Allow parents freedom to decide when their children start school, aged 4 or 5

All parents should be given the freedom to choose when their children start school between the ages of 4 and 5 either full time or part time for a set period. At present schools and LEAs have widely differing policies which can prevent parents from deciding the most appropriate age at which their children start school. This idea should accompanied by a guarantee of a place being held for the child, if the parents choose to delay their start. At the same time schools should not be financially penalised where this occurs.             

Why is this idea important?

All parents should be given the freedom to choose when their children start school between the ages of 4 and 5 either full time or part time for a set period. At present schools and LEAs have widely differing policies which can prevent parents from deciding the most appropriate age at which their children start school. This idea should accompanied by a guarantee of a place being held for the child, if the parents choose to delay their start. At the same time schools should not be financially penalised where this occurs.             

abolish deposit protection scheme

Abolish the requirement that all landlords must deposit their deposit against damage and lose on the proper with the dps.  TIn my case, this manditory  scheme for landlords requires £200 be deposited for each tenant, from which damages can be deducted before returning the balance to the tenant at the end of the contract. 

In the past, landlords collect a deposit when a tenant moved into the property, an amount agreed before the contract was signed.  Any damages to the property were simply taken from this sum before the tenant vacated the property.  If their was no damage, the sum was returned in total;  if the damage was greater, then the landlord could take the tenant to court to recover the lose if it was not covered by insurance.  If the landlord refused to return the deposit, the tenant could take the landlord to court to recover the money.

Now, the government has intervened and created a lot of unnecessary red tape to cover this simple process that worked for years and years, but with no guarantee that it will solve the problem of the bad landlord that it was intended to address.

Why is this idea important?

Abolish the requirement that all landlords must deposit their deposit against damage and lose on the proper with the dps.  TIn my case, this manditory  scheme for landlords requires £200 be deposited for each tenant, from which damages can be deducted before returning the balance to the tenant at the end of the contract. 

In the past, landlords collect a deposit when a tenant moved into the property, an amount agreed before the contract was signed.  Any damages to the property were simply taken from this sum before the tenant vacated the property.  If their was no damage, the sum was returned in total;  if the damage was greater, then the landlord could take the tenant to court to recover the lose if it was not covered by insurance.  If the landlord refused to return the deposit, the tenant could take the landlord to court to recover the money.

Now, the government has intervened and created a lot of unnecessary red tape to cover this simple process that worked for years and years, but with no guarantee that it will solve the problem of the bad landlord that it was intended to address.

Changes to the Landlord & Tenant Act re: Commercial properties

I sold my catering business with a new 15 years lease. I am now responsible for the rent until I am 72 years of age. If any business defaults during this time the Landlord can come back to me for the rent, his costs and depreciations.. The Act states that the Landlord should NOT be held responsible for any costs. The rent now stands at £21,000 a year. How on earth are we supposed to find the money if the person whom we sold the business to, or their successors defaults. This act has no place in the 21st century. The Federation of Small Business's have been calling for a change for years.  If I sold a leasehold flat I would not be responsible for the rent, so why Commercial properties. Our Landord deceided to do £15, 000 worth of repairs to HIS building, which I had to pay for. I had to sell the business to pay HIS bills.

This Act should be moderated so that greedy Landlords and tenants should have the same rights. It is HIS building so he should be responsible to see that it is tenanted, not the previous owners.

Why is this idea important?

I sold my catering business with a new 15 years lease. I am now responsible for the rent until I am 72 years of age. If any business defaults during this time the Landlord can come back to me for the rent, his costs and depreciations.. The Act states that the Landlord should NOT be held responsible for any costs. The rent now stands at £21,000 a year. How on earth are we supposed to find the money if the person whom we sold the business to, or their successors defaults. This act has no place in the 21st century. The Federation of Small Business's have been calling for a change for years.  If I sold a leasehold flat I would not be responsible for the rent, so why Commercial properties. Our Landord deceided to do £15, 000 worth of repairs to HIS building, which I had to pay for. I had to sell the business to pay HIS bills.

