Crowdsourcing changes to UK law
It should be compulsary to cary your driving license when driving and the paper part should be scrapped.
It should be compulsary to cary your driving license when driving and the paper part should be scrapped.
At present many companies have the right to shut off sections of road at any time of their choosing. This often results in chaos or farce where other companies dig up nearby roads or even the same stretch a short time after it was resurfaced by the previous company. This results in severe frustration and stress, increased emissions as cars wait and an incalculable bill to businesses who may lose both their workers and their customers.
Given that Local Authorities need to raise alternative revenues without pushing up Council Tax, would it not make sense for Councils to police the digging up of highways, charging for the right to do so and issuing licences that were valid for an agreed period with stinging penalty clauses for delays? Regulation should place a duty on such companies to coordinate their activities ensuring that no particular route was disrupted more than a certain number of days per year. A duty should also be placed on the Council to ensure that traffic flow was kept as free as possible.
At present many companies have the right to shut off sections of road at any time of their choosing. This often results in chaos or farce where other companies dig up nearby roads or even the same stretch a short time after it was resurfaced by the previous company. This results in severe frustration and stress, increased emissions as cars wait and an incalculable bill to businesses who may lose both their workers and their customers.
Given that Local Authorities need to raise alternative revenues without pushing up Council Tax, would it not make sense for Councils to police the digging up of highways, charging for the right to do so and issuing licences that were valid for an agreed period with stinging penalty clauses for delays? Regulation should place a duty on such companies to coordinate their activities ensuring that no particular route was disrupted more than a certain number of days per year. A duty should also be placed on the Council to ensure that traffic flow was kept as free as possible.
The design of our towns and cities leaves a lot to be desired when coping with the unforseen traffic levels for when they were designed. Most 'A' roads are of single lane construction and where the roads widen are often littered with parked vehicles.
A free and easy way to alleviate traffic problems is to ban parking along these 'A' roads which would add to safety and help keep the traffic moving.
It may inconvenience a few motorists but for the greater good it will help solve a problem that can be operated almost overnight at little or no cost.
The design of our towns and cities leaves a lot to be desired when coping with the unforseen traffic levels for when they were designed. Most 'A' roads are of single lane construction and where the roads widen are often littered with parked vehicles.
A free and easy way to alleviate traffic problems is to ban parking along these 'A' roads which would add to safety and help keep the traffic moving.
It may inconvenience a few motorists but for the greater good it will help solve a problem that can be operated almost overnight at little or no cost.
One of the biggest daily holdups is that at the Dartford Crossing. Tolls are collected both Southbound and Northbound. Why not cancel either of these tolls and instead just double the toll on the other. This method is already used on the Severn crossing.
One of the biggest daily holdups is that at the Dartford Crossing. Tolls are collected both Southbound and Northbound. Why not cancel either of these tolls and instead just double the toll on the other. This method is already used on the Severn crossing.
Once upon a time in Britain there was a growing industrythat provided kits for converting rusting relics to fun and exciting 30's-style roadsters and many other forms, using GRP body tubs and a host of replica 'period' fittings and accessories. Building these cars provided enjoyable involvement and spare-time occupation for thousands of people, and driving them around on summer weekends was a fun activity that harmed no-one.
Every car built had of course to pass an MOT test, that ensured that it was mechanically safe and met all statutory requirements regarding lighting, seat belt anchorages, structural strength etc. etc. Then about 10 years ago, for no apparent reason at all, the DVLA introduced the 'Single Vehicle Approval' process for all kit-built cars, involving conformity with a host of ridiculous reguirements about 'minimum radius' edges, BS approved steering wheels and so on, that it isvirtually impossible for any period-style kit car to meet. Almost overnight, a useful and fun British industry was killed, and thousands of long-term builders were left with part-complete vehicles they could never hope to get on the road. Now the regulations are being even futher tightened to bring all those existing kit cars that are 'incorrectly registered' – that is, still retain the base 'donor' car identity – into the net, even if they have been on the road perhaps for years, been taxed and MOT'd etc..
There is simply no need for these laws. Kit cars can never meet regulations designed for mass production vehicles – they are lightweight 'specials' generally used for low-mileage weekend fun driving by their dedicated owners. They can never be as 'safe' for the drivers as the steel tanks produced by the car industry, but are safer for both driver and pedestrians than road-legal motorcycles, trikes or cycle/sidecar 'combos', by a very wide margin. There is no history of any particular problems associated with kit cars – on the contrary, insurance premiums are typically low, because kit cars tend NOT to be involved in accidents.
