Allow Foreign TV Channels on Sky

Margaret Thatcher saw the value of free speech and passed laws allowing UK citizens to easily watch foreign satellite TV channels. Freedom of speech and access to foreign sources helps democracy abroad. Yet in the UK the previous mixed-provider platform on Astra has been replaced with a system controlled by just one broadcaster, Sky. In theory non-UK channels can operate on the Sky platform, but in reality every channel is UK regulated by Ofcom or tacitly approved by Sky. It's market power makes direct competitors or types of channels Sky disapproves of unable to access the UK market. They can't get a transponder slot. If they do,m they can't get listed on the Sky EPG. If they do the cost is £25,000 or more per year.

This is an insurmountable hurdle for, say, a small French regional channel, that might want to broadcast to ex-patriot French working in Britain. A custom dish set-up is not an option for many people, particularly anyone in temporary accommodation.

The Sky platform has just 2 European channels, both bland state run "Best Of" packages. We should be strengthening our ties, not weakening them.

Not a Government issue? Not a freedom issue? Yes, Mr Moderator, it is. It will take Government action to force Sky (and Virgin, BT, etc) to carry european channels on request and at low cost, without UK regulation. (Dual regulation does not work).

Give the UK people freedom to hear the rest of the world, not just what big business wants us to hear.

Why is this idea important?

Margaret Thatcher saw the value of free speech and passed laws allowing UK citizens to easily watch foreign satellite TV channels. Freedom of speech and access to foreign sources helps democracy abroad. Yet in the UK the previous mixed-provider platform on Astra has been replaced with a system controlled by just one broadcaster, Sky. In theory non-UK channels can operate on the Sky platform, but in reality every channel is UK regulated by Ofcom or tacitly approved by Sky. It's market power makes direct competitors or types of channels Sky disapproves of unable to access the UK market. They can't get a transponder slot. If they do,m they can't get listed on the Sky EPG. If they do the cost is £25,000 or more per year.

This is an insurmountable hurdle for, say, a small French regional channel, that might want to broadcast to ex-patriot French working in Britain. A custom dish set-up is not an option for many people, particularly anyone in temporary accommodation.

The Sky platform has just 2 European channels, both bland state run "Best Of" packages. We should be strengthening our ties, not weakening them.

Not a Government issue? Not a freedom issue? Yes, Mr Moderator, it is. It will take Government action to force Sky (and Virgin, BT, etc) to carry european channels on request and at low cost, without UK regulation. (Dual regulation does not work).

Give the UK people freedom to hear the rest of the world, not just what big business wants us to hear.

Allow Pets to Travel Internationally

Where did this crazy myth start up, that the Continent is riddled with rabies?

Fill in the missing letters: T*b*oids.

There might have been some rabies issue in the 80s, but within a few years of spraying animal habitats with antidote food-pellets, the number of infected aniimals had dimininshed to practically zero. This was achieved within a few years by the 1990s.

Yet it was NEVER reported on.

Well, it’s now 20 years on from 1990, and we’re still the nanny state we were then. (Even worse if you count everything else.)

A number of other rabies-free countries (like Finland and Cyprus) have already signed up for the Schengen freedom-of-movement agreement. And I’d hate to count the number of times I’ve been scratched and bitten by playful cats on the Continent.

Time we reviewed and reformed this uniquely British crazy law.

Why is this idea important?

Where did this crazy myth start up, that the Continent is riddled with rabies?

Fill in the missing letters: T*b*oids.

There might have been some rabies issue in the 80s, but within a few years of spraying animal habitats with antidote food-pellets, the number of infected aniimals had dimininshed to practically zero. This was achieved within a few years by the 1990s.

Yet it was NEVER reported on.

Well, it’s now 20 years on from 1990, and we’re still the nanny state we were then. (Even worse if you count everything else.)

A number of other rabies-free countries (like Finland and Cyprus) have already signed up for the Schengen freedom-of-movement agreement. And I’d hate to count the number of times I’ve been scratched and bitten by playful cats on the Continent.

