Repeal the Natural Environment & Rural Communities Act 2006 section 67

I believe that this legislation is both ineffectual or otherwise flawed. I request that section 67 of the Natural Environment & Rural Communities Act 2006 be repealed on the grounds that it is a clumsy statute that has caused very unfair and unreasonable impacts to a significant part of the community, often creating absurd situations, rather than solving problems. There has to be a better and fairer way of addressing the recording and sustainable use of our ancient highways.

 

Why is this idea important?

I believe that this legislation is both ineffectual or otherwise flawed. I request that section 67 of the Natural Environment & Rural Communities Act 2006 be repealed on the grounds that it is a clumsy statute that has caused very unfair and unreasonable impacts to a significant part of the community, often creating absurd situations, rather than solving problems. There has to be a better and fairer way of addressing the recording and sustainable use of our ancient highways.

 

Performance Management in Local Government

Performance Management has grown exponentially within local government since 1997 as a result of target setting by central government and is a drain on finite public resources.

Why is this idea important?

Performance Management has grown exponentially within local government since 1997 as a result of target setting by central government and is a drain on finite public resources.

Repeal the Financial Services & Markets Act 2000

All financial services firms are subject to the Act and the interpretation placed on it by the Financial Services Authority.

Unbeknownst to Parliament the passing of FSMA breached financial advisers human rights by retrospectively removing the ability to claim protection under the Limitation Act 1980. All other UK citizens and firms are able to rely upon the 15 year longstop to protect thrmselves against stale claims.

Financial advisers have not only lost this protection but it has been amde retrospective. In this regard they have lesser rights than terrorists, sex offenders and other unsavoury groups.

If we are fighting for a fairer and more just society then this distortion must be removed.

Why is this idea important?

All financial services firms are subject to the Act and the interpretation placed on it by the Financial Services Authority.

Unbeknownst to Parliament the passing of FSMA breached financial advisers human rights by retrospectively removing the ability to claim protection under the Limitation Act 1980. All other UK citizens and firms are able to rely upon the 15 year longstop to protect thrmselves against stale claims.

Financial advisers have not only lost this protection but it has been amde retrospective. In this regard they have lesser rights than terrorists, sex offenders and other unsavoury groups.

If we are fighting for a fairer and more just society then this distortion must be removed.

The only idea you need: make all laws apply to MPs

Dear Mr Clegg

I think it's great that you've set up this website. It shows that you are committed to real engagement in the democratic process, which is an excellent thing.

However, you must be wondering now how you are going to sort through all the ideas here. There are thousands of ideas, and although doubtless many of the dafter ones can be ruled out pretty quickly, many of the other suggestions are actually pretty good, so it must be very hard to know where to start.

Let me help you. I would like to suggest just one law that you could introduce to help businesses emerge from the shackles of red tape. This is not to say that the other ideas aren't good: many of them are excellent, but all the good ideas will emerge naturally over the course of this parliament if you implement my idea first.

My idea is simple: make sure that every single business regulation applies to MPs and ministers in their own offices and departments, only more so. MPs are probably exempt from a lot of laws at the moment, and even if they're not technically exempt, someone at a high level has clearly taken a decision not to enforce them. For example, I can't take on an unpaid intern in my business, as I would be breaking minimum wage legislation, yet if you look on the w4mp.org website, you'll see many MPs advertising for unpaid interns. That kind of double standard has to stop.

But it needs to go further than that. The laws that apply to the rest of us need to apply much more vigorously to MPs. You need to set up an independent enforcement body (perhaps headed by a senior police officer), with the job of proactively looking for any breaches of any business regulation whatsoever among MPs and ministers. For example, I am required to update my health and safety policy annually. I actually do that, because I'm a good boy, but if I didn't, I'd probably get away with it unless there were some accident at my company that got investigated. However, with my idea, inspectors would regularly inspect the health and safety policy in every MPs office. If it's 366 days since it was last updated, then the MP is prosecuted. No ifs, no buts. You could imagine something pretty similar for every other bit of business regulation.

And if MPs are prosecuted, penalties would have to be more serious. Any fines levied could be at 5 times the level that would be applied to a business caught for the same offence (and no claiming the fines on expenses!), and if they do anything serious enough to merit a custodial sentence, then you'd lock them up for longer than you would a member of the public. Needless to say, ministers would be personally liable for any breaches of the law in their own departments.

And it goes without saying that MPs would have to fill in a P11D for all their expenses, which would be gone over in minute detail by some of the meanest inspectors that HMRC has to offer (and trust me, they are not lacking in such people).

Once that regime is in place, I think you'd find that parliament would pretty quickly vote for most of the other good ideas suggested on this site, without your having to do anything specific to encourage it.

