‘catching a cold’) are seen by the public to be life-threatening. Certainly, some people will die if they ‘catch a cold’, but these people are in a very, very small minority. There is no reason that the vast majority should believe that their lives are at risk if they catch a cold. We see the Health Dept, more and more, spreading rumours that ALL the people’s lives are at risk from ANY ailment, whether it a great or a small risk. It seems to me to be true that the Health Dept has built itself into a MAGNIFICENT EDDIFICE on the basis of possible but minor risks. There are many examples, but one or two will suffice.

 

Every year, I get a letter from my doctor asking me to go for a flu jab. I am old, but not unhealthy. I believe that my body is quite capable of fighting the flu. The only effect of the letter is to scare me and to keep me scared. I do not want to live what is left of my life in a state of perpetual fear. I therefore bin the letter and try to forget it. I have also had letters asking me to go for prostate checks and other things. The same applies.

 

I believe that whatever law or regulation permits the Health Dept to waste billions of taxpayers’ money only to scare people to death and keep them scared should be repealed/amended.

Department for International Development: how to improve human rights in Uganda

My two ideas are

  1. Channel some existing aid via minority groups – womens groups or gay groups – so that if these groups are locked-up, there is nobody to cash the cheques.   I'm assuming that they would be prepared to cash cheques for large amounts of money and pay the money on to existing grant recipients, and that this could be monitored for any corruption.
     
  2. A long-term goal of linking human rights violations with higher EU import tariffs. I'm thinking of examples where a third world country gets a special zero tariff in order to help it develop, but the third world government is more interested in locking people up and killing people than development.

My hope is that the short-term policy and long-term policy combined would make it very hard for third world politicians to persecute minorities to get easy popularity, as the Kampala government is doing now.

Why is this idea important?

My two ideas are

  1. Channel some existing aid via minority groups – womens groups or gay groups – so that if these groups are locked-up, there is nobody to cash the cheques.   I'm assuming that they would be prepared to cash cheques for large amounts of money and pay the money on to existing grant recipients, and that this could be monitored for any corruption.
     
  2. A long-term goal of linking human rights violations with higher EU import tariffs. I'm thinking of examples where a third world country gets a special zero tariff in order to help it develop, but the third world government is more interested in locking people up and killing people than development.

My hope is that the short-term policy and long-term policy combined would make it very hard for third world politicians to persecute minorities to get easy popularity, as the Kampala government is doing now.

Scrap enforced and harmful fluoridation which is against European directives.

fluoride is put in water when it is known some peaple are harmed by presence of the substance. It is intolerable as – although it may and this is not certain- assist some people with prevention of dental caries other  consumers are being provided with water contanminated by a  substance that definitely does them harm and causes adverse reactions .

 

The rules which permit this abusive contamination of water supplies must be stopped as soon as possible.

Why is this idea important?

fluoride is put in water when it is known some peaple are harmed by presence of the substance. It is intolerable as – although it may and this is not certain- assist some people with prevention of dental caries other  consumers are being provided with water contanminated by a  substance that definitely does them harm and causes adverse reactions .

 

The rules which permit this abusive contamination of water supplies must be stopped as soon as possible.

100 watt Light Bulbs

Give the public the right to buy 100 watt incandescent electric light bulbs. These have been banned by the EU in favour of fluourscents, but give a poor quality light. This causes eye strain, may lead to permanent eye damage, and some people compensate by turning on multiple lights or using secondary tungsten spot lights – this can increase electricity consumption.

The young need good lights for homework.

The elderly and middle aged often have some occular degradation, and require a sharp bright light to read small print on cooking instructions, medicines, etc.

By all means discourage use of high wattage bulbs – add a £1 environment tax – but don't outlaw them.

Why is this idea important?

Give the public the right to buy 100 watt incandescent electric light bulbs. These have been banned by the EU in favour of fluourscents, but give a poor quality light. This causes eye strain, may lead to permanent eye damage, and some people compensate by turning on multiple lights or using secondary tungsten spot lights – this can increase electricity consumption.