To revive a quirky British industry and to restore the freedom to have a bit of fun to all those who own or would like to build a kit car, the requirment to go through an SVA/IVA test should be abolished and replaced by an extended initial MOT test carried out at a local garage, to ensure build standard, general safety, and conformity with all statutory requirements, but no more.
Once upon a time in Britain there was a growing industrythat provided kits for converting rusting relics to fun and exciting 30's-style roadsters and many other forms, using GRP body tubs and a host of replica 'period' fittings and accessories. Building these cars provided enjoyable involvement and spare-time occupation for thousands of people, and driving them around on summer weekends was a fun activity that harmed no-one.
Every car built had of course to pass an MOT test, that ensured that it was mechanically safe and met all statutory requirements regarding lighting, seat belt anchorages, structural strength etc. etc. Then about 10 years ago, for no apparent reason at all, the DVLA introduced the 'Single Vehicle Approval' process for all kit-built cars, involving conformity with a host of ridiculous reguirements about 'minimum radius' edges, BS approved steering wheels and so on, that it isvirtually impossible for any period-style kit car to meet. Almost overnight, a useful and fun British industry was killed, and thousands of long-term builders were left with part-complete vehicles they could never hope to get on the road. Now the regulations are being even futher tightened to bring all those existing kit cars that are 'incorrectly registered' – that is, still retain the base 'donor' car identity – into the net, even if they have been on the road perhaps for years, been taxed and MOT'd etc..
There is simply no need for these laws. Kit cars can never meet regulations designed for mass production vehicles – they are lightweight 'specials' generally used for low-mileage weekend fun driving by their dedicated owners. They can never be as 'safe' for the drivers as the steel tanks produced by the car industry, but are safer for both driver and pedestrians than road-legal motorcycles, trikes or cycle/sidecar 'combos', by a very wide margin. There is no history of any particular problems associated with kit cars – on the contrary, insurance premiums are typically low, because kit cars tend NOT to be involved in accidents.
To revive a quirky British industry and to restore the freedom to have a bit of fun to all those who own or would like to build a kit car, the requirment to go through an SVA/IVA test should be abolished and replaced by an extended initial MOT test carried out at a local garage, to ensure build standard, general safety, and conformity with all statutory requirements, but no more.
From: "Jim Quinn"
To: "The Cabinet Office UK" <pscorrespondence@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk>
Cc:
Subject: UNSAFE AAIB report 4-2010
Date: 04 September 2010 21:30
The UK AAIB have done it again with their report on a Boeing 777 incident at St Kitts, West Indies (airport ref SKB) on 26th September 2009. See:
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/sites/aaib/publications/formal_reports.cfm
Their report AAIB 4-2010 dated 2sept10 is the fourth poor one this year (and thus every one this year has been poor!) that I have commented upon, and it again has insufficient safety recommendations.
The UK AAIB report says at para 1.18.1.1:
"Also the low sun was directly over the western end of the ramp."
According to the following website, http://www.sunrisesunsetmap.com/ , sunset was at 1802 hours Bolivia time, and the 777 aircrew started to talk to ATC (Air Traffic Control) about taxi at 2059:57 hours (three hours later, and Boliva is on the same longitude as SKB, but there may be an hour time zone difference of course), so the sun was well below the horizon. Since St Kitts is only 17 degrees North of the Equator, I would have thought the Sun would set at about 1800 hours for days are as long as nights on the equator at almost all times of the year, so I also mindfully conclude that the Sun was actually set for some long time previous to taxi out, and thus it was dark. Thus my safety recommendation ON THE UK AAIB, that they always check local time, and quote local sunset time in this case, for their reports.
So, it was dark, yet the UK AAIB report mentions no lights on the taxiway. Were there none, and thus why the co-pilot taxied blindly? Or was it his fault for not having a recce of the taxiway map before flight? Do SKB have big maps at aircrew lounge departure doors? Two more safety recommendations.
If the taxiway lights had been on, the co-pilot would have seen alpha taxiway to A departing to his left as he approached B. So importantly, were there no taxiway lights? Because the co-pilot was only following his own head lamps it seems. A safety recommendation to fit taxiway lights.
The UK AAIB mention the British Airways NDA, but do not show it. Why not, since it seems to me to indicate that BA should have their St Kitts flight clearance withdrawn – useless NDA still not corrected? A safety recommendation.