This Act should be moderated so that greedy Landlords and tenants should have the same rights. It is HIS building so he should be responsible to see that it is tenanted, not the previous owners.

Prevent local councils from snooping into private bank accounts

It should be made unlawful for local authorities to gain access to an individuals bank account details to access their assets with out due consent from the individual, this would then prevent the possibility of identity freud by anyone working at the local authority. Only individuals and the baks themselves should have this access unless due permission is granted

Why is this idea important?

It should be made unlawful for local authorities to gain access to an individuals bank account details to access their assets with out due consent from the individual, this would then prevent the possibility of identity freud by anyone working at the local authority. Only individuals and the baks themselves should have this access unless due permission is granted

Move environmental taxes from point of disposal to point of sale

Abolish Point of Disposal environmental taxes like the land fill tax.

Instead, allow land fill and recycling centres to accept commercial waste free of charge.

To pay for this, increase the rate of VAT on building materials, tyres, etc. (i.e. whatever the difficult to dispose of items are).  VAT is cheaper to collect, impossible to avoid. Ultimately, the same person will pay for the disposal, but much sooner, without the ability to avoid the tax by dumping the waste.

To encourage recycling, make 2nd hand items VAT exempt and reduce the VAT on recycled goods, if practical.

Why is this idea important?

Abolish Point of Disposal environmental taxes like the land fill tax.

Instead, allow land fill and recycling centres to accept commercial waste free of charge.

To pay for this, increase the rate of VAT on building materials, tyres, etc. (i.e. whatever the difficult to dispose of items are).  VAT is cheaper to collect, impossible to avoid. Ultimately, the same person will pay for the disposal, but much sooner, without the ability to avoid the tax by dumping the waste.

To encourage recycling, make 2nd hand items VAT exempt and reduce the VAT on recycled goods, if practical.

Local Authorities The RIPA Act Telephone Tapping

Local Authorities and Councils should be banned from being able to use the RIPA Act to spy on the people they are supposed to be serving. For example, the local authorities have the power to tap telephones without the knowledge or consent of the owner of the telephone, follow people around using outside private investigation agencies, pay Google fees to promote the names of certain people to the top of the front page of searches.

Why is this idea important?

Local Authorities and Councils should be banned from being able to use the RIPA Act to spy on the people they are supposed to be serving. For example, the local authorities have the power to tap telephones without the knowledge or consent of the owner of the telephone, follow people around using outside private investigation agencies, pay Google fees to promote the names of certain people to the top of the front page of searches.

Houses in Multiple Occupation Licences

Abolish the concept of a House in Multiplle Occupation. The definition of an HMO applies to  property rented to two or more unrelated adults and is used by councils to create revenue in the form of licencing costs to lanlords – thereby increasing rents to tenants – and as an excuse to spawn a plethora of public sector jobs policing the strict requirements that HMO status conveys.

A family with six children can rent a property without the intrusive and costly rules and regulations of HMO status being policed by an army of council officials. Three adult friends sharing an identical house next door will be deemed to be separate households  -as they are unrelated – and the landlord required to obtain an expensive HMO licence.

Environmental health officers will then make regular and intrusive inspections ,demand fire doors be installed, windows be locked to stop people falling out and many other requirements as presumably two or more unrelated adults are incapable of living in an ordinary rented property without risking life and limb!

HMO legislation serves no purpose, is unneccessary, increases private sector rental costs and daunts potential landlords thereby reducing the pool of rented property available. Owner occupiers are not exposed to local council demands and intruisions – why should tenants have to suffer such interference and landlords and taxpayers pay for the jobs created to support such legislation?

Legislation related to the rental of property needs a comprehensive overhaul.

Why is this idea important?

Abolish the concept of a House in Multiplle Occupation. The definition of an HMO applies to  property rented to two or more unrelated adults and is used by councils to create revenue in the form of licencing costs to lanlords – thereby increasing rents to tenants – and as an excuse to spawn a plethora of public sector jobs policing the strict requirements that HMO status conveys.

