Remove zig-zag lines from pedestrian crossings and create more parking spaces

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.

Why is this idea important?

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.

Make Traffic Laws Apply to Cyclists.

As demonstrated by the recently opened ‘cycle super highway’ in London an increasingly large amount of money is being spent on infrastructure and other facilities for cyclists, we are talking very, very, many millions of pounds.  Who is paying for all of this?  It is certainly not the cyclists, other than via the general taxation to which we are all subject.

The avowed intention of all of these so-called cycle friendly (but not pedestrian or other road user friendly) measures is to increase the number of cycles on our roads.  This is in itself a misguided notion because as the TV news pictures showed a significant proportion of cyclists still rode on the normal road surface, detoured onto the footway and rode without any consideration for other road users.

No-one doubts the exercise derived health benefits and effective means of commuting, especially in town centres, that cycling offers; however, if the numbers of cyclists are going to be encouraged and increased further by such measures then it is also high time that they were also brought firmly within and made rigorously subject to the principles and laws that govern other traffic using the public roads.  The ever increasing levels of reduction of road width are impeding the normal and effective flow of regular traffic which is the essential life blood of our towns and cities and the increasing restriction of which has a negative impact on the economic viability of our urban areas.

If these facilities are being provided for them then cyclists must be kept off the footways and footpaths so that they become once more safe for pedestrians rather than de-facto cycle tracks on which legitimate pedestrians are second class citizens.  What once were considered to be adequately sized footways must cease to have white lines painted down them and be reduced in width, with two thirds of the width being given over to cycles, such that there is little or no room for people to walk in comfort, or mothers to pass when pushing a pram or push chair.

I have never met a cyclist who admits to riding on the footway, riding through red lights, riding without lights or audible warning of approach, or riding the wrong way down a one way street.  You only have to be out on the road or in our towns to witness the lie of this apparent situation; the huge majority of cyclists ride without any concern whatsoever for other road users, the highway code, the rules of the road, road signs, or the most basic of traffic law; they hardly ever ride in single file to allow other vehicles to safely pass them on narrow roads or country lanes.  As far as they are concerned the law does not apply to them and yet they castigate other road users for not considering cyclists, whilst not demonstrating any reciprocal consideration on their part.  This ridiculous situation must change for the benefit of society as a whole.

I have seen cyclists blatantly ride through a red traffic light while a police officer stood and watched.  If I had then driven through the red light in my car that same officer would no doubt have taken my registration number and reported the offence, but because it involved a cyclist nothing happened.  I have witnessed similar occurrences at camera controlled lights when cyclists have ridden straight through knowing full well that they almost certainly cannot be traced.

The increase in cycling activity will inevitably bring with it an increase in the already high levels of illegal cycling activity.  Even with current cycling levels, let alone any increase, we must start to curb errant cycling and also force cyclists to become responsible road users with consideration for others.  This can only be done by the following suggestions:

  • All cyclists must take the equivalent of a driving test including theory, cycle maintenance, and Highway Code before they are allowed on the roads or cycle ways.
  • All cycles must be subject to the cycle equivalent of vehicle excise duty so that the cyclists make at least some contribution to the facilities provided for them.
  • All cycles must carry registration numbers so that other road users or pedestrians can identify them and report them if necessary.  This measure is also necessary so the police or cameras can identify, and action be taken against cyclists flouting traffic law, e.g. riding through red lights.
  • All cycles must at all times be equipped with adequate and appropriate lighting, both front and rear, and with an effective audible warning of approach.
  • Cycling on the footway and footpaths must end no argument.
  • All cycles over 3 years old must be subject to a cycle MoT.
  • All cycles, and/or cyclists, must be insured for at least third party risks.

All of the above are not anti-cycling; on the contrary, they will promote safe, responsible and considerate cycling whilst at the same time helping to bring the increasing numbers of cyclists within the management of existing traffic law.  Any responsible cyclist cannot but fail to agree with this philosophy; if they do disagree then they are not the responsible cyclists they claim to be.  Disagreement can only come from those who feel it is their divine right to do what they like on the public roads without fear of censure and cyclists can do no wrong, even if it is illegal.