The young need good lights for homework.

The elderly and middle aged often have some occular degradation, and require a sharp bright light to read small print on cooking instructions, medicines, etc.

By all means discourage use of high wattage bulbs – add a £1 environment tax – but don't outlaw them.

Meaningful Exam Grades

Give employers and employees the Right to meaningful exam grades at GCSE and A level.

What does an A level "A" grade actually mean?

Has anyone seen a definition? No other grade system in public or private life is to poorly defined.

This does not do pupils and young adults any favours, as hard work and top grades are ignored and ridiculed.

It does not do employers any favours as they simply do not know how to discriminate between candidates, and probably reject potential excellent employees at the shortlist/sift stage without ever reading their achievements let alone meeting them.

Introduce a legally enforcable definition of the top 2 grades and the pass/fail boundary (others will follow naturally). For any subject with more that 1000 candidates an A grade could be defined as the top X%, a B the next Y% and fail less than Z% or less than U partly correct questions. (With over 1000 candidates there should be a "normal" and representative spread of abilities that is consistent from year to year, unless a particular subject is targetted by head teachers as being easy for thick pupils.)

To be honest, employers are less interested in absolute measures of ability, and more interested in comparing between candidates for selected key subjects – and that is not possible if a single grage covers a 40 point range.

Alternatively there needs to be some clear objective qualative definition that inspires confidence that an A grade in one subject represents the same level of intellegence, hard work, practice and learning as an A grade in a wildly different subject. Yes I realise that contradicts the above paragraph, but … this is very difficult to do without testing actual exam questions on statistically valid large number of benchmarked candidates – and that would of course mean revealing exam questions in advance.

Why is this idea important?

Give employers and employees the Right to meaningful exam grades at GCSE and A level.

What does an A level "A" grade actually mean?

Has anyone seen a definition? No other grade system in public or private life is to poorly defined.

This does not do pupils and young adults any favours, as hard work and top grades are ignored and ridiculed.

It does not do employers any favours as they simply do not know how to discriminate between candidates, and probably reject potential excellent employees at the shortlist/sift stage without ever reading their achievements let alone meeting them.

Introduce a legally enforcable definition of the top 2 grades and the pass/fail boundary (others will follow naturally). For any subject with more that 1000 candidates an A grade could be defined as the top X%, a B the next Y% and fail less than Z% or less than U partly correct questions. (With over 1000 candidates there should be a "normal" and representative spread of abilities that is consistent from year to year, unless a particular subject is targetted by head teachers as being easy for thick pupils.)

To be honest, employers are less interested in absolute measures of ability, and more interested in comparing between candidates for selected key subjects – and that is not possible if a single grage covers a 40 point range.

Alternatively there needs to be some clear objective qualative definition that inspires confidence that an A grade in one subject represents the same level of intellegence, hard work, practice and learning as an A grade in a wildly different subject. Yes I realise that contradicts the above paragraph, but … this is very difficult to do without testing actual exam questions on statistically valid large number of benchmarked candidates – and that would of course mean revealing exam questions in advance.

Restore Parents Rights To Detailed School Data

Ofcom school inspections used to provide parents with a wealth of factual data that could help parents see through wooly waffle and vague statements about "values" and "nurturing every child" and help parents decide if a school was good or not.

The right to this data has been destoryed with new simplified Section 5 reports. Restore this right now. At low cost schools could publish data every year. Or Ofstead could publish it for them. They already collect this data for the Government, so the extra cost would minimal.

Here is the information that I, as a parent, would look for when trying to shortlist schools or when considering moving to a new area:

Number of pupils (years 7-11 and sixth form separately), male and female numbers.

Number of teachers

New teachers in the year

How many established teachers have left

Teachers who have joined and left in the same year (staff turnover is an important indicator of an unhappy school).

