Move income tax, to a tax on dirty energy

 

If we want to encourage clean energy development and lower electricity use, we should raise taxes on emissions created by power plants, so that dirty energy costs more to produce than clean energy. 

If a tax based on the amount of pollutants a power station produced was raised significantly it would make renewable energy economically advantages.  Making clean energy cheaper than that produced by fossil fuels would lead to a surge in renewable energy projects.  This would lower pollution, create a secure energy supply and help the economy through investment.

Obviously this would lead to higher energy prices.  The government should offset this by lowering income tax.  Maybe the Liberal Democrats could get their 10,000 income tax threshold.  Those on fixed incomes would also need an increase, paid for by the emissions tax.  This would be a fairer system of taxation.  

Why is this idea important?

 

If we want to encourage clean energy development and lower electricity use, we should raise taxes on emissions created by power plants, so that dirty energy costs more to produce than clean energy. 

If a tax based on the amount of pollutants a power station produced was raised significantly it would make renewable energy economically advantages.  Making clean energy cheaper than that produced by fossil fuels would lead to a surge in renewable energy projects.  This would lower pollution, create a secure energy supply and help the economy through investment.

Obviously this would lead to higher energy prices.  The government should offset this by lowering income tax.  Maybe the Liberal Democrats could get their 10,000 income tax threshold.  Those on fixed incomes would also need an increase, paid for by the emissions tax.  This would be a fairer system of taxation.  

Reduce restrictions for dog walkers

It is increasingly hard for responsible dog owners to give their dogs the exercise they need. The previous government made it easier for local government to bring in new restrictions. This doesn't work. Local government often does not follow proper consultation, failing to consider the needs of dog owners. Dogs are simply banned from large areas with no thought for the impact. In effect, responsible dog owners are being punished because of an irresponsible minority. There would be outrage if cars were banned from any road on which more than say ten people broke the speed limit in a month !

This sort of approach just does not work. In 1980 or 1990 not all dog owners cleared up poo. Now virtually all do, yet there are more restrictions than ever before. The impact on more eldely dog owners (or those with older dogs), those without a car, or anyone who has rescued an ill-treated dog can be huge, yet there is no benefit to society. Otherwise unnecessary car journeys are hardly a good thing, either. 

The power of local government to ban dogs outright has been misused, and should be severely curtailed. Existing dog bans should be converted to 'dogs on leads' restictions – still a compromise – unless exceptional circumstances can be demonstrated.

If Britain really is to become a fair and open society, the attitude of a small minority should not be allowed to make a simply, everyday activity so hard for so many decent, responsible dog owners.

Why is this idea important?

It is increasingly hard for responsible dog owners to give their dogs the exercise they need. The previous government made it easier for local government to bring in new restrictions. This doesn't work. Local government often does not follow proper consultation, failing to consider the needs of dog owners. Dogs are simply banned from large areas with no thought for the impact. In effect, responsible dog owners are being punished because of an irresponsible minority. There would be outrage if cars were banned from any road on which more than say ten people broke the speed limit in a month !

This sort of approach just does not work. In 1980 or 1990 not all dog owners cleared up poo. Now virtually all do, yet there are more restrictions than ever before. The impact on more eldely dog owners (or those with older dogs), those without a car, or anyone who has rescued an ill-treated dog can be huge, yet there is no benefit to society. Otherwise unnecessary car journeys are hardly a good thing, either. 

The power of local government to ban dogs outright has been misused, and should be severely curtailed. Existing dog bans should be converted to 'dogs on leads' restictions – still a compromise – unless exceptional circumstances can be demonstrated.

If Britain really is to become a fair and open society, the attitude of a small minority should not be allowed to make a simply, everyday activity so hard for so many decent, responsible dog owners.

Presentable and attractive views on properties

My idea is to make properties more presentable, you can do this by making it conpulsary to have an acceptable apperience on your house, this is because having a "messy" house on your street affects the costs of peoples houses, also it affects the appeal of people wanting to buy or rent properties around where there are unexceptable houses.

Having such horrifying sights gives England and the rest of Britain a "bad" look, this isn't appealing and that means we loose a lot of tourism.

For example we will use a council house, not all council houses are horrible and are tecnically an eye sore (which is a type of pollution). This is a link to a horrible council house http://www.freefoto.com/images/11/23/11_23_30—Derelict-council-house_web.jpg
 

and this is a link to a council house which is presentable and which all council houses have to set a standard to, if not even better.
http://s0.geograph.org.uk/photos/05/06/050694_ca4262b4.jpg

It is not just council houses, it's also private houses and companies.

Why is this idea important?

My idea is to make properties more presentable, you can do this by making it conpulsary to have an acceptable apperience on your house, this is because having a "messy" house on your street affects the costs of peoples houses, also it affects the appeal of people wanting to buy or rent properties around where there are unexceptable houses.

Having such horrifying sights gives England and the rest of Britain a "bad" look, this isn't appealing and that means we loose a lot of tourism.

For example we will use a council house, not all council houses are horrible and are tecnically an eye sore (which is a type of pollution). This is a link to a horrible council house http://www.freefoto.com/images/11/23/11_23_30—Derelict-council-house_web.jpg
 

and this is a link to a council house which is presentable and which all council houses have to set a standard to, if not even better.
http://s0.geograph.org.uk/photos/05/06/050694_ca4262b4.jpg

It is not just council houses, it's also private houses and companies.