Why is this idea important?

Dear Mr Clegg

I think it's great that you've set up this website. It shows that you are committed to real engagement in the democratic process, which is an excellent thing.

However, you must be wondering now how you are going to sort through all the ideas here. There are thousands of ideas, and although doubtless many of the dafter ones can be ruled out pretty quickly, many of the other suggestions are actually pretty good, so it must be very hard to know where to start.

Let me help you. I would like to suggest just one law that you could introduce to help businesses emerge from the shackles of red tape. This is not to say that the other ideas aren't good: many of them are excellent, but all the good ideas will emerge naturally over the course of this parliament if you implement my idea first.

My idea is simple: make sure that every single business regulation applies to MPs and ministers in their own offices and departments, only more so. MPs are probably exempt from a lot of laws at the moment, and even if they're not technically exempt, someone at a high level has clearly taken a decision not to enforce them. For example, I can't take on an unpaid intern in my business, as I would be breaking minimum wage legislation, yet if you look on the w4mp.org website, you'll see many MPs advertising for unpaid interns. That kind of double standard has to stop.

But it needs to go further than that. The laws that apply to the rest of us need to apply much more vigorously to MPs. You need to set up an independent enforcement body (perhaps headed by a senior police officer), with the job of proactively looking for any breaches of any business regulation whatsoever among MPs and ministers. For example, I am required to update my health and safety policy annually. I actually do that, because I'm a good boy, but if I didn't, I'd probably get away with it unless there were some accident at my company that got investigated. However, with my idea, inspectors would regularly inspect the health and safety policy in every MPs office. If it's 366 days since it was last updated, then the MP is prosecuted. No ifs, no buts. You could imagine something pretty similar for every other bit of business regulation.

And if MPs are prosecuted, penalties would have to be more serious. Any fines levied could be at 5 times the level that would be applied to a business caught for the same offence (and no claiming the fines on expenses!), and if they do anything serious enough to merit a custodial sentence, then you'd lock them up for longer than you would a member of the public. Needless to say, ministers would be personally liable for any breaches of the law in their own departments.

And it goes without saying that MPs would have to fill in a P11D for all their expenses, which would be gone over in minute detail by some of the meanest inspectors that HMRC has to offer (and trust me, they are not lacking in such people).

Once that regime is in place, I think you'd find that parliament would pretty quickly vote for most of the other good ideas suggested on this site, without your having to do anything specific to encourage it.

Remove Security Protection for ex Prime Ministers

Stop funding protection for Tony Blair and other ex Prime Ministers to save wasting our taxes.

 eg Blair is no longer part of the Britsh Government, has 2 full time security staff who travel with him first class all over the world, staying at First Class hotels. He doesn't need our funding, can afford his own, given his Pension, and the fees he gets for speaking.

The same apply for Margaret Thatcher et al.

Not sure what the law is for this, feel sure it was voted on by the British Parliament, and so can be recinded.

Why is this idea important?

Stop funding protection for Tony Blair and other ex Prime Ministers to save wasting our taxes.

 eg Blair is no longer part of the Britsh Government, has 2 full time security staff who travel with him first class all over the world, staying at First Class hotels. He doesn't need our funding, can afford his own, given his Pension, and the fees he gets for speaking.

The same apply for Margaret Thatcher et al.

Not sure what the law is for this, feel sure it was voted on by the British Parliament, and so can be recinded.

Reduce Oppressive Licensing Act 2003

The Licensing Act 2003 requires all events involving music or sale of alcohol to have a licence – the requirements are oppressive for small fundraising events organised by Charities or other non-commercial organisations.  As most do not have a Personal Licence holder or the premises (such as village halls, churches) do not have Premises Licences the organisers are required to complete in triplicate a 10 page form, most of which is irrelevant.  This form must be submitted to the local authority & police for vetting on each occasion at a cost of £21 a time.  

This requirement costs my charity a significant proportion of the funds raised by such events and, as a licence has never been refused to me, is a pointless bureacratic exercise.  Obtaining a Personal Licence requires attendance at a course typically costing £300 covering far more than the requirements for the small events I organise and as the premises we use (WI Hall, church) do not Have Premises Licences would still require the £21 redundant form to be completed and submitted for approval prior to the event.

The requirement could be simplified and made less onerous by allowing an individual organising such non-commercial events to be vetted once and subsequently allowed to hold, say, 5 events per annum simply by sending the local authority a one page form (or even simpler, holding a log record of events).  This would almost be reverting to the practice prior to John Prescott's oppresive law when individual licence holders could apply for a one year licence allowing a number of events per annum. 

Why is this idea important?