Number of pupils who took every GCSE subject and numbers by grade band, by age or 1st attempt/2nd attempt (there is a huge difference between a school where most pupils take GCSEs in Hairdressing, Geography and Art at 16, bumping up the league table results, and schools where 14 year olds routinely sit Maths, and a third school where a minority of pupils sit hard subjects, and the same pupils resit once or twice if necessary to improve grades, but all three would score the same in league tables).

Number of pupils in GCSE points bands (do 10% of pupils get no GCSEs or 20%? Averages won't tell you that).

Ethnic breakdown of the school.

Class sizes.

Number of temporary exclusions and indication of how many pupils that refers to.

Number of permanent exclusions.

Pupil outcomes – number of Y11s gone on to further education categorised by 6th form in same school, Other 6th form, FE College, not gone on to further education.

        – number that have gone to University by rough Uni category (Oxbridge, Russel Group, middling, desperate, USA Ivy League) and subject or type of subject.

       – number employed / unemployed after 5 years.

by lessimon

Why is this idea important?

Ofcom school inspections used to provide parents with a wealth of factual data that could help parents see through wooly waffle and vague statements about "values" and "nurturing every child" and help parents decide if a school was good or not.

The right to this data has been destoryed with new simplified Section 5 reports. Restore this right now. At low cost schools could publish data every year. Or Ofstead could publish it for them. They already collect this data for the Government, so the extra cost would minimal.

Here is the information that I, as a parent, would look for when trying to shortlist schools or when considering moving to a new area:

Number of pupils (years 7-11 and sixth form separately), male and female numbers.

Number of teachers

New teachers in the year

How many established teachers have left

Teachers who have joined and left in the same year (staff turnover is an important indicator of an unhappy school).

Number of pupils who took every GCSE subject and numbers by grade band, by age or 1st attempt/2nd attempt (there is a huge difference between a school where most pupils take GCSEs in Hairdressing, Geography and Art at 16, bumping up the league table results, and schools where 14 year olds routinely sit Maths, and a third school where a minority of pupils sit hard subjects, and the same pupils resit once or twice if necessary to improve grades, but all three would score the same in league tables).

Number of pupils in GCSE points bands (do 10% of pupils get no GCSEs or 20%? Averages won't tell you that).

Ethnic breakdown of the school.

Class sizes.

Number of temporary exclusions and indication of how many pupils that refers to.

Number of permanent exclusions.

Pupil outcomes – number of Y11s gone on to further education categorised by 6th form in same school, Other 6th form, FE College, not gone on to further education.

        – number that have gone to University by rough Uni category (Oxbridge, Russel Group, middling, desperate, USA Ivy League) and subject or type of subject.

       – number employed / unemployed after 5 years.

by lessimon

Data Protection and DVLA

DVLA and The Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002
 
Recently I fell foul of a car park management company. This company uses number plate recognition technology to scan your car registration on entry and exit from a car park.  With this information they simply contact the DVLA who are seemingly happy to hand over your name and address.
 
This company makes the excess parking charge on the basis that you have breached a contract with them.  You are deemed to have accepted the terms of the contract simply by parking your car (in the Aldi supermarket car park).  I won't bore you here with the appropriateness of their signage.  My point is that this dispute is based on a civil law contractual dispute and yet the DVLA is still quite happy to hand over my personal data.
 
I have included below an extract from the DVLA guidance in this area.  I don't believe staying 107 minutes instead of 90 minutes in the Aldi supermarket car park should be regarded as "reasonable cause" for the DVLA to hand over my personal data to a private business.  The DVLA is being used as a cheap resource by companies who simply have to set up cameras and then use the DVLA database.
 
A brief spell using Google shows that this is a concern of many hundreds, if not thousands, of others. I hope you will lend your support stopping this abuse of the DVLA data, sorry I mean MY data held by the DVLA.
 

Currently, Regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002 allows the Agency to release information from its vehicle register to the police, to local authorities for the investigation of an offence or decriminalised parking contravention, and to anybody who demonstrates ‘reasonable cause’ to have the information made available to them. Regulations also allow for a fee to be charged to cover the cost of processing requests.

