Great idea!
Nick Clegg’s crowd sourcing site has caused quite a stir in this Web 2.0 world.
“We’ve had an excellent response so far, with over 2,205 ideas, 7,419 comments and 18,000 votes in our first day.”
Would like to have found it in the search results instead of mining it through news articles so am doing my bit for SEO – Your Freedom!
Get on it and help make a change!
Subscribe to the RSS feed or to email updates!
If this site has piqued your interest in hiring Mel, either as a speaker for your event or as a consultant for your business, contact him now to start a conversation about how he can help...
Get in touch with Mel
Make a law to tax caravans using roads. We live in Cornwall and every summer our roads are blocked, mostly with caravans.It's so unfair that they use all this road space but don't pay any extra tax. It's something I've been campaigning about for years but have never had the opportunity to voice my opinion!!
This is about getting rid of laws, not making new ones!
I like your idea. I agree and have thought this for years. They also clogg the roads up to other UK places like the Lake District aznd Scotland. I think you should not only camp caravans but also those who pull camping trailers, and boats, They are often the main cause of accidents because they sway and become unstable in rain and winds. Many of our roads to the more picturesque places and through mountainous terrains are exposed and these people often not only cause the accidents but hold others on the roads up getting to their destinations. I have travelled over 40,000 milers p.a, for over 40 years ands mainky at weekends and I have had vast experiences of the accidents caused by trailers, caravans, and boats being towed. They close main roads and motorways frequently in the period Easter to end of Sept and again at other Bank holiday periods and school holidays and even when they are going to a location to take thenm home for a month or two in the winter. YES TAX THEM ALL.
I think that the law to give sheltered housing residents ARC tv licence is unfair in respect of guest rooms. I am informed that ONE guest room is allowed whether the scheme has 8 or 80 residents. Most new build schemes have a double guest room. and 36 flats. The scheme where I work has two small single guest rooms converted from store rooms for 60 flats. This 'overprovision' means that the scheme no longer qualifies for the concessionary ARC tv licence. This is grossly unfair, our guest rooms are too small to make either one a double, so couples would not be able to visit if we returned one room to its former store room status
Dear Nick,
I would like to see taxation being fairer to all. I know people who live and work in this country some British and some Foreign, who have never paid any tax in the UK at all. They are not 'evading' tax, they are 'avoiding' tax because the government allows them to do so.
I know British people who work in the city for big banks, but who are 'employed' by offshore shell companies, which exist simply to pay salaries. I also know a British businessman who makes all his money from property in the UK, who lives entirely in the UK, but whose businesses are registered in the channel islands and the Isle of Man for tax purposes. I am also aware of Foreign nationals who have lived and worked within the UK for many years and are not required to pay UK tax, but they pay no tax in their country of origin either. Just what is going on here ? My suggestion would be to prevent this inequality and make them pay tax, rather than cutting the public services of those who do pay tax in this country. Thank you.
Bank Holidays should be paid for by right of Law, not as they currently are with a right for an Employer not to pay. Dave Gladwell – Retired Former Full time GPMU Branch Official
approved
Come on Peeps, we trying to get rid of laws here – not make them… let market forces decide this one. if you want to be paid for Bank Holidays – ask your employer or quit. On this subject – the real issue is shouldn't we be aloowed more time off!
Dear Nick
I would like to see the General Permitted Development Order 1995 given very careful consideration, several members of parliament have already raised this issue since it came into law, an indication of just how unfair and unjust this order is.
As a member of a group fighting a network rail development in Suffolk I have been dismayed at the how this order has been used by network rail to develop their sites,
With out any consultation with those directly effected by their actions.
With out any meaningful consultation with local planners (who fear financial penalties under the order if they attempt to delay the projects in any way)
With out consideration of alternatives which in our case would reduce visual impact from the Broads national park, local SSSIs, a local amenity area, local tourist interests and local houses.
With out consideration of costs which could be reduced by tens of thousands if our site were relocated by just a few hundred meters along a rail way line.
From our experience at this one proposed site We would have to agree with the many hundreds of people who have registered their views on the internet regarding this matter and the MPs who thought the matter important enough to raise it in parliament, the order causes a sense of great injustice and must waste millions of pounds by encouraging developers such as network rail to develop sites because they can not because it would be the best and most cost effective option for themselves and the local people and environment.
i was recieving benifits while i was studying at college. I then started university. All the required security checks and personal information was given and sent off to right departments. I now am being hounded by dwp to pay back some benifits that i recieved! Despite having declared all personal financial details to the appropriate departments. Im very desheartened yet again, because of the lack of efficiency in which government departments work. E.G, why if i owe money, was it simply not taken out of the grants and burseries that are issud to me? why am i being hounded by dwp who are now strong arming me into paying money back? I relise most of the governtment depts are now all linked into eachother, so why am i being hard done by, why cant the amount of money be taken out of my study/grant/burseris entitlement, rather than pestering me, over two year after? Its not a problem repaying back whatever i owe (if and when i have the funds), but the main problem is the lack of efficiency the departments work at. Applying to university, i had to pass clearence checks, via dwp, the passsport office etc, all of which are linked into a main system. So why isnt “the money that i owe” taken out directly form my entitlments, rathen than inconvieniencing me years after. No one listens to the small person at all, and nothing ever gets done in order to help.