Why is this idea important?

As demonstrated by the recently opened ‘cycle super highway’ in London an increasingly large amount of money is being spent on infrastructure and other facilities for cyclists, we are talking very, very, many millions of pounds.  Who is paying for all of this?  It is certainly not the cyclists, other than via the general taxation to which we are all subject.

The avowed intention of all of these so-called cycle friendly (but not pedestrian or other road user friendly) measures is to increase the number of cycles on our roads.  This is in itself a misguided notion because as the TV news pictures showed a significant proportion of cyclists still rode on the normal road surface, detoured onto the footway and rode without any consideration for other road users.

No-one doubts the exercise derived health benefits and effective means of commuting, especially in town centres, that cycling offers; however, if the numbers of cyclists are going to be encouraged and increased further by such measures then it is also high time that they were also brought firmly within and made rigorously subject to the principles and laws that govern other traffic using the public roads.  The ever increasing levels of reduction of road width are impeding the normal and effective flow of regular traffic which is the essential life blood of our towns and cities and the increasing restriction of which has a negative impact on the economic viability of our urban areas.

If these facilities are being provided for them then cyclists must be kept off the footways and footpaths so that they become once more safe for pedestrians rather than de-facto cycle tracks on which legitimate pedestrians are second class citizens.  What once were considered to be adequately sized footways must cease to have white lines painted down them and be reduced in width, with two thirds of the width being given over to cycles, such that there is little or no room for people to walk in comfort, or mothers to pass when pushing a pram or push chair.

I have never met a cyclist who admits to riding on the footway, riding through red lights, riding without lights or audible warning of approach, or riding the wrong way down a one way street.  You only have to be out on the road or in our towns to witness the lie of this apparent situation; the huge majority of cyclists ride without any concern whatsoever for other road users, the highway code, the rules of the road, road signs, or the most basic of traffic law; they hardly ever ride in single file to allow other vehicles to safely pass them on narrow roads or country lanes.  As far as they are concerned the law does not apply to them and yet they castigate other road users for not considering cyclists, whilst not demonstrating any reciprocal consideration on their part.  This ridiculous situation must change for the benefit of society as a whole.

I have seen cyclists blatantly ride through a red traffic light while a police officer stood and watched.  If I had then driven through the red light in my car that same officer would no doubt have taken my registration number and reported the offence, but because it involved a cyclist nothing happened.  I have witnessed similar occurrences at camera controlled lights when cyclists have ridden straight through knowing full well that they almost certainly cannot be traced.

The increase in cycling activity will inevitably bring with it an increase in the already high levels of illegal cycling activity.  Even with current cycling levels, let alone any increase, we must start to curb errant cycling and also force cyclists to become responsible road users with consideration for others.  This can only be done by the following suggestions:

  • All cyclists must take the equivalent of a driving test including theory, cycle maintenance, and Highway Code before they are allowed on the roads or cycle ways.
  • All cycles must be subject to the cycle equivalent of vehicle excise duty so that the cyclists make at least some contribution to the facilities provided for them.
  • All cycles must carry registration numbers so that other road users or pedestrians can identify them and report them if necessary.  This measure is also necessary so the police or cameras can identify, and action be taken against cyclists flouting traffic law, e.g. riding through red lights.
  • All cycles must at all times be equipped with adequate and appropriate lighting, both front and rear, and with an effective audible warning of approach.
  • Cycling on the footway and footpaths must end no argument.
  • All cycles over 3 years old must be subject to a cycle MoT.
  • All cycles, and/or cyclists, must be insured for at least third party risks.

All of the above are not anti-cycling; on the contrary, they will promote safe, responsible and considerate cycling whilst at the same time helping to bring the increasing numbers of cyclists within the management of existing traffic law.  Any responsible cyclist cannot but fail to agree with this philosophy; if they do disagree then they are not the responsible cyclists they claim to be.  Disagreement can only come from those who feel it is their divine right to do what they like on the public roads without fear of censure and cyclists can do no wrong, even if it is illegal.

