Smearing campaign

In this country law is ‘you are not guilty until proven so’, therefore, any crime or wrongdoings should be proved before and a person should be given chance to defend herself/himself before somebody is put on any sort of offence register. If a person is innocent and not given chance to clear misunderstanding it could have a very bed consequences for their future life. They could be turned down for job and all other things not even to know why all this is happening to them. Nobody has right to seal anybody’s future without a 100% proof of that person’s crime or wrongdoings.

Why is this idea important?

In this country law is ‘you are not guilty until proven so’, therefore, any crime or wrongdoings should be proved before and a person should be given chance to defend herself/himself before somebody is put on any sort of offence register. If a person is innocent and not given chance to clear misunderstanding it could have a very bed consequences for their future life. They could be turned down for job and all other things not even to know why all this is happening to them. Nobody has right to seal anybody’s future without a 100% proof of that person’s crime or wrongdoings.

Amend the Libel Laws.

My idea is to change the Libel Laws, specifically the defamation part of the Libel Laws. On this I support the proposals put forward by the Liberal Democrat Lord Lester who seeks to make substantial changes to the libel laws, so that those who are being sued have much more legal rights, and also to toughen the libel laws up, to make it much harder for firms to seek injunctions against journalists, and much harder in general to take legal action in disputes, when political disputes should never go to court in the first place.  This stop the UK being the Libel Capital of the world

Why is this idea important?

My idea is to change the Libel Laws, specifically the defamation part of the Libel Laws. On this I support the proposals put forward by the Liberal Democrat Lord Lester who seeks to make substantial changes to the libel laws, so that those who are being sued have much more legal rights, and also to toughen the libel laws up, to make it much harder for firms to seek injunctions against journalists, and much harder in general to take legal action in disputes, when political disputes should never go to court in the first place.  This stop the UK being the Libel Capital of the world

Ex pat voting

Remove the restrictions on expat British citizens which stop them voting in British general elections after they have lived abroad for a certain number of years.

Why is this idea important?

Remove the restrictions on expat British citizens which stop them voting in British general elections after they have lived abroad for a certain number of years.

Vienna Declaration – International movement towards drug policy based around scientific evidence & the principle of harm reduction. UN / ICSDP

It's plainly obvious that this website has already been restricted in terms of its effectiveness at restoring our liberty. Mr. Clegg has already pointed out that in our democracy, majority doesn't rule. Instead he rules the majority and therefore he'll only act on submitted Idea's that fit his skewed agenda.

Therefore, time to take responsibility for our own freedom and liberty as this government seems as pathetic as the last in terms of it's ability to protect the public and ensure freedom, justice and liberty for all.

So, my Idea is while we campaign here, please also go and support the international effort to reform drug policy, spearheaded by the UN. Please go and sign this international declaration:

http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6452/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=2794

Why is this idea important?

It's plainly obvious that this website has already been restricted in terms of its effectiveness at restoring our liberty. Mr. Clegg has already pointed out that in our democracy, majority doesn't rule. Instead he rules the majority and therefore he'll only act on submitted Idea's that fit his skewed agenda.

Therefore, time to take responsibility for our own freedom and liberty as this government seems as pathetic as the last in terms of it's ability to protect the public and ensure freedom, justice and liberty for all.

So, my Idea is while we campaign here, please also go and support the international effort to reform drug policy, spearheaded by the UN. Please go and sign this international declaration:

http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6452/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=2794

Repeal the law which allows the Government to block The People’s access to selected ideas

There seems to be no doubt that certain ideas are being blocked. Since 'Your Freedom' is a coalition government idea, it is reasonable to assume that only the Government can block ideas. It can only be, therefore, that it is the Government which is blocking access to certain ideas – I refer particularly to 'the enjoyment of tobacco' ideas.  The blocking of these ideas is heinous and undemocratic.

Why is this idea important?

There seems to be no doubt that certain ideas are being blocked. Since 'Your Freedom' is a coalition government idea, it is reasonable to assume that only the Government can block ideas. It can only be, therefore, that it is the Government which is blocking access to certain ideas – I refer particularly to 'the enjoyment of tobacco' ideas.  The blocking of these ideas is heinous and undemocratic.

FREEBORN ENGLISH RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES

English Bill Of Rights 1689

Quote

‘’And I do declare That noe forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realme Soe helpe me God.’’

ENGLISH ASSERTION OF OUR FREEBORN RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES

We the English assert our freeborn right to live without fear or threat from the government, state and foreign powers. And we recognise no oppressive laws nor foreign laws only Just laws made by and for the people in accordance with our English Declaration of Rights and its statutory form, the English Bill of rights. We are aware of, understand and acknowledge, that English common law has primacy.

And declare our nations right to govern itself and defend our ancient and indubitable rights and liberties against internal and external powers.

It is the duty and responsibility of parliament to protect these rights, liberties and the interests of the people both now and in the future, and not in anyway infringe, remove or be prejudiced against them. To do so is a breach of the Bill of Rights and unlawful.

The Bill of Rights states that the crown, both houses of parliament and the people are parts of a single entity, and abolition of the structure and responsibility of crown and parliament in part or whole is illegal. As the Declaration of Rights 1688 and Magna Carta 1215 declare our freedoms to be self-evident that exist by right and are permanent.

We assert that the crown servants and members of the judiciary do swear and continue to swear Oaths of Allegiance to this nation and will serve our people according to our laws and customs and will be faithful to these oaths in law, action and allegiance. -And that members of our Armed Forces do likewise and continue to swear allegiance to our nation. And that crown servants members of the judiciary and the armed forces do not and shall never swear oaths of allegiance nor any other oath to parliament or other powers. And that parliament does not interfere with the duties and relationships of these oaths, as parliament has no lawful right to do so, nor shall and must never have.

The Privy Counsillors shall always swear allegiance to this nation; and will assist and defend all jurisdictions, pre-eminences, and authorities granted and annexed to the crown by Acts of Parliament or otherwise, against all foreign princes, persons, prelates, states and potentates. And generally in all things do swear to be a faithful and true servant and do as they ought to do.
-Any person who breaches these oaths must be removed immediately and must never again hold office or be of service to the rule and government of this nation in any form.
Such a breach of oath is the swearing of an oath on appointment as a European Union Commissioner as committed by some of this nations privy counsillors. All those that have done this have broken their oath of allegiance to this nation and do serve foreign interest and powers. They must be removed from office.

Our eternal freedoms, rights and liberties and the right to govern ourselves are enshrined in the English Bill of Rights, they are permanent and for all time. Any acts that attack these are treason and the perpetrators of such acts must be tried for treason.

We recognise that the signing of the treaties below:

The six treaties:
1. The European Communities Act 1972.
2. The Single European Act, 1986.
3. The Maastricht Treaty, 1992.
4. The Amsterdam Treaty, 1997.
5. The Nice Treaty 2001.
6. The Lisbon Treaty 2008. (Previously called the Reform Treaty)

-Are such acts, and that parliament failed and neglected its duty as established for all time in the Bill of Rights. And that this was and is a crime against the people. This breach and betrayal of our English rights and liberties as enshrined and protected within the Bill of Rights marks the assault, erosion and loss of our independence and identity, and the moment that our nation ceased to be ruled by an elected government. Where the ability for self-rule and to make and live by our laws has been temporally lost. So today foreign laws that are made overseas by the unelected power called the European Union are used to oppress us. And this organisation called European Union now ‘claims’ jurisdiction over us.

This oppression by a foreign power and the continuing collaboration of our members of parliament is both an attack on our native freedoms, rights, liberties and identity and an act of treason against this nation and shall be lawfully treated as such.

We demand that those responsible for these acts of treason and neglect should be tried under our still legally binding law: MISPRISION OF TREASON.