Just a note to say this isn't Nick's official site. You have to click though to http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk to leave your thoughts and comments.
I was just writing about them coming up with this initiative.
Can you review the policy on Road Humps? On my way to my sons orthodontist, a 10 mile round trip, I go over 88 humps! With the state of the roads, what is the point of having road humps?
1. Our council Colchester Borough Council comes round every few weeks and takes away peoples’ garden waste. It is then carted to some remote location, composted, bagged and then taken somewhere else for the public to buy the bags. People are employed to do these things and CO2 is produced carting all this stuff about not to mention members of the public having to make individual journeys in petrol etc driven vehicles to go and buy the compost. This has been going on for a few years but before that people used to dispose of their own garden waste and I would suggest they could perfectly well compost it themselves. I can't believe the process is either economic or environmentally friendly.
2. Instead of employing people to rake autumn leaves from council parks, why not let the worms do the job and improve the soil in the process. Worms get rid of leaves in a few months. Maybe it’s necessary to sweep leaves off paths where people may slip on them but leave them on the grass to do what nature has done for millions of years.
3. On the subject of slipping/tripping accidents, these cost councils a huge amount of money in compensation every year. Why not tighten up the laws of negligence and try to make people more responsible for their own safety. People now expect to be able to claim for everything, and not be responsible for themselves. It’s largely judges who make these types of laws but clearly Parliament could make clear laws placing more responsibility on people for their own safety which the judges would then have to follow.
charcoal barbecues cause respiratory illnesses and are so poisonous that if
ash put into soil won't grow anything,i suffer on every warm day at least one
as all over 30 neighbours use them.i'm trapped even suffering indoors as they
are even just outside in these small 10x15m gardens. i suggest gas bbq as they
also compost give fungal fumes,need training,cause illnesses,i'm ill already
As local authorities have powers totake over vacant property and let them I see no case for squatting and such acts should be treated as trespass. I am confident that such a law change would be very popular with all but a few vagrants
Small claim court limits should be extended to £1,000,000 from the present £5000. Other changes much needed are that for a fee the court should be made to serve notices on those being pursued where their address is unknown. At present people are systematically building debt moving on and are effectively aided by data protection when in reality they are small time crooks who in time gone by would have been consighned to a debtors prison. Mind you in such times some high profile bankers would have been off to the Tower
Civil cases such as divorce and the like should ordinarily be adjudicated on by a judge in chambers following a review of the written evidence and interview of the protagonists and anyone representing them. The nonsense of lengthy court proceedings that cost the tax payer a fortune is very wasteful andalmost certainly overall probably quadraples the overall cost without any discernable benefit to justice
The present law that allows the police to keep innocent peoples data, DNA finger prints and other personal detail, even when they have been wrongly arrested or released without charge is an infringement of our rights. The State is becoming more like that in Russia or China.
please can you reconsider this law
Nick
It is obvious to all the the use of speed cameras is a method of taxation and not safety at all. These cameras do nothing to solve bad driving or other causes of accidents.
These sort of methods only lead to distrust in Govt as everyone can see why you use these machines to raise revenue but pretend that it is in the name of safety.
hope you take this on board
my husband was sentence to 18 years in jail though the joint enter-prize law for something he never done, a man was killed a pub and my husband was standing at the door and was not involved in this murdered of this man, he WAS there but he didnt touch the man and this was proven in court, the prosticution and the judge agreed with this but the jury came back with joint enter-prize with the other defendents.
