Employment Equality ( Age) Regulations 2006

This very discriminatory law should be repealed immediately because it really belongs in a totalitarian state.

The law states quite clearly that an employer can retire any employee 65yrs and over without any explanation or reason. There is no appeal available to the employee and therefore it leaves itself wideopen to discrimination misuse.

I really cannot believe how a law of this nature has been allowed entry into the statute books of a democratic country. It flys in the face of government policy in relation to working after 65 yrs and encourages employers to abuse the privilege that this law allows them.

In anticipation of a favourable responce.

Yours sincerely

Eric Jenkins

Why is this idea important?

This very discriminatory law should be repealed immediately because it really belongs in a totalitarian state.

The law states quite clearly that an employer can retire any employee 65yrs and over without any explanation or reason. There is no appeal available to the employee and therefore it leaves itself wideopen to discrimination misuse.

I really cannot believe how a law of this nature has been allowed entry into the statute books of a democratic country. It flys in the face of government policy in relation to working after 65 yrs and encourages employers to abuse the privilege that this law allows them.

In anticipation of a favourable responce.

Yours sincerely

Eric Jenkins

Stop protecting the anonymity of teenagers convicted of violent crime

Amend the law which grants the right of anonymity to young offenders so that it does not apply to those aged 13 or over convicted of the most serious crimes, such as murder, attempted murder and grievous bodily harm.

The law should be protecting the victims of these crimes, not the perpetrators.  What is more, the public should have the right to know the identity of someone who has been convicted of committing a very serious crime in their community.

By the age of 13 someone should be well aware that such crimes destroy the lives of the victims and the victims’ families and should thus suffer the full consequences of their actions.  The perpetrators of these crimes are violent thugs, not sweet, innocent ‘children’ who need mollycoddling and protecting, and the law should reflect this.

Why is this idea important?

Amend the law which grants the right of anonymity to young offenders so that it does not apply to those aged 13 or over convicted of the most serious crimes, such as murder, attempted murder and grievous bodily harm.

The law should be protecting the victims of these crimes, not the perpetrators.  What is more, the public should have the right to know the identity of someone who has been convicted of committing a very serious crime in their community.

By the age of 13 someone should be well aware that such crimes destroy the lives of the victims and the victims’ families and should thus suffer the full consequences of their actions.  The perpetrators of these crimes are violent thugs, not sweet, innocent ‘children’ who need mollycoddling and protecting, and the law should reflect this.

sex education for minors

I have recently had to deal with the situation of my  child being taught 'HOW TO HAVE SEX' at school. This you call sex education, no this I call abuse . A childs mind needs to be free from the things that only an adult more mature mind can deal with . If we want our children to be as inocent as possible then do we as adults not need to protect thier minds, showing a child a video of a man having sex with a woman to me is pornography. How is a mind as young as a nine year old supposed to comprehend the physical nature of sex. 

Are not all children inquisitive, are some possibley disturbed and yet such things as this are only going to force the issues within their heads. You would not put a nine/ten year old a class and talk to them about how to murder some one, no it is sociably unaccetpable yet here we are giving our children the tools to go out and do such things as have sexual intercourse with each other. To me this is morally wrong. I accept that as part of growing up we need to learn about how our human bodies develop but until our children reach senior school then and only then should we educate them more approprate matters.

If the government is to proceed with this and teach our even younger children how to have sex with each other then the possibilities of more disturbed children growing up. Are we ready to tackle the rapists and peodohiles that this may bring forth to our communities. Only recently 2 ten year old boys were cought trying to force themselve upon a young girl you have to ask yourself was this before or after the 'sex education'.

 

Why is this idea important?

I have recently had to deal with the situation of my  child being taught 'HOW TO HAVE SEX' at school. This you call sex education, no this I call abuse . A childs mind needs to be free from the things that only an adult more mature mind can deal with . If we want our children to be as inocent as possible then do we as adults not need to protect thier minds, showing a child a video of a man having sex with a woman to me is pornography. How is a mind as young as a nine year old supposed to comprehend the physical nature of sex. 

Are not all children inquisitive, are some possibley disturbed and yet such things as this are only going to force the issues within their heads. You would not put a nine/ten year old a class and talk to them about how to murder some one, no it is sociably unaccetpable yet here we are giving our children the tools to go out and do such things as have sexual intercourse with each other. To me this is morally wrong. I accept that as part of growing up we need to learn about how our human bodies develop but until our children reach senior school then and only then should we educate them more approprate matters.

If the government is to proceed with this and teach our even younger children how to have sex with each other then the possibilities of more disturbed children growing up. Are we ready to tackle the rapists and peodohiles that this may bring forth to our communities. Only recently 2 ten year old boys were cought trying to force themselve upon a young girl you have to ask yourself was this before or after the 'sex education'.

 

Simply pension scheme minimum retirement ages

Remove the complexities and unfairness which surrounds the recent changes in the minimum retirement age from 50 to 55, including:

  • the detailed exemptions which allow some people to keep a minimum retirement age of 50
  • the detailed rules by which that exemption can be lost as a result of certain types of transfers from one pension scheme to another.

A fairer approach would be to revert to the minimum pension age of 50 for all, providing individuals with the maximum flexibilty.

If the government wishes to encourage working beyond age 50 then this could be done simply by limiting the availability of the Pension Commencement Lump Sum (commonly known as the tax-free cash) to retirements at age 55 or above. 

Anyone retiring before age 55 who takes a lump sum from their pension would be subject to income tax on that lump sum, unless retiring for reasons of permanent ill-health (which is already allowable at any age).

Why is this idea important?

Remove the complexities and unfairness which surrounds the recent changes in the minimum retirement age from 50 to 55, including:

  • the detailed exemptions which allow some people to keep a minimum retirement age of 50
  • the detailed rules by which that exemption can be lost as a result of certain types of transfers from one pension scheme to another.

A fairer approach would be to revert to the minimum pension age of 50 for all, providing individuals with the maximum flexibilty.

If the government wishes to encourage working beyond age 50 then this could be done simply by limiting the availability of the Pension Commencement Lump Sum (commonly known as the tax-free cash) to retirements at age 55 or above. 

Anyone retiring before age 55 who takes a lump sum from their pension would be subject to income tax on that lump sum, unless retiring for reasons of permanent ill-health (which is already allowable at any age).

Repeal Positive Discrimination (Part 11, Chapter 2) – Equality Act 2010

Repeal the provisions made for employers to positively discriminate against people of a certain age, race, sex or religious belief. 

Why is this idea important?

Repeal the provisions made for employers to positively discriminate against people of a certain age, race, sex or religious belief.