The Social Welfare State is fundementally broken

We have a social welfare state that is the envy of the world (well some of it anyhow), evidence of this is the sheer number of people that want to come to the UK to take advantage of it.

The fundemental basis of our social welfare state is that it works so long as those contributing significantly outweigh those who take from it.

Recent figures show that between 1 in 6 and 1 in 4 (depending on where you are in the UK) are employed by the state, remember that these take out (for doing a job admittedly) in terms of their salary, and only recontribute a fraction of what they take out.

So there are two issues to address,

1. The number of people claiming from the state (I think the government is already focusing on this)

2. Those employed by the state

To concentrate on the latter, I've no idea what the ratio should be, but its pretty obvious that its unsustainable.

We need to find the right balance between those employed by the state and the delivery of local and central services. To start the process, we need to determine what the ratio should be, probably not as easy as it sounds, but it should be given a priority.

Once established, this needs to be used in concert with 1. to establish the amount we spend on delivery of local and central government services.

Why is this idea important?

We have a social welfare state that is the envy of the world (well some of it anyhow), evidence of this is the sheer number of people that want to come to the UK to take advantage of it.

The fundemental basis of our social welfare state is that it works so long as those contributing significantly outweigh those who take from it.

Recent figures show that between 1 in 6 and 1 in 4 (depending on where you are in the UK) are employed by the state, remember that these take out (for doing a job admittedly) in terms of their salary, and only recontribute a fraction of what they take out.

So there are two issues to address,

1. The number of people claiming from the state (I think the government is already focusing on this)

2. Those employed by the state

To concentrate on the latter, I've no idea what the ratio should be, but its pretty obvious that its unsustainable.

We need to find the right balance between those employed by the state and the delivery of local and central services. To start the process, we need to determine what the ratio should be, probably not as easy as it sounds, but it should be given a priority.

Once established, this needs to be used in concert with 1. to establish the amount we spend on delivery of local and central government services.

repeal non life threatening health and safety laws

If the State tries too hard to protect us from minor incidents we will be unprepared for major incidents when they occur.This applies particularly to children;

Quite simply the health and safety authorities should be forbidden to interfere with any activity unless a there is reasonable expectation that there is a risk of death or serious injury likely to occur.

Children will then be free to play "conkers" and take part in"egg and spoon races" and adult functions will be able to take place without restrictions from hordes of officials.

Why is this idea important?

If the State tries too hard to protect us from minor incidents we will be unprepared for major incidents when they occur.This applies particularly to children;

Quite simply the health and safety authorities should be forbidden to interfere with any activity unless a there is reasonable expectation that there is a risk of death or serious injury likely to occur.

Children will then be free to play "conkers" and take part in"egg and spoon races" and adult functions will be able to take place without restrictions from hordes of officials.

Police Complaints and the IPCC

My idea is to overhaul the police complaints system and by so doing, restore public trust and confidence in British police services, particuarly the appalling Nottinghamshire Police 'Service'.

At present complaints against the police have to be made to a 'Professional Standards' Directorate (PSD) or if made directly to the 'Independent' Police Complaints Commission; the complaint is then forwarded to the relevant PSD for 'investigation' before the complainant has any right to appeal. Sadly, following the De Menezes whitewash and many other well-documented cases in the UK, the public have come to see the IPCC has nothing more than paid apologists for the police.

The system is fundamentally flawed and favours the police at every stage because police officers cannot be trusted to 'investigate' their fellow officers and almost always arrive at a conclusion that favours the police. If the police complaints procedure was radically changed to create a fair system that is not biased to the police, then public trust in the police/IPCC could be restored.

The proposal therefore is that all complaints against the police be handled entirely by the IPCC from the very outset and the police should only assist the IPCC in an administrative role by providing access to documents, evidence and to interview the officers who have been complained about  and this should be done in an impartial manner by all concerned.

The IPCC is not 'independent' and in its current guise resembles just another institutionally corrupt New Labour quango with a remit to cheat the public of anything remotely resembling truth and justice. The IPCC is perfectly capable of dealing with complaints against police officers from the outset and if the police object to the change in the complaints system, this will prove that they want to maintain the current biased system and retain the IPCC as mere puppets for public relations purposes….

There is widespread anger against the police in Britain and the New Labour years were a disaster for police and public relations and public trust has collapsed. By overhauling the current system to hand power and responsibility for police complaints to the IPCC, then the public would understand that the coalition government is deeply serious about changing the legal system in Britain. This in turn would cause public trust and confidence in the police and IPCC to grow. It is also imperative that IPCC Chairman Nick Hardwick is replaced because he was and remains a New Labour supporting flunkie with a love affair for the police and which he has demonstrated by his actions at the head of the IPCC.

Why is this idea important?