Meaning if one is found guilty there all found guilty of this crime, so therefore the joint enter-prize is a 300 year old law and it should be changed if anyone is sentenced under joint enter-prize law and didnt killed anyone should not go to jail for a long period of time, they should have:-
-joint enter-prize 1- for the person who kills
-joint enter-prize 2- for the person who intensionly to harm
-joint enter-prize 3- for person who is there but did not involved in the crime that has been commited.
this law has to be changed because not just my husband but thousands of innocent people have gone to jail in the UK for crimes and murders they have not commited.
the police and the prosticution services are still using this LAW to put away innocent people, if they commited murder they should go to jail but if they didint they should go for jail.
this subject about joint enter-prize has been to the house of commons back in march this year, they said the law may not be drop but made it clear that this law is WRONG, there is a group called LONDON AGAINST INJUSTICE is fighting for this to be changed. please can you listen to us because we are tryng to changed this law for innocent people to be changed, we are hoping to go back to the house of commons by the end of this year. thank you
i agree with this, i was on the LAI website and i think it great what their doing because there is thousands of innocents people that are in jail at the moment that have been sentence under the joint enter-prize law for something that they havent done. im not saying that we should get all the prisoners that have sentenced under this law to get out of jail but i am saying that their sentences should be reduced. there is a friend of mine that has been sentences through joint enter-prize law and is in jail now and her family is trying their best to get this law thrown out to because she didnt commited the crime. im replying to this comment because i think its great that there is some people out that is trying their best to get this law reduced by getting involved in meetings, MPs and also the LAI groups.
thank you
The Law Joint Enterprise for murder is not fair to put a group of people behind bars for one individuals actions. There are innocent people in prison with life sentences. This Law should be changed, it is very easy for 12 people (jury) to send groups of people down for life however it is very difficult to prove individuals innocence through the appeal system. The government needs to consider Human Rights, as these are taken away for the wrongfully accused and the family.
Dear Mr Clegg, I would like to see the Driving Standards Agency become a part of the Department of Transport as it used to be. In the 1970's a car driving test was about 25% more expensive than a car driving lesson. The average price of a one hour driving lesson to-day is £20 per hour. The present cost of a car driving test is £62 and lasts for about 45 minutes. Driving Instructors operate in the free market. Out of the £20 per hour charged to their customers they have to provide for their holidays, sickness and pension. They also have to purchase the car, provide the tax, insurance and fuel. The Driving Standards Agency is now bloated and inefficient. Please make it a much slimmer and cost effective provider of tests for the poor young people who which to drive on our roads.
Peter Cole ADI 9797 Cert Ed
Please repeal the Dangerous Dogs Act! It is a thoroughly bad law, drawn up as a knee-jerk crowd-appeaser, but no dog should be sentenced to death (after months of incarceration while the legalities drag on) just because of its breed. There are already laws to deal with dangerous dogs of any breed – but repealing the DDA will save lives, money, and court and police time.
Thanks for your consideration.
I think that ex-prime ministers should not have security provided outside the UK unless on official UK business. Expenses should be limited.
I would like to see the 300 year old joint-enterprise law dropped or at the very least changed because at the moment it is a joke, you can be at the wrong place at the wrong time and get a life sentence for doing absolutely nothing.
it should be changed to
joint-enterprise 1 for the person who actually kills someone
joint-enterprise 2 for the person who sets out to commit harm not murder
joint-enterprise 3 for the person who does nothing
There are people serving LIFE in prison because one of there friends they were with commits an act of violence while they did nothing.
Cancel the law that allows a Police Force itself to investigate complaints against it.
Peter Heaver
Please can we have a repeal of law protecting badgers. I cannot have hedgehogs or slow worms in my garden – the badgers have killed them all. We have lost our hares and our ground nesting birds and the badgers are digging up bumble bee nests. I feel it an infringements of my rights not to be able to control bangers that do so much damage to wild life and to my garden.
I THINK THE JOINT ENTERPRISE LAW SHOULD BE DROPED,BECAUSE INNOCENT PEOPLE ARE GETTING LIFE IN JAIL FOR A CRIME THEY DIDNT COMMITT,FOR EXAMPLE A MAN GOT FREED AFTER 27 YEARS IN JAIL FOR A CRIME HE DIDNT DO I THINK ITS ABSOULTY REDICULIS THAT AFTER 27 YEARS THEY DECIDED TO REOPEN HIS CASE BECUASE HIS FAMILY WERE STILL FIGHTING HIS INOCENTS THEN HE WAS FREED ,BUT HOW DO ARE YOU SOPPOSED TO GET BACK 27 YEARS OF YOUR LIFE ,ITS A 300 YEAR OLD LAW IT SHOULD BE ABOLISHED ,IT SHOULD WHO EVER LIFTS THERE HAND AND COMMITTS THE MURDER THE SHOULD BE PUNISHED NOT THE PEOPLE WHO WERE IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME.
yes, i totally agree with you on this subject about the joint enter-prize law.
the law may never be dropped but only if we could have it reduced to a lower sentence then maybe it would help wrongly convicted innocent people who have already been sentence through this law.
THANK YOU
I strongly agree with you, standing bye and doing nothing may be morally wrong
but does it deserve a LIFE sentence? young boys are serving 25 YEARS for being in the wrong place at the wrong time and have taken no part in any act of violence.