Abolish offence of not naming who was driving a vehicle

The offence of the registered keeper not disclosing who was driving a vehicle at a particular time should be abolished. I think that this is a strict liability offence

Why is this idea important?

The offence of the registered keeper not disclosing who was driving a vehicle at a particular time should be abolished. I think that this is a strict liability offence

no horse power!

i think horses should be banned from the road because they provide a hazzard for other drivers  because everyones expected to overtake realy wide and slowly a road has cars on it if a horse doesnt like cars and fast moving vehicles it shouldnt be on it! and none of the manure is ever picked up from the road afterwars potencialy causing a hazzard for motor cycles

Why is this idea important?

i think horses should be banned from the road because they provide a hazzard for other drivers  because everyones expected to overtake realy wide and slowly a road has cars on it if a horse doesnt like cars and fast moving vehicles it shouldnt be on it! and none of the manure is ever picked up from the road afterwars potencialy causing a hazzard for motor cycles

Repeal The Human Rights Act

To repeal the Human rights Act, and replace it with a British Bill of rights as promised in the election, so our human rights are controlled by Westminster not by unelected Brussels bureaucrats.

Why is this idea important?

To repeal the Human rights Act, and replace it with a British Bill of rights as promised in the election, so our human rights are controlled by Westminster not by unelected Brussels bureaucrats.

Simplify and rationalize suffrage entitlement

Currently, suffrage is limited to all adults. This discriminates against and unnecessarily infringes the freedoms of those young people who are net contributors to the public purse and therefore to society at large. At the same time, it unreasonably discriminates in favour of those adults who are a drain on the public purse and are given a vote enabling them to elect political parties who further entrench, enhance and enlarge the client state, creating a vicious cycle of growing client state, taxation and erosion of freedoms of the working poor to enjoy the fruits of our labour.

It also unfairly discriminates in favour of pro-high-taxation pro-client state pro-statist anti-personal freedom political parties who are given permission to buy votes with taxpayer money and create a captive voting block by promising to enhance, enlarge and entrench the client state. Unless everyone else is also granted permission to bribe voters and buy votes, this infringes the fundamental freedom of everyone else to participate equally in the election of our legislature.

Abolish all age restrictions on suffrage, while limiting suffrage to only those who are net contributors to the public purse, taking the vote away from all those who are net recipients of public money (be it welfare recipients or public employees).

No taxation without representation, no representation without taxation.

Why is this idea important?

Currently, suffrage is limited to all adults. This discriminates against and unnecessarily infringes the freedoms of those young people who are net contributors to the public purse and therefore to society at large. At the same time, it unreasonably discriminates in favour of those adults who are a drain on the public purse and are given a vote enabling them to elect political parties who further entrench, enhance and enlarge the client state, creating a vicious cycle of growing client state, taxation and erosion of freedoms of the working poor to enjoy the fruits of our labour.

It also unfairly discriminates in favour of pro-high-taxation pro-client state pro-statist anti-personal freedom political parties who are given permission to buy votes with taxpayer money and create a captive voting block by promising to enhance, enlarge and entrench the client state. Unless everyone else is also granted permission to bribe voters and buy votes, this infringes the fundamental freedom of everyone else to participate equally in the election of our legislature.

Abolish all age restrictions on suffrage, while limiting suffrage to only those who are net contributors to the public purse, taking the vote away from all those who are net recipients of public money (be it welfare recipients or public employees).

No taxation without representation, no representation without taxation.

Heritage

Many old properties are in need of urgent refurbishment but are being stopped from going ahead because of 'laws' imposed by English Heritage and National Trust and backed up by local authorities.  As a result many properties are derelict and an eyesore to the local community.  These regulations/laws normally insist only original materials be used – but these are not always available – except at great cost. One example of this is Politmore House near Exeter which had sufficient funds to carry out necessary repairs, but delays and unreasonable demands by English Heritage mean that the building is in a worse state now than when proposals were originally put forward

Why is this idea important?