Misprision of Treason is an offence or misdemeanor akin to treason or felony. It is the neglect of duty by a public official who conceals a knowledge of treasonable actions or designs. At an assize it may warrant the same penalty as High Treason. A subject of the Crown is also bound to inform the magistrates if he knows that High Treason is being contemplated.

When signing the Six Treaties the then governments knew they were breaking our laws and compromised parliaments integrity and duty as enshrined in the Bill of Rights. This betrayal is responsible for all subsequent attacks and assaults against our nation. As these acts are unlawful we demand their immediate repeal and shall never recognise foreign rule nor oppression and will stand firm and resolute until our people win back all that has been taken from them.

We assert our right, as set out in our English Bill of Rights, to petition the Monarch/Crown (referendum) on the matter of being ruled from overseas and by foreign power. This right to petition the Monarch having been denied us by successive Prime Ministers (The Monarchs/Crowns Administrator)
 

Why is this idea important?

English Bill Of Rights 1689

Quote

‘’And I do declare That noe forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realme Soe helpe me God.’’

ENGLISH ASSERTION OF OUR FREEBORN RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES

We the English assert our freeborn right to live without fear or threat from the government, state and foreign powers. And we recognise no oppressive laws nor foreign laws only Just laws made by and for the people in accordance with our English Declaration of Rights and its statutory form, the English Bill of rights. We are aware of, understand and acknowledge, that English common law has primacy.

And declare our nations right to govern itself and defend our ancient and indubitable rights and liberties against internal and external powers.

It is the duty and responsibility of parliament to protect these rights, liberties and the interests of the people both now and in the future, and not in anyway infringe, remove or be prejudiced against them. To do so is a breach of the Bill of Rights and unlawful.

The Bill of Rights states that the crown, both houses of parliament and the people are parts of a single entity, and abolition of the structure and responsibility of crown and parliament in part or whole is illegal. As the Declaration of Rights 1688 and Magna Carta 1215 declare our freedoms to be self-evident that exist by right and are permanent.

We assert that the crown servants and members of the judiciary do swear and continue to swear Oaths of Allegiance to this nation and will serve our people according to our laws and customs and will be faithful to these oaths in law, action and allegiance. -And that members of our Armed Forces do likewise and continue to swear allegiance to our nation. And that crown servants members of the judiciary and the armed forces do not and shall never swear oaths of allegiance nor any other oath to parliament or other powers. And that parliament does not interfere with the duties and relationships of these oaths, as parliament has no lawful right to do so, nor shall and must never have.

The Privy Counsillors shall always swear allegiance to this nation; and will assist and defend all jurisdictions, pre-eminences, and authorities granted and annexed to the crown by Acts of Parliament or otherwise, against all foreign princes, persons, prelates, states and potentates. And generally in all things do swear to be a faithful and true servant and do as they ought to do.
-Any person who breaches these oaths must be removed immediately and must never again hold office or be of service to the rule and government of this nation in any form.
Such a breach of oath is the swearing of an oath on appointment as a European Union Commissioner as committed by some of this nations privy counsillors. All those that have done this have broken their oath of allegiance to this nation and do serve foreign interest and powers. They must be removed from office.

Our eternal freedoms, rights and liberties and the right to govern ourselves are enshrined in the English Bill of Rights, they are permanent and for all time. Any acts that attack these are treason and the perpetrators of such acts must be tried for treason.

We recognise that the signing of the treaties below:

The six treaties:
1. The European Communities Act 1972.
2. The Single European Act, 1986.
3. The Maastricht Treaty, 1992.
4. The Amsterdam Treaty, 1997.
5. The Nice Treaty 2001.
6. The Lisbon Treaty 2008. (Previously called the Reform Treaty)

-Are such acts, and that parliament failed and neglected its duty as established for all time in the Bill of Rights. And that this was and is a crime against the people. This breach and betrayal of our English rights and liberties as enshrined and protected within the Bill of Rights marks the assault, erosion and loss of our independence and identity, and the moment that our nation ceased to be ruled by an elected government. Where the ability for self-rule and to make and live by our laws has been temporally lost. So today foreign laws that are made overseas by the unelected power called the European Union are used to oppress us. And this organisation called European Union now ‘claims’ jurisdiction over us.

This oppression by a foreign power and the continuing collaboration of our members of parliament is both an attack on our native freedoms, rights, liberties and identity and an act of treason against this nation and shall be lawfully treated as such.

We demand that those responsible for these acts of treason and neglect should be tried under our still legally binding law: MISPRISION OF TREASON.

Misprision of Treason is an offence or misdemeanor akin to treason or felony. It is the neglect of duty by a public official who conceals a knowledge of treasonable actions or designs. At an assize it may warrant the same penalty as High Treason. A subject of the Crown is also bound to inform the magistrates if he knows that High Treason is being contemplated.

When signing the Six Treaties the then governments knew they were breaking our laws and compromised parliaments integrity and duty as enshrined in the Bill of Rights. This betrayal is responsible for all subsequent attacks and assaults against our nation. As these acts are unlawful we demand their immediate repeal and shall never recognise foreign rule nor oppression and will stand firm and resolute until our people win back all that has been taken from them.

We assert our right, as set out in our English Bill of Rights, to petition the Monarch/Crown (referendum) on the matter of being ruled from overseas and by foreign power. This right to petition the Monarch having been denied us by successive Prime Ministers (The Monarchs/Crowns Administrator)
 

ENGLISH ASSERTION OF OUR FREEBORN RIGHTS

English Bill Of Rights 1689

Quote

‘’And I do declare That noe forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realme Soe helpe me God.’’

ENGLISH ASSERTION OF OUR FREEBORN RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES

We the English assert our freeborn right to live without fear or threat from the government, state and foreign powers. And we recognise no oppressive laws nor foreign laws only Just laws made by and for the people in accordance with our English Declaration of Rights and its statutory form, the English Bill of rights. We are aware of, understand and acknowledge, that English common law has primacy.

And declare our nations right to govern itself and defend our ancient and indubitable rights and liberties against internal and external powers.

It is the duty and responsibility of parliament to protect these rights, liberties and the interests of the people both now and in the future, and not in anyway infringe, remove or be prejudiced against them. To do so is a breach of the Bill of Rights and unlawful.

The Bill of Rights states that the crown, both houses of parliament and the people are parts of a single entity, and abolition of the structure and responsibility of crown and parliament in part or whole is illegal. As the Declaration of Rights 1688 and Magna Carta 1215 declare our freedoms to be self-evident that exist by right and are permanent.

We assert that the crown servants and members of the judiciary do swear and continue to swear Oaths of Allegiance to this nation and will serve our people according to our laws and customs and will be faithful to these oaths in law, action and allegiance. -And that members of our Armed Forces do likewise and continue to swear allegiance to our nation. And that crown servants members of the judiciary and the armed forces do not and shall never swear oaths of allegiance nor any other oath to parliament or other powers. And that parliament does not interfere with the duties and relationships of these oaths, as parliament has no lawful right to do so, nor shall and must never have.

The Privy Counsillors shall always swear allegiance to this nation; and will assist and defend all jurisdictions, pre-eminences, and authorities granted and annexed to the crown by Acts of Parliament or otherwise, against all foreign princes, persons, prelates, states and potentates. And generally in all things do swear to be a faithful and true servant and do as they ought to do.
-Any person who breaches these oaths must be removed immediately and must never again hold office or be of service to the rule and government of this nation in any form.
Such a breach of oath is the swearing of an oath on appointment as a European Union Commissioner as committed by some of this nations privy counsillors. All those that have done this have broken their oath of allegiance to this nation and do serve foreign interest and powers. They must be removed from office.

Our eternal freedoms, rights and liberties and the right to govern ourselves are enshrined in the English Bill of Rights, they are permanent and for all time. Any acts that attack these are treason and the perpetrators of such acts must be tried for treason.

