Categorise Smoking in pubs

The smoking ban should be repealed and the right to smoke or not in a pub should be at the landlord/ladies' discretion.

Why not introduce categories for pubs, for example

Cat. A , No smoking allowed on the premises.

Cat. B, Generally no smoking inside but a room is provided for smokers.

Cat. C, Smoking pub , but a no-smoking room is provided.

Cat. D. Smoking allowed throughout the pub.

Of course smoking should still be permitted in external areas.

Why is this idea important?

The smoking ban should be repealed and the right to smoke or not in a pub should be at the landlord/ladies' discretion.

Why not introduce categories for pubs, for example

Cat. A , No smoking allowed on the premises.

Cat. B, Generally no smoking inside but a room is provided for smokers.

Cat. C, Smoking pub , but a no-smoking room is provided.

Cat. D. Smoking allowed throughout the pub.

Of course smoking should still be permitted in external areas.

compulsory abolition of F.M.radio and instating of a digital service.

 We should all be grateful for scientific and technical progress , otherwise we should still be using crystal sets and winding up horned gramaphones. However the abolition of the FM radio services is a step too far. Purely on a personal level, this household owns 3 vehicles with analogue radios.On top of that there are some 29  radios in this house, from mini personal/ headphone jobs , stereo tuners , radio /cassette/C.D players/ TVs , , a radio telephone, 2 Freeplay  and 4 other wind ups to a deliciously expensive Bose  number and a several of small transistor radios of various types. If the Government  makes compulsory the dumping of these radios, or even the seemingly worthy recycling for the 3rd World, the financial outlay for us here will be enormous.We have 1 digital radio only and it is rarely used.

Having reserched this, it seems that digital radios consume more electricity / battery power than standard ones, although there are energy saving models available. Most people , post 2015, will to SOME  extent be sourcing cheap radios , probably made in China or the Far East .Can the economy of these models be guaranteed? I suspect that electricity/ battery  consumption will rise.Not environmentally friendly. Why encourage the use of economy light bulbs only to have the effect  counteracted by  electricity guzzling radios?There is also the problem of poor reception in many areas.

The Conservative Party , now Government , is in favour of personal choice  for the individual and encouragement of  each and every one of us , to be self sufficient   and non State reliant. It also  wishes to leave behind the "nanny  state" and interference  of Socialism that we have to tolerate every few years  when Labour are in power. DO NOT now decide that "Nanny knows best " and that  each and every one of us be COMPELLED to dump millions of functioning radios for no particular reason, other than a commercial one.

Why is this idea important?

 We should all be grateful for scientific and technical progress , otherwise we should still be using crystal sets and winding up horned gramaphones. However the abolition of the FM radio services is a step too far. Purely on a personal level, this household owns 3 vehicles with analogue radios.On top of that there are some 29  radios in this house, from mini personal/ headphone jobs , stereo tuners , radio /cassette/C.D players/ TVs , , a radio telephone, 2 Freeplay  and 4 other wind ups to a deliciously expensive Bose  number and a several of small transistor radios of various types. If the Government  makes compulsory the dumping of these radios, or even the seemingly worthy recycling for the 3rd World, the financial outlay for us here will be enormous.We have 1 digital radio only and it is rarely used.

Having reserched this, it seems that digital radios consume more electricity / battery power than standard ones, although there are energy saving models available. Most people , post 2015, will to SOME  extent be sourcing cheap radios , probably made in China or the Far East .Can the economy of these models be guaranteed? I suspect that electricity/ battery  consumption will rise.Not environmentally friendly. Why encourage the use of economy light bulbs only to have the effect  counteracted by  electricity guzzling radios?There is also the problem of poor reception in many areas.

The Conservative Party , now Government , is in favour of personal choice  for the individual and encouragement of  each and every one of us , to be self sufficient   and non State reliant. It also  wishes to leave behind the "nanny  state" and interference  of Socialism that we have to tolerate every few years  when Labour are in power. DO NOT now decide that "Nanny knows best " and that  each and every one of us be COMPELLED to dump millions of functioning radios for no particular reason, other than a commercial one.

Repeal The Digital Act And Stop Digital Discrimination Concerning Radio

Why on earth does Edd Vaizy want to continue with these stupid plans?  He has not thought this through.  People generally have more than one radio in the house.  I think I must have a least 10 radios if not more.  We live in a digital black spot and have been told that we cannot and will not be able to get DAB where we live as we live more than 25 miles from the transmitter.  The BBC, including BBC Radio Cambridgeshire keeps advertising the fact that they are broadcasting on DAB but we still cannot get this station.  I bought a DAB second hand radio and couldn't get any DAB stations on it at all.  I thought thank goodness I didn't waste money on a new one!  A friend of mine near where I live bought a new DAB radio but got rid of it because she got so fed up not being able to get any stations on it.  What about the cost to the environment?  We are told to reduce waste, what about all the FM radios that will end up in landfill sites?  Most FM portable radios cannot be converted. Why give new stations FM radio licences for 10 years if the FM signals will be stopped before then?

