Exempt employers with less than 10 employees from all labour laws

Exempt employers who employ less than 10 employees from all labour laws including laws relating to contracts of employment, job security, equality, wages, hours, collective labour laws, maternity pay, paternity pay, statutory sick pay, etc.

Why is this idea important?

Exempt employers who employ less than 10 employees from all labour laws including laws relating to contracts of employment, job security, equality, wages, hours, collective labour laws, maternity pay, paternity pay, statutory sick pay, etc.

Stop theTraining Wage Bill Deplorable attack ?

Training Wage Bill 2010-11
Most of this article will be speculation because the Bill is a Private Members Bill so we cannot get the contents of the Bill.

The National Minimum Wage doesn’t appear to be disappearing any time soon. The official term would be to be repealed, however, I am stating it will become “dissolved” as such Bill is aiming for legislation to bypass (not remove or replace) the National Minimum Wage what appears to be beyond any Government scheme.

A Bill to make provision that persons receiving a training wage are exempt from legislation relating to the minimum wage; and for connected purposes.

The above is a description for the Bill. We can only assume this means apprentices etc. and those deemed to be “training” (outside of Government unemployment/training/employment courses) to be able to receive below the National Minimum Wage.

Why is this idea important?

Training Wage Bill 2010-11
Most of this article will be speculation because the Bill is a Private Members Bill so we cannot get the contents of the Bill.

The National Minimum Wage doesn’t appear to be disappearing any time soon. The official term would be to be repealed, however, I am stating it will become “dissolved” as such Bill is aiming for legislation to bypass (not remove or replace) the National Minimum Wage what appears to be beyond any Government scheme.

A Bill to make provision that persons receiving a training wage are exempt from legislation relating to the minimum wage; and for connected purposes.

The above is a description for the Bill. We can only assume this means apprentices etc. and those deemed to be “training” (outside of Government unemployment/training/employment courses) to be able to receive below the National Minimum Wage.

Repeal the National Minimum Wage and replace with a “Top-Up Benefits System.”

The National Minimum Wage as it is at the moment is detrimental to businesses, employees and the economy. Anyone who wishes to employ is currently is forced to pay at least the minimum wage even if they deem the employee to be worth less than this amount. This leads to the predicament of employees being unable to afford or be willing to employ which, when the economy is suffering as it is at present, increases unemployment and subsequently Government expenditure through benefits such as job seekers allowance.

Instead employees should be free to pay whatever wage they deem appropriate and if this is lower than the current minimum wage the employee can apply for top up benefits from the government to take their pay up to the minimum wage value. This would decrease the amount of benefits paid out, lower unemployment and increase the number of economically active people.

Why is this idea important?

The National Minimum Wage as it is at the moment is detrimental to businesses, employees and the economy. Anyone who wishes to employ is currently is forced to pay at least the minimum wage even if they deem the employee to be worth less than this amount. This leads to the predicament of employees being unable to afford or be willing to employ which, when the economy is suffering as it is at present, increases unemployment and subsequently Government expenditure through benefits such as job seekers allowance.

Instead employees should be free to pay whatever wage they deem appropriate and if this is lower than the current minimum wage the employee can apply for top up benefits from the government to take their pay up to the minimum wage value. This would decrease the amount of benefits paid out, lower unemployment and increase the number of economically active people.

remove out of job centre placements such as A4e.

Remove all the tin pot unemployment courses such as A4E.  who sit at least 20 unemployed into a small room sharing a couple of computers. its unproductive with a  verrrrrry remote chance of gaining employment. STOP THESE COURSES THEY DO NOT WORK……..

 CREATE PROPER SENIOR APPRENTICE COURSES FOR THE UNEMPLOYED.

Why is this idea important?

Remove all the tin pot unemployment courses such as A4E.  who sit at least 20 unemployed into a small room sharing a couple of computers. its unproductive with a  verrrrrry remote chance of gaining employment. STOP THESE COURSES THEY DO NOT WORK……..

 CREATE PROPER SENIOR APPRENTICE COURSES FOR THE UNEMPLOYED.

People on benefits earning their money (menial work for the govt)

I think people who are recieving benefits should at least be used by the government/local town. Get them to sweep the streets, clean government offices, paint the roads.

These are work that anyone can do but the government currently has to pay for someone to do it. If we get people who recieve benefits to do these menial jobs in exchange of them recieving benefits, government saves money and at the same time benefit scroungers will be put off by being forced to do menial jobs.