A family with six children can rent a property without the intrusive and costly rules and regulations of HMO status being policed by an army of council officials. Three adult friends sharing an identical house next door will be deemed to be separate households  -as they are unrelated – and the landlord required to obtain an expensive HMO licence.

Environmental health officers will then make regular and intrusive inspections ,demand fire doors be installed, windows be locked to stop people falling out and many other requirements as presumably two or more unrelated adults are incapable of living in an ordinary rented property without risking life and limb!

HMO legislation serves no purpose, is unneccessary, increases private sector rental costs and daunts potential landlords thereby reducing the pool of rented property available. Owner occupiers are not exposed to local council demands and intruisions – why should tenants have to suffer such interference and landlords and taxpayers pay for the jobs created to support such legislation?

Legislation related to the rental of property needs a comprehensive overhaul.

Review the way housing ALMOs are set up and managed

I work for an ALMO in Rotherham (2010Rotherham Ltd). The ALMO employs 4 directors and a Chief Executive with the total salary cost for these positions being in excess of £500,000/year. These people have no idea of what they manage and they are too far from any operational issues to add any value to the overall processes. Also, any decision they make has to be ratified by officers in the Council (RMBC) some of these holding junior positions to the directors in the ALMO. The bureaucracy in the company is absolutely unbelievable with forms and processes being invented just to justify the existence of these highly paid Directors. At the same time the company is going through a restructure and essential operational posts which could make a difference to people's lives are cut. If organisations like the one I work for are reviewed, so that they could function with fewer executive staff, then the savings nationally could be millions of pounds.

Why is this idea important?

I work for an ALMO in Rotherham (2010Rotherham Ltd). The ALMO employs 4 directors and a Chief Executive with the total salary cost for these positions being in excess of £500,000/year. These people have no idea of what they manage and they are too far from any operational issues to add any value to the overall processes. Also, any decision they make has to be ratified by officers in the Council (RMBC) some of these holding junior positions to the directors in the ALMO. The bureaucracy in the company is absolutely unbelievable with forms and processes being invented just to justify the existence of these highly paid Directors. At the same time the company is going through a restructure and essential operational posts which could make a difference to people's lives are cut. If organisations like the one I work for are reviewed, so that they could function with fewer executive staff, then the savings nationally could be millions of pounds.

Traffic Management and Streetworks Act

This act should be repealed as it costs utility companies and their contractors a huge amount of money and resource and delivers nothing to the public in terms of traffic and congestion control. Local Authorities are poor at providing this information to the public and fines to contractors and statutory undertakers are too high and authorities abuse their powers.

Why is this idea important?

This act should be repealed as it costs utility companies and their contractors a huge amount of money and resource and delivers nothing to the public in terms of traffic and congestion control. Local Authorities are poor at providing this information to the public and fines to contractors and statutory undertakers are too high and authorities abuse their powers.

Refuse Collections

Currently our council collects our food waste every week. The container is very large.

Why is it necessary to collect every week when we usually have 2 small bags inside the container.   I know the Mail has had campaigns to collect this weekly but is totally unnecessary especially if users used bags instead of just putting food into a bin.   In fact at a rough calculation we could probably last for 6 months before the bin was filled but larger families could reduce this figure.   There is no smell because of the bags.

No survey has ever been done but maybe heavy users should be charged extra.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why is this idea important?

Currently our council collects our food waste every week. The container is very large.

Why is it necessary to collect every week when we usually have 2 small bags inside the container.   I know the Mail has had campaigns to collect this weekly but is totally unnecessary especially if users used bags instead of just putting food into a bin.   In fact at a rough calculation we could probably last for 6 months before the bin was filled but larger families could reduce this figure.   There is no smell because of the bags.

No survey has ever been done but maybe heavy users should be charged extra.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Repeal the regulation that results in lifts using double the energy necessary

Repeal the current regulations which requires all modern lifts to return to the ground floor, every time they are used. 