Time we reviewed and reformed this uniquely British crazy law.

Adopt Dutch Model for Crime Reporting

Part of the problem of crime in the UK is the perception of it. People believe it is at a worse level than in reality.

This is because the press thrive on crime. They sell papers from it.

The result is that people, particularly women, get unduly scared when going out.

This is not good for the social cohesion in our country.

So I propose we adopt the Dutch model for crime reporting to help quell these false perceptions of crime.

In Holland, when a crime is committed, names of suspects cannot be mentioned. And after conviction, only their initials can be reported.

Why is this idea important?

Part of the problem of crime in the UK is the perception of it. People believe it is at a worse level than in reality.

This is because the press thrive on crime. They sell papers from it.

The result is that people, particularly women, get unduly scared when going out.

This is not good for the social cohesion in our country.

So I propose we adopt the Dutch model for crime reporting to help quell these false perceptions of crime.

In Holland, when a crime is committed, names of suspects cannot be mentioned. And after conviction, only their initials can be reported.

The 1972 European Communities Act

We do not have to be members of the EU in order to trade with or European partners or to co-operate fully with them on cross-border issues such as crime or terrorism.

BUT  an organisation set up to foster trade links has become a greedy monster with a massive ego, a creature which repeatedly ignores the democratic will of the people it exists to 'serve'. It is unable to take "No" for an answer and routinely interferes in aspects of everyday life that are way outside its remit. It has been proven to be corrupt to the core, yet 'we' give it £45m a day (!!) to waste on its pet projects. We can no longer afford to be so profligate 

I am NOT  a citizen of a European superstate; I am BRITISH and I intend to remain so

Why is this idea important?

We do not have to be members of the EU in order to trade with or European partners or to co-operate fully with them on cross-border issues such as crime or terrorism.

BUT  an organisation set up to foster trade links has become a greedy monster with a massive ego, a creature which repeatedly ignores the democratic will of the people it exists to 'serve'. It is unable to take "No" for an answer and routinely interferes in aspects of everyday life that are way outside its remit. It has been proven to be corrupt to the core, yet 'we' give it £45m a day (!!) to waste on its pet projects. We can no longer afford to be so profligate 

I am NOT  a citizen of a European superstate; I am BRITISH and I intend to remain so

Pay Same Pension Wherever People Live

If a pensioner lives in the European Union their pension rises with inflation, exactly the same as if they live in the UK. But if they live in almost anywhere else their pension is frozen.

Why? It's exactly the same person and they have built up the same contributions and paid the same tax over heir working life.

The real reason is because pensions are not part of an insurance scheme at all, but a way of keeping the elderly off Government's back. Better a pension than a means tested benefit they think. Not so, pensioners have paid National Insurance and Tax all their lives and a pension is an earned entitlement, not Charity.

If someone wants to retire to Martinique or Florida or Egypt why shouldn't they? Of course no-one should be complled to do so, but for many people it is their dream. Don't cut their pension in real terms by 2-3% each year.

And there are financial benefits – in many countries they can get Care for less than in the UK, and certainly without the carer and family having to emigrate to the UK, so it is Win-Win for pensioners and taxpayers.

Why is this idea important?

If a pensioner lives in the European Union their pension rises with inflation, exactly the same as if they live in the UK. But if they live in almost anywhere else their pension is frozen.

Why? It's exactly the same person and they have built up the same contributions and paid the same tax over heir working life.

The real reason is because pensions are not part of an insurance scheme at all, but a way of keeping the elderly off Government's back. Better a pension than a means tested benefit they think. Not so, pensioners have paid National Insurance and Tax all their lives and a pension is an earned entitlement, not Charity.

If someone wants to retire to Martinique or Florida or Egypt why shouldn't they? Of course no-one should be complled to do so, but for many people it is their dream. Don't cut their pension in real terms by 2-3% each year.

