Open Government for the UK

            Alter the law/section that denies a citizen the right to see in detail where ALLgovernment collected money is spent i.e.: all salaries; fees; expenses; regardless of whether the recipient is a Crown employee or not;  regardless of whether the recipient is a UK citizen or not; regardless of whether the payment was made within the UK or not.

Why is this idea important?

            Alter the law/section that denies a citizen the right to see in detail where ALLgovernment collected money is spent i.e.: all salaries; fees; expenses; regardless of whether the recipient is a Crown employee or not;  regardless of whether the recipient is a UK citizen or not; regardless of whether the payment was made within the UK or not.

DNA Defends me.

            Alter the law/section that denies the Police and other government agencies the right to retain indefinitely any DNAsamples it acquires from any source.

Why is this idea important?

            Alter the law/section that denies the Police and other government agencies the right to retain indefinitely any DNAsamples it acquires from any source.

DNA Defends me.

            Alter the law/section that denies the Police and other government agencies the right to retain indefinitely any DNAsamples it acquires from any source.

Why is this idea important?

            Alter the law/section that denies the Police and other government agencies the right to retain indefinitely any DNAsamples it acquires from any source.

stop takin DNA for every crime.

it is not right in a free country that the police can pick anyone up they like and take their DNA, this is out of order and must stop, in a free country we should have the right to defend ourselfs agaist these nazi police, police powers are out of control, i would never let anyone take my DNA it makes me so mad, don,nt they unstand free country, do something, thank you, dade.

Why is this idea important?

it is not right in a free country that the police can pick anyone up they like and take their DNA, this is out of order and must stop, in a free country we should have the right to defend ourselfs agaist these nazi police, police powers are out of control, i would never let anyone take my DNA it makes me so mad, don,nt they unstand free country, do something, thank you, dade.

Ripa act – privacy stolen

I would like very much to see the RIPA act changed or abolished so that this level of intrusion is specifically and can only be applied against suspected terrorists, serious organised crime and serious breaches of law, i.e. to save lives, which I believe was the original intent for the introduction of this act.

I believe that myself, along with many other citizens of the UK that they have been wrongly targetted and investigated under the RIPA act.  The media have reported case upon case where clearly non criminal or suspected minor criminal activity has been used as a reason to remove the privacies we are guaranteed under article 8 of the human rights act (whether you agree with them or not, we have them). These privacies are arbitrarily removed by low level council staff and do not appear to have any central oversight whatsoever.  The potential for abuse is huge and I believe demonstrable in the thousands of cases highlighted in the media.  One of the worst aspects of the RIPA is that you have no guaranteed access to the information collected and stored as there are many exemption clauses in the freedom of information act that protect the collectors and storers of this information from disclosing it to the target of the investigation.  This leaves a huge area for misuse and errors that cannot be redressed fully by the investigated.

Apart from anything else, when did it become the job of local government to investigate its citizenry?  Is this not solely the role of law enforcement?  how can the cost be justified? 

Take the RIPA act and investigatory powers away from local government, place it in the hands of the law.  Use the money saved to set up national specialised units to cover any gaps created in intelligence gathering capability.

It is also apparent that the CRB share information with anyone paying, and when I say information, I mean they provide information above and beyond thier legislated scope.

I can only imagine that Stalin and Hitler would have been envious of the RIPA act and how easily it was foisted upon a free nation with almost no public discussion or awareness until abuses started to be reported in the media many years after its instigation.

Why is this idea important?

I would like very much to see the RIPA act changed or abolished so that this level of intrusion is specifically and can only be applied against suspected terrorists, serious organised crime and serious breaches of law, i.e. to save lives, which I believe was the original intent for the introduction of this act.

I believe that myself, along with many other citizens of the UK that they have been wrongly targetted and investigated under the RIPA act.  The media have reported case upon case where clearly non criminal or suspected minor criminal activity has been used as a reason to remove the privacies we are guaranteed under article 8 of the human rights act (whether you agree with them or not, we have them). These privacies are arbitrarily removed by low level council staff and do not appear to have any central oversight whatsoever.  The potential for abuse is huge and I believe demonstrable in the thousands of cases highlighted in the media.  One of the worst aspects of the RIPA is that you have no guaranteed access to the information collected and stored as there are many exemption clauses in the freedom of information act that protect the collectors and storers of this information from disclosing it to the target of the investigation.  This leaves a huge area for misuse and errors that cannot be redressed fully by the investigated.