Many old properties are in need of urgent refurbishment but are being stopped from going ahead because of 'laws' imposed by English Heritage and National Trust and backed up by local authorities.  As a result many properties are derelict and an eyesore to the local community.  These regulations/laws normally insist only original materials be used – but these are not always available – except at great cost. One example of this is Politmore House near Exeter which had sufficient funds to carry out necessary repairs, but delays and unreasonable demands by English Heritage mean that the building is in a worse state now than when proposals were originally put forward

Animal Rights

Idea is to ban all the animals business including the whole livestock industry. It is simply the same situation like it was with the slavery and woman rights to vote few decades ago.

Animals are intelligent sentient beings and they nature is to enjoy life not to be killed for food. More over it would help to solve the main cause of global warming which is not CO2, but methane and nitrous oxide produced primarily by livestock industry http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM. Livestock industry produces 40% more greenhouse gases than all the transportation combined. 

Thank you for your attention

Andrzej Misiek

 

Recognize meat for what it really is:  the antibiotic- and pesticide-laden corpse of a tortured animal.  ~Ingrid Newkirk, CEO and Founder of PETA

Truely man is the king of beasts, for his brutality exceeds theirs.  We live by the death of others:  we are burial places!  I have from an early age abjured the use of meat, and the time will come when men such as I will look on the murder of animals as they now look on the murder of men.  ~Leonardo da Vinci

Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet.  ~Albert Einstein

Why is this idea important?

Idea is to ban all the animals business including the whole livestock industry. It is simply the same situation like it was with the slavery and woman rights to vote few decades ago.

Animals are intelligent sentient beings and they nature is to enjoy life not to be killed for food. More over it would help to solve the main cause of global warming which is not CO2, but methane and nitrous oxide produced primarily by livestock industry http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM. Livestock industry produces 40% more greenhouse gases than all the transportation combined. 

Thank you for your attention

Andrzej Misiek

 

Recognize meat for what it really is:  the antibiotic- and pesticide-laden corpse of a tortured animal.  ~Ingrid Newkirk, CEO and Founder of PETA

Truely man is the king of beasts, for his brutality exceeds theirs.  We live by the death of others:  we are burial places!  I have from an early age abjured the use of meat, and the time will come when men such as I will look on the murder of animals as they now look on the murder of men.  ~Leonardo da Vinci

Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet.  ~Albert Einstein

Make Jerusalem The National Anthem Of England

Following the successful campaign to have "Jerusalem" as the national anthem for England at the upcoming Commonweath Games, why not make it the national anthem for England at all sporting events.

http://anthem4england.co.uk/

Why is this idea important?

Following the successful campaign to have "Jerusalem" as the national anthem for England at the upcoming Commonweath Games, why not make it the national anthem for England at all sporting events.

http://anthem4england.co.uk/

Do we need our “Armed Forces” to be so “High Tech” ??

My youngest daughter is currently serving in Afghanistan as a Staff Sergeant with the "Royal Engineers". She is often in a "Front Line" situation yet the kit she is supplied with is usually next to useless. Finding a land mine often comes down to how I used to have to do it by poking in the ground with a bayonet or rod.

Our latest Destroyers ( Type 45's ) cost around £1 billion each, so we can only afford 6 of them. Similarly with our supposedly state of the Art "Typhoon", the latest RAF aircraft. We have the "Astute" class "Hunter Killer" submarine and the massively expensive "Vanguard" class carrying our nuclear deterrent.

Do we need this expensive kit ??. All of it was designed, and our forces postured, to fight an "Armageddon" style conflict against the now defunct "Soviet Russians" back in the 60's and 70's. They, it seems, are no longer interested in military world domination, so who is our enemy ?? – apart from the Taliban and its followers. Their "High Tech" kit usually consists of a Honda step through motor cycle if they are lucky .