My idea is to overhaul the police complaints system and by so doing, restore public trust and confidence in British police services, particuarly the appalling Nottinghamshire Police 'Service'.

At present complaints against the police have to be made to a 'Professional Standards' Directorate (PSD) or if made directly to the 'Independent' Police Complaints Commission; the complaint is then forwarded to the relevant PSD for 'investigation' before the complainant has any right to appeal. Sadly, following the De Menezes whitewash and many other well-documented cases in the UK, the public have come to see the IPCC has nothing more than paid apologists for the police.

The system is fundamentally flawed and favours the police at every stage because police officers cannot be trusted to 'investigate' their fellow officers and almost always arrive at a conclusion that favours the police. If the police complaints procedure was radically changed to create a fair system that is not biased to the police, then public trust in the police/IPCC could be restored.

The proposal therefore is that all complaints against the police be handled entirely by the IPCC from the very outset and the police should only assist the IPCC in an administrative role by providing access to documents, evidence and to interview the officers who have been complained about  and this should be done in an impartial manner by all concerned.

The IPCC is not 'independent' and in its current guise resembles just another institutionally corrupt New Labour quango with a remit to cheat the public of anything remotely resembling truth and justice. The IPCC is perfectly capable of dealing with complaints against police officers from the outset and if the police object to the change in the complaints system, this will prove that they want to maintain the current biased system and retain the IPCC as mere puppets for public relations purposes….

There is widespread anger against the police in Britain and the New Labour years were a disaster for police and public relations and public trust has collapsed. By overhauling the current system to hand power and responsibility for police complaints to the IPCC, then the public would understand that the coalition government is deeply serious about changing the legal system in Britain. This in turn would cause public trust and confidence in the police and IPCC to grow. It is also imperative that IPCC Chairman Nick Hardwick is replaced because he was and remains a New Labour supporting flunkie with a love affair for the police and which he has demonstrated by his actions at the head of the IPCC.

Travel Anonymously Through London

Travel passes, such as for the London Underground, should not have people's names and details recorded against them.

The excuse for this given by London local politicians is that if someone has lost their card or had it stolen, then it can be recovered.

But a record of personal details is not necessary for this. All that is required is a unique identifier for the traveller (such as a serial number) and a photocard with the necessary details, such as name, which could be kept at home. If a card is lost or stolen, the traveller would only need present this photocard at a ticket office. His details need not be recorded and held on computer.

Why is this idea important?

Travel passes, such as for the London Underground, should not have people's names and details recorded against them.

The excuse for this given by London local politicians is that if someone has lost their card or had it stolen, then it can be recovered.

But a record of personal details is not necessary for this. All that is required is a unique identifier for the traveller (such as a serial number) and a photocard with the necessary details, such as name, which could be kept at home. If a card is lost or stolen, the traveller would only need present this photocard at a ticket office. His details need not be recorded and held on computer.

Dept. of Education (NI) should not be allowed to invent legislation that does not exist.

 

The Department of Education in Northern Ireland have recently issued new guidelines for school attendance which prevents parents from deregistering their child from school to electively home educate, even though this would require a change in law first.

Why is this idea important?

 

The Department of Education in Northern Ireland have recently issued new guidelines for school attendance which prevents parents from deregistering their child from school to electively home educate, even though this would require a change in law first.

Repeal the Act of Supremacy and disestablish the church

The 1558 Act of Supremacy gives the Church unprecedented powers within the State. This should cease and the Church can stand on it's own feet.

I have no problem  with the monarch being head of a church but the power of the Church, through inane limitations on my consumption of the special Lord's Days … (ie Sunday Trading, Easter, Christmas) .

Easily remove it and let it stand on it's own feet, have it as a preferred religion but not an institutional one.

Why is this idea important?

The 1558 Act of Supremacy gives the Church unprecedented powers within the State. This should cease and the Church can stand on it's own feet.

I have no problem  with the monarch being head of a church but the power of the Church, through inane limitations on my consumption of the special Lord's Days … (ie Sunday Trading, Easter, Christmas) .

Easily remove it and let it stand on it's own feet, have it as a preferred religion but not an institutional one.

Freedom of movement

We should be allowed to go across borders without being subjected to immigration control within the EU. Many countries in Europe have signed up to this and can move around freely. I believe we should have the same rights, as we already pay for membership, so we should get this benefit. It is especially needed for those people who spend their time traveling back and forth.

Why is this idea important?

We should be allowed to go across borders without being subjected to immigration control within the EU. Many countries in Europe have signed up to this and can move around freely. I believe we should have the same rights, as we already pay for membership, so we should get this benefit. It is especially needed for those people who spend their time traveling back and forth.

