Repeal some of appeal provisions of Town and Country Planning Act

I would suggest the virtual abolition of the rights of appeal contained in the Town and Country Planning Act and that central government, in the shape of the Planning Inspectorate, should have no role in the vast majority of planning matters. 

 

Historically, about two-thirds of planning appeals are rejected – meaning that in those cases the local planning authority’s original decision was “correct”.  We maintain an appeals system for the minority of cases (about one third) where the planning authority made a “wrong” decision.  That is a waste of resources and takes away the rights of local authorities to make their own decions – at grass roots level.

 

With no right of appeal it might be necessary to widen the circumstances in which the Secretary of State “calls-in” applications for his own determination.

 

The rights of appeal against non-determination of a planning application and against an enforcement notice would need to be retained.  But with those exceptions the power and responsibility for dealing with planning matters would be returned to the local level where it properly belongs.  The man from Whitehall would not be able to interfere.

Why is this idea important?

I would suggest the virtual abolition of the rights of appeal contained in the Town and Country Planning Act and that central government, in the shape of the Planning Inspectorate, should have no role in the vast majority of planning matters. 

 

Historically, about two-thirds of planning appeals are rejected – meaning that in those cases the local planning authority’s original decision was “correct”.  We maintain an appeals system for the minority of cases (about one third) where the planning authority made a “wrong” decision.  That is a waste of resources and takes away the rights of local authorities to make their own decions – at grass roots level.

 

With no right of appeal it might be necessary to widen the circumstances in which the Secretary of State “calls-in” applications for his own determination.

 

The rights of appeal against non-determination of a planning application and against an enforcement notice would need to be retained.  But with those exceptions the power and responsibility for dealing with planning matters would be returned to the local level where it properly belongs.  The man from Whitehall would not be able to interfere.

Ban asylum seekers right to appeal.

Asylum seekers who are refused should not be able to constantly appeal the decision.

If they are refused, their case has been looked at, the onus should be upon them to provide sufficient reason for their remaining here in the first instance.

Why is this idea important?

Asylum seekers who are refused should not be able to constantly appeal the decision.

If they are refused, their case has been looked at, the onus should be upon them to provide sufficient reason for their remaining here in the first instance.

A CRIMINAL CASE REVIEW COMMISSION MANNED BY VICTIMS – NOT PUPPETS

THE CRIMINAL CASE REVIEW COMMISSION IS THE LAST CHANCE FOR A DEFENDANT KNOCKED BACK BY THE APPEAL – THE APPEAL KNOCKS BACK 99% OF APPEALS

THE CRIMINAL CASE REVIEW COMMISSION IS A POWERFUL AND VALID ORGANISATION CREATED HONESTLY BY THE 1995 CRIMINAL APPEAL ACT

THE PROBLEM IS THAT IT IS INFLITRATED BY THE GOVERNMENT WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO KNOCK BACK ALL APPELLANTS

ELDERLY QUALIFIED VOLUNTEER CITIZENS WOULD SIT IN THE COMMISSION – CITIZENS VICTIMS OF MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE AND WOULD NOT ALLOW FILES TO BE CLOSED BEFORE THEY HAD REVIEWED THE ARGUMENTS OF THE CASE WORKER TO CLOSE THE FILE

Why is this idea important?

THE CRIMINAL CASE REVIEW COMMISSION IS THE LAST CHANCE FOR A DEFENDANT KNOCKED BACK BY THE APPEAL – THE APPEAL KNOCKS BACK 99% OF APPEALS

THE CRIMINAL CASE REVIEW COMMISSION IS A POWERFUL AND VALID ORGANISATION CREATED HONESTLY BY THE 1995 CRIMINAL APPEAL ACT

THE PROBLEM IS THAT IT IS INFLITRATED BY THE GOVERNMENT WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO KNOCK BACK ALL APPELLANTS

ELDERLY QUALIFIED VOLUNTEER CITIZENS WOULD SIT IN THE COMMISSION – CITIZENS VICTIMS OF MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE AND WOULD NOT ALLOW FILES TO BE CLOSED BEFORE THEY HAD REVIEWED THE ARGUMENTS OF THE CASE WORKER TO CLOSE THE FILE

Change the Security Industry Authority appeal process.

Under current rules applicants have a 14 day window for a written appeal, and if still unhappy are given 14 days to apply to iether a magistrates or crown court. When my legal team applied to courts they were told that Magistrates and Judges are under strict rukes to uphold the SIA get licensed booklet, and as result of this are basically just rubber stamping the SIA decisions. With the Judges hands tied by SIA rules there is no unbiased, fully independant body an applicant can appeal to. It is totally against civil liberties, and an individualals right to work. The Judges and Magistrates should hear all appeals without being controlled by the Security Industry Authority.

Why is this idea important?

Under current rules applicants have a 14 day window for a written appeal, and if still unhappy are given 14 days to apply to iether a magistrates or crown court. When my legal team applied to courts they were told that Magistrates and Judges are under strict rukes to uphold the SIA get licensed booklet, and as result of this are basically just rubber stamping the SIA decisions. With the Judges hands tied by SIA rules there is no unbiased, fully independant body an applicant can appeal to. It is totally against civil liberties, and an individualals right to work. The Judges and Magistrates should hear all appeals without being controlled by the Security Industry Authority.