We recognise that the signing of the treaties below:

The six treaties:
1. The European Communities Act 1972.
2. The Single European Act, 1986.
3. The Maastricht Treaty, 1992.
4. The Amsterdam Treaty, 1997.
5. The Nice Treaty 2001.
6. The Lisbon Treaty 2008. (Previously called the Reform Treaty)

-Are such acts, and that parliament failed and neglected its duty as established for all time in the Bill of Rights. And that this was and is a crime against the people. This breach and betrayal of our English rights and liberties as enshrined and protected within the Bill of Rights marks the assault, erosion and loss of our independence and identity, and the moment that our nation ceased to be ruled by an elected government. Where the ability for self-rule and to make and live by our laws has been temporally lost. So today foreign laws that are made overseas by the unelected power called the European Union are used to oppress us. And this organisation called European Union now ‘claims’ jurisdiction over us.

This oppression by a foreign power and the continuing collaboration of our members of parliament is both an attack on our native freedoms, rights, liberties and identity and an act of treason against this nation and shall be lawfully treated as such.

We demand that those responsible for these acts of treason and neglect should be tried under our still legally binding law: MISPRISION OF TREASON.

Misprision of Treason is an offence or misdemeanor akin to treason or felony. It is the neglect of duty by a public official who conceals a knowledge of treasonable actions or designs. At an assize it may warrant the same penalty as High Treason. A subject of the Crown is also bound to inform the magistrates if he knows that High Treason is being contemplated.

When signing the Six Treaties the then governments knew they were breaking our laws and compromised parliaments integrity and duty as enshrined in the Bill of Rights. This betrayal is responsible for all subsequent attacks and assaults against our nation. As these acts are unlawful we demand their immediate repeal and shall never recognise foreign rule nor oppression and will stand firm and resolute until our people win back all that has been taken from them.

We assert our right, as set out in our English Bill of Rights, to petition the Monarch/Crown (referendum) on the matter of being ruled from overseas and by foreign power. This right to petition the Monarch having been denied us by successive Prime Ministers (The Monarchs/Crowns Administrator)

Why is this idea important?

English Bill Of Rights 1689

Quote

‘’And I do declare That noe forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realme Soe helpe me God.’’

ENGLISH ASSERTION OF OUR FREEBORN RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES

We the English assert our freeborn right to live without fear or threat from the government, state and foreign powers. And we recognise no oppressive laws nor foreign laws only Just laws made by and for the people in accordance with our English Declaration of Rights and its statutory form, the English Bill of rights. We are aware of, understand and acknowledge, that English common law has primacy.

And declare our nations right to govern itself and defend our ancient and indubitable rights and liberties against internal and external powers.

It is the duty and responsibility of parliament to protect these rights, liberties and the interests of the people both now and in the future, and not in anyway infringe, remove or be prejudiced against them. To do so is a breach of the Bill of Rights and unlawful.

The Bill of Rights states that the crown, both houses of parliament and the people are parts of a single entity, and abolition of the structure and responsibility of crown and parliament in part or whole is illegal. As the Declaration of Rights 1688 and Magna Carta 1215 declare our freedoms to be self-evident that exist by right and are permanent.

We assert that the crown servants and members of the judiciary do swear and continue to swear Oaths of Allegiance to this nation and will serve our people according to our laws and customs and will be faithful to these oaths in law, action and allegiance. -And that members of our Armed Forces do likewise and continue to swear allegiance to our nation. And that crown servants members of the judiciary and the armed forces do not and shall never swear oaths of allegiance nor any other oath to parliament or other powers. And that parliament does not interfere with the duties and relationships of these oaths, as parliament has no lawful right to do so, nor shall and must never have.

The Privy Counsillors shall always swear allegiance to this nation; and will assist and defend all jurisdictions, pre-eminences, and authorities granted and annexed to the crown by Acts of Parliament or otherwise, against all foreign princes, persons, prelates, states and potentates. And generally in all things do swear to be a faithful and true servant and do as they ought to do.
-Any person who breaches these oaths must be removed immediately and must never again hold office or be of service to the rule and government of this nation in any form.
Such a breach of oath is the swearing of an oath on appointment as a European Union Commissioner as committed by some of this nations privy counsillors. All those that have done this have broken their oath of allegiance to this nation and do serve foreign interest and powers. They must be removed from office.

Our eternal freedoms, rights and liberties and the right to govern ourselves are enshrined in the English Bill of Rights, they are permanent and for all time. Any acts that attack these are treason and the perpetrators of such acts must be tried for treason.

We recognise that the signing of the treaties below:

The six treaties:
1. The European Communities Act 1972.
2. The Single European Act, 1986.
3. The Maastricht Treaty, 1992.
4. The Amsterdam Treaty, 1997.
5. The Nice Treaty 2001.
6. The Lisbon Treaty 2008. (Previously called the Reform Treaty)

-Are such acts, and that parliament failed and neglected its duty as established for all time in the Bill of Rights. And that this was and is a crime against the people. This breach and betrayal of our English rights and liberties as enshrined and protected within the Bill of Rights marks the assault, erosion and loss of our independence and identity, and the moment that our nation ceased to be ruled by an elected government. Where the ability for self-rule and to make and live by our laws has been temporally lost. So today foreign laws that are made overseas by the unelected power called the European Union are used to oppress us. And this organisation called European Union now ‘claims’ jurisdiction over us.

This oppression by a foreign power and the continuing collaboration of our members of parliament is both an attack on our native freedoms, rights, liberties and identity and an act of treason against this nation and shall be lawfully treated as such.

We demand that those responsible for these acts of treason and neglect should be tried under our still legally binding law: MISPRISION OF TREASON.

Misprision of Treason is an offence or misdemeanor akin to treason or felony. It is the neglect of duty by a public official who conceals a knowledge of treasonable actions or designs. At an assize it may warrant the same penalty as High Treason. A subject of the Crown is also bound to inform the magistrates if he knows that High Treason is being contemplated.

When signing the Six Treaties the then governments knew they were breaking our laws and compromised parliaments integrity and duty as enshrined in the Bill of Rights. This betrayal is responsible for all subsequent attacks and assaults against our nation. As these acts are unlawful we demand their immediate repeal and shall never recognise foreign rule nor oppression and will stand firm and resolute until our people win back all that has been taken from them.

We assert our right, as set out in our English Bill of Rights, to petition the Monarch/Crown (referendum) on the matter of being ruled from overseas and by foreign power. This right to petition the Monarch having been denied us by successive Prime Ministers (The Monarchs/Crowns Administrator)

ENGLISH ASSERTION OF OUR FREEBORN RIGHTS

English Bill Of Rights 1689

Quote

‘’And I do declare That noe forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realme Soe helpe me God.’’

ENGLISH ASSERTION OF OUR FREEBORN RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES

We the English assert our freeborn right to live without fear or threat from the government, state and foreign powers. And we recognise no oppressive laws nor foreign laws only Just laws made by and for the people in accordance with our English Declaration of Rights and its statutory form, the English Bill of rights. We are aware of, understand and acknowledge, that English common law has primacy.

And declare our nations right to govern itself and defend our ancient and indubitable rights and liberties against internal and external powers.

It is the duty and responsibility of parliament to protect these rights, liberties and the interests of the people both now and in the future, and not in anyway infringe, remove or be prejudiced against them. To do so is a breach of the Bill of Rights and unlawful.

The Bill of Rights states that the crown, both houses of parliament and the people are parts of a single entity, and abolition of the structure and responsibility of crown and parliament in part or whole is illegal. As the Declaration of Rights 1688 and Magna Carta 1215 declare our freedoms to be self-evident that exist by right and are permanent.