The Licensing Act 2003 requires all events involving music or sale of alcohol to have a licence – the requirements are oppressive for small fundraising events organised by Charities or other non-commercial organisations.  As most do not have a Personal Licence holder or the premises (such as village halls, churches) do not have Premises Licences the organisers are required to complete in triplicate a 10 page form, most of which is irrelevant.  This form must be submitted to the local authority & police for vetting on each occasion at a cost of £21 a time.  

This requirement costs my charity a significant proportion of the funds raised by such events and, as a licence has never been refused to me, is a pointless bureacratic exercise.  Obtaining a Personal Licence requires attendance at a course typically costing £300 covering far more than the requirements for the small events I organise and as the premises we use (WI Hall, church) do not Have Premises Licences would still require the £21 redundant form to be completed and submitted for approval prior to the event.

The requirement could be simplified and made less onerous by allowing an individual organising such non-commercial events to be vetted once and subsequently allowed to hold, say, 5 events per annum simply by sending the local authority a one page form (or even simpler, holding a log record of events).  This would almost be reverting to the practice prior to John Prescott's oppresive law when individual licence holders could apply for a one year licence allowing a number of events per annum. 

Remove requirement of ISO 9000 for government tenders

At present, it is a requirement of most government tenders that bidders are accredited to ISO 9000. As anyone who has the misfortune to work for an ISO 9000 certified company will know, ISO 9000 is essentially a way to create enormous amounts of stifling bureaucracy supervised by jumped up jobsworths both internally and externally. Surprise surprise, companies which do not tender for government work do not register for ISO 9000. It is well known that ISO 9000 is almost impossible to lose (because there is money to be made from accreditation) and there is no evidence that ISO 9000 accreditation is associated with success in business. For more details, read the works of John Seddon at http://www.systemsthinking.co.uk  (Note that I have no connection with Mr Seddon).

Why is this idea important?

At present, it is a requirement of most government tenders that bidders are accredited to ISO 9000. As anyone who has the misfortune to work for an ISO 9000 certified company will know, ISO 9000 is essentially a way to create enormous amounts of stifling bureaucracy supervised by jumped up jobsworths both internally and externally. Surprise surprise, companies which do not tender for government work do not register for ISO 9000. It is well known that ISO 9000 is almost impossible to lose (because there is money to be made from accreditation) and there is no evidence that ISO 9000 accreditation is associated with success in business. For more details, read the works of John Seddon at http://www.systemsthinking.co.uk  (Note that I have no connection with Mr Seddon).

Cutting red tape for small farms

Much of the damage to wildlife results from big farms with big fields all doing the same thing at the same time. Small farms (less then 100 acres) have smaller fields, and have an economic need to do things differently from their neighbours.

Small farms do not get the commercial discounts that their larger neighbours get. They also suffer from having to pay minimum charges for many services required under European Waste Directive etc. Sometimes the minimum charge is larger then the entire profit on small enterprises. Householders get the same ammount of rubbish disposed of free.

Livestock disposal cost is much higher for small farms then for large farms. On one occasion I calculated that we paid more per kilogram to dispose of 2 still born lambs then a large commercial farm paid in fines and disposal costs after illegally disposing of nearly 200tons of carcasses.

Electronic Identification of sheep (EID) costs much more for a small flock then for a large one. Officially the cost is about 60p, but after the cost of the application tool is taken into account it costs about £2.00 a sheep for our flock. (We couldn't possibly buy the machine which reads the tags)

Transport licences: We have a rare breed flock and need to buy in one ram every 3 years to avoid in-breeding. The nearest flock of the same breed is over 100 miles away. (We provide a unique insurance against foot and mouth etc for this breed that only has about 500 sheep in the world) Without a licence we can only transport our sheep 40km. Getting the licence for transporting our own sheep would cost £150 and involve 2 days away from our small business. Paying anyone else to transport them would cost more. 

Farmers get their ORDERS from DEFRA, and sometimes (in our case) from the Welsh Assembly (WA). The division of responsibilities bewteen these two organisations is not clear. Sometimes the WA website just links straight through to DEFRA, sometimes neither seems to have relavant information.

We have to apply for Rural Payements Agency forms to the local WA Dept of Ag office. We have a very reliable local postal service, but vital Rural Payements Agency forms often go missing. After 10 years, and having completely lost the opportunity to get Single Farm Payments because of undelivered forms, I have only just discovered that the forms are posted to Wales from somewhere in England. What is worse, WA Dept Ag staff do not even know where the forms actually come from! THis makes affective chasing of lost forms almost impossible.

When we were turned down for Single Farm Payment we were told that there was a two stage appeal. We tried the first stage, but couldn't go onto the second stage because the charge was more then we had in the bank, and was about 25% of the payment we would have gained if the appeal was succesful.