Divorce Church of England from the State

In a multi-cultural society in which we endeavour to treat all people as citizens, and not subjects,it is important that all be treated equally and with respect under the law.  The current system discriminates against non CofE people because of the direct connection between Church and State with the Monarchy being Head of the Church as an integral part of its responsibilities.

The Head of State should be seen as representing the entire population, regardless of faith, and not just those people of CofE faith.

Why is this idea important?

In a multi-cultural society in which we endeavour to treat all people as citizens, and not subjects,it is important that all be treated equally and with respect under the law.  The current system discriminates against non CofE people because of the direct connection between Church and State with the Monarchy being Head of the Church as an integral part of its responsibilities.

The Head of State should be seen as representing the entire population, regardless of faith, and not just those people of CofE faith.

Why Cannabis SHOULD be Legalized

I think that Cannabis should be legalized because it will have so many benefits on our country.

I will list the reasons below.

  1. Cannabis has MANY proven health benefits. It can help several problems/illnessess Search google and you will finds thousands of information.
  2. Legalization and Taxation of Cannabis will cut our national Debt in a year.
  3. It keeps the money in the country instead of in the hands of thugs and murderers.
  4. Amsterdam style coffeeshops would keep drug use under control.
  5. A very high percentage of crimes from murders to muggings are because of illegal drug dealing. if this was eliminated then we would have a lot more safer streets. (This includes all drugs not just cannabis)
  6. Myself and other cannabis users are constantly being stereotyped. We are not lazy layabouts. We are not criminals or murderers. We are humans and should be able to do this along with our everyday life.
  7. Legalizing Cannabis would also reduce people going to harder drugs the reason I say this is because when your going to buy cannabis from a shop you dont have the persausive drug dealers pressuring you to buy.
  8. It will also form several jobs

There are plenty of other reasons why it should be legalized all the way through to the hemp industry. Oil Clothing Food plenty of other things.

Give us a chance and you will see how much the country will improve greatly. More freedom more relaxed more happier…. = more hardworking people.

Why is this idea important?

I think that Cannabis should be legalized because it will have so many benefits on our country.

I will list the reasons below.

  1. Cannabis has MANY proven health benefits. It can help several problems/illnessess Search google and you will finds thousands of information.
  2. Legalization and Taxation of Cannabis will cut our national Debt in a year.
  3. It keeps the money in the country instead of in the hands of thugs and murderers.
  4. Amsterdam style coffeeshops would keep drug use under control.
  5. A very high percentage of crimes from murders to muggings are because of illegal drug dealing. if this was eliminated then we would have a lot more safer streets. (This includes all drugs not just cannabis)
  6. Myself and other cannabis users are constantly being stereotyped. We are not lazy layabouts. We are not criminals or murderers. We are humans and should be able to do this along with our everyday life.
  7. Legalizing Cannabis would also reduce people going to harder drugs the reason I say this is because when your going to buy cannabis from a shop you dont have the persausive drug dealers pressuring you to buy.
  8. It will also form several jobs

There are plenty of other reasons why it should be legalized all the way through to the hemp industry. Oil Clothing Food plenty of other things.

Give us a chance and you will see how much the country will improve greatly. More freedom more relaxed more happier…. = more hardworking people.

Disestablish the Church of England

All formal ties between the Church of England and the state should be eliminated and set to the same level as that of any other denomination and religion. The government should have no say whatsoever in the affairs of the church or any other denomination or religion, and should not be able to appoint the Archbishop of Canterbury or any other official of the church. Such decisions should be up to the relevant church.

Why is this idea important?

All formal ties between the Church of England and the state should be eliminated and set to the same level as that of any other denomination and religion. The government should have no say whatsoever in the affairs of the church or any other denomination or religion, and should not be able to appoint the Archbishop of Canterbury or any other official of the church. Such decisions should be up to the relevant church.

Shift the obligation of enforcement from state to citizen

Retain all laws as they will either be useful or become quaint news items of the future.

Then transfer the responsibility of enforcement of laws from the state back to the citizen.

The local citizen bodies will then:

  • Select enforcement of laws that cab be ignored and put into the Quaint category
  • Prioritise the remaining enforcements for their local area
  • Vote on what is sensible and supportable
  • Select what is to be done locally and either fund or volunteer it
  • Outsource the rest to competing private and public services

Our ability to communicate should make this easy to implement.

Why is this idea important?

Retain all laws as they will either be useful or become quaint news items of the future.

Then transfer the responsibility of enforcement of laws from the state back to the citizen.

The local citizen bodies will then:

  • Select enforcement of laws that cab be ignored and put into the Quaint category
  • Prioritise the remaining enforcements for their local area
  • Vote on what is sensible and supportable
  • Select what is to be done locally and either fund or volunteer it
  • Outsource the rest to competing private and public services

Our ability to communicate should make this easy to implement.