And there are financial benefits – in many countries they can get Care for less than in the UK, and certainly without the carer and family having to emigrate to the UK, so it is Win-Win for pensioners and taxpayers.

Review the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008

Review and revise the HFEA to end research on embryonic stem cells, which has produced NO feasible treatments for any diseases. Re-focus the money on adult and umbilical cord stem cell research, which has already produced promising treatments for leukemia, Crohn's Disease, heart disease, with other treatments in the pipeline.

I'm not suggesting the government has to say that an embryo has a complete set of human rights, but the government must at least acknowledge that there are many people, both religious people, medical ethicists and philosophers, who are deeply uncomfortable with the idea that an embryo is created with the specific purpose of being destroyed in research.

Proposed European legislation to change the rules on medical testing may make embryonic testing even more common, and it is necessary that we legislate now to prevent this further attack on the integrity of human life at its' origin.

Why is this idea important?

Review and revise the HFEA to end research on embryonic stem cells, which has produced NO feasible treatments for any diseases. Re-focus the money on adult and umbilical cord stem cell research, which has already produced promising treatments for leukemia, Crohn's Disease, heart disease, with other treatments in the pipeline.

I'm not suggesting the government has to say that an embryo has a complete set of human rights, but the government must at least acknowledge that there are many people, both religious people, medical ethicists and philosophers, who are deeply uncomfortable with the idea that an embryo is created with the specific purpose of being destroyed in research.

Proposed European legislation to change the rules on medical testing may make embryonic testing even more common, and it is necessary that we legislate now to prevent this further attack on the integrity of human life at its' origin.

Taking back control from Europe

Great Britain should be take back responsibility for governing Great Britain from Europe including its own laws, regulations, human rights, employment, social welfare and the economy in general and cut its funding to Europe.

Why is this idea important?

Great Britain should be take back responsibility for governing Great Britain from Europe including its own laws, regulations, human rights, employment, social welfare and the economy in general and cut its funding to Europe.

Scrap REACH regulations

The REACH regulations which are currently being implemented are placing a huge administrative and financial burden on numerous companies.

There will be little positive impact of these regulations once they are in full force and will overridingly be detrimental to the competitiveness of EU based companies in the EU and global markets. 

Why is this idea important?

The REACH regulations which are currently being implemented are placing a huge administrative and financial burden on numerous companies.

There will be little positive impact of these regulations once they are in full force and will overridingly be detrimental to the competitiveness of EU based companies in the EU and global markets. 

Repeal European Union Membership

repealing European Union Membership would SAVE the British Economy overall 118billion. That is membership costs 118 BILLION pounds sterling a year. Most of that cost comes through European red tape and directives, directly costing each and every business thousand of pounds, or in government jargon, costing jobs and slowing growth and this could cause a double dip recession. The free trade agreements are good but doesn't Switzerland and Norway get all the benefits and minimum costs? So to send the recovery into overdrive axe the EU. It will reduce business costs, could increase employment and save the government billions.

 

Some facts on the EU

Every book loan under EU libarys cost 570 pounds

According to the German magazine Der Speigel, fraud committed in Brussels amounts to 1 million euros per day.

Every year 3.3Billion British Pounds of fish are caught in British territorial waters by non-British fisherman, ie. Spain fishes in our waters we don't fish in theirs.

 

Also the claim that "3million jobs" depends on EU membership" but the scientist who led the research publicly disowned this claim. His report said that few, if any, jobs would be lost if we left, because trade with Europe would continue. So vote down the Euopean Union, Nick Clegg has to listen to normal sane people eventually.

Why is this idea important?

repealing European Union Membership would SAVE the British Economy overall 118billion. That is membership costs 118 BILLION pounds sterling a year. Most of that cost comes through European red tape and directives, directly costing each and every business thousand of pounds, or in government jargon, costing jobs and slowing growth and this could cause a double dip recession. The free trade agreements are good but doesn't Switzerland and Norway get all the benefits and minimum costs? So to send the recovery into overdrive axe the EU. It will reduce business costs, could increase employment and save the government billions.