Why is there no ATC sound recorder? The UK AAIB report did not even mention it, even though they recognised difficulties in memory recall from the staff in the ATC room. I agree with the UK AAIB report 4-2010, that SKB is obviously not performing as it should, for they were lazy in their approach to safety. So they should be more stringently scrutinised before flights are allowed there again – but no UK AAIB recommendation anywhere near strong enough. Suspension hurts the whole island, so pressure to improve much better if flights were suspended. Two more safety recommendations.
If the departure via beta (B) was so regular, why was there no woman standing at the junction to ensure the 777 aircraft went down alpha to A? There are not that many flights into or out of SKB, so it should be easily setup. A safety recommendation.
The UK AAIB mention June 2010 as the date for work to be completed at the airport. Their report is September 2010. Was it done? Why publish the lazy report, if they do not know? Similarly for the training necessary for ATC crew. Another safety recommendation UPON the UK AAIB.
Count those safety recommendations up, and I think the UK AAIB will find they should be up to about number 2010-056 by now (not just their 2010-049), with an additonal two from ME onto THEM, which obviously EASA/CAA will have to think about.
Thus the UK AAIB are again quality audited. The UK AAIB should send many senior managers back to school (or sack them), and make sure those left know how to conduct an investigation in future. A safety recommendation on the UK AAIB, for our skys are only safer, if they report well.
NOW please.
IMMEDIATELY, for our future flight safety depends upon these people.
The UK Cabinet Office to follow up actions please.
Jim Quinn FIMechE
From: "Jim Quinn"
To: "The Cabinet Office UK" <pscorrespondence@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk>
Cc:
Subject: UNSAFE AAIB report 4-2010
Date: 04 September 2010 21:30
The UK AAIB have done it again with their report on a Boeing 777 incident at St Kitts, West Indies (airport ref SKB) on 26th September 2009. See:
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/sites/aaib/publications/formal_reports.cfm
Their report AAIB 4-2010 dated 2sept10 is the fourth poor one this year (and thus every one this year has been poor!) that I have commented upon, and it again has insufficient safety recommendations.
The UK AAIB report says at para 1.18.1.1:
"Also the low sun was directly over the western end of the ramp."
According to the following website, http://www.sunrisesunsetmap.com/ , sunset was at 1802 hours Bolivia time, and the 777 aircrew started to talk to ATC (Air Traffic Control) about taxi at 2059:57 hours (three hours later, and Boliva is on the same longitude as SKB, but there may be an hour time zone difference of course), so the sun was well below the horizon. Since St Kitts is only 17 degrees North of the Equator, I would have thought the Sun would set at about 1800 hours for days are as long as nights on the equator at almost all times of the year, so I also mindfully conclude that the Sun was actually set for some long time previous to taxi out, and thus it was dark. Thus my safety recommendation ON THE UK AAIB, that they always check local time, and quote local sunset time in this case, for their reports.
So, it was dark, yet the UK AAIB report mentions no lights on the taxiway. Were there none, and thus why the co-pilot taxied blindly? Or was it his fault for not having a recce of the taxiway map before flight? Do SKB have big maps at aircrew lounge departure doors? Two more safety recommendations.
If the taxiway lights had been on, the co-pilot would have seen alpha taxiway to A departing to his left as he approached B. So importantly, were there no taxiway lights? Because the co-pilot was only following his own head lamps it seems. A safety recommendation to fit taxiway lights.
The UK AAIB mention the British Airways NDA, but do not show it. Why not, since it seems to me to indicate that BA should have their St Kitts flight clearance withdrawn – useless NDA still not corrected? A safety recommendation.
Why is there no ATC sound recorder? The UK AAIB report did not even mention it, even though they recognised difficulties in memory recall from the staff in the ATC room. I agree with the UK AAIB report 4-2010, that SKB is obviously not performing as it should, for they were lazy in their approach to safety. So they should be more stringently scrutinised before flights are allowed there again – but no UK AAIB recommendation anywhere near strong enough. Suspension hurts the whole island, so pressure to improve much better if flights were suspended. Two more safety recommendations.
If the departure via beta (B) was so regular, why was there no woman standing at the junction to ensure the 777 aircraft went down alpha to A? There are not that many flights into or out of SKB, so it should be easily setup. A safety recommendation.
The UK AAIB mention June 2010 as the date for work to be completed at the airport. Their report is September 2010. Was it done? Why publish the lazy report, if they do not know? Similarly for the training necessary for ATC crew. Another safety recommendation UPON the UK AAIB.