Why is this idea important?

Repeal the current regulations which requires all modern lifts to return to the ground floor, every time they are used. 

Sustainabilty – Civil Service pensions

Everyone is aware of the current financial climate and the aims of all and sundry with regard to sustainabilty.Clearly this country and others cannot afford the increasing triple burden created of many years of an expanding Public Sector, linked to final salary indexlinked pensions and the possibilty of early retirement. It is clearly also the single largest non sustainble item in the UK's present and future planning.That it has been identified in the past and no action taken for many years is testament to the power of the Civil Service, and Local Government to maintain it's vested interest by threats of action, implied or real.The Health Service is now so mis managed in spite of increased funds paying for thousands of adminstrators producing meaningless data that few will ever act upon.

So idea 1- Phase out final pension schemes over five years with no new entrants to the scheme from Jan 1 2011. Have the same pension scheme as the private sector and phase in same retirement age.

Administrative staff in the NHS to apply for patient facing positions where qualifications exist and cut adminstration numbers by 20% By July 2011 _ Same targets for local councils,and Government depts average ie somew higher some lower.

 

Idea 2 Phase out March 31 st Dealines for spending a fixed budget and have a rolling published P&L. Savings to be kept by the authority.

 

Idea 3 Full access to be given to real costs to outside contractors when tendering – and targets of 20% reduction in hours and labour costs to be targeted.

 

Idea 4 As redundancies occur cap all payments.

 

Idea 5 Allow all economic immigration with a sponsor, job and financial backing. Stop all Housing Benefit, Employment Benefit and Healthcare for all who have not been resident for 5 years.

 

Idea 6. Reduce Draconian  planning laws and allow ribbon development to farmers where they have been in occupation for 10 years

Why is this idea important?

Everyone is aware of the current financial climate and the aims of all and sundry with regard to sustainabilty.Clearly this country and others cannot afford the increasing triple burden created of many years of an expanding Public Sector, linked to final salary indexlinked pensions and the possibilty of early retirement. It is clearly also the single largest non sustainble item in the UK's present and future planning.That it has been identified in the past and no action taken for many years is testament to the power of the Civil Service, and Local Government to maintain it's vested interest by threats of action, implied or real.The Health Service is now so mis managed in spite of increased funds paying for thousands of adminstrators producing meaningless data that few will ever act upon.

So idea 1- Phase out final pension schemes over five years with no new entrants to the scheme from Jan 1 2011. Have the same pension scheme as the private sector and phase in same retirement age.

Administrative staff in the NHS to apply for patient facing positions where qualifications exist and cut adminstration numbers by 20% By July 2011 _ Same targets for local councils,and Government depts average ie somew higher some lower.

 

Idea 2 Phase out March 31 st Dealines for spending a fixed budget and have a rolling published P&L. Savings to be kept by the authority.

 

Idea 3 Full access to be given to real costs to outside contractors when tendering – and targets of 20% reduction in hours and labour costs to be targeted.

 

Idea 4 As redundancies occur cap all payments.

 

Idea 5 Allow all economic immigration with a sponsor, job and financial backing. Stop all Housing Benefit, Employment Benefit and Healthcare for all who have not been resident for 5 years.

 

Idea 6. Reduce Draconian  planning laws and allow ribbon development to farmers where they have been in occupation for 10 years

Scrap the duty of care notice for refuse collection

I run a 1 man business. I pay £160 per year for Merton Council to collect one bag of rubbish per week. On top of this I have to pay them £90 for a duty of care notice to tell Merton Council that I have disposed of my rubbish with an approved contractor, i.e. Merton Council.

Why is this idea important?

I run a 1 man business. I pay £160 per year for Merton Council to collect one bag of rubbish per week. On top of this I have to pay them £90 for a duty of care notice to tell Merton Council that I have disposed of my rubbish with an approved contractor, i.e. Merton Council.