 

Some facts on the EU

Every book loan under EU libarys cost 570 pounds

According to the German magazine Der Speigel, fraud committed in Brussels amounts to 1 million euros per day.

Every year 3.3Billion British Pounds of fish are caught in British territorial waters by non-British fisherman, ie. Spain fishes in our waters we don't fish in theirs.

 

Also the claim that "3million jobs" depends on EU membership" but the scientist who led the research publicly disowned this claim. His report said that few, if any, jobs would be lost if we left, because trade with Europe would continue. So vote down the Euopean Union, Nick Clegg has to listen to normal sane people eventually.

No Licence Vehicles

Introduce vehicles where no driving licence is required to run them.

Across Europe several categories of speed limited micro cars and small sizedengine scooters are driven by people without a licence. These vehicles allow access to th roads for the young, the elderly and those who only want motors for very short distance driving. They are limited to 45kmph (just under 30mph) and usually have weight and power limits.

 

This would take young people out of high speed deathtraps which they can use immediately they pass the test and also tends to push up the age at which young people take their driving test.

 

It would also introduce an incentive for people to drive eco friendly low power cars around town. and it would create a new economic market in the uk for sale service and repair of these vehicles. One scheme in france rents low power scooters to the young for only 20 euros a month to allow them to easily and cheaply get to college/work.

 

We should have no licence motoring in this country to give us someof the freedoms of the EU that would offset all the additional regulation brought in.

Why is this idea important?

Introduce vehicles where no driving licence is required to run them.

Across Europe several categories of speed limited micro cars and small sizedengine scooters are driven by people without a licence. These vehicles allow access to th roads for the young, the elderly and those who only want motors for very short distance driving. They are limited to 45kmph (just under 30mph) and usually have weight and power limits.

 

This would take young people out of high speed deathtraps which they can use immediately they pass the test and also tends to push up the age at which young people take their driving test.

 

It would also introduce an incentive for people to drive eco friendly low power cars around town. and it would create a new economic market in the uk for sale service and repair of these vehicles. One scheme in france rents low power scooters to the young for only 20 euros a month to allow them to easily and cheaply get to college/work.

 

We should have no licence motoring in this country to give us someof the freedoms of the EU that would offset all the additional regulation brought in.

Why do we allow a really stupid Eurpean command to make our pensioners wait for two minutes in pouring rain and cold when all they want to do is cross the road?

Our pedestrian lights, if set correctly, make a pedestrian wait a full two minutes because Europe says we must.

The result is we get wetter and colder than we needed to for absolutly no reason.  When I questioned a local highways official, he said it was necessary to let the traffic calm down before people cross -Europe says so, there is nothing he can do, it's the Law.

TOAL, ABSOLUTE, STUPID, NO-REASON NONSENSE!!  Any time you press the crossing request, the way the traffic is does not change, it's either coming or it's not!!

Why is this idea important?

Our pedestrian lights, if set correctly, make a pedestrian wait a full two minutes because Europe says we must.

The result is we get wetter and colder than we needed to for absolutly no reason.  When I questioned a local highways official, he said it was necessary to let the traffic calm down before people cross -Europe says so, there is nothing he can do, it's the Law.

TOAL, ABSOLUTE, STUPID, NO-REASON NONSENSE!!  Any time you press the crossing request, the way the traffic is does not change, it's either coming or it's not!!

Scrap eBorders before it goes ‘live’ in 2014

The eBorders huge database computer system has been declared ILLEGAL under European Law, for EU Citizens. So it cannot be used LEGALLY as originally planned by the Blair/Brown Government.

The Blair/Brown Government said they would now make it a 'voluntary" way to jump the Border queues at the UK's Airports & Ports. By being 'pre-checked" before you travel, you can then walk through the fast track when you arrive.

Why didn't they realise it is ILLEGAL under EU Law? What a waste of money!