‘Reasonable cause’ is not defined in legislation but release is normally associated with road safety, events occurring as a direct consequence of the use of the vehicle, the enforcement of road traffic legislation and the collection of taxes. The Agency has to evaluate very carefully the reasons for the request as well as the way in which the information will be used before releasing the information.

Why is this idea important?

DVLA and The Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002
 
Recently I fell foul of a car park management company. This company uses number plate recognition technology to scan your car registration on entry and exit from a car park.  With this information they simply contact the DVLA who are seemingly happy to hand over your name and address.
 
This company makes the excess parking charge on the basis that you have breached a contract with them.  You are deemed to have accepted the terms of the contract simply by parking your car (in the Aldi supermarket car park).  I won't bore you here with the appropriateness of their signage.  My point is that this dispute is based on a civil law contractual dispute and yet the DVLA is still quite happy to hand over my personal data.
 
I have included below an extract from the DVLA guidance in this area.  I don't believe staying 107 minutes instead of 90 minutes in the Aldi supermarket car park should be regarded as "reasonable cause" for the DVLA to hand over my personal data to a private business.  The DVLA is being used as a cheap resource by companies who simply have to set up cameras and then use the DVLA database.
 
A brief spell using Google shows that this is a concern of many hundreds, if not thousands, of others. I hope you will lend your support stopping this abuse of the DVLA data, sorry I mean MY data held by the DVLA.
 

Currently, Regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002 allows the Agency to release information from its vehicle register to the police, to local authorities for the investigation of an offence or decriminalised parking contravention, and to anybody who demonstrates ‘reasonable cause’ to have the information made available to them. Regulations also allow for a fee to be charged to cover the cost of processing requests.

‘Reasonable cause’ is not defined in legislation but release is normally associated with road safety, events occurring as a direct consequence of the use of the vehicle, the enforcement of road traffic legislation and the collection of taxes. The Agency has to evaluate very carefully the reasons for the request as well as the way in which the information will be used before releasing the information.

Repeal the part of the Road Traffic Act 1988 on closed road for special events

Throughout Europe (and also in Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man), ‘closed road’ events bring great benefit to the local communities in terms of tourism, economic prosperity and sporting kudos. The UK is at a disadvantage and is not able to reap these benefits because s.12(1), of the Road Traffic Act 1988, makes it an offence for a person to promote or take part in a race or trial of speed between motor vehicles on a public way. Though it is understandable that this legislation is directed at preventing dangerous and unregulated races and speed trials, properly monitored events can be both safe and enjoyable.  Instead of abolishing the legislation completely the new UK government could provide a mechanism to deliver a Temporary Suspension Order (in association with local authorities) that would enable a limited annual number of ‘closed road’ events to take place in England, Wales and Scotland, with the associated benefits for the regions selected. Previous studies undertaken on behalf of the Jim Clark Rally, put the figure for that one event in excess of £3m – this leads the MSA to estimate that closed road rallying for a limited number of approximately 20 events a year, could deliver substantial benefit to local areas, particularly in the low season, of between £20m and £60m a year

Why is this idea important?

Throughout Europe (and also in Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man), ‘closed road’ events bring great benefit to the local communities in terms of tourism, economic prosperity and sporting kudos. The UK is at a disadvantage and is not able to reap these benefits because s.12(1), of the Road Traffic Act 1988, makes it an offence for a person to promote or take part in a race or trial of speed between motor vehicles on a public way. Though it is understandable that this legislation is directed at preventing dangerous and unregulated races and speed trials, properly monitored events can be both safe and enjoyable.  Instead of abolishing the legislation completely the new UK government could provide a mechanism to deliver a Temporary Suspension Order (in association with local authorities) that would enable a limited annual number of ‘closed road’ events to take place in England, Wales and Scotland, with the associated benefits for the regions selected. Previous studies undertaken on behalf of the Jim Clark Rally, put the figure for that one event in excess of £3m – this leads the MSA to estimate that closed road rallying for a limited number of approximately 20 events a year, could deliver substantial benefit to local areas, particularly in the low season, of between £20m and £60m a year