Make the Building Regulations less bureaucratic and restrictive

The Building Regulations were originally introduced to make sure that buildings complied with certain building standards.  In recent times they have been expanded enormously with a series of 14 technical Parts devoted to particular topics e.g. Part P for electrics and Part N for glazing/windows.  At the same time the Building Regulations are now also used to ensure that building work increases the energy efficiency rating of the relevant components to certain levels.

Whilst the intentions may have been good, the practice is far from good.  The result is that only people registered with particular schemes (e.g. FENSA for windows or NICEIC for electrics) are allowed to sign-off their own work.  The alternative is to pay a fee to the local Council Building Control Officer (BCO) to give approval.  In both cases the quality of the work or assessment is highly variable.  Some BCOs give a cursory assessment whilst others scrutinise every detail and reject work for trivial deviations (in terms of their impact) from the standard.  SImilarly, whilst some tradesmen will do the work well, others will not – but both can sign off the work as being to the standard.

The Building Regulations should be reviewed and the highly restrictive, bureacratic and costly requirements to use certain approved installers should be relaxed.  These apply particularly to Parts N and P but the requirement to have the work approved applies also to other parts that a competent householder might wish to tackle e.g. Parts F, G, H. J and L.  I propose that all the relevant standards e.g. for quality of materials and components and for the design should be freely available for anyone to access e.g. on the internet or at their local library (or council office perhaps).  Anyone who is competent and confident they can undertake the work should be able to do so, whether this is the householder or someone they know.  If the work represents a significant change from what previously existed (for example, not simply replacing a broken light switch), it may be appropriate that they should have to record the nature of the work undertaken and sign to state it has been done to the appropriate standard.

This self-certification of work could either be recorded in a "House Logbook" – (why don't houses have some kind of logbook that records details of repairs and maintenance undertaken and changes to systems etc  that can be passed on to the next owner?), or  perhaps a self-certification could be submitted to the local authority to be held on record, similar to now (although there would be a risk that would become bureaucratic and incur costs too.)  In either case, a future prospective owner or tenant should be able to find out what significant work has been undertaken and, if they wish, get 'an expert' to check it was actually done to standard.  They key factor is having a record of what has been done.  We need to get back to a point where people are allowed to carry out their own repairs and maintenance without being forced to use someone deemed competent (but who often isn't) or going through a bureaucratic and costly local authority approval system.

Why is this idea important?

The Building Regulations were originally introduced to make sure that buildings complied with certain building standards.  In recent times they have been expanded enormously with a series of 14 technical Parts devoted to particular topics e.g. Part P for electrics and Part N for glazing/windows.  At the same time the Building Regulations are now also used to ensure that building work increases the energy efficiency rating of the relevant components to certain levels.

Whilst the intentions may have been good, the practice is far from good.  The result is that only people registered with particular schemes (e.g. FENSA for windows or NICEIC for electrics) are allowed to sign-off their own work.  The alternative is to pay a fee to the local Council Building Control Officer (BCO) to give approval.  In both cases the quality of the work or assessment is highly variable.  Some BCOs give a cursory assessment whilst others scrutinise every detail and reject work for trivial deviations (in terms of their impact) from the standard.  SImilarly, whilst some tradesmen will do the work well, others will not – but both can sign off the work as being to the standard.

The Building Regulations should be reviewed and the highly restrictive, bureacratic and costly requirements to use certain approved installers should be relaxed.  These apply particularly to Parts N and P but the requirement to have the work approved applies also to other parts that a competent householder might wish to tackle e.g. Parts F, G, H. J and L.  I propose that all the relevant standards e.g. for quality of materials and components and for the design should be freely available for anyone to access e.g. on the internet or at their local library (or council office perhaps).  Anyone who is competent and confident they can undertake the work should be able to do so, whether this is the householder or someone they know.  If the work represents a significant change from what previously existed (for example, not simply replacing a broken light switch), it may be appropriate that they should have to record the nature of the work undertaken and sign to state it has been done to the appropriate standard.