Surprisingly, having failed to get SFP we were told we could still get Tyr Cynnal (Entry level environment scheme) We would have to stick to a management scheme. I wrote out a scheme that had succesfully supported summer Grasshopper Warblers and winter Snipe but as soon as I presented it it was screwed up and thrown on the floor. We were told to obey a plan from Brussels. The field cannot be grazed or topped at the time Brussels allows as it is usually waterlogged at that time of year. The field is now swamped with rushes, we have lost the Grasshopper Warblers and Snipe and are losing the very rare Whorled Carraway which used to blossom there. I have seen no new species. Although we run the farm as a nature reserve with 1/2 acres fields the extra boundary regulations took 16% of our land out of production.

Also there are no grants available to help very small farms to diversify into non farming enterprises. All that are available require match funding that exceeds that available from cash flow. Banks are, apparently, not interested in small rural enterprises. 

I am sure that many farmers have similar stories and can give many other examples of damaging red tape.

  

Why is this idea important?

Much of the damage to wildlife results from big farms with big fields all doing the same thing at the same time. Small farms (less then 100 acres) have smaller fields, and have an economic need to do things differently from their neighbours.

Small farms do not get the commercial discounts that their larger neighbours get. They also suffer from having to pay minimum charges for many services required under European Waste Directive etc. Sometimes the minimum charge is larger then the entire profit on small enterprises. Householders get the same ammount of rubbish disposed of free.

Livestock disposal cost is much higher for small farms then for large farms. On one occasion I calculated that we paid more per kilogram to dispose of 2 still born lambs then a large commercial farm paid in fines and disposal costs after illegally disposing of nearly 200tons of carcasses.

Electronic Identification of sheep (EID) costs much more for a small flock then for a large one. Officially the cost is about 60p, but after the cost of the application tool is taken into account it costs about £2.00 a sheep for our flock. (We couldn't possibly buy the machine which reads the tags)

Transport licences: We have a rare breed flock and need to buy in one ram every 3 years to avoid in-breeding. The nearest flock of the same breed is over 100 miles away. (We provide a unique insurance against foot and mouth etc for this breed that only has about 500 sheep in the world) Without a licence we can only transport our sheep 40km. Getting the licence for transporting our own sheep would cost £150 and involve 2 days away from our small business. Paying anyone else to transport them would cost more. 

Farmers get their ORDERS from DEFRA, and sometimes (in our case) from the Welsh Assembly (WA). The division of responsibilities bewteen these two organisations is not clear. Sometimes the WA website just links straight through to DEFRA, sometimes neither seems to have relavant information.

We have to apply for Rural Payements Agency forms to the local WA Dept of Ag office. We have a very reliable local postal service, but vital Rural Payements Agency forms often go missing. After 10 years, and having completely lost the opportunity to get Single Farm Payments because of undelivered forms, I have only just discovered that the forms are posted to Wales from somewhere in England. What is worse, WA Dept Ag staff do not even know where the forms actually come from! THis makes affective chasing of lost forms almost impossible.

When we were turned down for Single Farm Payment we were told that there was a two stage appeal. We tried the first stage, but couldn't go onto the second stage because the charge was more then we had in the bank, and was about 25% of the payment we would have gained if the appeal was succesful.

Surprisingly, having failed to get SFP we were told we could still get Tyr Cynnal (Entry level environment scheme) We would have to stick to a management scheme. I wrote out a scheme that had succesfully supported summer Grasshopper Warblers and winter Snipe but as soon as I presented it it was screwed up and thrown on the floor. We were told to obey a plan from Brussels. The field cannot be grazed or topped at the time Brussels allows as it is usually waterlogged at that time of year. The field is now swamped with rushes, we have lost the Grasshopper Warblers and Snipe and are losing the very rare Whorled Carraway which used to blossom there. I have seen no new species. Although we run the farm as a nature reserve with 1/2 acres fields the extra boundary regulations took 16% of our land out of production.

Also there are no grants available to help very small farms to diversify into non farming enterprises. All that are available require match funding that exceeds that available from cash flow. Banks are, apparently, not interested in small rural enterprises. 

I am sure that many farmers have similar stories and can give many other examples of damaging red tape.

  

Magistrates to license pubs not councils

As the last government did nothing to help Pubs and there is no glimmer of this one doing anything could we please revert back to the Magistrates Courts for licence extensions. We use to be able to go to court and get a licence for the next day but since it was Blairised we now have to give 10 working days notice which means we loose even more business. I note that licenses have just been issued to some pouns shops to sell beer and wine for 1.00 a pint, thats going to be helpful to pubs and all the associated crime that goes with cheap alcohol
 

Why is this idea important?