I am now (not through my own choice) on part-time wages and cannot afford to buy a new DAB.  It is bad going to be bad enough being done out of TV in 2011 without being done out of a radio as well!   (I cannot afford freeview because of the cost of having to buy a digibox and having a high gain aerial put up on the roof in order to get it.).  This is just one step too far.  Pensioners and other people on low incomes will not be able to afford DAB.  What is the point of buying a DAB if you cannot get anything on it in any case. People should revolt against this.  Why would anybody want to have such an inferior service as DAB? 

DAB is suppose to bring choice but it is does not.   Concerning local radio, why is only one local BBC and only one local ILR (Independent Local Radio) station allowed to broadcast per multiplex?  Surely this means that where you have more than one ILR  broadcasting some of them will have to close down thus putting people out of work.  At the moment I can get 4 BBC local radio stations on FM from where I live (BBC Radio Cambridgeshire, BBC Radio Suffolk, BBC Radio Norfolk, BBC Radio Lincolnshire) yet I cannot and will not be able to get any of these on DAB.  The whole thing is just madness.

This law should be stopped immediately.

 

Why is this idea important?

Why on earth does Edd Vaizy want to continue with these stupid plans?  He has not thought this through.  People generally have more than one radio in the house.  I think I must have a least 10 radios if not more.  We live in a digital black spot and have been told that we cannot and will not be able to get DAB where we live as we live more than 25 miles from the transmitter.  The BBC, including BBC Radio Cambridgeshire keeps advertising the fact that they are broadcasting on DAB but we still cannot get this station.  I bought a DAB second hand radio and couldn't get any DAB stations on it at all.  I thought thank goodness I didn't waste money on a new one!  A friend of mine near where I live bought a new DAB radio but got rid of it because she got so fed up not being able to get any stations on it.  What about the cost to the environment?  We are told to reduce waste, what about all the FM radios that will end up in landfill sites?  Most FM portable radios cannot be converted. Why give new stations FM radio licences for 10 years if the FM signals will be stopped before then?

I am now (not through my own choice) on part-time wages and cannot afford to buy a new DAB.  It is bad going to be bad enough being done out of TV in 2011 without being done out of a radio as well!   (I cannot afford freeview because of the cost of having to buy a digibox and having a high gain aerial put up on the roof in order to get it.).  This is just one step too far.  Pensioners and other people on low incomes will not be able to afford DAB.  What is the point of buying a DAB if you cannot get anything on it in any case. People should revolt against this.  Why would anybody want to have such an inferior service as DAB? 

DAB is suppose to bring choice but it is does not.   Concerning local radio, why is only one local BBC and only one local ILR (Independent Local Radio) station allowed to broadcast per multiplex?  Surely this means that where you have more than one ILR  broadcasting some of them will have to close down thus putting people out of work.  At the moment I can get 4 BBC local radio stations on FM from where I live (BBC Radio Cambridgeshire, BBC Radio Suffolk, BBC Radio Norfolk, BBC Radio Lincolnshire) yet I cannot and will not be able to get any of these on DAB.  The whole thing is just madness.

This law should be stopped immediately.

 

Repeal Crime and Disorder Act 1998 s 34 and amend CYPA 1963, s 16 (criminal responsibility)

My suggestion re raising age of criminal responsibility was closed because not suggesting repeal (though hard to reconcile this with other threads that continue).

CDA 1998 s 34 relates to the very unwise removal of doli incapax (presumption child under 14 does not understand that the alleged act was wrong).

CYPA 1963 raised age of criminal responsibilty to 10. It now needs to be raised further to a) bring us in line with most of Europe, b) reflect current understanding of child development c) be more aligned with other minimum ages in England/Wales law. 

Why is this idea important?

My suggestion re raising age of criminal responsibility was closed because not suggesting repeal (though hard to reconcile this with other threads that continue).

CDA 1998 s 34 relates to the very unwise removal of doli incapax (presumption child under 14 does not understand that the alleged act was wrong).

CYPA 1963 raised age of criminal responsibilty to 10. It now needs to be raised further to a) bring us in line with most of Europe, b) reflect current understanding of child development c) be more aligned with other minimum ages in England/Wales law. 