This self-certification of work could either be recorded in a "House Logbook" – (why don't houses have some kind of logbook that records details of repairs and maintenance undertaken and changes to systems etc  that can be passed on to the next owner?), or  perhaps a self-certification could be submitted to the local authority to be held on record, similar to now (although there would be a risk that would become bureaucratic and incur costs too.)  In either case, a future prospective owner or tenant should be able to find out what significant work has been undertaken and, if they wish, get 'an expert' to check it was actually done to standard.  They key factor is having a record of what has been done.  We need to get back to a point where people are allowed to carry out their own repairs and maintenance without being forced to use someone deemed competent (but who often isn't) or going through a bureaucratic and costly local authority approval system.

Voting System

Before a referendom on voting reform can we have some radical new ideas for a truly democratic system. There is no way would I put my cross alongside some of the existing lying, cheating, clueless, arrogant, greedy, and generally corrupt politicians for a first choice, let alone second choice.    So I am deprived of a voice.

Existing politicians must be shown the full contempt that I believe much of the British Public hold for them. Too often they read into election results totally preposterous personal interpretations of peoples intentions.

The internet is available to most people, at home, colleges, workplaces, libraries etc. I would propose that "government by the people" could, by using that technology, become a reality.

I can see a time when the voters are advised the time of any particular debate. If they wish to take part they can log in and submit there ideas.   Independent adjudicators could sift these ideas into some order of relevence and content and introduce the ideas for discussion.    After the debate parliament makes a recommendation and the electorate can vote yes or no.

I'm no brain surgeon but it seems easy enough to me.

In no time at all we could be rid of the EU, Elf an Safety, Out of Border Conflicts, Road Tax, murderers and a million other unwanted gems. And maybe,   just maybe,    we could be rid of the  prementioned politicians and replace them with honest administrators working 5 days weekly 9-5 for a realistic salary.

I suspect the real brains out there could work out an even better way to bring democracy back to the people.  I'm all ears….

 

Why is this idea important?

Before a referendom on voting reform can we have some radical new ideas for a truly democratic system. There is no way would I put my cross alongside some of the existing lying, cheating, clueless, arrogant, greedy, and generally corrupt politicians for a first choice, let alone second choice.    So I am deprived of a voice.

Existing politicians must be shown the full contempt that I believe much of the British Public hold for them. Too often they read into election results totally preposterous personal interpretations of peoples intentions.

The internet is available to most people, at home, colleges, workplaces, libraries etc. I would propose that "government by the people" could, by using that technology, become a reality.

I can see a time when the voters are advised the time of any particular debate. If they wish to take part they can log in and submit there ideas.   Independent adjudicators could sift these ideas into some order of relevence and content and introduce the ideas for discussion.    After the debate parliament makes a recommendation and the electorate can vote yes or no.

I'm no brain surgeon but it seems easy enough to me.

In no time at all we could be rid of the EU, Elf an Safety, Out of Border Conflicts, Road Tax, murderers and a million other unwanted gems. And maybe,   just maybe,    we could be rid of the  prementioned politicians and replace them with honest administrators working 5 days weekly 9-5 for a realistic salary.

I suspect the real brains out there could work out an even better way to bring democracy back to the people.  I'm all ears….

 

Method Statements

Building sites have a number of subcontractors on them each of which has to produce a huge ammount of method statements. The cost of these is over £50,000 for each contractor. They sit on shelves in files, about 8 feet of shelf space. Nobody has ever read any of these documents.

 

Save lots on the government's construction budget and just scrap the whole lot of them.

Why is this idea important?

Building sites have a number of subcontractors on them each of which has to produce a huge ammount of method statements. The cost of these is over £50,000 for each contractor. They sit on shelves in files, about 8 feet of shelf space. Nobody has ever read any of these documents.

 

Save lots on the government's construction budget and just scrap the whole lot of them.