As the last government did nothing to help Pubs and there is no glimmer of this one doing anything could we please revert back to the Magistrates Courts for licence extensions. We use to be able to go to court and get a licence for the next day but since it was Blairised we now have to give 10 working days notice which means we loose even more business. I note that licenses have just been issued to some pouns shops to sell beer and wine for 1.00 a pint, thats going to be helpful to pubs and all the associated crime that goes with cheap alcohol
 

Abolish chancel repair liability

Chancel repair liability is an ancient power that gives the Church of England the right to charge a resident for the upkeep of a church if their home is found to be on land that was formerly owned by the church.  Such charges may exceed the value of the land and home, and may also bankrupt the home owner.  I would like to see chancel repair liability abolished.

Why is this idea important?

Chancel repair liability is an ancient power that gives the Church of England the right to charge a resident for the upkeep of a church if their home is found to be on land that was formerly owned by the church.  Such charges may exceed the value of the land and home, and may also bankrupt the home owner.  I would like to see chancel repair liability abolished.

SIMPLIFY THE TAX SYSTEM

We have too many taxes. 

Abolish VAT and employees National Insurance and add them to Income Tax. 

Abolish employers National Insurance and add it to Corporation Tax. 

Abolish Stamp Duty and Inheritance Tax and make up the difference with either Income Tax or Corporation tax.

Rationalise the tax system into Income Tax, Corporation tax and Capital Gains Tax.. 

Why is this idea important?

We have too many taxes. 

Abolish VAT and employees National Insurance and add them to Income Tax. 

Abolish employers National Insurance and add it to Corporation Tax. 

Abolish Stamp Duty and Inheritance Tax and make up the difference with either Income Tax or Corporation tax.

Rationalise the tax system into Income Tax, Corporation tax and Capital Gains Tax.. 

Freedom for temporary trading, pop-up businesses and one-off events for profit.

It should be easier and simpler to allow people to trade on  a temporary basis, Please free them from the laborious paperwork and rregistration equirements which inhibit initiative.

This would enable people to  viably test their business ideas out and learn before taking the leap into self-employment

Encourage financial self-sufficiency and innovation.

Give an opportunity for those who are disabled or too ill to work full time to help themselves when they can.

Encourage the use of temporary shop premises between long-lets, preventing them from beign squatted or beign an empty eyesore on the High Street.

Why is this idea important?

It should be easier and simpler to allow people to trade on  a temporary basis, Please free them from the laborious paperwork and rregistration equirements which inhibit initiative.

This would enable people to  viably test their business ideas out and learn before taking the leap into self-employment

Encourage financial self-sufficiency and innovation.

Give an opportunity for those who are disabled or too ill to work full time to help themselves when they can.

Encourage the use of temporary shop premises between long-lets, preventing them from beign squatted or beign an empty eyesore on the High Street.

Reduce Council’s costs – Use English only

Stop spending money on translations, translators and their administrators; people should be able to understand English. Those that can't should be required to provide, at their cost, family members or friends to explain any documents etc. Those who have managed to get into this country without understanding English and  without family or friends should not be here claiming support.

Why is this idea important?

Stop spending money on translations, translators and their administrators; people should be able to understand English. Those that can't should be required to provide, at their cost, family members or friends to explain any documents etc. Those who have managed to get into this country without understanding English and  without family or friends should not be here claiming support.

A TAX SYSTEM FOR THE DIGITAL AGE… ‘The George Tax’

 

THE GEORGE TAX

Current taxation systems throughout the world were developed for a physical currency transaction, this means it is a tax system that can easily be avoided and is inherently corrupt in that the richest can avoid tax through highly paid Lawyers and Accountants finding loopholes in the system, and cash only business can avoid tax by not declaring transactions.

A digital age taxation system would allow the Government to collect tax electronically at a centralised point of transaction, and would also allow the government to deploy algorithms to calculate a 'Real Time' tax rate which could adjust dynamically to the expenditure requirements of government, rather than the government being forced to go cap in hand to the bond markets or raise taxation retrospectively on budget day.

IMPLEMENTING THE GEARGE TAX

The starting point for a digital age taxation system would be to abolish the entire UK taxation and cash transaction system and start from scratch.

Algorithms would need to be formulated (A.) to determine the value of all financial transactions carried out in the UK and between the UK and Overseas and (B.) Projected governmental expenditure for the year calculated in real time.

To collect THE GEORGE TAX,  centralised electronic transaction hubs would be built and developed throughout the UK and each of these would be connected in a network to each other and to a master hub connected to the banks where tax is collected as a percentage of each transaction passing through the hub.