Why is this idea important?

I think people who are recieving benefits should at least be used by the government/local town. Get them to sweep the streets, clean government offices, paint the roads.

These are work that anyone can do but the government currently has to pay for someone to do it. If we get people who recieve benefits to do these menial jobs in exchange of them recieving benefits, government saves money and at the same time benefit scroungers will be put off by being forced to do menial jobs.

Anti Human Trafficking Bill

A statute which consolidates and clarifies UK law with respect to the prevention of people trafficking, the prosecution of traffickers and protection of trafficking victims. 

As well as ensuring that existing UK law on human trafficking is consolidated into one piece of primary legislation, the Anti Human Trafficking Bill (or Act, as it would become) would also transpose into domestic law the safeguards and rights for victims of people trafficking contained in various international treaties which the UK has ratified. 

Two important treaties which a UK Anti Human Trafficking Bill could transpose are: (1) the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (CETS 197) and (2) the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, which supplements the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime.  The UK has signed and ratified these international instruments on human trafficking, but as yet they cannot be directly enforced by victims in UK courts.

An Anti Human Trafficking Bill would place positive obligations on all public authorities (including local authorities) to prevent human trafficking and protect the victims of human trafficking in so far as their areas of competency permit them to do (e.g. a local authority may have competency in housing, but not in investigating and prosecuting trafficking – which is within the competency of the Police and CPS).  A key obligation might be that public bodies have a legal duty to work in strategic partnership with appropriate civil society organisations in the fight against people trafficking.

An Anti Human Trafficking Bill would create in domestic law specific and fully justiciable rights which would ensure the protection of those identified as victims of human trafficking, especially children and women. At a minimum, these rights would mirror those contained in the Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (CETS 197, above).  A victim would be able to enforce these rights in UK courts where public bodies failed to fulfill them.  In creating justiciable rights, all public bodies would be compelled to raise awareness of such rights amongst their employees, and civil society organisations would be empowered to better represent the needs of victims in the context of rights which are available in the domestic legal system.

An Anti Human Trafficking Bill would also ensure that the definition of Human Trafficking, as provided for in the UN Trafficking Protocol (above) and CETS 197 (above), is enshrined in UK law, thus reducing any confusion as to the nature of people trafficking.  The definition reads (Article 4 CETS 197):

Trafficking in human beings shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs.

Further, rather than regarding human trafficking as a transnational phenomenon, a UK Anti Human Trafficking Bill would recognise that people trafficking within nations (internal trafficking) is an increasing issue, and therefore such Bill would not make the error of approaching human trafficking as an exclusively immigration related crisis.  Therefore, together with the above definition of human trafficking, a UK Anti Human Trafficking Bill would use the CETS 197 definition of a victim of human trafficking, which is:

"Victim" shall mean any natural person who is subject to trafficking in human beings as defined in this article. (Article 4, Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings).

A UK Anti Human Trafficking Bill could also build upon the Corporate Liability provisions contained under Article 22 CETS 197, by introducing a criminal offence of knowingly importing, exporting or making available to consumers products which are sourced or produced by, or contain ingredients or components sourced or produced by, victims of human trafficking or slavery.  This would demonstrate the UK's commitment to international corporate responsibility, by ensuring that companies operating in the UK are prohibited from being knowlingly complicit in the international crime of human trafficking.

 

 

 

 

Why is this idea important?

A statute which consolidates and clarifies UK law with respect to the prevention of people trafficking, the prosecution of traffickers and protection of trafficking victims. 

As well as ensuring that existing UK law on human trafficking is consolidated into one piece of primary legislation, the Anti Human Trafficking Bill (or Act, as it would become) would also transpose into domestic law the safeguards and rights for victims of people trafficking contained in various international treaties which the UK has ratified. 

Two important treaties which a UK Anti Human Trafficking Bill could transpose are: (1) the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (CETS 197) and (2) the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, which supplements the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime.  The UK has signed and ratified these international instruments on human trafficking, but as yet they cannot be directly enforced by victims in UK courts.

An Anti Human Trafficking Bill would place positive obligations on all public authorities (including local authorities) to prevent human trafficking and protect the victims of human trafficking in so far as their areas of competency permit them to do (e.g. a local authority may have competency in housing, but not in investigating and prosecuting trafficking – which is within the competency of the Police and CPS).  A key obligation might be that public bodies have a legal duty to work in strategic partnership with appropriate civil society organisations in the fight against people trafficking.