Magistrates to license pubs not councils

As the last government did nothing to help Pubs and there is no glimmer of this one doing anything could we please revert back to the Magistrates Courts for licence extensions. We use to be able to go to court and get a licence for the next day but since it was Blairised we now have to give 10 working days notice which means we loose even more business. I note that licenses have just been issued to some pouns shops to sell beer and wine for 1.00 a pint, thats going to be helpful to pubs and all the associated crime that goes with cheap alcohol
 

Why is this idea important?

As the last government did nothing to help Pubs and there is no glimmer of this one doing anything could we please revert back to the Magistrates Courts for licence extensions. We use to be able to go to court and get a licence for the next day but since it was Blairised we now have to give 10 working days notice which means we loose even more business. I note that licenses have just been issued to some pouns shops to sell beer and wine for 1.00 a pint, thats going to be helpful to pubs and all the associated crime that goes with cheap alcohol
 

Blanket planning permission 4 solar panels, windmills, satallite dishes

I think wind farms are beautiful, so just ignore my point about that perhaps and concentrate on the simpler part.

If I want to extend a building upwards by the height of solar panels and water tanks, and I have had the strength of the building inspected, surely this could be enough to allow automatic planning permission just as previous generations argued for their sheds and porch extensions to be covered automaticaly.

Why is this idea important?

I think wind farms are beautiful, so just ignore my point about that perhaps and concentrate on the simpler part.

If I want to extend a building upwards by the height of solar panels and water tanks, and I have had the strength of the building inspected, surely this could be enough to allow automatic planning permission just as previous generations argued for their sheds and porch extensions to be covered automaticaly.

Remove the requirement to pay Business Rates by sporting clubs

As an amateur football club, that re-invests any profits made from its social club back in to our facilities and the community, we are required to pay business rates based on the size of a our ground, stand and clubhouse. This is a tremendously high financial burden that could more directly be put to the better good of the community.

Why is this idea important?

As an amateur football club, that re-invests any profits made from its social club back in to our facilities and the community, we are required to pay business rates based on the size of a our ground, stand and clubhouse. This is a tremendously high financial burden that could more directly be put to the better good of the community.

Introduce an ‘Assured Shorthold Tenancy’ for commercial property

To provide a simple and quick means of occupying commercial property (of all types), with fixed terms, standard clauses, standard deposits, standard rights and obligations etc.  My suggestion would be that it should be available to all properties up to £50,000 pa exclusive.   The AST has transformed the private rented residential sector and with some thought a similar basis could be put in place for commercial lettings, which would significantly improve the market and the economy, in my opinion. 

Why is this idea important?

To provide a simple and quick means of occupying commercial property (of all types), with fixed terms, standard clauses, standard deposits, standard rights and obligations etc.  My suggestion would be that it should be available to all properties up to £50,000 pa exclusive.   The AST has transformed the private rented residential sector and with some thought a similar basis could be put in place for commercial lettings, which would significantly improve the market and the economy, in my opinion. 

Local Acts

Around the country there are a number of local acts dealing with the design and construction of buildings. Most of these acts place a requirement on the builduing relating to fire safety.

 

These acts often conflict with what is required in the neighboring town or city. If the requirement is a good idea it should be adopted nationally.If not then why is it there? Just to give the local authority or fire authority some power.

 

The previous government commissioned a report on this topic and the report concluded that ALL local acts should be repealed as they are acting against the best interests of development, and affecting growth. However nothing was done about them. It is now time to take these acts off the statute book as they do not fulfil a useful purpose.

Why is this idea important?

Around the country there are a number of local acts dealing with the design and construction of buildings. Most of these acts place a requirement on the builduing relating to fire safety.

 

These acts often conflict with what is required in the neighboring town or city. If the requirement is a good idea it should be adopted nationally.If not then why is it there? Just to give the local authority or fire authority some power.

 

The previous government commissioned a report on this topic and the report concluded that ALL local acts should be repealed as they are acting against the best interests of development, and affecting growth. However nothing was done about them. It is now time to take these acts off the statute book as they do not fulfil a useful purpose.

