Each piece of legislation should have an expiry date

Each new piece of legislation should automatically expire 25 years after it is adopted.  This provision should also be added to each existing piece of legislation, with the expiry dates distributed at random over the next 25 years.

When a piece of legislation is due to expire within the next year, the enacting body (Parliament, Local Authority, etc.) will be reminded.  If it takes no action, the legislation will expire.  However, it can renew the legislation (as is or amended), or replace it.

Why is this idea important?

Each new piece of legislation should automatically expire 25 years after it is adopted.  This provision should also be added to each existing piece of legislation, with the expiry dates distributed at random over the next 25 years.

When a piece of legislation is due to expire within the next year, the enacting body (Parliament, Local Authority, etc.) will be reminded.  If it takes no action, the legislation will expire.  However, it can renew the legislation (as is or amended), or replace it.

Remove disabilites suffered by Roman Catholics and Jews

Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829 and the Jews Relief Act 1858 make it an offence for Roman Catholics and Jews to advise Her Majesty on matters to do with ecclesiastical offices which is a disability not suffered by all other non Anglican religions.  We should either remove the disabilities or rewrite them in a way that includes all non-Anglicans.

Why is this idea important?

Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829 and the Jews Relief Act 1858 make it an offence for Roman Catholics and Jews to advise Her Majesty on matters to do with ecclesiastical offices which is a disability not suffered by all other non Anglican religions.  We should either remove the disabilities or rewrite them in a way that includes all non-Anglicans.

Implement new thresholds for making / repealing new laws

Set the threshold for making a new law at 75% of those eligible to vote, rather than a simple majority, as any new law should have at least the support of a sizeable majority of the law makers.

All new laws to have a sunset clause whereby they are either reaffirmed as necessary or they are automatically repealed.

Set the threshold for repealing existing laws at 25% of those eligible to vote, as if a quarter of the law makers think it is unworkable / impracticable etc, then it deserves to go.

The current proposal for one in one out also makes sense.

Why is this idea important?

Set the threshold for making a new law at 75% of those eligible to vote, rather than a simple majority, as any new law should have at least the support of a sizeable majority of the law makers.

All new laws to have a sunset clause whereby they are either reaffirmed as necessary or they are automatically repealed.

Set the threshold for repealing existing laws at 25% of those eligible to vote, as if a quarter of the law makers think it is unworkable / impracticable etc, then it deserves to go.

The current proposal for one in one out also makes sense.

Abolish legislation that ministers have branded as “trivial” or “petty”

Recently a number of ministers (from both this and the previous government) have "advised" enforcement bodies to take a light approach, or a common sense approach to certain legislation, or even to ignore it altogether.  If this legisaltion is trivial or petty, then it should be removed.

It's not for enforcement bodies to decide what legislation is worthwhile, and what isn't; that's what we pay politicians for.  So if health and safety legislation is petty, get rid of it, and leave the non-petty regulation in place; then support enforcement authorities, when they enforce it.

If weights and measures legislation is draconian and petty, get rid of it.  Allow sellers to use whatever units they like – the pound, the drachm, the bowl, the handful, but don't leave it on the statute books, then demonise officers for caring about compliance with the law.

 

Clear out the dross, so that everyone knows that the law, is the law.

Why is this idea important?

Recently a number of ministers (from both this and the previous government) have "advised" enforcement bodies to take a light approach, or a common sense approach to certain legislation, or even to ignore it altogether.  If this legisaltion is trivial or petty, then it should be removed.

It's not for enforcement bodies to decide what legislation is worthwhile, and what isn't; that's what we pay politicians for.  So if health and safety legislation is petty, get rid of it, and leave the non-petty regulation in place; then support enforcement authorities, when they enforce it.

If weights and measures legislation is draconian and petty, get rid of it.  Allow sellers to use whatever units they like – the pound, the drachm, the bowl, the handful, but don't leave it on the statute books, then demonise officers for caring about compliance with the law.

 

Clear out the dross, so that everyone knows that the law, is the law.

non serious criminal offences

All laws relating to non serious offences that cannot be policed should be scrapped. Laws that cannot be policed achieve nothing except to bring the law into disrepute. The law should deal with that which can be achieved not that which can't.

Why is this idea important?

All laws relating to non serious offences that cannot be policed should be scrapped. Laws that cannot be policed achieve nothing except to bring the law into disrepute. The law should deal with that which can be achieved not that which can't.

All Legislation to Have Expiry Date

All Legislation to have expiry dates. Legislation to be broken down into differnt types each with an apprpriate validity period.

Only exceptions Common Law and Written Constituttion approved and or amended by referendum on an all or nothing basis.

Why is this idea important?

All Legislation to have expiry dates. Legislation to be broken down into differnt types each with an apprpriate validity period.

Only exceptions Common Law and Written Constituttion approved and or amended by referendum on an all or nothing basis.

Repeal the State completely

Repeal the State, push it back so that it is tiny once again. allow the state to only do the things necessary to protect life & property. Here is the bottom line, government are crap at running things, they do not have owners & shareholders to answer to & be sacked by, without golden parachutes either. Sell off every single government department except for Defense & Foreign Office. Local communities can decide how to protect themselves, etc.

We would all be better off financially, just a minor levy for defense & foreign office. Health, welfare etc can be taken care of by charities, they are really good at it already. schools would be better off out of daft left or right educational policies, learn this learn that.

roads work well as toll roads, M6 is great! more of that please. There is no money, the cupboard is bare, we need to look after ourselves, come on Britian we can do this.

Why is this idea important?

Repeal the State, push it back so that it is tiny once again. allow the state to only do the things necessary to protect life & property. Here is the bottom line, government are crap at running things, they do not have owners & shareholders to answer to & be sacked by, without golden parachutes either. Sell off every single government department except for Defense & Foreign Office. Local communities can decide how to protect themselves, etc.

We would all be better off financially, just a minor levy for defense & foreign office. Health, welfare etc can be taken care of by charities, they are really good at it already. schools would be better off out of daft left or right educational policies, learn this learn that.

roads work well as toll roads, M6 is great! more of that please. There is no money, the cupboard is bare, we need to look after ourselves, come on Britian we can do this.