to wonder if there is anything that could be changed in our society that most people would agree is reasonable

[chomalungma]

Without angry headlines in the Daily Mail, columns and tweets by Piers Morgan and Laurence Fox, comments by Boris Johnson, no angry arguments on Twitter, on social media, on morning TV programmes etc

Just something that unites most people as a good thing, something that is wrong and needs changing.

Because it's just division at the moment. Division, tribes, culture wars etc.

Can anyone think of anything?

For relevant experience to be required in order to be a member of the cabinet eg the secretary of state for health having healthcare experience.

More done about litter and fly tipping?

I think investment in healthcare. Especially for disability and mental health services.

@hibbledobble yes!

More flexible working as a long term option, not just because of covid.

To slow the pace a little, we need to have more time with our families and friends and enjoying ourselves rather than slavishly working all hours just to pay for expensive houses cars and holidays. Maybe offering a four day week or 3 day week to anyone who wants it? I know some who've paid mortgages off that might go for that

I’d like SEN to be dealt with and supported properly.
I’d also like CAMHS to be fit for purpose.

Fully agree ulanbatorismynextstop, society's priorities have been all wrong for a while now. Why do we make life harder for ourselves?

Being able to make a non-emergency appointment with the GP. It is mission impossible where I live. You have to call like over 70 times just at 10 am to get into the phone queuee, then wait around 20 min. Then the receptionist will cheerfully inform you that all the appointments are allocated for the next 3 weeks and to call next Monday. And, no, they cannot give you an appointment for later than 3 weeks.

@hibbledobble

For relevant experience to be required in order to be a member of the cabinet eg the secretary of state for health having healthcare experience.

I don't know about this one. I think it would be difficult for a lot of ministries and minister's experience might make them biased. Say if you're minister for health and had been a doctor would that mean you would understand every bit of health care? Or minister of universities and had been w Cambridge professor would you understand, say, university of Coventry?

I think I'd prefer minister who actually took advice from and listened to professionals and civil servants. Rather than sack them for carrying the decisions they made. And stay in post themselves.

• decisions they made = the minister made

Ending child poverty surely

Hopefully MUCH better care for the most vulnerable would be something we could all get on board with - both children and adults with SEN/D, but also the care of elderly, particularly those with dementia.

Someone addressing the HUGE issues of some parts of the NHS being woefully under strain - Mental Health services being probably the most underfunded for many, many, many years.
I'd love to see a non political body be set up to listen to actual practitioners - paramedics, nurses, doctors, hospital social workers, mental health workers - to find out what can be done about the pressures on A&E. Watch any '999' or 'Ambulance' type programmes or the '24 hrs in A&E' type progs and overwhelmingly a large % of the people they are called to, or that go to A&E actually need completely different services, not A&E and not a highly trained paramedic at all. It isn't only about money.

However, whereas i'd like to hope everyone would agree these things would be really positive, what we'll never all agree on is the right way to fund what 'we'd like' or even what we 'need'.

Sadly probably very few things. Or things that people might agree with in principle but not if it would cost them.
To use one of the examples above: ending child poverty. I'd guarantee that would bring out a whole host of 'don't breed em if you can't feed em' comments and a load of frothing about giving money to feckless parents who'd only spend it on drugs/drink/fake tan/a big TV.

A universal basic income. It would bring massive changes to society and remove so many equalities.

Can't think of anything that everyone would agree on tbh.

I would hope this epidemic has made everyone including government etc value green spaces more and make sure everyone has reasonable access to some.

Euthanasia for terminal illnesses, especially painful ones. Most people wouldn’t want to prolong their lives if they knew they were going to die slowly and painfully. Unfortunately no government has the balls to even consider it.

Significant increase in provision for mental health services, especially for addiction. If we had the world's best rehab facilities a lot of society's problems would be reduced. You just have to watch one of those documentaries about the emergency services to see what a huge drain on society addiction is (including alcoholism) - family breakdown, damage to children's wellbeing, crime, homelessness, effects on the NHS.

@SinisterBumFacedCat

Euthanasia for terminal illnesses, especially painful ones. Most people wouldn’t want to prolong their lives if they knew they were going to die slowly and painfully. Unfortunately no government has the balls to even consider it.

I agree with this and would be one of the first to sign up but you'd get objections from religious groups and those worried it would be exploited for financial reasons, ie avoiding the cost of expensive end of life care, or by relatives overburdened by being carers.

A universal basic income would also draw objections from the higher paid or whichever businesses/services saw taxes rise to pay for it.

You can implement policies or ideologies that most people will agree with but you'll still get the opposite political view being angry about it on the Internet or in the media.

Almost everyone would be happy with a zero tolerance approach towards littering and fly tipping but there would need to be enforcement and punishment.

Then you'd have people complaining due to impact of fines, being made to do litter picking and the imposition on free time or other commitments such as work, childcare responsibilities or leisure or the fall out when serious offenders are jailed.

Singapore is famous for its zero tolerance littering laws.

singaporelegaladvice.com/law-articles/littering-killer-litter-offences-penalties-singapore/

"Ending child poverty surely"

Attempts to do that are one of the biggest sources of Daily Mail headlines.

No, I don't think it's a great idea to have multiple children when you don't have a job or anywhere for them to live but why the hell should the children suffer homelessness or overcrowding because the parents haven't thought things through?

Child sex abuse. Surely to goodness we can deal with the dreadful and powerful men who want to do this with impunity.

Euthanasia seems an odd choice, quite a lot of people disagree with that and it's not just the religious. Lots of doctors too.

I think what someone said upthread is right. Many things people would agree with the goal, but what would cause disagreement is the approach, or maybe what costs we could bear to accomplish it.

But I do think ending child sex abuse is one that would have a lot of support. Where that gets tricky is it seems extremely difficult to know how to do it at all.

Currently I think not.

Division is the objective of the government, so they deliberately drive it.

Toilets, all over the world.
Be them composting or flush.
End to humans taking free poops.
Look up world toilet day

Replacing the requirement for GCSE Maths/English with a basic numeracy and literacy tests that can be taken at any age. Means that those who genuinely struggle with these things can focus on the 'life skills' numeracy/literacy instead of getting bogged down in the unnecessary stuff- and the pupils who find it easier can have more of a challenge.