Costing £1.2bn it should be scrapped.

The EU has stated that it is illegal to hinder, check, or hassle EU citizens at EU borders.

So this system which the Brown Labour Government pretended was a counter terrorism tool, but was really a Tax and Court Fine enforcing tool.( Brown's people envisiged that if UK Citizens were stopped from travelling abroad if the owed Tax or Court fines, this would encourage UK citizens to pay on time.)

All the terrorists captured todate in the UK would have passed all checks, having clean records and in some cases being NHS Doctors. So eBorders would have been useless in these cases.

David Cameron stated during the Election Campaign that he wants to scrap all Labour's planned huge Databases.  Well this has got to be the biggest one, bigger than the ID Cards would have been.

Let's bite the bullet, and scrap it now.

___________________________________________

If the the Blair/Brown Government have signed a binding contract with the American suppliers of the system; then perhaps the system could be modified to make the Visa application system more efficient for the UK Embassies around the World. This could lead to fewer Staff being employed in our Foreign Embassies?

 

Why is this idea important?

The eBorders huge database computer system has been declared ILLEGAL under European Law, for EU Citizens. So it cannot be used LEGALLY as originally planned by the Blair/Brown Government.

The Blair/Brown Government said they would now make it a 'voluntary" way to jump the Border queues at the UK's Airports & Ports. By being 'pre-checked" before you travel, you can then walk through the fast track when you arrive.

Why didn't they realise it is ILLEGAL under EU Law? What a waste of money!

Costing £1.2bn it should be scrapped.

The EU has stated that it is illegal to hinder, check, or hassle EU citizens at EU borders.

So this system which the Brown Labour Government pretended was a counter terrorism tool, but was really a Tax and Court Fine enforcing tool.( Brown's people envisiged that if UK Citizens were stopped from travelling abroad if the owed Tax or Court fines, this would encourage UK citizens to pay on time.)

All the terrorists captured todate in the UK would have passed all checks, having clean records and in some cases being NHS Doctors. So eBorders would have been useless in these cases.

David Cameron stated during the Election Campaign that he wants to scrap all Labour's planned huge Databases.  Well this has got to be the biggest one, bigger than the ID Cards would have been.

Let's bite the bullet, and scrap it now.

___________________________________________

If the the Blair/Brown Government have signed a binding contract with the American suppliers of the system; then perhaps the system could be modified to make the Visa application system more efficient for the UK Embassies around the World. This could lead to fewer Staff being employed in our Foreign Embassies?

 

IMMIGRATION the subject we’re not allowed to comment on!

This was the healine in todays Daily Mail!

SOMALI ASYLUM SEEKER FAMILY OF 9 GIVEN 2 MILLION DOLLAR HOUSE IN KENSINGTON AFTER COMPLAINING 5 BEDROOMED HOUSE THEY HAD BEEN GIVEN WAS IN "A BAD AREA".

WHEN is this madness going to end? Why have the British people been Forced not only into unwanted membership of the eu but into taking every Tom, Dick and Abdul that takes it into his/her head to come to Britain and live like leeches on the backs of the taxpaying public.

This family is only one of millions who heard about our benefit system and our seemingly endlessly open purse which allows them to live the life of Riley and never have to do a days work for it.

IT HAS TO STOP!!

This once proud nation is the laughing stock of the world and a magnet to criminals, terrorists and the workshy in the world. If other nations need help let that help be in the form of teams going to their countries and giving instruction on how to improve it, how to get water, how to grow their own food etc.   We CANNOT and WILL NOT continue to be browbeaten and taxed so that these people can come here and speak the magic words "aslyum seeker' and be given benefits the indiginous population cannot get. It's unfair, and what kind of country are we turning into for our own children? we have nothing left, liebour saw to that by allowing this unfettered immigration, our resources once set up for the British citizens are being sacked daily and our governments are doing nothing to stop it. 

This is the subject we want to talk about Mr Cameron/Clegg this and continued so called 'membership' of the eu.