I would suggest that huge saving could be made, and a more efficient Navy, RAF, and Army, would result, if only we could get away from the need for "Trident"and all that goes with it.

Nuclear warheads, if ever they are needed, GOD forbid, can be fitted to Tomahawk and other cruise missiles. These can be launched from a variety of vessels and even air launched by aircraft.

A single Type 45 Destroyer could be replaced by several smaller "Corvette" or even "Fishery Patrol" type ships, all can carry missiles and an assortment of medium calibre weapons, along with landing and boarding parties. Surely much better value for money ??

The "Typhoon" will never come into combat with a "Sukhoi 37", so perhaps a few more "BaE Hawk's" could be purchased in its place, or maybe even some helicopters that can actually do the job that is needed.

We are spending vast amounts, and losing too many precious young lives, in Afghanistan for this to continue. 

The enemy is here amongst us, we need to spend more on "Intelligence" and "Good" Policing. We need to do what we have always been good at – fighting the real enemy – and not follow the American "High Tech" path any longer. 

 

Why is this idea important?

My youngest daughter is currently serving in Afghanistan as a Staff Sergeant with the "Royal Engineers". She is often in a "Front Line" situation yet the kit she is supplied with is usually next to useless. Finding a land mine often comes down to how I used to have to do it by poking in the ground with a bayonet or rod.

Our latest Destroyers ( Type 45's ) cost around £1 billion each, so we can only afford 6 of them. Similarly with our supposedly state of the Art "Typhoon", the latest RAF aircraft. We have the "Astute" class "Hunter Killer" submarine and the massively expensive "Vanguard" class carrying our nuclear deterrent.

Do we need this expensive kit ??. All of it was designed, and our forces postured, to fight an "Armageddon" style conflict against the now defunct "Soviet Russians" back in the 60's and 70's. They, it seems, are no longer interested in military world domination, so who is our enemy ?? – apart from the Taliban and its followers. Their "High Tech" kit usually consists of a Honda step through motor cycle if they are lucky .

I would suggest that huge saving could be made, and a more efficient Navy, RAF, and Army, would result, if only we could get away from the need for "Trident"and all that goes with it.

Nuclear warheads, if ever they are needed, GOD forbid, can be fitted to Tomahawk and other cruise missiles. These can be launched from a variety of vessels and even air launched by aircraft.

A single Type 45 Destroyer could be replaced by several smaller "Corvette" or even "Fishery Patrol" type ships, all can carry missiles and an assortment of medium calibre weapons, along with landing and boarding parties. Surely much better value for money ??

The "Typhoon" will never come into combat with a "Sukhoi 37", so perhaps a few more "BaE Hawk's" could be purchased in its place, or maybe even some helicopters that can actually do the job that is needed.

We are spending vast amounts, and losing too many precious young lives, in Afghanistan for this to continue. 

The enemy is here amongst us, we need to spend more on "Intelligence" and "Good" Policing. We need to do what we have always been good at – fighting the real enemy – and not follow the American "High Tech" path any longer. 

 

JUST BE FAIR

do away with the 'one rule for us another for them' thing and rich peoples pull the ladder up jack mentality. i have nothing against the wealthy, a lot of you worked hard to get there, but so do a lot of poor people, work hard that is, but if you have the money some should be used to help the less well off, and if one rule applies to the less well off it should apply to all

Why is this idea important?

do away with the 'one rule for us another for them' thing and rich peoples pull the ladder up jack mentality. i have nothing against the wealthy, a lot of you worked hard to get there, but so do a lot of poor people, work hard that is, but if you have the money some should be used to help the less well off, and if one rule applies to the less well off it should apply to all

Moratorium on Immigration

It is now freely admitted that this country does not know the true numbers of immigrants both legal and illegal who have entered ther country in the last few years.  However it takes no imagination whatsoever to see the impact which the number of no-British nationals are having upon our services.  One only has to look at hospital queues, pressures on Police, affect upon schools, statistics on violence, inability of Social Services to cope, Bank queues, etc., etc.