We assert that the crown servants and members of the judiciary do swear and continue to swear Oaths of Allegiance to this nation and will serve our people according to our laws and customs and will be faithful to these oaths in law, action and allegiance. -And that members of our Armed Forces do likewise and continue to swear allegiance to our nation. And that crown servants members of the judiciary and the armed forces do not and shall never swear oaths of allegiance nor any other oath to parliament or other powers. And that parliament does not interfere with the duties and relationships of these oaths, as parliament has no lawful right to do so, nor shall and must never have.

The Privy Counsillors shall always swear allegiance to this nation; and will assist and defend all jurisdictions, pre-eminences, and authorities granted and annexed to the crown by Acts of Parliament or otherwise, against all foreign princes, persons, prelates, states and potentates. And generally in all things do swear to be a faithful and true servant and do as they ought to do.
-Any person who breaches these oaths must be removed immediately and must never again hold office or be of service to the rule and government of this nation in any form.
Such a breach of oath is the swearing of an oath on appointment as a European Union Commissioner as committed by some of this nations privy counsillors. All those that have done this have broken their oath of allegiance to this nation and do serve foreign interest and powers. They must be removed from office.

Our eternal freedoms, rights and liberties and the right to govern ourselves are enshrined in the English Bill of Rights, they are permanent and for all time. Any acts that attack these are treason and the perpetrators of such acts must be tried for treason.

We recognise that the signing of the treaties below:

The six treaties:
1. The European Communities Act 1972.
2. The Single European Act, 1986.
3. The Maastricht Treaty, 1992.
4. The Amsterdam Treaty, 1997.
5. The Nice Treaty 2001.
6. The Lisbon Treaty 2008. (Previously called the Reform Treaty)

-Are such acts, and that parliament failed and neglected its duty as established for all time in the Bill of Rights. And that this was and is a crime against the people. This breach and betrayal of our English rights and liberties as enshrined and protected within the Bill of Rights marks the assault, erosion and loss of our independence and identity, and the moment that our nation ceased to be ruled by an elected government. Where the ability for self-rule and to make and live by our laws has been temporally lost. So today foreign laws that are made overseas by the unelected power called the European Union are used to oppress us. And this organisation called European Union now ‘claims’ jurisdiction over us.

This oppression by a foreign power and the continuing collaboration of our members of parliament is both an attack on our native freedoms, rights, liberties and identity and an act of treason against this nation and shall be lawfully treated as such.

We demand that those responsible for these acts of treason and neglect should be tried under our still legally binding law: MISPRISION OF TREASON.

Misprision of Treason is an offence or misdemeanor akin to treason or felony. It is the neglect of duty by a public official who conceals a knowledge of treasonable actions or designs. At an assize it may warrant the same penalty as High Treason. A subject of the Crown is also bound to inform the magistrates if he knows that High Treason is being contemplated.

When signing the Six Treaties the then governments knew they were breaking our laws and compromised parliaments integrity and duty as enshrined in the Bill of Rights. This betrayal is responsible for all subsequent attacks and assaults against our nation. As these acts are unlawful we demand their immediate repeal and shall never recognise foreign rule nor oppression and will stand firm and resolute until our people win back all that has been taken from them.

We assert our right, as set out in our English Bill of Rights, to petition the Monarch/Crown (referendum) on the matter of being ruled from overseas and by foreign power. This right to petition the Monarch having been denied us by successive Prime Ministers (The Monarchs/Crowns Administrator)

Why is this idea important?

English Bill Of Rights 1689

Quote

‘’And I do declare That noe forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realme Soe helpe me God.’’

ENGLISH ASSERTION OF OUR FREEBORN RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES

We the English assert our freeborn right to live without fear or threat from the government, state and foreign powers. And we recognise no oppressive laws nor foreign laws only Just laws made by and for the people in accordance with our English Declaration of Rights and its statutory form, the English Bill of rights. We are aware of, understand and acknowledge, that English common law has primacy.

And declare our nations right to govern itself and defend our ancient and indubitable rights and liberties against internal and external powers.

It is the duty and responsibility of parliament to protect these rights, liberties and the interests of the people both now and in the future, and not in anyway infringe, remove or be prejudiced against them. To do so is a breach of the Bill of Rights and unlawful.

The Bill of Rights states that the crown, both houses of parliament and the people are parts of a single entity, and abolition of the structure and responsibility of crown and parliament in part or whole is illegal. As the Declaration of Rights 1688 and Magna Carta 1215 declare our freedoms to be self-evident that exist by right and are permanent.

We assert that the crown servants and members of the judiciary do swear and continue to swear Oaths of Allegiance to this nation and will serve our people according to our laws and customs and will be faithful to these oaths in law, action and allegiance. -And that members of our Armed Forces do likewise and continue to swear allegiance to our nation. And that crown servants members of the judiciary and the armed forces do not and shall never swear oaths of allegiance nor any other oath to parliament or other powers. And that parliament does not interfere with the duties and relationships of these oaths, as parliament has no lawful right to do so, nor shall and must never have.

The Privy Counsillors shall always swear allegiance to this nation; and will assist and defend all jurisdictions, pre-eminences, and authorities granted and annexed to the crown by Acts of Parliament or otherwise, against all foreign princes, persons, prelates, states and potentates. And generally in all things do swear to be a faithful and true servant and do as they ought to do.
-Any person who breaches these oaths must be removed immediately and must never again hold office or be of service to the rule and government of this nation in any form.
Such a breach of oath is the swearing of an oath on appointment as a European Union Commissioner as committed by some of this nations privy counsillors. All those that have done this have broken their oath of allegiance to this nation and do serve foreign interest and powers. They must be removed from office.

Our eternal freedoms, rights and liberties and the right to govern ourselves are enshrined in the English Bill of Rights, they are permanent and for all time. Any acts that attack these are treason and the perpetrators of such acts must be tried for treason.

We recognise that the signing of the treaties below:

The six treaties:
1. The European Communities Act 1972.
2. The Single European Act, 1986.
3. The Maastricht Treaty, 1992.
4. The Amsterdam Treaty, 1997.
5. The Nice Treaty 2001.
6. The Lisbon Treaty 2008. (Previously called the Reform Treaty)

-Are such acts, and that parliament failed and neglected its duty as established for all time in the Bill of Rights. And that this was and is a crime against the people. This breach and betrayal of our English rights and liberties as enshrined and protected within the Bill of Rights marks the assault, erosion and loss of our independence and identity, and the moment that our nation ceased to be ruled by an elected government. Where the ability for self-rule and to make and live by our laws has been temporally lost. So today foreign laws that are made overseas by the unelected power called the European Union are used to oppress us. And this organisation called European Union now ‘claims’ jurisdiction over us.

This oppression by a foreign power and the continuing collaboration of our members of parliament is both an attack on our native freedoms, rights, liberties and identity and an act of treason against this nation and shall be lawfully treated as such.

We demand that those responsible for these acts of treason and neglect should be tried under our still legally binding law: MISPRISION OF TREASON.

Misprision of Treason is an offence or misdemeanor akin to treason or felony. It is the neglect of duty by a public official who conceals a knowledge of treasonable actions or designs. At an assize it may warrant the same penalty as High Treason. A subject of the Crown is also bound to inform the magistrates if he knows that High Treason is being contemplated.

When signing the Six Treaties the then governments knew they were breaking our laws and compromised parliaments integrity and duty as enshrined in the Bill of Rights. This betrayal is responsible for all subsequent attacks and assaults against our nation. As these acts are unlawful we demand their immediate repeal and shall never recognise foreign rule nor oppression and will stand firm and resolute until our people win back all that has been taken from them.

We assert our right, as set out in our English Bill of Rights, to petition the Monarch/Crown (referendum) on the matter of being ruled from overseas and by foreign power. This right to petition the Monarch having been denied us by successive Prime Ministers (The Monarchs/Crowns Administrator)

Reject Refugees

The UK needs to reject all applications for refugee status and expel all those currently residing here in the name of asylum. The UK is an Island nation, surrounded by free countries. In order to be deemed a refugee you're supposed to claim asylum in the first free country you encounter. As there are no countries surrounding the the UK where people are being persecuted, then there is no legitimate claim to asylum in the UK. 