Repeal the Climate Change Act of 2008.

This foolish piece of legislation, passed by MPs who did not understand how corrupt was the information on which it was based, would severely damage the economy of the UK while having no impact on climate or climate change.

Why is this idea important?

This foolish piece of legislation, passed by MPs who did not understand how corrupt was the information on which it was based, would severely damage the economy of the UK while having no impact on climate or climate change.

plans to abolish FM radio.

this is all being handles badly.

Why is this being promoted? reasons so far given are nonsense.

how much will it cost us all ? 30 million car radios, and goodness knows how many in peoples homes.DAB rados are expensive compared to FM radios. What happens to my expensive hi fi tuner.

The 'industry ' is said to be ready for 2015. oh really, want to bet the radios will be made in China. Its just a gravy train for retailers.

What are vacant FM bands to be used for?

It would be nice if the minister would come clean as to why this idea even got considered. I detect Sir Humphrey Appleby in there somewhere.

Why is this idea important?

this is all being handles badly.

Why is this being promoted? reasons so far given are nonsense.

how much will it cost us all ? 30 million car radios, and goodness knows how many in peoples homes.DAB rados are expensive compared to FM radios. What happens to my expensive hi fi tuner.

The 'industry ' is said to be ready for 2015. oh really, want to bet the radios will be made in China. Its just a gravy train for retailers.

What are vacant FM bands to be used for?

It would be nice if the minister would come clean as to why this idea even got considered. I detect Sir Humphrey Appleby in there somewhere.

repeal digital economy act

It is all very well to say it is a wonderful opportunity for the radio manufacturers….with millions of homes suddenly having to buy one two or three new radios to replace existing FM radios that work well, of course it is. But why? Reception of digital is very mixed. I don't want to replace all my radios, its too expensive. If the system ain't broke. why mend it???

Why is this idea important?

It is all very well to say it is a wonderful opportunity for the radio manufacturers….with millions of homes suddenly having to buy one two or three new radios to replace existing FM radios that work well, of course it is. But why? Reception of digital is very mixed. I don't want to replace all my radios, its too expensive. If the system ain't broke. why mend it???

REVIEW THE SMOKING BAN

I am a smoker, though I accept that smoking is not acceptable to many people, and that pubs, offices etc are now more pleasant without smoke.

 

However, surely society can recognise that many people do smoke, and that it is quite easy to provide comfortable smoking facilities in office blocks, hospitals and many pubs without forcing smokers to hang around outside pub and office block doorways, and the gates of schools and hospitals.

Why is this idea important?

I am a smoker, though I accept that smoking is not acceptable to many people, and that pubs, offices etc are now more pleasant without smoke.

 

However, surely society can recognise that many people do smoke, and that it is quite easy to provide comfortable smoking facilities in office blocks, hospitals and many pubs without forcing smokers to hang around outside pub and office block doorways, and the gates of schools and hospitals.

AMEND SMOKING LAWS FOR A MINORITY OF PUBS

I write this as a non-smoker.

 

The nanny-state rule about no smoking in pubs has its merits.  But it does take away the rights of pub owners who smoke, pub staff who smoke and, of course, members of the public who smoke and wish to have a quiet drink.  As a result hundreds of pubs have closed down.

 

What on earth would be wrong with a minority of pubs – pubs where the owners, staff and customers all want to smoke – being allowed to smoke inside the pub premises.  Smoking pubs could be capped at (say) 5% of the total numbers of pubs.  Customers/staff who don’t want to drink/work in a smoky atmosphere could go to the vast majority of pubs where smoking is not permitted. 

 

I am sick of the sight of smokers standing outside pubs having a quiet smoke in the rain – kind of like a persecuted minority.

Why is this idea important?

I write this as a non-smoker.

 

The nanny-state rule about no smoking in pubs has its merits.  But it does take away the rights of pub owners who smoke, pub staff who smoke and, of course, members of the public who smoke and wish to have a quiet drink.  As a result hundreds of pubs have closed down.

 

What on earth would be wrong with a minority of pubs – pubs where the owners, staff and customers all want to smoke – being allowed to smoke inside the pub premises.  Smoking pubs could be capped at (say) 5% of the total numbers of pubs.  Customers/staff who don’t want to drink/work in a smoky atmosphere could go to the vast majority of pubs where smoking is not permitted. 

 

I am sick of the sight of smokers standing outside pubs having a quiet smoke in the rain – kind of like a persecuted minority.