Count those safety recommendations up, and I think the UK AAIB will find they should be up to about number 2010-056 by now (not just their 2010-049), with an additonal two from ME onto THEM, which obviously EASA/CAA will have to think about.
Thus the UK AAIB are again quality audited. The UK AAIB should send many senior managers back to school (or sack them), and make sure those left know how to conduct an investigation in future. A safety recommendation on the UK AAIB, for our skys are only safer, if they report well.
NOW please.
IMMEDIATELY, for our future flight safety depends upon these people.
The UK Cabinet Office to follow up actions please.
Jim Quinn FIMechE
We are asking for a complete review of the Euro emissions regulations for heavy vehicles (known as Euro I, Euro II etc.)
We are asking for a complete review of the Euro emissions regulations for heavy vehicles (known as Euro I, Euro II etc.)
In Italy and France everyone pays road tax on the motorways according to how far they travel. But in the UK, foreign drivers travel free.
Get foreign drivers to take a printed card when they arrive and submit it when they leave, paying the yearly road tax pro rata against the time they have spent in the country.
In Italy and France everyone pays road tax on the motorways according to how far they travel. But in the UK, foreign drivers travel free.
Get foreign drivers to take a printed card when they arrive and submit it when they leave, paying the yearly road tax pro rata against the time they have spent in the country.
At the moment travelling by train during the rush hour, when most people are going to work, is the most expensive time of the day to travel. Fares reduce once the rush hour is over and yet the journeys taken in off-peak are far more pleasant and enjoyable as people have more room.
My idea is to reverse this, to make the less pleasant, busiest and yet economically most important journeys the cheapest to take, whilst those trips that people take for purely pleasure more expensive if necessary.
At the moment there is a kind of economic discrimination against those of us who go to work during the rush hour while the ladies (and gents) of leisure have their fares subsidised by the rest of us
At the moment travelling by train during the rush hour, when most people are going to work, is the most expensive time of the day to travel. Fares reduce once the rush hour is over and yet the journeys taken in off-peak are far more pleasant and enjoyable as people have more room.
My idea is to reverse this, to make the less pleasant, busiest and yet economically most important journeys the cheapest to take, whilst those trips that people take for purely pleasure more expensive if necessary.
At the moment there is a kind of economic discrimination against those of us who go to work during the rush hour while the ladies (and gents) of leisure have their fares subsidised by the rest of us
The rule that restricts most lorries from driving at more than 40 mph on non-dual carraigeway roads is presumably there in an attempt to increase safety, but is actually positively dangerous, and should be repealed.
The rule that restricts most lorries from driving at more than 40 mph on non-dual carraigeway roads is presumably there in an attempt to increase safety, but is actually positively dangerous, and should be repealed.
Recently the rules were changed so a vehicle recovery driver without a tachograph can't recover a vehicle to a location outside a 50 mile radius of his base. This results in wasted time and expense for customers, the RAC etc. Furthermore the rules don't apply to recoveries on Police business!
All this is petty bureacracy gone mad with VOSA people checking up on an industry which has run entirely satisfactorily for years
Recently the rules were changed so a vehicle recovery driver without a tachograph can't recover a vehicle to a location outside a 50 mile radius of his base. This results in wasted time and expense for customers, the RAC etc. Furthermore the rules don't apply to recoveries on Police business!
All this is petty bureacracy gone mad with VOSA people checking up on an industry which has run entirely satisfactorily for years
To reduce the fuel levy, or other taxes on fuel for persons living in rural areas.
To reduce the fuel levy, or other taxes on fuel for persons living in rural areas.
Allow advertisements on motorway overbridges and highway land where a safety case allows for it
Allow advertisements on motorway overbridges and highway land where a safety case allows for it
I recently contacted DVLA to ask about purchasing the registration for my first car, which would have been long scrapped and was told that this was not possible.
It seems to me that a change in regulation would allow people like myself to purchase a cherished number, when otherwise I would not be interested in something like this.
I recently contacted DVLA to ask about purchasing the registration for my first car, which would have been long scrapped and was told that this was not possible.
It seems to me that a change in regulation would allow people like myself to purchase a cherished number, when otherwise I would not be interested in something like this.
My idea is to scrap the requirement of all lgv drivers to obtain and maintain the cpc.
My idea is to scrap the requirement of all lgv drivers to obtain and maintain the cpc.
The cost to the traveling public has gone through the roof with every individual airport charging every single passenger for the use of the facility. These airports were built with public money. It should be the right of every citizen to use them without paying more and more. Let the airport companies make their money from their over-priced shops in the concourse.
