Scrap ALL Quangos

All Quangos should be scrapped as from January 2011.  In the next six months current chief executives can re-apply for funding by justifying their existence to the relevant ministry or parliamentary committee. Those that fail will disappear.  

Why is this idea important?

All Quangos should be scrapped as from January 2011.  In the next six months current chief executives can re-apply for funding by justifying their existence to the relevant ministry or parliamentary committee. Those that fail will disappear.  

Scrap the Funds for Liabilities burden on telecoms companies

At present Telecoms companies are required to lodge a bond or other financial instrument which would pay for their network to be ripped out or made safe in the event that they go bust and no one buys up the assets. This used to be a discretionary power for Oftel but it has now become compulsory for all network operators. It is costly and burdensome and has never been triggered so it is tying up cash which could better be used in rolling out next generation networks for the UK. 

Why is this idea important?

At present Telecoms companies are required to lodge a bond or other financial instrument which would pay for their network to be ripped out or made safe in the event that they go bust and no one buys up the assets. This used to be a discretionary power for Oftel but it has now become compulsory for all network operators. It is costly and burdensome and has never been triggered so it is tying up cash which could better be used in rolling out next generation networks for the UK. 

Allow LIVE MUSIC anywhere, if it isn’t LOUD.

The new licensing acts require all live music events to be covered entirely in red tape.  Live music should be spontaneous, and subject to regulation only when it may cause annoyance.

I propose that "live music" should not be regulated, but "loud music" should be.  Thus an acoustic guitar in the town square should not be regulated, but a heavily amplified should be.

Why is this idea important?

The new licensing acts require all live music events to be covered entirely in red tape.  Live music should be spontaneous, and subject to regulation only when it may cause annoyance.

I propose that "live music" should not be regulated, but "loud music" should be.  Thus an acoustic guitar in the town square should not be regulated, but a heavily amplified should be.

Planning Laws

Many councils now withdraw 'permitted development rights' from new homes, simply to make money from the householders when they want to do the simplest of alterations/extensions to their homes.  This law should be removed so that everybody is able to make simple alterations/extension without the need to get the council involved and line their coffers. Planning permission should not be needed for those of us who want a greener environment and wish to install solar panels or a small wind turbine. As things stand it is cost prohibited when the council need to get involved in every aspect of these matters.

Why is this idea important?

Many councils now withdraw 'permitted development rights' from new homes, simply to make money from the householders when they want to do the simplest of alterations/extensions to their homes.  This law should be removed so that everybody is able to make simple alterations/extension without the need to get the council involved and line their coffers. Planning permission should not be needed for those of us who want a greener environment and wish to install solar panels or a small wind turbine. As things stand it is cost prohibited when the council need to get involved in every aspect of these matters.

Remove the link between SEN diagnosis and funding.

The system for the provision of support to pupils with specific personalised learning needs is grotesquely expensive and inefficient. The problem with the whole system is that 'statementing' has funding attached, and therefore becomes bureaucratic on both a clinical and a financial level.

It would be so much simpler (and cheaper!) to simply dedicate a proportion of every school's budget to the provision of special educational needs. That money must be spent on support for individuals, but not assigned to specific individuals. Then the professionals within that school (possibly but not necessarily including educational psychologists) would be able to allocate resources to their students in a way that meets their needs.

It is of course important that children are properly diagnosed, but this should be a purely medical/clinical concern. The relationship with funding means that money is constantly being wasted on appeals and such.

Schools should use professional diagnosis to justify their allocation of the fixed pot of funds that they have been given as a school. If parents cannot agree with the provision that a school allocates their child then they should be allowed to look for another school.

The current problems all come from an overly litigious approach that favours bureaucrats and only benefits the children of parents that have enough time on ther hands to pursue their claims through the many conflicting agencies and organisations.

Why is this idea important?

The system for the provision of support to pupils with specific personalised learning needs is grotesquely expensive and inefficient. The problem with the whole system is that 'statementing' has funding attached, and therefore becomes bureaucratic on both a clinical and a financial level.

It would be so much simpler (and cheaper!) to simply dedicate a proportion of every school's budget to the provision of special educational needs. That money must be spent on support for individuals, but not assigned to specific individuals. Then the professionals within that school (possibly but not necessarily including educational psychologists) would be able to allocate resources to their students in a way that meets their needs.

It is of course important that children are properly diagnosed, but this should be a purely medical/clinical concern. The relationship with funding means that money is constantly being wasted on appeals and such.

Schools should use professional diagnosis to justify their allocation of the fixed pot of funds that they have been given as a school. If parents cannot agree with the provision that a school allocates their child then they should be allowed to look for another school.