Repeal the Acts of Union 1707

By repealing the Ats of Union, Scotland can be given independence and can be asked to repay the Darien loan [which was why they joined England – i.e. Scotland was bankrupted by the Darien colony and England bailed them out]. In giving Scotland its independence, it should also be given its share of the current National debt / bail out costs of the Royal Bank of Scotland [another catastrophic Scottish failure]

Why is this idea important?

By repealing the Ats of Union, Scotland can be given independence and can be asked to repay the Darien loan [which was why they joined England – i.e. Scotland was bankrupted by the Darien colony and England bailed them out]. In giving Scotland its independence, it should also be given its share of the current National debt / bail out costs of the Royal Bank of Scotland [another catastrophic Scottish failure]

review the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 – raves clause

under "Powers in relation to raves" anytime there is

(a) two or more persons are making preparations for the holding there of a gathering to which this section applies,

(b) ten or more persons are waiting for such a gathering to begin there, or

(c) ten or more persons are attending such a gathering which is in progress,

Now curiously enough a gathering is defined by having " “music” includes sounds wholly or predominantly characterised by the emission of a succession of repetitive beats."

The police have the power to move you on under these cirumstances!

Why is this idea important?

under "Powers in relation to raves" anytime there is

(a) two or more persons are making preparations for the holding there of a gathering to which this section applies,

(b) ten or more persons are waiting for such a gathering to begin there, or

(c) ten or more persons are attending such a gathering which is in progress,

Now curiously enough a gathering is defined by having " “music” includes sounds wholly or predominantly characterised by the emission of a succession of repetitive beats."

The police have the power to move you on under these cirumstances!

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.

 

Repeal of the Hunting Act 2004

The above law is a bad law, unenforceable, wasting police time, an infringement of civil liberties and above all not making any difference to animal welfare.  Foxes are shot and wounded and numbers are increasing.  The newspapers have an incident nearly every day now of foxes savaging babies and children.  They are not cuddly pets they are vermin and those who understand and run the countryside should be left to control them in time honoured fashion in just the same way as rats and rabbits.

Why is this idea important?

The above law is a bad law, unenforceable, wasting police time, an infringement of civil liberties and above all not making any difference to animal welfare.  Foxes are shot and wounded and numbers are increasing.  The newspapers have an incident nearly every day now of foxes savaging babies and children.  They are not cuddly pets they are vermin and those who understand and run the countryside should be left to control them in time honoured fashion in just the same way as rats and rabbits.

Lets lift the smoking ban it’s killing England

PUBS CLOSING THE TRADE IS DYING. WE SHOULD HAVE A CHOICE US THE BRITISH PEOPLE NOT TO BE DICTATED TO AND TOLD WHAT WE CAN AND NOT DO FREEDOM OF CHOICE PLEASE. A FAG AND A PINT NOT STANDING IN THE COLD

Why is this idea important?

PUBS CLOSING THE TRADE IS DYING. WE SHOULD HAVE A CHOICE US THE BRITISH PEOPLE NOT TO BE DICTATED TO AND TOLD WHAT WE CAN AND NOT DO FREEDOM OF CHOICE PLEASE. A FAG AND A PINT NOT STANDING IN THE COLD

Legalise Psilocybin Mushrooms

Section 21 of the Drugs Act 2005 outlaws fungi containing psilocin or an ester of psilocin (which would include psilocybin). This law was rushed without enough debate in the 'wash-up' period of 2005. This law should be repealed due to a complete lack of evidence and misunderstanding of the effects of psilocin and psilocybin.

Why is this idea important?

Section 21 of the Drugs Act 2005 outlaws fungi containing psilocin or an ester of psilocin (which would include psilocybin). This law was rushed without enough debate in the 'wash-up' period of 2005. This law should be repealed due to a complete lack of evidence and misunderstanding of the effects of psilocin and psilocybin.

Repeal the Digital Economy Act (ending of FM and medium wave radio )

The Digital Economy Act (ending of FM and medium wave radio ) is ill thought out and typical of the Big Brother State of New Labour who sought to control every aspect of the UK citizens life. The switch to digital broadcasting is not necessary, the current frequency band allocations are well mapped and do not cause mutual interference within the UK.

Why is this idea important?

The Digital Economy Act (ending of FM and medium wave radio ) is ill thought out and typical of the Big Brother State of New Labour who sought to control every aspect of the UK citizens life. The switch to digital broadcasting is not necessary, the current frequency band allocations are well mapped and do not cause mutual interference within the UK.

the dangerous dogs act 19991 should be abolished

The above act outlaws 4 dog breeds  chosen arbitrarily. Breeds of dogs are not dangerous, individual dogs are aggressive of any breed dependent on their upbringing. Particularly pit bull types are persecuted for the way they look and often destroyed having done absolutely nothing wrong. Staffordshire Bull Terriers are also dragged into this ignorant and prejudicial law since they were used in the breeding of the pit bull. 