THE GEORGE TAX is essentially a transaction tax. Whenever a financial transaction is carried out, a percentage of that transaction is taken as a tax, the tax percentage is calculated in 'Real Time' and would be variable by miniscule percentage movements using an algorithm calculating government spending requirements for the tax year against projected UK financial transactions for the tax year.

All financial transactions including share dealing, bank to bank transfers etc.. would have to pass through the hubs by law, with serious penalties for non compliance.

For small transactions, pre paid cash cards containing say £10 in value could be purchased 'TAX PAID' at shops and supermarkets etc.. these could then be used to pay for small purchases in store and at temporary outlets and outdoor events etc. where terminal connections to the centralised transaction hubs cant be made.

The cards could possibly be top up cards or disposable depending on security issues, but this would negate the need for cash in today’s society, it would also mean that transactions could be carried out without a need for a connection to the main hubs or to a power source as payment tills could be battery or solar powered and would not need a phone line, all transactions taken through these cards would then be uploaded at a later date through a connected terminal to the main transaction hubs.

The benefits of THE GEORGE TAX, are that it is a simple one tax system, it can be collected at the time of transaction, it will reduce business costs significantly, would increase tax collection to near 100%, would be 100% fair, would reduce government expenditure significantly, and would reduce the overall tax burden on the individual significantly, cutting red tape and tax loop holes to pretty much zero.

THE GEORGE TAX is a progressive digital age tax system, that is simple and effective, it just needs a progressive and visionary government to implement it in its simplest form.

The basic rule is to keep it very simple, tax the transaction at a single real time rate, a one tax system.

I can envisage an extremely low tax rate of a percentage of 1% using THE GEORGE TAX , every single financial transaction in the UK and between the UK and Overseas would be taxed at the time of transaction, this amounts to a staggeringly huge sum of money available to be taxed against.

Because the tax is a transaction tax, both sides of the transaction are taxed, therefore a transaction of £1.00 is actually worth £2.00 for taxable purposes.

The benefits to society and the UK economy would be immeasurable!

THE GEORGE TAX – Should be this governments legacy to this great nation, i give my idea for FREE, in the hope that somebody with the vision of progress will take it forward.

Why call it the  THE GEORGE TAX?

Well its my last name, its my idea, so why not!  😉

Why is this idea important?

 

THE GEORGE TAX

Current taxation systems throughout the world were developed for a physical currency transaction, this means it is a tax system that can easily be avoided and is inherently corrupt in that the richest can avoid tax through highly paid Lawyers and Accountants finding loopholes in the system, and cash only business can avoid tax by not declaring transactions.

A digital age taxation system would allow the Government to collect tax electronically at a centralised point of transaction, and would also allow the government to deploy algorithms to calculate a 'Real Time' tax rate which could adjust dynamically to the expenditure requirements of government, rather than the government being forced to go cap in hand to the bond markets or raise taxation retrospectively on budget day.

IMPLEMENTING THE GEARGE TAX

The starting point for a digital age taxation system would be to abolish the entire UK taxation and cash transaction system and start from scratch.

Algorithms would need to be formulated (A.) to determine the value of all financial transactions carried out in the UK and between the UK and Overseas and (B.) Projected governmental expenditure for the year calculated in real time.

To collect THE GEORGE TAX,  centralised electronic transaction hubs would be built and developed throughout the UK and each of these would be connected in a network to each other and to a master hub connected to the banks where tax is collected as a percentage of each transaction passing through the hub.

THE GEORGE TAX is essentially a transaction tax. Whenever a financial transaction is carried out, a percentage of that transaction is taken as a tax, the tax percentage is calculated in 'Real Time' and would be variable by miniscule percentage movements using an algorithm calculating government spending requirements for the tax year against projected UK financial transactions for the tax year.

All financial transactions including share dealing, bank to bank transfers etc.. would have to pass through the hubs by law, with serious penalties for non compliance.

For small transactions, pre paid cash cards containing say £10 in value could be purchased 'TAX PAID' at shops and supermarkets etc.. these could then be used to pay for small purchases in store and at temporary outlets and outdoor events etc. where terminal connections to the centralised transaction hubs cant be made.

The cards could possibly be top up cards or disposable depending on security issues, but this would negate the need for cash in today’s society, it would also mean that transactions could be carried out without a need for a connection to the main hubs or to a power source as payment tills could be battery or solar powered and would not need a phone line, all transactions taken through these cards would then be uploaded at a later date through a connected terminal to the main transaction hubs.

The benefits of THE GEORGE TAX, are that it is a simple one tax system, it can be collected at the time of transaction, it will reduce business costs significantly, would increase tax collection to near 100%, would be 100% fair, would reduce government expenditure significantly, and would reduce the overall tax burden on the individual significantly, cutting red tape and tax loop holes to pretty much zero.