The current problems all come from an overly litigious approach that favours bureaucrats and only benefits the children of parents that have enough time on ther hands to pursue their claims through the many conflicting agencies and organisations.

sack ATOS LIAR LIARS doctor

sack the liars why should these people get paid, waste of £££  while people who need dla or esa dont get it because of there reports, I have fibromyalgia, and had two home vist for dla  done by atos doc both reports where full of lies,according to them I dont suffer from fatigue, PAIN, stiffness irritable bowels,exhaustion,dizziness,cramp,nerve damage,the list goes on, I have supporting evidance from on doc pain clinic, OCP, I have things like bath lift, stair rails, cruches stool,none of this wasin the report. IVE been fighting to get dla since 2007 this is not fair that there docs have more say then mine,  , I have three young son and have had fibro all my life but over the last ten years its got worse Iam sick to death asking for help, everthing is a fight,these people dont help they just make it worse for desent  honest people to get help  

 

 

Why is this idea important?

sack the liars why should these people get paid, waste of £££  while people who need dla or esa dont get it because of there reports, I have fibromyalgia, and had two home vist for dla  done by atos doc both reports where full of lies,according to them I dont suffer from fatigue, PAIN, stiffness irritable bowels,exhaustion,dizziness,cramp,nerve damage,the list goes on, I have supporting evidance from on doc pain clinic, OCP, I have things like bath lift, stair rails, cruches stool,none of this wasin the report. IVE been fighting to get dla since 2007 this is not fair that there docs have more say then mine,  , I have three young son and have had fibro all my life but over the last ten years its got worse Iam sick to death asking for help, everthing is a fight,these people dont help they just make it worse for desent  honest people to get help  

 

 

Planning Inspectorate

The activities of the Planning Inspectorate need curtailing.  If a planning application is turned down, an appeal can be launched by the aggrieved party.   However, the Inspectorate appoints someone who knows nothing about the area and his/her opinion takes precedence of that of the local planning authority.  Even though the Inspectorate employs someone to do quality control of its decisions, it appears not to carry out any quality control.  I know of a case when the Inspectorate was asked to review a decision it had made, the quality control man sid they could not do this because they had thrown away the papers!

Why is this idea important?

The activities of the Planning Inspectorate need curtailing.  If a planning application is turned down, an appeal can be launched by the aggrieved party.   However, the Inspectorate appoints someone who knows nothing about the area and his/her opinion takes precedence of that of the local planning authority.  Even though the Inspectorate employs someone to do quality control of its decisions, it appears not to carry out any quality control.  I know of a case when the Inspectorate was asked to review a decision it had made, the quality control man sid they could not do this because they had thrown away the papers!

All official answers must be committal not noncommittal

This applies to every answer given by a government minister or office, civil servant, MP, councillor etc, other public office or commission of any nature, or business answering an enquiry about problems with its product, inclduing lawyers.

Everything stated in every answer given in an official capacity, i.e. as part of these folks' jobs, must be definite about all facts involved. if total factual certainty does not exist, the extent to which it does must be stated definitely. The words "unfortuately", "regrettably", and all synonyms used similarly, should be banned. Phrases like "you feel" or "you consider", that take the committal factuality out of a sentence, should be banned, and provision made for any new such phrase that bureaucrats are seen to coin and use, to be banned too upon its existence being demonstrated.

If the recipient of the answer perceives that any statement in it is noncommittal, s/he will be entitled to write back stating and explaining how that is, and to demand, as an enforceable right, a reply where the writer of the statement has to show, word by word, that it is watertightly committal and definite.

Why is this idea important?

This applies to every answer given by a government minister or office, civil servant, MP, councillor etc, other public office or commission of any nature, or business answering an enquiry about problems with its product, inclduing lawyers.

Everything stated in every answer given in an official capacity, i.e. as part of these folks' jobs, must be definite about all facts involved. if total factual certainty does not exist, the extent to which it does must be stated definitely. The words "unfortuately", "regrettably", and all synonyms used similarly, should be banned. Phrases like "you feel" or "you consider", that take the committal factuality out of a sentence, should be banned, and provision made for any new such phrase that bureaucrats are seen to coin and use, to be banned too upon its existence being demonstrated.

If the recipient of the answer perceives that any statement in it is noncommittal, s/he will be entitled to write back stating and explaining how that is, and to demand, as an enforceable right, a reply where the writer of the statement has to show, word by word, that it is watertightly committal and definite.

that housing law shall consist only of clear facts that disprove their own opposites

This is to enact a blanket principle, that simply states: in all law concerning occupancy of your  home, as owner or tenant, every fact of law or point of law that is true shall be absolutely true with no shades of uncertainty, and shall disprove that its opposite is true.