I truly do not believe it could possibly cost as much as they collect in order to run their services.
Also, where a flight has been canceled, for whatever reason, airlines and airports should be made to refund the full amount the traveler has paid out, without quibble or delay, at present we have the situation where you are, eventually, able to reclaim the flight cost but it's almost impossible to get the airport taxes back.
The cost to the traveling public has gone through the roof with every individual airport charging every single passenger for the use of the facility. These airports were built with public money. It should be the right of every citizen to use them without paying more and more. Let the airport companies make their money from their over-priced shops in the concourse.
I truly do not believe it could possibly cost as much as they collect in order to run their services.
Also, where a flight has been canceled, for whatever reason, airlines and airports should be made to refund the full amount the traveler has paid out, without quibble or delay, at present we have the situation where you are, eventually, able to reclaim the flight cost but it's almost impossible to get the airport taxes back.
from the Ealing times news paper
A CONTROVERSIAL box junction in Southall has netted Ealing Council more than £1m in just 12 months. Nearly 19,000 motorists were fined after being caught on CCTV.
Jim Douglas, who runs consumer website Moneybox Junction which gives advice to motorists who believe they have been unfairly charged, said Ealing is the authority he gets the most complaints about.
He said: "It's disgusting. The council is not obliged to enforce,
"However, it continues to send out tickets like confetti and whenever someone takes it to appeal it does not contest because it knows it is in the wrong."
Last week the Department for Transport (DfT) advised councils to pay back money which had been raised through unfair enforcement to motorists.
There were lots of complaints to ealing council but there was a blunt response from the council's was that residents should pay up or appeal.
The problem for residents is when you appeal you risk doubling the fine and that's one thing many couldn't afford – and hundreds were pressured into paying fines that should never have been levied."
from the Ealing times news paper
A CONTROVERSIAL box junction in Southall has netted Ealing Council more than £1m in just 12 months. Nearly 19,000 motorists were fined after being caught on CCTV.
Jim Douglas, who runs consumer website Moneybox Junction which gives advice to motorists who believe they have been unfairly charged, said Ealing is the authority he gets the most complaints about.
He said: "It's disgusting. The council is not obliged to enforce,
"However, it continues to send out tickets like confetti and whenever someone takes it to appeal it does not contest because it knows it is in the wrong."
Last week the Department for Transport (DfT) advised councils to pay back money which had been raised through unfair enforcement to motorists.
There were lots of complaints to ealing council but there was a blunt response from the council's was that residents should pay up or appeal.
The problem for residents is when you appeal you risk doubling the fine and that's one thing many couldn't afford – and hundreds were pressured into paying fines that should never have been levied."
Change the laws regarding Tramway development
Change the laws regarding Tramway development
The Welsh Sports Association believes that Government should abolish the requirement under the Local Transport Act 2008 that volunteers driving children to an event even in a small car require a Section 19 Permit from the Vehicle & Operator Services Agency (VOSA)if they are taking contributions from the passengers towards the cost of fuel. This is a totally unnecessary bureaucratic burden
The Welsh Sports Association believes that Government should abolish the requirement under the Local Transport Act 2008 that volunteers driving children to an event even in a small car require a Section 19 Permit from the Vehicle & Operator Services Agency (VOSA)if they are taking contributions from the passengers towards the cost of fuel. This is a totally unnecessary bureaucratic burden
I sugest we scrap the collection of road tax and collect the missing income ont fuel duty – this passes the cost onto all users as those who do not tax their vehicle would still need fuel , so cannot escape the duty – also the more miles you drive the higher your cost which is a fairer system. It would also concentrate our minds on the real need for unnecessary journeys.
The Insurance /mot document relating to this vehicle should be displayed on the windscreen, failure to do so would alert the authorities of possible no -insurance, and unsuitable vehicles on the road, a far worse crime than no licence duty.
I sugest we scrap the collection of road tax and collect the missing income ont fuel duty – this passes the cost onto all users as those who do not tax their vehicle would still need fuel , so cannot escape the duty – also the more miles you drive the higher your cost which is a fairer system. It would also concentrate our minds on the real need for unnecessary journeys.
The Insurance /mot document relating to this vehicle should be displayed on the windscreen, failure to do so would alert the authorities of possible no -insurance, and unsuitable vehicles on the road, a far worse crime than no licence duty.