The system is in a shambles.  The only way this situation can be corrected is to place a complete ban on any immigration over the next 3/5 years  whilst the whole subject is reviewed and brought under control with proper procedures for entry to the UK, suitable numbers of properly trained staff put in place and a  sensible policy developed for control from there on.

Why is this idea important?

It is now freely admitted that this country does not know the true numbers of immigrants both legal and illegal who have entered ther country in the last few years.  However it takes no imagination whatsoever to see the impact which the number of no-British nationals are having upon our services.  One only has to look at hospital queues, pressures on Police, affect upon schools, statistics on violence, inability of Social Services to cope, Bank queues, etc., etc.

The system is in a shambles.  The only way this situation can be corrected is to place a complete ban on any immigration over the next 3/5 years  whilst the whole subject is reviewed and brought under control with proper procedures for entry to the UK, suitable numbers of properly trained staff put in place and a  sensible policy developed for control from there on.

Scrap cars, if owner is caught holding and talking on a mobile ‘phone, when driving.

This punishment would really work, as most people love their cars and cannot do without them.  Immediately scrapping them, if found guilty, would stop this dreadful practice.

Why is this idea important?

This punishment would really work, as most people love their cars and cannot do without them.  Immediately scrapping them, if found guilty, would stop this dreadful practice.

For councils, householders and schools

I totally agree. People should get used to the fact that snow is not anymore a rare thing and than we are going to see more of it. Owner should be obliged by law to clear snow in front of their properties. The same way local councils should put more effort into freeing public roads from snow. I live in West Sussex and during snow fall this winter one Saturday morning in the centre of the town I saw council workers at 11 am shovelling in no rush at all grit from a wheelbarrow. In my view they should have been on the job from early hours of the morning so pavements and roads were ready by 9am for shops to open.

The same is for opening of schools. A lot of children attend schools in catchment’s areas. So school should try their best to open.  And parents should make sure that if they can not use a car that morning they have to allow extra time in the morning to walk children to school. The Primary school where my children go reassured parents during January snow fall that they were doing everything possible to open school door. However 10 days of extra snow holidays children went back to school and to my horror no snow was cleared around the school.  Is not this job for school caretakers?

Why is this idea important?

I totally agree. People should get used to the fact that snow is not anymore a rare thing and than we are going to see more of it. Owner should be obliged by law to clear snow in front of their properties. The same way local councils should put more effort into freeing public roads from snow. I live in West Sussex and during snow fall this winter one Saturday morning in the centre of the town I saw council workers at 11 am shovelling in no rush at all grit from a wheelbarrow. In my view they should have been on the job from early hours of the morning so pavements and roads were ready by 9am for shops to open.

The same is for opening of schools. A lot of children attend schools in catchment’s areas. So school should try their best to open.  And parents should make sure that if they can not use a car that morning they have to allow extra time in the morning to walk children to school. The Primary school where my children go reassured parents during January snow fall that they were doing everything possible to open school door. However 10 days of extra snow holidays children went back to school and to my horror no snow was cleared around the school.  Is not this job for school caretakers?

Stop parking on footpaths and facing on coming traffic

How many times have you witnessed vehicles parked on double yellow lines, inside pedstrian crossings,on footpaths and facing oncoming traffic.

Can not say I am a EU supporter but many of member countries outlaw such behaviour.

I believe it should be made unlawfull and thereafter  local authourites empowered to enfoce.

It need not be an expensive process. A date timed photograph is all that is required.

Why is this idea important?

How many times have you witnessed vehicles parked on double yellow lines, inside pedstrian crossings,on footpaths and facing oncoming traffic.

Can not say I am a EU supporter but many of member countries outlaw such behaviour.

I believe it should be made unlawfull and thereafter  local authourites empowered to enfoce.

It need not be an expensive process. A date timed photograph is all that is required.

National Service

It seems that the Uk has lost all respect .

I feel by bringing back national service you would give the young adults the opportunity to see how important life is and the importance of respect for all .

