The 1953 Act for the Registration of Births,Deaths and Marriages in England and Wales

It only states that there should be an index, and the legal interprtation of what that index contains and how it is delivered shifts according to goverment whim and civil service expediency. Apparently this legislative framework makes it difficult to improve existing indexes and deems it necessary for all certificates to be issued only as certified legal paper documents at a cost of £9.25. Historical certificates ovber a certain age currently held by the GRO and local registrars should'nt have to be issued as expensive official certificates. They should be made available in digital form via a pay per view or subscription service (check out how Scotland do it). Some of these documents have already been digitised and are being used to issue the paper copies, so we know that it is possible to make the available in this way. The GRO should improve indexing of these digital documents and make the index available online, or enable a commercial partner to provide the service accordingly. If the law cannot make that happen,then we must change it.  I am sure it will make the GRO money and satisfy many hundreds of thousands of family history customers througout the world, which is what goverment is supposed to be about. I was interested to read that this new coalition goverment is asking for suggestions for amendments to unnecessary laws and free up regulatory burdens, if any law needs overhauling and brought into the 21st century it is this one

Why is this idea important?

It only states that there should be an index, and the legal interprtation of what that index contains and how it is delivered shifts according to goverment whim and civil service expediency. Apparently this legislative framework makes it difficult to improve existing indexes and deems it necessary for all certificates to be issued only as certified legal paper documents at a cost of £9.25. Historical certificates ovber a certain age currently held by the GRO and local registrars should'nt have to be issued as expensive official certificates. They should be made available in digital form via a pay per view or subscription service (check out how Scotland do it). Some of these documents have already been digitised and are being used to issue the paper copies, so we know that it is possible to make the available in this way. The GRO should improve indexing of these digital documents and make the index available online, or enable a commercial partner to provide the service accordingly. If the law cannot make that happen,then we must change it.  I am sure it will make the GRO money and satisfy many hundreds of thousands of family history customers througout the world, which is what goverment is supposed to be about. I was interested to read that this new coalition goverment is asking for suggestions for amendments to unnecessary laws and free up regulatory burdens, if any law needs overhauling and brought into the 21st century it is this one

Allow “previous history” to be fully taken into consideration when sentencing

At present, when a judge decides a sentence for an offender, only previous *related* offences are taken into consideration.

Thus, for instance, if the current crime being judged is for car theft, a previous history of convictions for shoplifting or housebreaking or assault is not taken into consideration because these are not considered relevant to car theft.

A single person can become an entire crime wave, yet still get off with nothing more than a trivial punishment for each crime, as long as they remain *unrelated* to each other.

Which seems pretty daft to me, and shows that justice in this country is aimed more at raising revenue for the government than setting the standards that people should live by.

Why is this idea important?

At present, when a judge decides a sentence for an offender, only previous *related* offences are taken into consideration.

Thus, for instance, if the current crime being judged is for car theft, a previous history of convictions for shoplifting or housebreaking or assault is not taken into consideration because these are not considered relevant to car theft.

A single person can become an entire crime wave, yet still get off with nothing more than a trivial punishment for each crime, as long as they remain *unrelated* to each other.

Which seems pretty daft to me, and shows that justice in this country is aimed more at raising revenue for the government than setting the standards that people should live by.

Open up the BBC’s archives

Any BBC programme, 10 years or older, should be freely available on the BBC website to stream and/or download, with no DRM. Any licence should be in the form of copyleft i.e. you can copy, share, modify, distort, clip or whatever any programme on there. The only restriction should be that those who make use of the BBC's content in this way simply state where they got the content from. The internet is not total anarchy, so most people would be happy to give the BBC credit.

Why is this idea important?

Any BBC programme, 10 years or older, should be freely available on the BBC website to stream and/or download, with no DRM. Any licence should be in the form of copyleft i.e. you can copy, share, modify, distort, clip or whatever any programme on there. The only restriction should be that those who make use of the BBC's content in this way simply state where they got the content from. The internet is not total anarchy, so most people would be happy to give the BBC credit.

National Curriculum History

I understand that the National Curriculum has lacked a methodology towards the science of History. The United Kingdom presently has a weak program in History for state schools, particularly in the primary schools. The History sections covered in a program of a year normally concentrate on the Great Wars, some reigns at the discretion of the teacher or the program and whatever Horrible History books can offer. There is an absent inquiry of how about this nation became important in the maritime history, in the management theory, and in the science (to name just few achievements); how UK produced the best scientists from the past. Welllington is confused with Nelson, and from Adam Smith to Sir Keynes it is mistery of economic history, it might be that they are taken as foreigners so unknown they are for children. The whole study in History is data based ( 1775 such and such happened). Children have no idea how the English colonies affected their lifes through the past international trade. For instance, why New Zealand has a treaty of peace and Australia does not; how abacus became an instrument for English Maths to be used at school; how Victorian society was the last step on the English kingdom, and finally how that these facts affected the English society as such. Children are taught data, but not to relate data with facts and historical-political impact for England as a society. In consequence of that situation, English children are lost in the next decade. History allows one to recognize errors from the past and judge better the future decisions to be made. There is a lack of interest around teachers to challenge and to shape up thinkers for the future. That independent thinking one could find in the independent system (private and selective schools or the few grammar schools). Nonetheless, all tax payers should be entitled to give the best education to their children, Without paying an extra penny.

Why is this idea important?

I understand that the National Curriculum has lacked a methodology towards the science of History. The United Kingdom presently has a weak program in History for state schools, particularly in the primary schools. The History sections covered in a program of a year normally concentrate on the Great Wars, some reigns at the discretion of the teacher or the program and whatever Horrible History books can offer. There is an absent inquiry of how about this nation became important in the maritime history, in the management theory, and in the science (to name just few achievements); how UK produced the best scientists from the past. Welllington is confused with Nelson, and from Adam Smith to Sir Keynes it is mistery of economic history, it might be that they are taken as foreigners so unknown they are for children. The whole study in History is data based ( 1775 such and such happened). Children have no idea how the English colonies affected their lifes through the past international trade. For instance, why New Zealand has a treaty of peace and Australia does not; how abacus became an instrument for English Maths to be used at school; how Victorian society was the last step on the English kingdom, and finally how that these facts affected the English society as such. Children are taught data, but not to relate data with facts and historical-political impact for England as a society. In consequence of that situation, English children are lost in the next decade. History allows one to recognize errors from the past and judge better the future decisions to be made. There is a lack of interest around teachers to challenge and to shape up thinkers for the future. That independent thinking one could find in the independent system (private and selective schools or the few grammar schools). Nonetheless, all tax payers should be entitled to give the best education to their children, Without paying an extra penny.