Why is this idea important?

The UK needs to reject all applications for refugee status and expel all those currently residing here in the name of asylum. The UK is an Island nation, surrounded by free countries. In order to be deemed a refugee you're supposed to claim asylum in the first free country you encounter. As there are no countries surrounding the the UK where people are being persecuted, then there is no legitimate claim to asylum in the UK. 

Enact anti-racist legislation to free Black and Ethnic Minority People

Review reveals racism claims at GCHQ

Anti-terrorism efforts at GCHQ – Britain's secret eavesdropping centre – are being undermined by failing to recruit enough ethnic minority staff, according to a new report. Skip related content

The review found that black and Asian intelligence officers complained of a racist culture at the complex near Cheltenham, in Gloucestershire.

It also said that GCHQ had only a "very small pool" of black and Asian staff among its 5,000 workers – while all of the agency's senior staff were white.

Much of the agency's work involves monitoring calls and emails from terror suspects, but a lack of officers with specialist knowledge of languages like Urdu and Arabic was found to be harming efforts to spot codes and cultural nuances in intercepted conversations.

"It is critical to have a diverse staff group who are able to profile and recognise certain behaviour patterns and communications," the document said.

The report recommends better engagement with ethnic minority communities in order to boost recruitment and improve the image of the organisation, adding: "This is critical to good national security intelligence."
 

Why is this idea important?

Review reveals racism claims at GCHQ

Anti-terrorism efforts at GCHQ – Britain's secret eavesdropping centre – are being undermined by failing to recruit enough ethnic minority staff, according to a new report. Skip related content

The review found that black and Asian intelligence officers complained of a racist culture at the complex near Cheltenham, in Gloucestershire.

It also said that GCHQ had only a "very small pool" of black and Asian staff among its 5,000 workers – while all of the agency's senior staff were white.

Much of the agency's work involves monitoring calls and emails from terror suspects, but a lack of officers with specialist knowledge of languages like Urdu and Arabic was found to be harming efforts to spot codes and cultural nuances in intercepted conversations.

"It is critical to have a diverse staff group who are able to profile and recognise certain behaviour patterns and communications," the document said.

The report recommends better engagement with ethnic minority communities in order to boost recruitment and improve the image of the organisation, adding: "This is critical to good national security intelligence."
 

A sensible right to self/home defence

Lots of talk about owning guns etc for self defence. Although I now live in the USA and own guns and have a concealed carry pemit I agree it is not in the British psyche. However current law forbids anyone to carry anything which can be conceived as a weapon and this is wrong. Any mugger knows that it is unlikely that their victim can defend themselves – so the nurse coming off a late shift and having to take the tube home when it is deserted then walk from the station to home is vulnerable. For gods sake make some defence items legal such as pepper spray, short baton whatever. The criminals have them because they are criminals, like they carry knives – more legislation on knives only affects the law abiding citizen. For years even before I came to the US I carried a lock knife with a 3" blade thinking it was legal – I now discover I was breaking the law. That is crazy as I carry it out of habit and use it daily for all sorts of things. I feel naked without it. My wife as a nurse often used to walk from Ancoats hospital with her scissors in her hand in her coat pocket.

Why is this idea important?

Lots of talk about owning guns etc for self defence. Although I now live in the USA and own guns and have a concealed carry pemit I agree it is not in the British psyche. However current law forbids anyone to carry anything which can be conceived as a weapon and this is wrong. Any mugger knows that it is unlikely that their victim can defend themselves – so the nurse coming off a late shift and having to take the tube home when it is deserted then walk from the station to home is vulnerable. For gods sake make some defence items legal such as pepper spray, short baton whatever. The criminals have them because they are criminals, like they carry knives – more legislation on knives only affects the law abiding citizen. For years even before I came to the US I carried a lock knife with a 3" blade thinking it was legal – I now discover I was breaking the law. That is crazy as I carry it out of habit and use it daily for all sorts of things. I feel naked without it. My wife as a nurse often used to walk from Ancoats hospital with her scissors in her hand in her coat pocket.

Protection of Red Tape & Preventing Pollution from Bonfires

I would like Government to introduce a law that prevents any new Government coming into office having the ability to set fire to all our lovely red tape.  (There should also be a cooling off period protecting the good bits of any previous administration – say for example the Building Schools for the Future Programme).

Red tape is good stuff.  I like the sense I live in a civilised society that has sensible laws and regulations that protect me.  It's nice that I can go into a restaurant and not be given food poisoning.  It's good to know that if I go out on my bike I am unlikely to be run over by a runaway lorry as the regular MOT Test ensures most vehicles on the road are fitted with working brakes.  When my kids go and work in a local business they are protected from idiot employers who won't ask them to do unsuitable work or go into dangerous situations.  I like the fact we have a planning system which while it may limit what I can do, it protects me from my neighbours should they decide they want to build a sky scraper next to my house.

Regulation is sensible – moderation to all extremes and all that of course.  If you look carefully at almost all of the UK regulatory environment it is based on reasonableness and common sense.  Many of our laws and regulations have been derived over a long history within a (mostly) reasonably tolerant culture.  Some were hard won and have only come into being after horrendous accidents or events that we should not wish to see repeated.

Clearly where it sometimes falls down is in how it is applied.  Often the situations where a regulation has reached the headlines a degree of common sense or even proper application of the rules could have avoided the problem.  As part of making things work we should recognise Cap and Badge Syndrome and provide help and understanding to those in positions of power who occasionally succumb to a sense of their own importance.

So please Mr Clegg don't let the Nasty Party lead you astray and remember bonfires release CO2.  I'm happy with much of the regulation within the UK – it makes me feel safe (by the way I enjoy adventure sports and don't read the Daily Mail so perhaps I am not representative in feeling safe in my own little world).

.

 

Why is this idea important?

I would like Government to introduce a law that prevents any new Government coming into office having the ability to set fire to all our lovely red tape.  (There should also be a cooling off period protecting the good bits of any previous administration – say for example the Building Schools for the Future Programme).

Red tape is good stuff.  I like the sense I live in a civilised society that has sensible laws and regulations that protect me.  It's nice that I can go into a restaurant and not be given food poisoning.  It's good to know that if I go out on my bike I am unlikely to be run over by a runaway lorry as the regular MOT Test ensures most vehicles on the road are fitted with working brakes.  When my kids go and work in a local business they are protected from idiot employers who won't ask them to do unsuitable work or go into dangerous situations.  I like the fact we have a planning system which while it may limit what I can do, it protects me from my neighbours should they decide they want to build a sky scraper next to my house.

Regulation is sensible – moderation to all extremes and all that of course.  If you look carefully at almost all of the UK regulatory environment it is based on reasonableness and common sense.  Many of our laws and regulations have been derived over a long history within a (mostly) reasonably tolerant culture.  Some were hard won and have only come into being after horrendous accidents or events that we should not wish to see repeated.

Clearly where it sometimes falls down is in how it is applied.  Often the situations where a regulation has reached the headlines a degree of common sense or even proper application of the rules could have avoided the problem.  As part of making things work we should recognise Cap and Badge Syndrome and provide help and understanding to those in positions of power who occasionally succumb to a sense of their own importance.

So please Mr Clegg don't let the Nasty Party lead you astray and remember bonfires release CO2.  I'm happy with much of the regulation within the UK – it makes me feel safe (by the way I enjoy adventure sports and don't read the Daily Mail so perhaps I am not representative in feeling safe in my own little world).

.

 

Reduce Police Costs AND Improve Freedom of Speech

Reduce Protest confrontations by limiting same day or location of secondary counter demonstrations from occuring and thus save money as well as reduce friction in the community, and agression and violence on our streets.