 

Why is this idea important?

It seems that the Uk has lost all respect .

I feel by bringing back national service you would give the young adults the opportunity to see how important life is and the importance of respect for all .

 

Stop the benefits culture

 

What do we do? We pay the rent of dossers who live in £500 a week flats in central London.

This country has gone down the toilet because of the idiots in power who just give away money and have created large sections of the population who won't work and are totally useless. And what does the government do, just carry handing out this cash and make these sections of the population even more degenerate. Now we have made such large sections of the British population degenerate from benefits, that we have to import labour for the low paid jobs, because they won't do it.

Quite frankly, if Russia invaded this country, I don't think I would fight because I would be quite happy to see these morons in power out and the country shift to some kind of state of reality.

Why is this idea important?

 

What do we do? We pay the rent of dossers who live in £500 a week flats in central London.

This country has gone down the toilet because of the idiots in power who just give away money and have created large sections of the population who won't work and are totally useless. And what does the government do, just carry handing out this cash and make these sections of the population even more degenerate. Now we have made such large sections of the British population degenerate from benefits, that we have to import labour for the low paid jobs, because they won't do it.

Quite frankly, if Russia invaded this country, I don't think I would fight because I would be quite happy to see these morons in power out and the country shift to some kind of state of reality.

clamp down on hand car wash tax evaders

There is a proliferation of these operating in petrol stations. It is all on a cash basis and the operators, mainly eastern European, brag that they are also claiming full social security benefits. Once again we are being taken for a ride – why cant they contribute to society in an honest way.

Why is this idea important?

There is a proliferation of these operating in petrol stations. It is all on a cash basis and the operators, mainly eastern European, brag that they are also claiming full social security benefits. Once again we are being taken for a ride – why cant they contribute to society in an honest way.

benefit cheats

I am unfortunate to have to live on a council estate.  Unfortunate because when I wanted to buy a home of my own I could not afford to buy anywhere else but my council house.  I have worked everyday since the age of 16 years old as has my husband.  In my street you would be able to count on one hand how many people actually work  for a living (ie paying tax and NI).  The rest  of them are sitting pretty on hand outs that I and my husband are having to go to work for in jobs that barely manage to pay the bills.  They say that they are disabled, they have mental issues.  Yes they do but only when it suits them.  Inside the home where no one can see they take on a complete different persona.  Can't work got a bad back, but they can stand and cook, they  can do the decorating so on and so on.  Up and down my street you can always tell when one of them has a meeting with works and pension coming up as the walking sticks come on out.  It is one thing writing to them inviting them to come in for a meeting to discuss their immobility as it gives them a chance to practice their ill health.  What you need to do is to put stop checks in place, just turn up and knock on the door.  You would soon see the keen gardeners and decorators that live amongst us for what they really are.
 

Why is this idea important?

I am unfortunate to have to live on a council estate.  Unfortunate because when I wanted to buy a home of my own I could not afford to buy anywhere else but my council house.  I have worked everyday since the age of 16 years old as has my husband.  In my street you would be able to count on one hand how many people actually work  for a living (ie paying tax and NI).  The rest  of them are sitting pretty on hand outs that I and my husband are having to go to work for in jobs that barely manage to pay the bills.  They say that they are disabled, they have mental issues.  Yes they do but only when it suits them.  Inside the home where no one can see they take on a complete different persona.  Can't work got a bad back, but they can stand and cook, they  can do the decorating so on and so on.  Up and down my street you can always tell when one of them has a meeting with works and pension coming up as the walking sticks come on out.  It is one thing writing to them inviting them to come in for a meeting to discuss their immobility as it gives them a chance to practice their ill health.  What you need to do is to put stop checks in place, just turn up and knock on the door.  You would soon see the keen gardeners and decorators that live amongst us for what they really are.
 

A Cure

The now common practice for young people to get plastered and be assisted to recovery by hospitals and police should be charged for the use of all the facilities involved and that may lead them to think twice about over indulging.

Why is this idea important?