 

 

 

 

Why is this idea important?

This was the healine in todays Daily Mail!

SOMALI ASYLUM SEEKER FAMILY OF 9 GIVEN 2 MILLION DOLLAR HOUSE IN KENSINGTON AFTER COMPLAINING 5 BEDROOMED HOUSE THEY HAD BEEN GIVEN WAS IN "A BAD AREA".

WHEN is this madness going to end? Why have the British people been Forced not only into unwanted membership of the eu but into taking every Tom, Dick and Abdul that takes it into his/her head to come to Britain and live like leeches on the backs of the taxpaying public.

This family is only one of millions who heard about our benefit system and our seemingly endlessly open purse which allows them to live the life of Riley and never have to do a days work for it.

IT HAS TO STOP!!

This once proud nation is the laughing stock of the world and a magnet to criminals, terrorists and the workshy in the world. If other nations need help let that help be in the form of teams going to their countries and giving instruction on how to improve it, how to get water, how to grow their own food etc.   We CANNOT and WILL NOT continue to be browbeaten and taxed so that these people can come here and speak the magic words "aslyum seeker' and be given benefits the indiginous population cannot get. It's unfair, and what kind of country are we turning into for our own children? we have nothing left, liebour saw to that by allowing this unfettered immigration, our resources once set up for the British citizens are being sacked daily and our governments are doing nothing to stop it. 

This is the subject we want to talk about Mr Cameron/Clegg this and continued so called 'membership' of the eu.

 

 

 

 

A referendum on Europe

Have a referendum on our continuing membership of the EU. I think most British people would vote to leave, therefore clearing the way for the British Parliament and people to introduce laws which are for the benefit of us and us alone, like immigration, defence and most importantly the hated Human Rights Law, which the EU use to go against the wishes of the majority of British people time and time again.

Why is this idea important?

Have a referendum on our continuing membership of the EU. I think most British people would vote to leave, therefore clearing the way for the British Parliament and people to introduce laws which are for the benefit of us and us alone, like immigration, defence and most importantly the hated Human Rights Law, which the EU use to go against the wishes of the majority of British people time and time again.

Get out of Europe

We should leave the EU.

Repeal the laws that have taken sovereignty away from the people and their Parliament. 

All functionaries of the Eu now in our Parliament must, by law, declare an interest everytime they speak – as their penssions are conditional on the supporting the EU – and so doing down the UK.

I am very happy to trade with Europe, and to visit it – and have Europeans come here to play or to work.

The EU – with its unaccountable bureaucrcy, is a source of far too many rules and regulations – som probably sensible, if not strictly necessary; others, like bent cucumbers [I know that, finally, has been repealed] simply beyond parody.

Why is this idea important?

We should leave the EU.

Repeal the laws that have taken sovereignty away from the people and their Parliament. 

All functionaries of the Eu now in our Parliament must, by law, declare an interest everytime they speak – as their penssions are conditional on the supporting the EU – and so doing down the UK.

I am very happy to trade with Europe, and to visit it – and have Europeans come here to play or to work.

The EU – with its unaccountable bureaucrcy, is a source of far too many rules and regulations – som probably sensible, if not strictly necessary; others, like bent cucumbers [I know that, finally, has been repealed] simply beyond parody.

Repeal of Open Skies legislation

This may not pertain to civil liberties as such, but the unhelpful cataloguing system doesn't provide a relevant area, and this seems to be home of 'gripes with the E.U.'

 

Since 2007, E.U. and U.S. Airlines have been able to operate any route within the E.U., or between the E.U. and the U.S.. However, E.U. airlines have not in turn been granted the right to operate flights within the U.S.. This is unfair. Either amend the legislation, or do away with it altogether.

Why is this idea important?

This may not pertain to civil liberties as such, but the unhelpful cataloguing system doesn't provide a relevant area, and this seems to be home of 'gripes with the E.U.'