Apart from anything else, when did it become the job of local government to investigate its citizenry?  Is this not solely the role of law enforcement?  how can the cost be justified? 

Take the RIPA act and investigatory powers away from local government, place it in the hands of the law.  Use the money saved to set up national specialised units to cover any gaps created in intelligence gathering capability.

It is also apparent that the CRB share information with anyone paying, and when I say information, I mean they provide information above and beyond thier legislated scope.

I can only imagine that Stalin and Hitler would have been envious of the RIPA act and how easily it was foisted upon a free nation with almost no public discussion or awareness until abuses started to be reported in the media many years after its instigation.

Stop asking about my ethnic origin

At almost every dealing with national or local government, there is always an extra form to fill in stating your ethnic origin.

Whilst I see the point in this when conducting the National Cencus, I see no need for it when taking out a library book.

Not only is it a huge waste of money on additional forms, but millions of pounds must be wasted on the administration of all this information.

 

Why is this idea important?

At almost every dealing with national or local government, there is always an extra form to fill in stating your ethnic origin.

Whilst I see the point in this when conducting the National Cencus, I see no need for it when taking out a library book.

Not only is it a huge waste of money on additional forms, but millions of pounds must be wasted on the administration of all this information.

 

Should all government data on citizens be controlled by independent trusts? And to whom would they be answerable?

Just wondering on this, but the more storage we get, inevitably the more data the government holds will increase. Computers were supposed to reduce paperwork, they increased it due to data.

The more data the government holds the more capacity, power and potential corruption therein they have to start abusing it. Should the control of what requests in their various contexts are acceptable and what not, lie with the system, or should it be independently controlled?

Trusts can be used to monitor which types of data requests are asked (by polticians, police, insurance companies), of whom and why. Police are already known to use anti terror requests to identify comparatively petty criminals, showing that (through the abuse of power) they can be no more trusted with data than said criminals.

As we have more data over time over more issues, I propose that the data is pulled away from the people that can unaccountably use that data to trusts that are accountable. Once appointed, they could appoint new members keeping themselves independent. But to whom should the trusts be accountable? The people via votes, other data trusts, or the politicians they are supposed to regulate?

Why is this idea important?

Just wondering on this, but the more storage we get, inevitably the more data the government holds will increase. Computers were supposed to reduce paperwork, they increased it due to data.

The more data the government holds the more capacity, power and potential corruption therein they have to start abusing it. Should the control of what requests in their various contexts are acceptable and what not, lie with the system, or should it be independently controlled?

Trusts can be used to monitor which types of data requests are asked (by polticians, police, insurance companies), of whom and why. Police are already known to use anti terror requests to identify comparatively petty criminals, showing that (through the abuse of power) they can be no more trusted with data than said criminals.

As we have more data over time over more issues, I propose that the data is pulled away from the people that can unaccountably use that data to trusts that are accountable. Once appointed, they could appoint new members keeping themselves independent. But to whom should the trusts be accountable? The people via votes, other data trusts, or the politicians they are supposed to regulate?

Don’t collect irrelevant data when people get married

When a couple gets married, or enters into a civil partnership, the forms that they are asked to fill in include a variety of pieces of information which are of no relevance to the event – things like parents' occupations, for example (even if the parents are dead … is 'corpse' an occupation?). All of this information is then publicly available on the marriage register.

My idea is to simplify the forms so that only essential information is asked for – perhaps just name and national insurance number.

Why is this idea important?

When a couple gets married, or enters into a civil partnership, the forms that they are asked to fill in include a variety of pieces of information which are of no relevance to the event – things like parents' occupations, for example (even if the parents are dead … is 'corpse' an occupation?). All of this information is then publicly available on the marriage register.

My idea is to simplify the forms so that only essential information is asked for – perhaps just name and national insurance number.