An Anti Human Trafficking Bill would create in domestic law specific and fully justiciable rights which would ensure the protection of those identified as victims of human trafficking, especially children and women. At a minimum, these rights would mirror those contained in the Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (CETS 197, above).  A victim would be able to enforce these rights in UK courts where public bodies failed to fulfill them.  In creating justiciable rights, all public bodies would be compelled to raise awareness of such rights amongst their employees, and civil society organisations would be empowered to better represent the needs of victims in the context of rights which are available in the domestic legal system.

An Anti Human Trafficking Bill would also ensure that the definition of Human Trafficking, as provided for in the UN Trafficking Protocol (above) and CETS 197 (above), is enshrined in UK law, thus reducing any confusion as to the nature of people trafficking.  The definition reads (Article 4 CETS 197):

Trafficking in human beings shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs.

Further, rather than regarding human trafficking as a transnational phenomenon, a UK Anti Human Trafficking Bill would recognise that people trafficking within nations (internal trafficking) is an increasing issue, and therefore such Bill would not make the error of approaching human trafficking as an exclusively immigration related crisis.  Therefore, together with the above definition of human trafficking, a UK Anti Human Trafficking Bill would use the CETS 197 definition of a victim of human trafficking, which is:

"Victim" shall mean any natural person who is subject to trafficking in human beings as defined in this article. (Article 4, Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings).

A UK Anti Human Trafficking Bill could also build upon the Corporate Liability provisions contained under Article 22 CETS 197, by introducing a criminal offence of knowingly importing, exporting or making available to consumers products which are sourced or produced by, or contain ingredients or components sourced or produced by, victims of human trafficking or slavery.  This would demonstrate the UK's commitment to international corporate responsibility, by ensuring that companies operating in the UK are prohibited from being knowlingly complicit in the international crime of human trafficking.

 

 

 

 

People should work for benefits

Anybody claiming benefits should have to work a minimum number of hours per week to earn the money they receive.  They should be able to do this work either for the local authority doing useful jobs around the local area such as picking up litter, grass cutting, delivering meals to the elderly etc. or as a volunteer for any local charity.  The work could be tailored to fit ability so that even people who are excluded from work due to illness or disability are able to contribute and be an asset for the local community.  Those who refuse to work should not receive a penny unless they can prove that they have a genuine disability which entirely prevents them from doing anything useful.

Why is this idea important?

Anybody claiming benefits should have to work a minimum number of hours per week to earn the money they receive.  They should be able to do this work either for the local authority doing useful jobs around the local area such as picking up litter, grass cutting, delivering meals to the elderly etc. or as a volunteer for any local charity.  The work could be tailored to fit ability so that even people who are excluded from work due to illness or disability are able to contribute and be an asset for the local community.  Those who refuse to work should not receive a penny unless they can prove that they have a genuine disability which entirely prevents them from doing anything useful.

Repeal Drugs Prohibition

The UK has long participated in the "Global War On Drugs". In spite of this, all research and anecdotal evidence suggests that the use of currently illegal drugs is increasing.

Arguements are made pertaining to the health and societal aspects of drug use being detrimental to the country. This is almost always overstated and often detracts from rational discussion on the subject.

What is proposed?

  • The prohibition of all drugs currently illegal to posses or use should end.
  • Those who wish to purchase previously illegal drugs should be able to obtain them from licenced and reputable vendors such as chemists.
  • Registration could be implemented in order to allow analysis of purchasing patterns to identify those who are potentially at risk from any proven health concerns.
  • VAT to be applied to these sales earning the government much needed revenue.
  • Quality control to be ensured by those licenced to manufacture and supply.

Why is this idea important?

The UK has long participated in the "Global War On Drugs". In spite of this, all research and anecdotal evidence suggests that the use of currently illegal drugs is increasing.

Arguements are made pertaining to the health and societal aspects of drug use being detrimental to the country. This is almost always overstated and often detracts from rational discussion on the subject.

What is proposed?

  • The prohibition of all drugs currently illegal to posses or use should end.
  • Those who wish to purchase previously illegal drugs should be able to obtain them from licenced and reputable vendors such as chemists.
  • Registration could be implemented in order to allow analysis of purchasing patterns to identify those who are potentially at risk from any proven health concerns.
  • VAT to be applied to these sales earning the government much needed revenue.
  • Quality control to be ensured by those licenced to manufacture and supply.