This is to prevent manipulation and swindling by your solicitor. At present, there can be all sorts of complications arising from planning issues, certifying the completion of extensions, or "burdens", duties attached to a piece of land for murky reasons of its history. When these complications or any others arise, you are left to rely on your solicitor's opinion, with no definite reference point to say it is right or wrong, and solicitors are allowed to have different conflicting opinions on the same thing yet both count as right. This is manipulation, it leaves you with no entitlement to know for certain what the law is that you are trying to comply with.

These things are true in both the English and Scottish systems.

Why is this idea important?

This is to enact a blanket principle, that simply states: in all law concerning occupancy of your  home, as owner or tenant, every fact of law or point of law that is true shall be absolutely true with no shades of uncertainty, and shall disprove that its opposite is true.

This is to prevent manipulation and swindling by your solicitor. At present, there can be all sorts of complications arising from planning issues, certifying the completion of extensions, or "burdens", duties attached to a piece of land for murky reasons of its history. When these complications or any others arise, you are left to rely on your solicitor's opinion, with no definite reference point to say it is right or wrong, and solicitors are allowed to have different conflicting opinions on the same thing yet both count as right. This is manipulation, it leaves you with no entitlement to know for certain what the law is that you are trying to comply with.

These things are true in both the English and Scottish systems.

Repeal Ombudsman Laws/ Rules

I would like to see the repeal of the law and or rules, that stop a judicial review having full powers to oversee and reverse any of the various Ombudsman's decisions.

Widely seen as biased and untrustworthy, Most people who have had to deal with any Ombudsman department would like the total power held over them by the Ombudsman and be association, the power of big business to act as they please, to be moderated and overseen by Judicial review or by going through some other suitable route.

The way the present Laws, rules and process moves, there is no protection for the public from even the most obviously ridiculous one sided rulings the ombudsman's bodies make.

So I, and a huge body of the British public urge a reform over the Laws and rules governing the way the Ombudsman and courts interact with the pubic once a complaint about a business, council, or utility service, has been made. 

Why is this idea important?

I would like to see the repeal of the law and or rules, that stop a judicial review having full powers to oversee and reverse any of the various Ombudsman's decisions.

Widely seen as biased and untrustworthy, Most people who have had to deal with any Ombudsman department would like the total power held over them by the Ombudsman and be association, the power of big business to act as they please, to be moderated and overseen by Judicial review or by going through some other suitable route.

The way the present Laws, rules and process moves, there is no protection for the public from even the most obviously ridiculous one sided rulings the ombudsman's bodies make.

So I, and a huge body of the British public urge a reform over the Laws and rules governing the way the Ombudsman and courts interact with the pubic once a complaint about a business, council, or utility service, has been made. 

Abolish the AONB boards

A few years ago it was decided that AONBs (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) should each have some form of board, invoving a staff, website, publications, meetings, input into planning decisions etc. These were duly formed and now are staffed up and eating money and wasting time.  

The planning functions can be discharged by locally elected bodies eg councils who have due regard to AONB status when looking at applications.  Everything else they do is a complete waste of time including handing out tiny grants to local bodies – councils can, and do, this already.  Basically they are an extra layer of non-accountable cost which duplicates council functions.  No-one asked for them and no-one would miss them.

Why is this idea important?

A few years ago it was decided that AONBs (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) should each have some form of board, invoving a staff, website, publications, meetings, input into planning decisions etc. These were duly formed and now are staffed up and eating money and wasting time.  

The planning functions can be discharged by locally elected bodies eg councils who have due regard to AONB status when looking at applications.  Everything else they do is a complete waste of time including handing out tiny grants to local bodies – councils can, and do, this already.  Basically they are an extra layer of non-accountable cost which duplicates council functions.  No-one asked for them and no-one would miss them.

Simplification of minibus driving regulations

To change the complicated rules around category D on driving licences to allow those passing their tests after Jan 1997 to have the same rights to drive a minibus as those who passed before.

Why is this idea important?

To change the complicated rules around category D on driving licences to allow those passing their tests after Jan 1997 to have the same rights to drive a minibus as those who passed before.

Update definition of forestry to include community and educational use

The current definition of forestry is limited and is inconsistent with DEFRA'S latest strategy for Trees, Woods and Forests which states that community and educational use of woodlands is core to it's aims.

Under current planning law, woodlands are only available for 'non forestry' use for 28 days a year. This means that community forest schools (which offer children opportunities to learn and connect with their environment), woodland playschemes and conservation groups using young people as volunteers may be required to apply for change of use. Current definitions of land use are also inflexible so that there are no sub groups; educational use is presumed to be a 'school' and a conservation project can find themselves being asked to supply car parking to the same specifications as a new build school in order to get change of use.