Example:-

1/ Those who protest agains the war should not be permitted to protest at the same places and times where soldiers are marching to commemorate losses/celebrate their bravery.

2/ BNP and anti-BNP groups should have seperate protests either by the location or the date.

The tests I would apply is here is one of historical violence and size of protest as well as whether the secondary protest will prevent the first from freedom of expression at all. If the groups are known to be peaceful and of a reasonable size then this change should not be applied.

Why is this idea important?

Reduce Protest confrontations by limiting same day or location of secondary counter demonstrations from occuring and thus save money as well as reduce friction in the community, and agression and violence on our streets.

Example:-

1/ Those who protest agains the war should not be permitted to protest at the same places and times where soldiers are marching to commemorate losses/celebrate their bravery.

2/ BNP and anti-BNP groups should have seperate protests either by the location or the date.

The tests I would apply is here is one of historical violence and size of protest as well as whether the secondary protest will prevent the first from freedom of expression at all. If the groups are known to be peaceful and of a reasonable size then this change should not be applied.

Deport foreign criminals upon sentencing

If a foreign national commits a crime in this country and the conviction stipulates a prison sentence, they should be deported to their country of origin upon sentencing instead of being held in a British prison.

Why is this idea important?

If a foreign national commits a crime in this country and the conviction stipulates a prison sentence, they should be deported to their country of origin upon sentencing instead of being held in a British prison.

Please don’t axe the census

Reports in today's newspapers suggest the government is about to scrap the census. This is the first coalition money saving policy idea that I have to disagree with, simply because of the value of census information to future generations.

There may well be other sources of population information available for the government to rely on that are more up to date than the census, however these new sources cannot possibly give the range of information about relationships between individuals that is to be found on the existing census.

If the census is to be abolished then the government should at least consider replacing it with a voluntary electronic version so that those who want to leave a record for future generations can do so. The information on the electronic census could perhaps be released within a much shorter timeframe than the current census.

Why is this idea important?

Reports in today's newspapers suggest the government is about to scrap the census. This is the first coalition money saving policy idea that I have to disagree with, simply because of the value of census information to future generations.

There may well be other sources of population information available for the government to rely on that are more up to date than the census, however these new sources cannot possibly give the range of information about relationships between individuals that is to be found on the existing census.

If the census is to be abolished then the government should at least consider replacing it with a voluntary electronic version so that those who want to leave a record for future generations can do so. The information on the electronic census could perhaps be released within a much shorter timeframe than the current census.

Please don’t axe the census

Reports in today's newspapers suggest the government is about to scrap the census. This is the first coalition money saving policy idea that I have to disagree with, simply because of the value of census information to future generations.

There may well be other sources of population information available for the government to rely on that are more up to date than the census, however these new sources cannot possibly give the range of information about relationships between individuals that is to be found on the existing census.

If the census is to be abolished then the government should at least consider replacing it with a voluntary electronic version so that those who want to leave a record for future generations can do so. The information on the electronic census could perhaps be released within a much shorter timeframe than the current census.

Why is this idea important?

Reports in today's newspapers suggest the government is about to scrap the census. This is the first coalition money saving policy idea that I have to disagree with, simply because of the value of census information to future generations.

There may well be other sources of population information available for the government to rely on that are more up to date than the census, however these new sources cannot possibly give the range of information about relationships between individuals that is to be found on the existing census.

If the census is to be abolished then the government should at least consider replacing it with a voluntary electronic version so that those who want to leave a record for future generations can do so. The information on the electronic census could perhaps be released within a much shorter timeframe than the current census.

Please don’t axe the census

Reports in today's newspapers suggest the government is about to scrap the census. This is the first coalition money saving policy idea that I have to disagree with, simply because of the value of census information to future generations.

There may well be other sources of population information available for the government to rely on that are more up to date than the census, however these new sources cannot possibly give the range of information about relationships between individuals that is to be found on the existing census.

If the census is to be abolished then the government should at least consider replacing it with a voluntary electronic version so that those who want to leave a record for future generations can do so. The information on the electronic census could perhaps be released within a much shorter timeframe than the current census.

Why is this idea important?

Reports in today's newspapers suggest the government is about to scrap the census. This is the first coalition money saving policy idea that I have to disagree with, simply because of the value of census information to future generations.

There may well be other sources of population information available for the government to rely on that are more up to date than the census, however these new sources cannot possibly give the range of information about relationships between individuals that is to be found on the existing census.

If the census is to be abolished then the government should at least consider replacing it with a voluntary electronic version so that those who want to leave a record for future generations can do so. The information on the electronic census could perhaps be released within a much shorter timeframe than the current census.

make the united kingdom united again

we should all be part of the united kindom  one queen one parlement one language. we should do away with local assembleys eg the welsh assembly and the scottish parlement this would save billions of tax payers money which could be used to reduce our debt sell of the expensive assembly buildings. repel the welsh language law which only acts as a wepon for racism and discrimiation for the minority of welsh people that actually speak it. make the united kindom united because united we stand.

Why is this idea important?

we should all be part of the united kindom  one queen one parlement one language. we should do away with local assembleys eg the welsh assembly and the scottish parlement this would save billions of tax payers money which could be used to reduce our debt sell of the expensive assembly buildings. repel the welsh language law which only acts as a wepon for racism and discrimiation for the minority of welsh people that actually speak it. make the united kindom united because united we stand.

Stop the publication of false stories, health and safety myths etc by changing legislation for the British press

Make journalists and editors more responsible for what they print. Make it a criminal offence to publish blatant lies regarding health and safety rules. Remove the right to refer to ‘an undisclosed source’ as this is a green light to enable the media to make up stories to sell papers.

Why is this idea important?

Make journalists and editors more responsible for what they print. Make it a criminal offence to publish blatant lies regarding health and safety rules. Remove the right to refer to ‘an undisclosed source’ as this is a green light to enable the media to make up stories to sell papers.

Dissolve the NHS and Give Free Public Transport (Trains)

I propose a free transport system in place of the costly and obselete NHS. People should pay Health Insurance premiums and not such high taxes, i feel sick when i look at my wages and it shows i work a week for stuff i do not even use such as the NHS.

It is one the largest employers in the world and i still had to wait 2 months for an appointment for Trigger finger injection by which time i opted for private, My Dad had to wait 5 hours in A + E with Finger hanging off, My grandad died of secondary cancer which i do not believed helped with such late diagnosis after telling him he had a bad back, actually it was cancer eating the base of the spine.

So on the plus a free transport system would free up roads make the economy boom, it would provide unemployed incentive to work, students lumbered with less debt and i would have an extra £120.00 in my pocket each month instead of throwing it away at greedy private train operators who believe high prices are needed to provide good service.

In all essence if the system was modernised to such a point most of it could be automated !!

Why is this idea important?

I propose a free transport system in place of the costly and obselete NHS. People should pay Health Insurance premiums and not such high taxes, i feel sick when i look at my wages and it shows i work a week for stuff i do not even use such as the NHS.

It is one the largest employers in the world and i still had to wait 2 months for an appointment for Trigger finger injection by which time i opted for private, My Dad had to wait 5 hours in A + E with Finger hanging off, My grandad died of secondary cancer which i do not believed helped with such late diagnosis after telling him he had a bad back, actually it was cancer eating the base of the spine.

So on the plus a free transport system would free up roads make the economy boom, it would provide unemployed incentive to work, students lumbered with less debt and i would have an extra £120.00 in my pocket each month instead of throwing it away at greedy private train operators who believe high prices are needed to provide good service.

In all essence if the system was modernised to such a point most of it could be automated !!

Vastly reduce the number of pointless automated announcements at major railway stations.

For the government to consider a new legislation to limit, reduce or curtail the sheer number of pointlessly intrusive automated [public address system] announcements at major railway stations (often done on the spurious pretexts of health and safety and security).