 

Since 2007, E.U. and U.S. Airlines have been able to operate any route within the E.U., or between the E.U. and the U.S.. However, E.U. airlines have not in turn been granted the right to operate flights within the U.S.. This is unfair. Either amend the legislation, or do away with it altogether.

All legislation originating from the European Parliament.

The British Parliament should have the right not to implement any legislation originating from the European Parliament whenver this is considered to be neither in the popular nor national interest.

Why is this idea important?

The British Parliament should have the right not to implement any legislation originating from the European Parliament whenver this is considered to be neither in the popular nor national interest.

Limit EU Powers To Mimimal Intervention

The EU legislates in minute detail on every aspect of trade and commerce. It cannot resist the urge to intervene and thinks that more rules and regulations improve business. Drawing up laws that cover every national variation inevitably makes the rules lengthy, complex, difficult to interpret and largely irrelevant. The rules on coffins in hot climates, for example, are not relevant in icy ones.

The EU constitution in the form of European Union treaties must be amended so that EU laws, rules and regulations are only valid so far as they are the very minimum necessary for international free trade in goods and services.

Business should be free to ignore excessive regulation without fear or years of delay while court cases drag on.

Why is this idea important?

The EU legislates in minute detail on every aspect of trade and commerce. It cannot resist the urge to intervene and thinks that more rules and regulations improve business. Drawing up laws that cover every national variation inevitably makes the rules lengthy, complex, difficult to interpret and largely irrelevant. The rules on coffins in hot climates, for example, are not relevant in icy ones.

The EU constitution in the form of European Union treaties must be amended so that EU laws, rules and regulations are only valid so far as they are the very minimum necessary for international free trade in goods and services.

Business should be free to ignore excessive regulation without fear or years of delay while court cases drag on.

Why are we still in the European Union?

Being a member of the European Union costs this country a substantial amount of money reported at an estimated 40 million pounds per day, our laws and budget policies are scrutinised by Europeans, we have no control over immigration within the EU – we are expected to open our doors to anybody, we are stuck with an outdated and unfair human rights act and finally we allow convicted criminals to appeal their sentences at the European court of justice.

My idea is to stop this madness and leave now before we completely lose sovereignty and turn into a bureaucratic arm of a larger and more malignant body of German and French bureaucrats.

Why is this idea important?

Being a member of the European Union costs this country a substantial amount of money reported at an estimated 40 million pounds per day, our laws and budget policies are scrutinised by Europeans, we have no control over immigration within the EU – we are expected to open our doors to anybody, we are stuck with an outdated and unfair human rights act and finally we allow convicted criminals to appeal their sentences at the European court of justice.

My idea is to stop this madness and leave now before we completely lose sovereignty and turn into a bureaucratic arm of a larger and more malignant body of German and French bureaucrats.

Reduce Environmental Regulatory Burden – The Mining Waste Directive: One Step Too Far.

 

Simple put: Why would a large multinational company invest money in the UK? It's easier and there would be a higher rate of return if they invested their money else where. Our increasingly restrictive environmental legalisation is going to finish the UK Extractive Industry for good. 

I work for a large multinational company as a geologist in the UK's Extractive Materials Industry. We supply materials such as aggregates, cement, asphalt and concrete, so that the UK can build and grow.

The company however (and the industry as a whole) is really suffering in the economic downturn, with volumes declining by up to 50%.

There is one thing however that's not declining, and that's the amount of Environmental Legalisation that continues to be implemented, seemingly on a monthly basis, and the industry just cannot cope with it. The minerals industry desperately needs the regulatory burden to be eased.

The latest piece of major legalisation to shortly affect my company is the Mining Waste Directive, which has been interpreted from EU Law by DEFRA and is being implemented by the EA. This is a completely useless and unbeneficial piece of legislation, as everything the new directive covers is already covered in other legislation!  It is pure and simple unnecessary duplication.

The UK quarrying industry (which is already the most legislated and safest in the whole world) ALREADY has two main tiers which govern every move that the industry makes. These are Planning Permissions and the HSE 1999 Quarries Regulations. Legalisation that the industry works well with.