THE GEORGE TAX is a progressive digital age tax system, that is simple and effective, it just needs a progressive and visionary government to implement it in its simplest form.

The basic rule is to keep it very simple, tax the transaction at a single real time rate, a one tax system.

I can envisage an extremely low tax rate of a percentage of 1% using THE GEORGE TAX , every single financial transaction in the UK and between the UK and Overseas would be taxed at the time of transaction, this amounts to a staggeringly huge sum of money available to be taxed against.

Because the tax is a transaction tax, both sides of the transaction are taxed, therefore a transaction of £1.00 is actually worth £2.00 for taxable purposes.

The benefits to society and the UK economy would be immeasurable!

THE GEORGE TAX – Should be this governments legacy to this great nation, i give my idea for FREE, in the hope that somebody with the vision of progress will take it forward.

Why call it the  THE GEORGE TAX?

Well its my last name, its my idea, so why not!  😉

Abolish NHS Pharmaceutical Services Regulations 2005 preventing GP’s from dispensing NHS drugs to patients living within 1.6 km of the Surgery

Abolish the amended NHS Pharmaceutical Services Regulations 2005 that prevent GP’s from dispensing NHS drugs to patients living within 1.6 km of the Surgery dispensary if a new Chemist opens in the same village.

Why is this idea important?

Abolish the amended NHS Pharmaceutical Services Regulations 2005 that prevent GP’s from dispensing NHS drugs to patients living within 1.6 km of the Surgery dispensary if a new Chemist opens in the same village.

Carer’s Allowance

It is very questionable that Carer's Allowance is withdrawn from carers when they receive their pension.

To then claim the right to prosecute these people if they fail to inform the department of any change to their life that would affect the money that they do not receive, were they were receiving it, is a total injustice and would have been a step too far for Big Brother.

Why is this idea important?

It is very questionable that Carer's Allowance is withdrawn from carers when they receive their pension.

To then claim the right to prosecute these people if they fail to inform the department of any change to their life that would affect the money that they do not receive, were they were receiving it, is a total injustice and would have been a step too far for Big Brother.

Amend minimum wage legislation to allow internships

I must confess I'm not sure whether the minimum wage legislation as a basic principle is a good thing or a  bad thing. I can see the arguments against, that it distorts the market, and the arguments for, that it protects exploitation of those at the lower end of the income scale. I'll let those who understand more about economics than I do decide whether the minimum wage legislation as a whole should stay or go.

However, if we are going to keep this law, then we need to make an exception for internships. Currently, it is illegal for employers to offer unpaid internships. This is a great shame. Internships can be a great stepping-stone for recent graduates, who can find it very hard to find work if they have no experience. They often lead to permanent jobs in the same organisation, and even if they don't, then the experience that the interns can put on their CVs can be a great help in finding jobs elsewhere. And of course the employer benefits from having an extra pair of hands at no cost. It's a classic win-win situation.

Maybe in an ideal world all internships would be paid at the minimum wage, but in real life many employers simply can't afford to pay, and so internships that would otherwise be available just don't exist.

Oh, and by the way, how come MPs can still advertise for unpaid interns for their offices? Is this another law from which MPs have a special exemption?

Why is this idea important?

I must confess I'm not sure whether the minimum wage legislation as a basic principle is a good thing or a  bad thing. I can see the arguments against, that it distorts the market, and the arguments for, that it protects exploitation of those at the lower end of the income scale. I'll let those who understand more about economics than I do decide whether the minimum wage legislation as a whole should stay or go.

However, if we are going to keep this law, then we need to make an exception for internships. Currently, it is illegal for employers to offer unpaid internships. This is a great shame. Internships can be a great stepping-stone for recent graduates, who can find it very hard to find work if they have no experience. They often lead to permanent jobs in the same organisation, and even if they don't, then the experience that the interns can put on their CVs can be a great help in finding jobs elsewhere. And of course the employer benefits from having an extra pair of hands at no cost. It's a classic win-win situation.

Maybe in an ideal world all internships would be paid at the minimum wage, but in real life many employers simply can't afford to pay, and so internships that would otherwise be available just don't exist.

Oh, and by the way, how come MPs can still advertise for unpaid interns for their offices? Is this another law from which MPs have a special exemption?

Home Sharing for Senior Citizens

Allow resident home-owners to share their properties without the requirement to turn their homes into Houses in Multiple Occupation.

As a single woman I have shared my large, six-bedroom, victorian house for over 25 years.

Changes in the Housing Act mean that my property is now classed as a H.M.O. if I wish to share with more than two other people.