Why is this idea important?

For the government to consider a new legislation to limit, reduce or curtail the sheer number of pointlessly intrusive automated [public address system] announcements at major railway stations (often done on the spurious pretexts of health and safety and security).

American Driving Licenses should be accepted in UK

 

I currently live, work and pay tax in the UK. I have done so for the last 6 years – first as a student and now as the spouse of an Englishman. Both my husband and I are educated to a postgraduate level and contribute to the higher band of income tax.

As it now stands, because I am from the united States (and not a former Commonwealth or EU nation), I am unable to convert my driving license to a UK license as persons from Canada, Greece, and Australia may do. In order to drive in the UK I must re-take the theory and practical exams despite having driven for 14 years without a single point on my license.

When I wrote to the Department for Transport, the message I received from Paul Clark was:

"For countries outside the European Union, a Designation Order needs to be in place to convert the foreign license to a UK issued one. There is no such Order in place for driving licenses from the USA, as the driving test and licensing procedures are not comparable to our own."

I feel that the USA is certainly comparable to all countries in the former Commonwealth and Europe. Driving regulations are actually quite stringent in the USA and can easily be considered more or as strict as the Ukraine and Namibia.

Considering that many African and Eastern European citizens carry fraudulent documents as a matter of course, i cannot understand this argument. For example, in Nigeria it is commonplace to forge documents (such as university qualifications) but driving licenses from Nigeria would be allowed under this regulation.

I am simply trying to live my life to the best of my ability and do not see why I should need to retake my driving exams just because I choose to live with my husband in the UK.

Leila Lacrosse

SW14

Blog: The American Baby Plan in London

Why is this idea important?

 

I currently live, work and pay tax in the UK. I have done so for the last 6 years – first as a student and now as the spouse of an Englishman. Both my husband and I are educated to a postgraduate level and contribute to the higher band of income tax.

As it now stands, because I am from the united States (and not a former Commonwealth or EU nation), I am unable to convert my driving license to a UK license as persons from Canada, Greece, and Australia may do. In order to drive in the UK I must re-take the theory and practical exams despite having driven for 14 years without a single point on my license.

When I wrote to the Department for Transport, the message I received from Paul Clark was:

"For countries outside the European Union, a Designation Order needs to be in place to convert the foreign license to a UK issued one. There is no such Order in place for driving licenses from the USA, as the driving test and licensing procedures are not comparable to our own."

I feel that the USA is certainly comparable to all countries in the former Commonwealth and Europe. Driving regulations are actually quite stringent in the USA and can easily be considered more or as strict as the Ukraine and Namibia.

Considering that many African and Eastern European citizens carry fraudulent documents as a matter of course, i cannot understand this argument. For example, in Nigeria it is commonplace to forge documents (such as university qualifications) but driving licenses from Nigeria would be allowed under this regulation.

I am simply trying to live my life to the best of my ability and do not see why I should need to retake my driving exams just because I choose to live with my husband in the UK.

Leila Lacrosse

SW14

Blog: The American Baby Plan in London

Benefit Reform And People With Autism And ASD’s

Introduction

This is a personal response to the coalition governments plans to reform the benefit system mainly disability living allowance and incapacity benefit.

I speak here on behalf of the People of Britain who suffer from Autism and Autistic spectrum disorders as a sufferer of the condition myself, I feel I should write a response to the coalition government’s plans for Welfare reform.

Quoted From David Cameron www.conservatives.com “In these times of tight budgets, we need to make sure the money we do spend is better spent. If we don't we are failing disabled people and their families.”

Protection

It is the government's duty to protect the vulnerable members of society namely those of us with Autism and Autistic spectrum disorders.

The government has had a long history of failings where it comes to protecting people with autism it is my fear that with the new benefit reform system people with autism will be forced off the benefits which are a life line to us.

I fear that we will not be able to find work:

Quoted from DWP The Disability Handbook : "Adults with moderate/severe autism are unlikely to be able to live independently or be employed"

Quoted from National autistic society : "Only 15% of adults with autism are in full-time employment, but most are willing and able to work."

Quoted From David Cameron www.conservatives.com “If you or someone you love suffers from a disability, life is going to be hard a lot of the time. But I do believe there are moments of despair, helplessness and frustration that could be directly alleviated by the work of government.”

I myself as an autistic person have found it impossible to find work, However I have an high IQ which is above average and other people with intelligence levels as high as myself are more often than not found in the highest area's of society's hierarchical system.

Where as people with autistic spectrum disorders with similar intelligence levels are often found in the lowest area's of society's hierarchical systems. Which is amongst the poor and lower class.

If we are thrown off off benefits without support we will start to develop more complicated mental problems :

Quoted From David Cameron www.conservatives.com “A third of adults with autism have suffered severe mental health problems because they lack the right support”

 

Help us find work and Support Those Who Can't

I ask the coalition government to make a promise to protect us and support us:

Quoted from UK Autism Foundation : "Ivan Corea of the UK Autism Foundation has called on Prime Minister David Cameron to keep his promise that he will protect the vulnerable and the poor."

Quoted from Iain Duncan Smith Capital Gains Tax (Rates) (28 Jun 2010) "I am committed to ensuring that disabled people and carers receive the support that they deserve"

Quoted from Lord Freud Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970: 40th Anniversary — Debate "We also recognise that some disabled people will not be able to make the move into employment. If people genuinely cannot work, we will make sure they get the unconditional support they need."

I ask the Coalition government to make a promise in the words of Lord Freud, Iain Duncan Smith, Ivan Corea. Saying in a statement to the public a promise that :

“ We will make it law that: If autistic people cannot work, they will get the unconditional support they need”

“We will make it law that : If autistic people cannot work, they will not be forced from benefits into work”

For those of us who can work I ask the coalition government to destroy the barriers to work we face once and for all:

Quoted from Lord Freud Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970: 40th Anniversary — Debate "We recognise that there are some groups of disabled people, particularly people with learning difficulties, mental health conditions, and autism, who face additional barriers to employment and will need additional support to move into, or return to, work"

I ask the Coalition government to make a promise saying in a statement to the public a promise that :

“We will break the barriers autistic people face in finding employment”

“We will make it law that autistic people do not have to write a CV for employment”
“We will make it law that autistic people do not have to attend a Job Interview”
“We will make it law that autistic people can have a carer with them in employment.”
“We will make it law that autistic people can have a travel buddy to and from work”
“We will make it law that autistic people can have a scribe in work”

 

 

Carers of people with autism

Forcing our carers to find work will mean that they cannot care for us. If you do make them work then they will need to be replaced by government or council appointed carers.

Carers do a Fantastic job at helping us live independently in society:

Quoted From David Cameron www.conservatives.com “it's such a wide spectrum, from those with high functioning autism and asperger's to those who need 24-hour care”

If the carers are taken away and made to find jobs without them being replaced. People with autism will be forced into residential care homes.


I ask the Coalition government to make a promise saying in a statement to the public a promise that :

“ We will make it law that the carers of autistic people will not be removed from benefits”
“ We will make it law that the carers of autistic people will not be forced to work”
“ We will make it law that if the carers of autistic people are made to work they will be replaced with government appointed carers”

Disability and discrimination


Quoted from Disability Discrimination Act 1995

“a person has a disability for the purposes of this Act if he has a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.”


For the purpose of this document the above statement is to outline that a person with autism is legally disabled.
 

Quoted from Disability Discrimination Act 1995
Meaning of “discrimination”
“for a reason which relates to the disabled person’s disability, he treats him less favourably than he treats or would treat others”

In Forcing people with autism from benefits and into work the Disability Discrimination Act is broken because. The person with autism will be treated less favourably than the rest of society.

They will find it more difficult to find a job, where as the rest of society find it easy to find a job this is discrimination.

