Brand navigation


Weekdays 12.00pm

Radio 4's consumer affairs programme

Brand navigation

« Previous | Main | Next »

Abolishing a Law

Post categories:

Julian Worricker Julian Worricker | 12:37 PM, Thursday, 1 July 2010

finger-on-phone-303.jpgThe quality of any phone-in programme relies heavily on the strength of the callers but next week we'll be relying on the ingenuity of listeners even more than usual. On Tuesday's Call You and Yours we're taking the lead of deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and asking you which law you'd most like to see abolished.

We can claim to have given early voice to this notion - in the run-up to the 2005 General Election we used Call You and Yours to compile a Listeners' Manifesto. One of the top five suggestions was that no new law should be introduced without another being abolished.

A quick straw poll in the office revealed an end to road speed restrictions would be popular. There was one vote for speed cameras, one for speed limits on motorways - that from the tiny, male contingent on the team. By contrast Winifred lives a life of such unparalleled perfection she couldn't think of a single law she'd like to do without.

On the Today Programme, the Taxpayers Alliance suggested the ID Cards Act and the Digital Economy Act should be ditched. And the TUC wants to scrap the VAT exemption on private school fees.

Anyway we want your contributions to this Government-inspired debate. I'll be presenting Call You and Yours on Tuesday July 6th from 12-1. The number to call on the day is 03700 100 444. Lines are open from 10-1.
Or you can email at any time.

Julian Worricker presents You and Yours on BBC Radio 4


  • Comment number 1.

    Yes, end all speed limits and drink driving rules. This would save an enormous amount of police time and reduce masses of street furniture. Car repair shops, car insurance companies, new car sales, undertakers and pubs would also increase business dramatically, contributing to economic growth.
    The NHS would be under pressure but at least those killed young would not be a burden in their old age and there would be more spare parts for transplantation for those who survived.

  • Comment number 2.

    the laws that should be abolished are all 'kneejerk reaction' laws. Something e.g 'bubbles -legal drug',photographing kids, (in the 90's raves) etc happens, the redtops and/or Daily Mail scream, the government rushes through a badly thought out law, usually banning something. There are lots of examples.
    Plus there are thousandes of statutes on the books from passed in te last 1000 years. Start cleaning them out
    And of course the 1707 Act of Union.....

  • Comment number 3.

    I would like to see the following scrapped..
    (1) The requirement to have 100 persons on the Electoral Roll sign a Nomination Form, before you are allowed on the Ballot.

    (2) The requirement , to Place a Deposit, which is not returned, if you get less than 5% of the vote.

    If both these things were scrapped, then we could claim our Democratcy back from the Political Gangs, that have stolen it from us.

  • Comment number 4.

    I would like to see all Licences Fee's Charged by Local Councils Scrapped.

    No-one should be required to pay a Fine, for Complying with the Laws.
    Thats what these Fee's are. Compliance with the Law, is not an Offence..

  • Comment number 5.

    Repeal the Welsh Language Act 1993. Julian was dismissive of this a few weeks ago. Read my comments on this link for a more detailed analysis.

  • Comment number 6.

    I agree with Graham, most of these people wanting to repeal these laws will be sitting in a country pub having 3 or 4 pints, driving home and moaning when the police stop them because they 'should be catching the real criminals'. Also all these Health & Safety myths are not by HSE or Europe they are caused by lawyers getting people to claim for anything and pouring taxpayers money into their coffers - perhaps banning lawyers might be better. Oh, and when something happens that directly impinges on people because a law they wanted repealed has been repealed, for instance in child protection, then I don't want to hear them moaning about it - remember it will be their fault.

  • Comment number 7.

    Laws which could lead to a penalty yet don't in practice - because of disuse or lack of enforcement - could be automatically voided after a statutory period of "neglect". Say 5 years with no use of the law in question? Just by passing one simple law, I imagine.

    BUT adopting this approach would detract from the attention being given to this spurious debate and could free up the media etc. for discussion of real issues in greater depth? Or is it all just a bit of fun and I haven't seen the joke?

  • Comment number 8.

    I'm sorry There is a problem with this one of many PR stunts by this coalition of parties who didn't win an overall majority at the last election If you really think a government of any hue would Abolish any law otherthan those they chose themselves must be living in fairy land the likelihood isthey'll sctrap a few that they don't like and then sayIt weas what the public asked for It is more PR pUFF FROM A pr PM
    I for one will not give it credibility by respondingthey've done nothing but seek to punish disenfranchised disabled people with their quite appalling budget, cut to ser4vices, particularly those of children and disabled people(not in any party manifesto) and they've cut pensions and disability benefit by changing the annual % increase by changing the inflation figure used to that of theconsumer prices index historically a lower figure than the previously used retail price index thus allowing the value of disabled benefits to decrease in real terms every year
    As if they ever kept pace with the real extra cost of disability at the risk of appearing ungrateful the annual£10 christmas bonus will be worthg roughly the price of a pint by christmas it has remained unchanged so long
    Itherefore will do nothing which may ad credibility to this sham coalition which is rushing through legislation with indecent haste to avoid proper scrutiny.

  • Comment number 9.

    There is a problem with car insurance costing from £6000 up to £20,000 just for one year of car insurance is highly pathetic if not abolish the need to be insured then put a cap on the cost of £1500 max, these companys are doing this because they can.
    There are many cases where people who hit your car just drive off and nothing can be done and you end up paying for your car so there's no point paying the insurance company for not covering you, unless you paid a lot more for comprehensive cover. You should be looking after your car yourself. This is why so many people drive uninsured because if you would ever get the max find of £5000 it is still a lot cheaper than being uninsured...


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.