I disagree with the jointenterprise because a lot of people is getting life in prison down to that law ,when they should have got 4 or 5 years. What ever part you played you should only get jail for what you did and not what sombody else did . And thats why i think that this law should be changed.
i would like to see a change in the joint enterprise law, as i feel this law is unjust and unfair, alot of innocent people are being given a life sentence for a crime they are not guilty of, there at least needs to be a different degree in everyones action, as they have all not taken part in a crime, and all not committed the murder, you should not be responsible for someone elses action, it was not the intention of all, this is a lazy law that is been used to lock up mainly innocents youths for life, this is not fair, and its unjust, this 300yr old law is out of date for todays society, and needs a dramatic change so it is justice for all, allso you should not be made responsible for a crime you are not guilty off, i thought it was a life sentence for a murder, not a life sentence for a murder you did not commit and are not guilty for,
i disagree with the joint enterprise law, this should only be served on people who have committed crimes. it is unfair on innocent people to be convicted of crimes they have no participation in. families are being destroyed because of wrong and infair convictions because of this law. people with no involvement should not be tried or sentenced under this law even if they have witnessed a crime but have no involvement.
How about making sure the people who take driving tests and the written examinations are the Bona Fide candidates. You can't open a bank account with out a huge amount of ID and scrutiny. Why can something that allows inadequate and totally unqualified people to drive in a potentially fatal manner be allowed. The driving is bad enough as is with out adding to it. Only in Britain it seems.
I would also like to see cyclists have at least thrid party liability insurance.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/jul/15/police… http://www.yhai.org.uk/dannymajor.html PLEASE READ THE ABOVE.MY FAMILY HAVE ALWAYS VOTED LABOUR BUT DIDNT THIS TIME,THE WHOLE FAMILY WERE RELEIVED THAT THERE IS A COALITION.LABOUR WERE NOT INTERESTED IN THE MESS THAT THEY CREATED.MY HUSBAND IS A POLICE OFFICER WITH OVER 30 YEARS IN WEST YORKSHIRE POLICE AND HE ALONG WITH OTHER OFFICERS ARE DISGUSTED AT THE WAY OUR SON HAS BEEN USED AS A SCAPE GOAT.THE POLICE PREPARED 9 INTERVIEWS AND AGREED WITH US THAT THE CCTV (THAT THE POLICE HID AND WE HAVE NOW GOT OUR HANDS ON)SHOWED THEY HAD LIED.BUT ONCE THE ORIGINAL INVESTIGATING OFFICER WAS INTEVIWED THE POLICE TURNED ON US.WE ARE NOW AT THE MERCY OF OUR LOCAL POLICE FORCE.WE HAVE GOT PROOF THAT THE POLICE ARE STILL TELLING LIES.PLEASE COME TO WEST YORKSHIRE AND TALK TO PC ERIC MAJOR HE WILL STAND UP AND BE COUNTED,SOMETHING THAT COULD RUIN HIS CAREER.BUT THE TRUTH HAS TO BE TOLD
Footballers and their clubs earn obscne wages yet the publicepay to police those matches can licences be applied for based on the cat of football match ie Cat £50K, Cat B £75 K Cat C £100K cat c + £125k barely a splash for some players lets get the balance right plesase
Laws governing the powers of the PRS (Performing Rights Society Ltd) to be abolished. A recent appraisal by them was 100% incorrect and late in coming due to a “backlog of work”; a penalty was the applied for late appraisal ! On appeal the facts on the license were changed (to show the real situation) but the charges remained the same. The workings of this bunch of faceless beauro no bodies need to be curtailed, or at the very least the proceeds of their plundering needs to be investigated.
The joint enterprise law should be changed, if you are out with some friends and one acts like an idiot and hits somebody or worse why should you be held responsible ?
You can be given the exact same JAIL sentence as him !!!
Some poor people are doing LIFE in prison because of this 300 year old law.
Introduce maximum salaries (or fees) and maximum notice periods for ALL (senior) staff employed directly or indirectly by the state or at public expense.
eg maximum notice period 1 year
eg maximum termination payoff a multiple of legal minima (twice?)
eg no legal fees over (say) £500k per annum or scale equivalents
all salaries greater than the Prime Minister’s to be signed off personally by him
Organisations like the BBC wd then have to toe the line! (This suggestion is not intended to be an attack on the BeeB – that is just an example currently in the public eye).
Re current furore over Green’s lack of procurement policies and procedures:
As a stopgap give all significant suppliers notice that they are UK preferred suppliers only if they undertake to give all UK State purchasers best price irrespective of circumstance – ie they will never sell to anyone else at a lower price (with qualifications to stop dodges such as repackaging etc)
If applied to Big Pharma (for example) surely savings would be massive.
This does not preclude other appropriate controls!
Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the public for retaining the joint enterprise law.