Many cannot attend a job interview or may fail it because of social difficulties. Where as the rest of society have normal social skills this is discrimination.

Many cannot use the telephone because of social phobia in order to apply for a job where as rest of society find it easy to use the telephone this is discrimination.

Many people with autism cannot write a CV which is required for employment. where as rest of society find it easy to use to write a CV this is discrimination.

Many people with autism have problems with independent travel, Many cannot drive in society people are required to drive or travel independently to work. This is discrimination because an autistic person will not be able to or have problems travelling to work.

Many people with autism have problems writing in comprehensible English and this would effect there work quality. Where as other people in society have no problems with this. This is discrimination
 

 A Personal Statement from me

I end this document with a personal statement from myself:

Although I suffer from Autism I am an excellent photographer I would be of value to the arts industry. However I am met with huge barriers, I would love to be self employed as a freelance photographer or to work as a photographer in society and contribute my art and creative skills to society.

However I find the way the hierarchical system of society and the Social order in which society works is a barrier.

In essence I feel like an alien who was born on the wrong planet and the systems in place are alien to me and I find it near impossible to find my way in such a hostile and complicated environment.

I am sure my one voice reflects the voice and feelings of the autistic community as a whole. It is not often autistic people stand up and speak out themselves.

I have chosen to do this because I feel although all the views and educated opinions of the professionals and experts on autism are very valid, Nothing compares to a “Real” autistic persons views.

I feel because I suffer from the condition then I am the most qualified person to talk about it and no medical qualifications with replace the first hand experience that comes with living with the condition itself.

Why is this idea important?

Introduction

This is a personal response to the coalition governments plans to reform the benefit system mainly disability living allowance and incapacity benefit.

I speak here on behalf of the People of Britain who suffer from Autism and Autistic spectrum disorders as a sufferer of the condition myself, I feel I should write a response to the coalition government’s plans for Welfare reform.

Quoted From David Cameron www.conservatives.com “In these times of tight budgets, we need to make sure the money we do spend is better spent. If we don't we are failing disabled people and their families.”

Protection

It is the government's duty to protect the vulnerable members of society namely those of us with Autism and Autistic spectrum disorders.

The government has had a long history of failings where it comes to protecting people with autism it is my fear that with the new benefit reform system people with autism will be forced off the benefits which are a life line to us.

I fear that we will not be able to find work:

Quoted from DWP The Disability Handbook : "Adults with moderate/severe autism are unlikely to be able to live independently or be employed"

Quoted from National autistic society : "Only 15% of adults with autism are in full-time employment, but most are willing and able to work."

Quoted From David Cameron www.conservatives.com “If you or someone you love suffers from a disability, life is going to be hard a lot of the time. But I do believe there are moments of despair, helplessness and frustration that could be directly alleviated by the work of government.”

I myself as an autistic person have found it impossible to find work, However I have an high IQ which is above average and other people with intelligence levels as high as myself are more often than not found in the highest area's of society's hierarchical system.

Where as people with autistic spectrum disorders with similar intelligence levels are often found in the lowest area's of society's hierarchical systems. Which is amongst the poor and lower class.

If we are thrown off off benefits without support we will start to develop more complicated mental problems :

Quoted From David Cameron www.conservatives.com “A third of adults with autism have suffered severe mental health problems because they lack the right support”

 

Help us find work and Support Those Who Can't

I ask the coalition government to make a promise to protect us and support us:

Quoted from UK Autism Foundation : "Ivan Corea of the UK Autism Foundation has called on Prime Minister David Cameron to keep his promise that he will protect the vulnerable and the poor."

Quoted from Iain Duncan Smith Capital Gains Tax (Rates) (28 Jun 2010) "I am committed to ensuring that disabled people and carers receive the support that they deserve"

Quoted from Lord Freud Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970: 40th Anniversary — Debate "We also recognise that some disabled people will not be able to make the move into employment. If people genuinely cannot work, we will make sure they get the unconditional support they need."

I ask the Coalition government to make a promise in the words of Lord Freud, Iain Duncan Smith, Ivan Corea. Saying in a statement to the public a promise that :

“ We will make it law that: If autistic people cannot work, they will get the unconditional support they need”

“We will make it law that : If autistic people cannot work, they will not be forced from benefits into work”

For those of us who can work I ask the coalition government to destroy the barriers to work we face once and for all:

Quoted from Lord Freud Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970: 40th Anniversary — Debate "We recognise that there are some groups of disabled people, particularly people with learning difficulties, mental health conditions, and autism, who face additional barriers to employment and will need additional support to move into, or return to, work"

I ask the Coalition government to make a promise saying in a statement to the public a promise that :

“We will break the barriers autistic people face in finding employment”

“We will make it law that autistic people do not have to write a CV for employment”
“We will make it law that autistic people do not have to attend a Job Interview”
“We will make it law that autistic people can have a carer with them in employment.”
“We will make it law that autistic people can have a travel buddy to and from work”
“We will make it law that autistic people can have a scribe in work”

 

 

Carers of people with autism

Forcing our carers to find work will mean that they cannot care for us. If you do make them work then they will need to be replaced by government or council appointed carers.

Carers do a Fantastic job at helping us live independently in society:

Quoted From David Cameron www.conservatives.com “it's such a wide spectrum, from those with high functioning autism and asperger's to those who need 24-hour care”

If the carers are taken away and made to find jobs without them being replaced. People with autism will be forced into residential care homes.


I ask the Coalition government to make a promise saying in a statement to the public a promise that :

“ We will make it law that the carers of autistic people will not be removed from benefits”
“ We will make it law that the carers of autistic people will not be forced to work”
“ We will make it law that if the carers of autistic people are made to work they will be replaced with government appointed carers”

Disability and discrimination


Quoted from Disability Discrimination Act 1995

“a person has a disability for the purposes of this Act if he has a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.”


For the purpose of this document the above statement is to outline that a person with autism is legally disabled.
 

Quoted from Disability Discrimination Act 1995
Meaning of “discrimination”
“for a reason which relates to the disabled person’s disability, he treats him less favourably than he treats or would treat others”

In Forcing people with autism from benefits and into work the Disability Discrimination Act is broken because. The person with autism will be treated less favourably than the rest of society.

They will find it more difficult to find a job, where as the rest of society find it easy to find a job this is discrimination.

Many cannot attend a job interview or may fail it because of social difficulties. Where as the rest of society have normal social skills this is discrimination.

Many cannot use the telephone because of social phobia in order to apply for a job where as rest of society find it easy to use the telephone this is discrimination.

Many people with autism cannot write a CV which is required for employment. where as rest of society find it easy to use to write a CV this is discrimination.

Many people with autism have problems with independent travel, Many cannot drive in society people are required to drive or travel independently to work. This is discrimination because an autistic person will not be able to or have problems travelling to work.

Many people with autism have problems writing in comprehensible English and this would effect there work quality. Where as other people in society have no problems with this. This is discrimination
 

 A Personal Statement from me

I end this document with a personal statement from myself:

Although I suffer from Autism I am an excellent photographer I would be of value to the arts industry. However I am met with huge barriers, I would love to be self employed as a freelance photographer or to work as a photographer in society and contribute my art and creative skills to society.

However I find the way the hierarchical system of society and the Social order in which society works is a barrier.

In essence I feel like an alien who was born on the wrong planet and the systems in place are alien to me and I find it near impossible to find my way in such a hostile and complicated environment.

I am sure my one voice reflects the voice and feelings of the autistic community as a whole. It is not often autistic people stand up and speak out themselves.

I have chosen to do this because I feel although all the views and educated opinions of the professionals and experts on autism are very valid, Nothing compares to a “Real” autistic persons views.

I feel because I suffer from the condition then I am the most qualified person to talk about it and no medical qualifications with replace the first hand experience that comes with living with the condition itself.