I would like the definition of forestry and agrigulture to be more flexible- to allow for sustainable community growing and conservation projects.

Why is this idea important?

The current definition of forestry is limited and is inconsistent with DEFRA'S latest strategy for Trees, Woods and Forests which states that community and educational use of woodlands is core to it's aims.

Under current planning law, woodlands are only available for 'non forestry' use for 28 days a year. This means that community forest schools (which offer children opportunities to learn and connect with their environment), woodland playschemes and conservation groups using young people as volunteers may be required to apply for change of use. Current definitions of land use are also inflexible so that there are no sub groups; educational use is presumed to be a 'school' and a conservation project can find themselves being asked to supply car parking to the same specifications as a new build school in order to get change of use.

I would like the definition of forestry and agrigulture to be more flexible- to allow for sustainable community growing and conservation projects.

Overhaul The Companies Act And Various Revisions For SME’s

Remove the requirement for SME's that are largely or principally owner-managed to have an annual accounts audit.

Remove the requirement for SME's that are largely or principally owner-managed to have to make an annual return to Companies House.

Remove the requirement for SME's that are largely or principally owner-managed to have to file annual accounts.

Remove the requirement for SME's that are largely or principally owner-managed to have to have their information publicly displayed.

 

Why is this idea important?

Remove the requirement for SME's that are largely or principally owner-managed to have an annual accounts audit.

Remove the requirement for SME's that are largely or principally owner-managed to have to make an annual return to Companies House.

Remove the requirement for SME's that are largely or principally owner-managed to have to file annual accounts.

Remove the requirement for SME's that are largely or principally owner-managed to have to have their information publicly displayed.

 

Repeal the European Communities Act 1972 (UK)

This Act, although given Royal Assent, must be repealed if Britain and British people are to have any say in the governance of their way of life. The Act states, in effect, that all legislation and Acts of Parliament are subject to approval by the European Parliament. To hand over control of everything that maintains law and order in Britain is totally unacceptable. It must never have represented the wishes of the majority of the British population.

Europe has far too much influence on our way of life. While there is a strong case to change from pounds and ounces to kilogrammes, or to abandon gills, pints, gallons and firkins in favour of litres, the European insistence that we must sell eggs by weight is just plain silly. If you ask for a kilogramme of eggs will you endup with all small eggs? Or a mixture of small and large?

More serious is the cost to Britain's taxpayers for this European interference. Everyone in the British isles is affected by the unbelievable debt run up by the Socialist government; we are all feeling the pinch to a greater or lesser degree and yet an unacceptably large percentage of our GNP is lost in the corridors of the European Parliament.

Why is this idea important?

This Act, although given Royal Assent, must be repealed if Britain and British people are to have any say in the governance of their way of life. The Act states, in effect, that all legislation and Acts of Parliament are subject to approval by the European Parliament. To hand over control of everything that maintains law and order in Britain is totally unacceptable. It must never have represented the wishes of the majority of the British population.

Europe has far too much influence on our way of life. While there is a strong case to change from pounds and ounces to kilogrammes, or to abandon gills, pints, gallons and firkins in favour of litres, the European insistence that we must sell eggs by weight is just plain silly. If you ask for a kilogramme of eggs will you endup with all small eggs? Or a mixture of small and large?

More serious is the cost to Britain's taxpayers for this European interference. Everyone in the British isles is affected by the unbelievable debt run up by the Socialist government; we are all feeling the pinch to a greater or lesser degree and yet an unacceptably large percentage of our GNP is lost in the corridors of the European Parliament.

Review all routine paperwork in all areas of public life

All practitioners dealing directly with the public – teachers, police, social workers in particular – routinely complain that they spend far too much time on filling in forms, making returns etc at the expense of time spent doing what they are trained to do and what is the real purpose of their job. Of course, proper records need to be kept, reasons for key decisions noted, minutes made of significant meetings etc, but the pendulum has swung too far towards recording every detail and away from common sense.

Why is this idea important?

All practitioners dealing directly with the public – teachers, police, social workers in particular – routinely complain that they spend far too much time on filling in forms, making returns etc at the expense of time spent doing what they are trained to do and what is the real purpose of their job. Of course, proper records need to be kept, reasons for key decisions noted, minutes made of significant meetings etc, but the pendulum has swung too far towards recording every detail and away from common sense.

remove maximun numbers of licences in village halls

We are unable to hold all the events we would like to in our village because we have used up the maximimun of 12 licences in one year before the end of the year.  Also why does the TENS form ( Temporary Events Notice) required for a licence have to be filled out in triplicate.  Why cannot the form be submitted online

Why is this idea important?