By way of a very short account of what this entails, the means that every soil bund, material stockpile, silt pond and excavation is covered by a planning permission, a restoration plan, method of working plan, phasing plan, H&S risk assessments, geotechnical stability analysis, archaeological studies, ecological studies, dust studies, air quality studies, hydrogeological risk assessments, flood studies….. I could go on.

We now have to add to this Environmental Permits and (which cost money!) so that the EA can approve, along with the Planning Authority and the HSE where we are allowed to place bunds, stockpiles and ponds.

Just drop the Mining Waste Directive…. it really isn't required. It's for other less well regulated countries from the EU, where there isn’t ANY existing regulation in place.

Senior Geologist from the UK Minerals Industry

Why is this idea important?

 

Simple put: Why would a large multinational company invest money in the UK? It's easier and there would be a higher rate of return if they invested their money else where. Our increasingly restrictive environmental legalisation is going to finish the UK Extractive Industry for good. 

I work for a large multinational company as a geologist in the UK's Extractive Materials Industry. We supply materials such as aggregates, cement, asphalt and concrete, so that the UK can build and grow.

The company however (and the industry as a whole) is really suffering in the economic downturn, with volumes declining by up to 50%.

There is one thing however that's not declining, and that's the amount of Environmental Legalisation that continues to be implemented, seemingly on a monthly basis, and the industry just cannot cope with it. The minerals industry desperately needs the regulatory burden to be eased.

The latest piece of major legalisation to shortly affect my company is the Mining Waste Directive, which has been interpreted from EU Law by DEFRA and is being implemented by the EA. This is a completely useless and unbeneficial piece of legislation, as everything the new directive covers is already covered in other legislation!  It is pure and simple unnecessary duplication.

The UK quarrying industry (which is already the most legislated and safest in the whole world) ALREADY has two main tiers which govern every move that the industry makes. These are Planning Permissions and the HSE 1999 Quarries Regulations. Legalisation that the industry works well with.

By way of a very short account of what this entails, the means that every soil bund, material stockpile, silt pond and excavation is covered by a planning permission, a restoration plan, method of working plan, phasing plan, H&S risk assessments, geotechnical stability analysis, archaeological studies, ecological studies, dust studies, air quality studies, hydrogeological risk assessments, flood studies….. I could go on.

We now have to add to this Environmental Permits and (which cost money!) so that the EA can approve, along with the Planning Authority and the HSE where we are allowed to place bunds, stockpiles and ponds.

Just drop the Mining Waste Directive…. it really isn't required. It's for other less well regulated countries from the EU, where there isn’t ANY existing regulation in place.

Senior Geologist from the UK Minerals Industry

Allow the use of the European Social fund

As an individual, I am appalled by the lack of funding available for education and further training. The UK gives the EU over £2 billion per year and we are not able to use this fund. The restrictions on this fund are ridiculous. Allow individuals to gain access to the fund rather than through companies.  We are complaining about the lack of funding for schools and colleges which is appalling considering there is £2 BILLION available. People what to train further but have no access to the funds. Promote the use of this fund. More people will gain further education. Further more this fund should be available for new businesses to gain start up grants. gain this is not so easily accessed as you still have to apply to a company. This fund should be utilised for the betterment of all the UK and not companies.

Why is this idea important?

As an individual, I am appalled by the lack of funding available for education and further training. The UK gives the EU over £2 billion per year and we are not able to use this fund. The restrictions on this fund are ridiculous. Allow individuals to gain access to the fund rather than through companies.  We are complaining about the lack of funding for schools and colleges which is appalling considering there is £2 BILLION available. People what to train further but have no access to the funds. Promote the use of this fund. More people will gain further education. Further more this fund should be available for new businesses to gain start up grants. gain this is not so easily accessed as you still have to apply to a company. This fund should be utilised for the betterment of all the UK and not companies.