Also make it easier for people to turn their homes into flats.  This would allow the Senior Citizen to live on the ground floor, creating a flat or flats above, providing a solution and income for the ageing and accommodation for the young.

 

 

Why is this idea important?

Allow resident home-owners to share their properties without the requirement to turn their homes into Houses in Multiple Occupation.

As a single woman I have shared my large, six-bedroom, victorian house for over 25 years.

Changes in the Housing Act mean that my property is now classed as a H.M.O. if I wish to share with more than two other people.

Also make it easier for people to turn their homes into flats.  This would allow the Senior Citizen to live on the ground floor, creating a flat or flats above, providing a solution and income for the ageing and accommodation for the young.

 

 

Reform the Party Wall Act to streamline building projects and protect consumers from huge bills

Reform the Party Wall Act.  It is damaging to building and puts consumers into a position where they can end up paying thousands of pounds in bills over which they have no control.   My idea is this:  The Party Wall Act is simply not necessary, and could be replaced by a simple insurance scheme which could be invoked if your building work damages your neighbour's property. If it was felt this was insufficient, there could be a simplifed Party Wall notification scheme where neighbours were given 14 days to comment (not delay) a building scheme (opt in, not opt out).  Where building work already falls under permitted development, party wall notices could be scrapped altogether as the quality of these works is already subject to insp)ection by Building Control (who of course like the Party Wall Act because it covers their backs!

Why is this idea important?

Reform the Party Wall Act.  It is damaging to building and puts consumers into a position where they can end up paying thousands of pounds in bills over which they have no control.   My idea is this:  The Party Wall Act is simply not necessary, and could be replaced by a simple insurance scheme which could be invoked if your building work damages your neighbour's property. If it was felt this was insufficient, there could be a simplifed Party Wall notification scheme where neighbours were given 14 days to comment (not delay) a building scheme (opt in, not opt out).  Where building work already falls under permitted development, party wall notices could be scrapped altogether as the quality of these works is already subject to insp)ection by Building Control (who of course like the Party Wall Act because it covers their backs!

Abolish the need to submit an annual return to companies house

Abolish the need to submit an annual return to companies house for small businesses. Every year it costs me £15 just to log on to a web site, tick a box and click send. £15 may not sound like much but there are penalties for failing to submit the return and it can lead to losing your limited company.

Why not make it mandatory to submit a return only if something changes? There must be millions of small limited companies in which nothing changes from year to year, yet we have to jump through this stupid revenue-raising hoop.

Why is this idea important?

Abolish the need to submit an annual return to companies house for small businesses. Every year it costs me £15 just to log on to a web site, tick a box and click send. £15 may not sound like much but there are penalties for failing to submit the return and it can lead to losing your limited company.

Why not make it mandatory to submit a return only if something changes? There must be millions of small limited companies in which nothing changes from year to year, yet we have to jump through this stupid revenue-raising hoop.

make seeking planning permission more efficient

Allow people who apply for planning permission to send in just one form rather than an original plus three copies as is currently required by Wealden District Council.

Why is this idea important?

Allow people who apply for planning permission to send in just one form rather than an original plus three copies as is currently required by Wealden District Council.

Abolish the Cattle Passport Scheme and The British Cattle Movement Service

Cattle Passports were first introduced in 1996 as part of the Government’s strategy to eradicate BSE. Since 1996 the incidence of BSE has declined significantly – occurrences of BSE in the UK are now rare. I would suggest that the old movements recording system (as used pre 1996) would be more than adequate given the present situation.

The Cattle Passports are something of a nightmare for farmers – for instance if a passport is lost an animal is effectively valueless.

Why is this idea important?

Cattle Passports were first introduced in 1996 as part of the Government’s strategy to eradicate BSE. Since 1996 the incidence of BSE has declined significantly – occurrences of BSE in the UK are now rare. I would suggest that the old movements recording system (as used pre 1996) would be more than adequate given the present situation.

The Cattle Passports are something of a nightmare for farmers – for instance if a passport is lost an animal is effectively valueless.

Abolish CRB checks

Remove the law that says Voluntary organisations must complete Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks before allowing an individual to participate. If removing CRB checks is considered too politically dangerous (red-tops would have a regular field day), make the legislation optional. The charity involved could then perform a 'local' assessment of need and decide whether CRB checks are appropriate. All the above also applies to Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) and Vetting and Barring Scheme (VSB). 

Why is this idea important?

Remove the law that says Voluntary organisations must complete Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks before allowing an individual to participate. If removing CRB checks is considered too politically dangerous (red-tops would have a regular field day), make the legislation optional. The charity involved could then perform a 'local' assessment of need and decide whether CRB checks are appropriate. All the above also applies to Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) and Vetting and Barring Scheme (VSB).