We are unable to hold all the events we would like to in our village because we have used up the maximimun of 12 licences in one year before the end of the year.  Also why does the TENS form ( Temporary Events Notice) required for a licence have to be filled out in triplicate.  Why cannot the form be submitted online

Remove the requirement for a pre-movement TB test of cattle.

Remove the requirement for a pre-movement TB test of cattle. This is a pointless test because all cattle are tested once a year any way. It has added a huge cost to the industry and extreme inconvenience to the agricultural sector and to the Veterinary businesses that serve it.

Why is this idea important?

Remove the requirement for a pre-movement TB test of cattle. This is a pointless test because all cattle are tested once a year any way. It has added a huge cost to the industry and extreme inconvenience to the agricultural sector and to the Veterinary businesses that serve it.

Overhaul , review and simplify the town planning process

1 – Reduce the beaurocracy associated with the planning process , particularly insofar as it applies to smaller schemes, ( say up to 10 houses on smaller sites ) Remove the legalised bribery that is Section 106 ' Agreements ' (!!) ; Impose stricter time scales on planning Authorities to deal with applications ; Inhibit Authoritys ability to make up all manner of costly conditions to attach to the decision when it is finally given such as Archeological Digs for the tiniest of or no reasons; contamination tests where there has been no real  evidence of previous suspect activity; Expensive works to protect suspected presence of one or two newts or frogs etc etc etc

2. – Stop mixing ' social ' housing with private and prevent Developers promoting their sites as private and then selling large numbers of houses to Housing Assns. after some people have bought privately.

3 – Stop the drive to keep increasing the  Coded sustainability. Each increase is very costly and of dubious ongoing viability.

4 – Put less emphasis on density targets.

Why is this idea important?

1 – Reduce the beaurocracy associated with the planning process , particularly insofar as it applies to smaller schemes, ( say up to 10 houses on smaller sites ) Remove the legalised bribery that is Section 106 ' Agreements ' (!!) ; Impose stricter time scales on planning Authorities to deal with applications ; Inhibit Authoritys ability to make up all manner of costly conditions to attach to the decision when it is finally given such as Archeological Digs for the tiniest of or no reasons; contamination tests where there has been no real  evidence of previous suspect activity; Expensive works to protect suspected presence of one or two newts or frogs etc etc etc

2. – Stop mixing ' social ' housing with private and prevent Developers promoting their sites as private and then selling large numbers of houses to Housing Assns. after some people have bought privately.

3 – Stop the drive to keep increasing the  Coded sustainability. Each increase is very costly and of dubious ongoing viability.

4 – Put less emphasis on density targets.

Repeal the 2004 Christmas Day Trading Act

The Christmas Day Trading Act prohibits large shops (those covered by Sunday Trading laws) from opening at all for retail on Christmas day.

 This ridiculous piece of legislation is an unnecessary interference both in business and in peoples’ right to spend their spare time as they choose.  The Government should not be interfering in the harmless activity of its citizens, and certainly not at the expense of businesses during a time when our economy is in such a bad state. 

 As shops would only open if there was demand for them to be open and they were able to get staff to work that day, the sole purpose of this piece of legislation seems to have been a means by which the Government could impose its own values upon the rest of society. 

Why is this idea important?

The Christmas Day Trading Act prohibits large shops (those covered by Sunday Trading laws) from opening at all for retail on Christmas day.

 This ridiculous piece of legislation is an unnecessary interference both in business and in peoples’ right to spend their spare time as they choose.  The Government should not be interfering in the harmless activity of its citizens, and certainly not at the expense of businesses during a time when our economy is in such a bad state. 

 As shops would only open if there was demand for them to be open and they were able to get staff to work that day, the sole purpose of this piece of legislation seems to have been a means by which the Government could impose its own values upon the rest of society. 

“Scottish Law” is unnecessary duplication of England & Wales Law

Get rid of Scottish Law and have the same laws all across the UK.

It is a HUGE WASTE OF MONEY to re-enact every new law a second time with tiny differences to fit in with the Scottish legal system.

Anyway we should have the same law everywhere across our nation.

The few legal differences in Northern Ireland and the little islands should be eliminated as well.

 

Why is this idea important?

Get rid of Scottish Law and have the same laws all across the UK.

It is a HUGE WASTE OF MONEY to re-enact every new law a second time with tiny differences to fit in with the Scottish legal system.

Anyway we should have the same law everywhere across our nation.

The few legal differences in Northern Ireland and the little islands should be eliminated as well.