Allow a 16 & 17 year olds to take on a tenancy agreement

Individuals under age of 18 are not allowed to hold an interest in land. 16 year olds are allowed to leave school and find work. They can live independently from their families. They can fight (and die) for their country. They are allowed to bear children, yet they are not allowed to hold a tenancy agreement.

This is hampering their independent living (if they choose it), and a curse to landlords (especially the uninformed ones).

Allow 16 & 17 year olds to be responsible and accountable. They may surprise you.

Why is this idea important?

Individuals under age of 18 are not allowed to hold an interest in land. 16 year olds are allowed to leave school and find work. They can live independently from their families. They can fight (and die) for their country. They are allowed to bear children, yet they are not allowed to hold a tenancy agreement.

This is hampering their independent living (if they choose it), and a curse to landlords (especially the uninformed ones).

Allow 16 & 17 year olds to be responsible and accountable. They may surprise you.

Remove requirement for fire-doors in 2-storey shared rented houses

It is illogical to require self-closing firedoors in an ordinary 2-storey house which is rented on a joint tenancy as a shared house (eg to professionals or students) – as is required in HMO-related legislation, as interpreted by some (not all) local authorities.

Such a house is occupied & lived in, in the same way as any (rented or non-rented) family house, with no greater danger of fire. Furthermore, firedoors can be an undesirable feature when the landlord wishes to sell the house to, or return it to (non-HMO) family accommodation. And furthermore again, fire doors are frequently propped in an open position by tenants (esp. kitchen & lounge doors) because they find them inconvenient, & are therefore ineffective. The landlord therefore has the cost (which increases rent) of installing, then removing, a feature of dubious usefulness.

The LACORS fire guidance document does not require them, but not all LAs follow this.

An appropriate smoke alarm system of course is necessary, & I don't disagree with fire doors in a 3-storey house from which escape is more difficult, although there is evidence that sprinkler systems are more effective.

Why is this idea important?

It is illogical to require self-closing firedoors in an ordinary 2-storey house which is rented on a joint tenancy as a shared house (eg to professionals or students) – as is required in HMO-related legislation, as interpreted by some (not all) local authorities.

Such a house is occupied & lived in, in the same way as any (rented or non-rented) family house, with no greater danger of fire. Furthermore, firedoors can be an undesirable feature when the landlord wishes to sell the house to, or return it to (non-HMO) family accommodation. And furthermore again, fire doors are frequently propped in an open position by tenants (esp. kitchen & lounge doors) because they find them inconvenient, & are therefore ineffective. The landlord therefore has the cost (which increases rent) of installing, then removing, a feature of dubious usefulness.

The LACORS fire guidance document does not require them, but not all LAs follow this.

An appropriate smoke alarm system of course is necessary, & I don't disagree with fire doors in a 3-storey house from which escape is more difficult, although there is evidence that sprinkler systems are more effective.

Remove Quango interference in how teachers teach/work

The Institute For Learning (IFL) is just an unnecessary organisation that Further Education teachers are obliged to join, just so that they can record any training or CPD that they have engaged in.  Why is this necessary?  it is just  another layer of form-filling bureacracy that wastes time that FE teachers should be using in planning and teaching.

Also, OFSTED appears to be treating Further Education Colleges as if they are schools.  Instead treating college students as trainee adults, we are being forced to treat them more like little children.  Much of what ofsted requires of schools is unsuitable for colleges.

Why is this idea important?

The Institute For Learning (IFL) is just an unnecessary organisation that Further Education teachers are obliged to join, just so that they can record any training or CPD that they have engaged in.  Why is this necessary?  it is just  another layer of form-filling bureacracy that wastes time that FE teachers should be using in planning and teaching.

Also, OFSTED appears to be treating Further Education Colleges as if they are schools.  Instead treating college students as trainee adults, we are being forced to treat them more like little children.  Much of what ofsted requires of schools is unsuitable for colleges.