Currently, drivers of all vehicles over 3.5 tonnes (ie Transit size and up) which are used to transport dangerous goods by road are required to take an ADR course and pass a test on the topic every 5 years. Costs for this course are at least £300 per person, plus 2 to 5 days off work since the training course has to be attended in person. The examination costs another £60 to £250, and is marked centrally by the Scottish Qualifications Agency.
Of course safety is important, but the ADR training course is over-the-top for drivers of small vehicles, and much too expensive for small companies. It should be possible to take at least the refresher training online, or for small companies only operating small veicles (ie 3.5-5 tonnes) to have delegated authority to run the training courses and exams for their own staff once a manager has attended the training course and passed an exam. Of course, the small company taking this responsibility would have to take on liability if they fail to run it properly.
The current system is bureaucratic, and adds nothing to the saftey of road users or drivers. A huge industry has sprung up testing drivers, often cheating so that the instruction company can attain high pass marks. It is box-checking and not value-added.
Currently, drivers of all vehicles over 3.5 tonnes (ie Transit size and up) which are used to transport dangerous goods by road are required to take an ADR course and pass a test on the topic every 5 years. Costs for this course are at least £300 per person, plus 2 to 5 days off work since the training course has to be attended in person. The examination costs another £60 to £250, and is marked centrally by the Scottish Qualifications Agency.
Of course safety is important, but the ADR training course is over-the-top for drivers of small vehicles, and much too expensive for small companies. It should be possible to take at least the refresher training online, or for small companies only operating small veicles (ie 3.5-5 tonnes) to have delegated authority to run the training courses and exams for their own staff once a manager has attended the training course and passed an exam. Of course, the small company taking this responsibility would have to take on liability if they fail to run it properly.
The current system is bureaucratic, and adds nothing to the saftey of road users or drivers. A huge industry has sprung up testing drivers, often cheating so that the instruction company can attain high pass marks. It is box-checking and not value-added.
Remove the 'no parking' zones around pedestrian crossings that are indicated by zig zag markings on the road and allow vehicles to park right up to (but not on) the crossing unless the whole road has other parking restrictions.
Remove the 'no parking' zones around pedestrian crossings that are indicated by zig zag markings on the road and allow vehicles to park right up to (but not on) the crossing unless the whole road has other parking restrictions.
I would like to see the demise of the Driving Standards Agency (DSA), the cancellation of the HGV/PSV drivers CPC legislation, and I'd also like to see a strong government that can stand up for itself and not be brow beaten into implementing ridiculous legislation brought on by the whim of faceless, unelected bureaucrats with no knowledge of the transport or construction industries.
The drivers CPC comes into effect by 2014 and drivers must have 35hrs of classroom training every 5yrs. Why ? Where are the facts ? Where are the statistics to say that we need it ? Answer is – there are none. It is purely the EEC and the DSA making mischief in order to justify their own existance.
I would like to see the demise of the Driving Standards Agency (DSA), the cancellation of the HGV/PSV drivers CPC legislation, and I'd also like to see a strong government that can stand up for itself and not be brow beaten into implementing ridiculous legislation brought on by the whim of faceless, unelected bureaucrats with no knowledge of the transport or construction industries.
The drivers CPC comes into effect by 2014 and drivers must have 35hrs of classroom training every 5yrs. Why ? Where are the facts ? Where are the statistics to say that we need it ? Answer is – there are none. It is purely the EEC and the DSA making mischief in order to justify their own existance.
Repeal regulations made by TRANSEC that require shore ticketing on the Caledonian MacBrayne ferry crossing to Dunoon but not on the Western Ferries crossing that is perfoming the same function.
Repeal any similar regulations that exist on any other inland ferry crossings anywhere in the UK.
Investigate the effectivness of TRANSEC and get rid of the dead wood.
Repeal regulations made by TRANSEC that require shore ticketing on the Caledonian MacBrayne ferry crossing to Dunoon but not on the Western Ferries crossing that is perfoming the same function.
Repeal any similar regulations that exist on any other inland ferry crossings anywhere in the UK.
Investigate the effectivness of TRANSEC and get rid of the dead wood.
Repeal the law/regulations that require contractors to be trained in removing animal carcasses before they are permitted to do so.
This law/regulations led to the absurd situation recently, highlighted in the national media, where contractors painting markings on the road, left a gap around a dead animal, rather than simply move the carcass off the road and carry on.
Repeal the law/regulations that require contractors to be trained in removing animal carcasses before they are permitted to do so.
This law/regulations led to the absurd situation recently, highlighted in the national media, where contractors painting markings on the road, left a gap around a dead animal, rather than simply move the carcass off the road and carry on.