The now common practice for young people to get plastered and be assisted to recovery by hospitals and police should be charged for the use of all the facilities involved and that may lead them to think twice about over indulging.

Retake driving test for some traffic offences as opposed to points and penalty.

Instead of issueing fixed penalty notices drivers should be given the option of retaking their driving test for minor traffic offences i.e. crossing solid white lines, failing to observe traffic signs etc. The lack of understanding of the highway code by some motorists is alarming. This would improve driving standards.

Why is this idea important?

Instead of issueing fixed penalty notices drivers should be given the option of retaking their driving test for minor traffic offences i.e. crossing solid white lines, failing to observe traffic signs etc. The lack of understanding of the highway code by some motorists is alarming. This would improve driving standards.

Ellimination of all motor vehicles from cities centres.

No private motor vehicles to enter into a designated radius from the city centre.

Electified public transport should cover all  transport needs in the cities of the nation. Multi-storied car parks to be built above railway stations some considerable distance from the city centre. Car owners must park and ride public transport into the no vehicle zones. Every street in the non car zones must be serviced by public transport. A small fee to be charged for using the buses, trams or monorail services.

Why is this idea important?

No private motor vehicles to enter into a designated radius from the city centre.

Electified public transport should cover all  transport needs in the cities of the nation. Multi-storied car parks to be built above railway stations some considerable distance from the city centre. Car owners must park and ride public transport into the no vehicle zones. Every street in the non car zones must be serviced by public transport. A small fee to be charged for using the buses, trams or monorail services.

Raise the drinking age

Most binge drinking is done by people in their early 20's, raising the drinking age would thus:

  1. lower police costs or at least mean the police have more time to deal with other offences
  2. lower health care costs as there is less long term damage to the liver and fewer fights and trips
  3. raise productivity, if at university or at work people will have fewer hangovers meaning productivity increases
  4. fewer driving offences – lowers deaths and injuries and means people will have lower insurance claims

I recognise that there would be some problems – people still might sell alcohol to the underaged who regard it as rebellious and so cool. However if a fine was placed upon the offence it would bring in money and stop rampant alcoholism. It would also encourage people to drink sensibly.

Finally brewers might protest that they're losing a lot of revenue. However with fewer drunk youths on the streets more of the older generation may be encouraged to go out thus increaing revenues.

Why is this idea important?

Most binge drinking is done by people in their early 20's, raising the drinking age would thus:

  1. lower police costs or at least mean the police have more time to deal with other offences
  2. lower health care costs as there is less long term damage to the liver and fewer fights and trips
  3. raise productivity, if at university or at work people will have fewer hangovers meaning productivity increases
  4. fewer driving offences – lowers deaths and injuries and means people will have lower insurance claims

I recognise that there would be some problems – people still might sell alcohol to the underaged who regard it as rebellious and so cool. However if a fine was placed upon the offence it would bring in money and stop rampant alcoholism. It would also encourage people to drink sensibly.

Finally brewers might protest that they're losing a lot of revenue. However with fewer drunk youths on the streets more of the older generation may be encouraged to go out thus increaing revenues.

Non Resident Landlord’s Duty of Care to Neighbours.

In the area in which I live, which is a tourist area, there are a lot of flats and bed and breakfast accomodation amongst people trying to make a living from Guest Houses.  From time to time miscreants and anti social people are housed in these properties by various agencies.    When these people act in an anti social way there does not seem to be an easy way of dealing with a) the person or b) the landlord.  I think that the laws need to be looked at to help the long suffering residents, and Guest House owners, do something about these properties.

Why is this idea important?

In the area in which I live, which is a tourist area, there are a lot of flats and bed and breakfast accomodation amongst people trying to make a living from Guest Houses.  From time to time miscreants and anti social people are housed in these properties by various agencies.    When these people act in an anti social way there does not seem to be an easy way of dealing with a) the person or b) the landlord.  I think that the laws need to be looked at to help the long suffering residents, and Guest House owners, do something about these properties.