We have The Dogs Act 1887 which legislates against dogs who actually aggress – we do not need a knee jerk reactionary law that wastes huge amounts of public money and allows peoples' innocent pets to be taken from them and destroyed. The Dangerous Dog's Act is ill informed, hugely unfair and costly.

Why is this idea important?

The above act outlaws 4 dog breeds  chosen arbitrarily. Breeds of dogs are not dangerous, individual dogs are aggressive of any breed dependent on their upbringing. Particularly pit bull types are persecuted for the way they look and often destroyed having done absolutely nothing wrong. Staffordshire Bull Terriers are also dragged into this ignorant and prejudicial law since they were used in the breeding of the pit bull. 

We have The Dogs Act 1887 which legislates against dogs who actually aggress – we do not need a knee jerk reactionary law that wastes huge amounts of public money and allows peoples' innocent pets to be taken from them and destroyed. The Dangerous Dog's Act is ill informed, hugely unfair and costly.

A repeal of the hunting Act

The hunting Act should be repeled as it has proved to be unworkable, illiberel and a waste of Police time. It has given animal rights activists credence with the police as they aasume the position of monitors thinking that they are an extension of the Law, when they have publicly ststed that if tghere is a repeal they will revert to "sabbing" full time.

Let us hope that if and when the time comes for repeal, that this Government will not waste the hours on it that the former administration did and also take heed of the reports submitted on hunting especially that of Lord Burns.

Why is this idea important?

The hunting Act should be repeled as it has proved to be unworkable, illiberel and a waste of Police time. It has given animal rights activists credence with the police as they aasume the position of monitors thinking that they are an extension of the Law, when they have publicly ststed that if tghere is a repeal they will revert to "sabbing" full time.

Let us hope that if and when the time comes for repeal, that this Government will not waste the hours on it that the former administration did and also take heed of the reports submitted on hunting especially that of Lord Burns.

repeal section 12 of Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829

"2.Offices witheld from Roman Catholics.

Provided also, that nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed to extend to enable any person or persons professing the Roman Catholic religion to hold or exercise the office of guardians and justices of the United Kingdom, or of regent of the United Kingdom, under whatever name, style, or title such office may be constituted; nor to enable any person, otherwise than as he is now by law enabled, to hold or enjoy the office of lord high chancellor, lord keeper or lord commissioner of the great seal of Great Britain . . . ; or his Majestys high commissioner to the general assembly of the Church of Scotland."

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=Act+(UK+Public+General)&ActiveTextDocId=1030253

Why is this idea important?

"2.Offices witheld from Roman Catholics.

Provided also, that nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed to extend to enable any person or persons professing the Roman Catholic religion to hold or exercise the office of guardians and justices of the United Kingdom, or of regent of the United Kingdom, under whatever name, style, or title such office may be constituted; nor to enable any person, otherwise than as he is now by law enabled, to hold or enjoy the office of lord high chancellor, lord keeper or lord commissioner of the great seal of Great Britain . . . ; or his Majestys high commissioner to the general assembly of the Church of Scotland."

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=Act+(UK+Public+General)&ActiveTextDocId=1030253

repeal all Church Measures

There appear to be around 50 Church Measures still on the Statute Law database.  Whilst these rules may well be important to those who are part of the Church of England they have no place in the law of the land.

This could be done as part of disestablishing the Church of England would reduce bureaucracy in the British legal system.

Why is this idea important?

There appear to be around 50 Church Measures still on the Statute Law database.  Whilst these rules may well be important to those who are part of the Church of England they have no place in the law of the land.

This could be done as part of disestablishing the Church of England would reduce bureaucracy in the British legal system.

Repeal Of The Foxhunting Ban

Repeal this ban that is necessary for the control of foxes throughout England ,Scotland and Wales.Not only is it necessary to bring back foxhunting but also to restore it back to an integral part of our heritage.

Restoring this will bring back a wrongly banned sport which was only banned because of the class inferiority that labour felt it had and had nothing to do with animal welfare.

Why is this idea important?

Repeal this ban that is necessary for the control of foxes throughout England ,Scotland and Wales.Not only is it necessary to bring back foxhunting but also to restore it back to an integral part of our heritage.

Restoring this will bring back a wrongly banned sport which was only banned because of the class inferiority that labour felt it had and had nothing to do with animal welfare.