I believe this action will substantially reduce the number of 'cold calls' to households. Business callers are to declare their full names - first and second - plus the business or organisation they represent, and their formal position within it. I am fed up with cold calling as I am sure everybody else is. Cold calling is now something of an industry and some of these calls which tout for business are potentially fraudulent. How many innocent people have been scammed or duped over the phone, when they would otherwise have been spared this, if only they had been able to verify the identity of the caller? The concept of 'Name Is No Shame' equally applies to business letters written to members of the public and emails, where the full identity of the author has been withheld. Government it seems has done little if anything to stem the tide of unsolicited phone calls to the public; it is down to us to insist that they act. I am confident that if 'Name Is No Shame' becomes law and that it is mandatory for the business community to declare their identity in dealings with the general public, it will substantially reduce the number of 'cold calls' to households. Thank you.

Upon speaking to a call centre employee (based in India) he was forced to work overtime to make up time taken for 'holiday'; this may not seem like a big deal, but he has no holiday entitlement for the first 6 months of his employment contract with BSKYB (or whichever third party they are sub contracting the call centre work to)!!!… can you imagine anyone here in the UK having to endure that working arrangement? It's already bad enough that these multi-billion dollar corporations take jobs out of the British economy, and although workers in the developing world may not need equal pay scale don't we as fellow workers feel they at least deserve some basic working entitlements (for example accrued holiday earned via the hours they work)… Currently in India the statutory minimum is merely 1 days entitlement for every 20 days of work performed the previous year!!!… SHOCKING when you consider SKY TV has millions of customers here in Britain paying BIG MONEY every month into the coffers!!...

Everyone knows what is going on here and it is getting ridiculous: We talk about a "bad food environment" and yet there is little legislation to prevent the powerful retailers who supply most of our nutrition from using pernicious sales tack-ticks. Supermarkets know that will power is finite resource and the most effective way of getting customers to crack, is to tempt them with high sugar foods in close proximity for a long time. These counters are designed cause sugar cravings. They are deliberately overriding the consumers free will and in light of the obesity and diabetes pandemics it is a disgraceful business practice.

How many of you with a landline actually use it? Ofcom proposed an upto 8% cost reduction, yet the costs have just gone up by 6%+!! Ofcom produced a report that proposed the reduction in the costs of landline rentals over a number of years. At the time of the Ofcom report, 11th July 2013, the wholesale cost of a landline was £93.27 per annum or £7.77 per month. These are phone lines rented from BT by the likes of Sky, and then re-sold to Sky subscribers at a cost of £196.80 per annum or £16.40 Ex VAT per month (current price after latest price rise). The current landline rental price from Sky Is £16.40 Ex VAT per month and that's a rise of 6.49% on last years cost - yet Ofcom proposed a reduction in these rental costs! Ofcom stated in its published article 11th July 2013, and I quote: "Wholesale line rental: the regulated wholesale price today is £93.27 per year. Under Ofcom's proposals the prices will fall in real terms by between CPI - 2% and CPI - 8% every year" and if the proposal was successful the reduction in charges would come into effect on 1 April 2014 and run until 31 March 2017. CPI = Consumer Price Index. See full details of Ofcom's proposals here:http://media.ofcom.org.uk/news/2013/new-prices-for-landline-and-broadband-services/ What happened to Ofcom's proposals as monthly costs for landlines are still rising? Perhaps this text below explains the price rises?! According to a BBC article; Latest figures from the regulator, Ofcom, show that consumers spent three billion minutes fewer on their landlines in the year to June 2014, a reduction of 12.7% in one year alone. As a result, operators lost out on £85m of revenue compared with the previous year. "Call volumes are declining," said James Barford of Enders Analysis. "People are using Facebook or WhatsApp, or even email if they're a little old-fashioned, so operators are having to recover their costs from increased line rental," he added. see full article here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30251029 The landline price increases: Sky: up by 6.49% to £16.40 a month BT: up 6.25% to £16.99 Virgin Media: up 6.25% to £16.99 Talk Talk: up 4.7% to £16.70 Why are the costs of landlines still rising and what happened to Ofcom's proposals to reduce the costs of landlines? We all understand that companies have to make money but making a margin of £103.53 per year, per landline, per customer is scandalous, especially when the likes of Sky do not have to do any work or maintain the landline, as they pass this job back to BT. We do understand there are processing costs associated with these charges though!! Let's put this into context:- SKY have 5.3 million subscribers who need a landline to receive the full TV service from Sky and use their broadband services. So, all the subscribers have a phone line, thats 5,300,000 x £103.53 (Sky's margin on landlines) = £548,709,000.00 income from landlines per year! That's over HALF A BILLION plus revenue, per year from landline charges! BT, Virgin and Talk Talk are making vast amounts of money as well from landline rentals per month. There where as of December 2013 - 22.6 Million residential and SME broadband connections - do the maths at £103.53 margin per connection! See full details here: http://media.ofcom.org.uk/facts/ 'Margin' is the amount of money made by Sky when charging for a landline:£16.40 x 12 = £196.80 less the £93.27 quoted by Ofcom = £103.53 Margin. What about the elderly that don't have SKY TV or Talk Talk TV or BT TV/Sports? These are people that need a landline to stay in contact with family and the outside world? The fact that it costs them £16.99 + VAT per month or £203.88 +VAT per annum for a landline from BT is outrageous. Is it any wonder some elderly people will not put the heating on? They probably can't afford it when they are paying £16.99 + VAT a month NOT TO TALK! In 1995 BT ran an advertising campaign with the late great Bob Hoskins and the strap line was "It's good to talk". Their next advert should use No Doubt's song 'Don't Speak' as the backing track and they should have a Dick Turpin character holding a sign with the strap line "It's great for us!" or they could pay Bork to use her version of the song 'It's Oh So Quiet" with an elderly person in a cold house, staring at the landline telephone!! The more people that sign the petition the better. "Come on BT, Sky, Talk Talk and Virgin, show some community spirit and immediately reduce the costs for landlines for the elderly and for those who need landlines to communicate with the outside world because they are house bound. Individually we can moan about the costs of landlines, sign the petition and collectively we could get cost reductions as proposed by Ofcom. Please sign. Thank You Philip Smith-Lawrence

I've just watched PETA's shocking video about fur farms in "Origin Assured" countries (http://petauk.org/originassured) and I can't understand why Harvey Nichols continues to support animal cruelty. Video footage shows how on fur farms in Finland, Sweden, the US and other Origin Approved countries, animals such as raccoons, rabbits and minks are kept in filthy wire cages, sometimes alongside the rotting corpses of other animals, and are often left to suffer from open, untreated wounds and even missing limbs. Please support this campaign and share it via soical media Thanks Tom

The same perpetrators who promoted and operated Ark were responsible for Capita Oak, and they are still out there right this minute doing the same thing day in, day out. Thousands of victims, hundreds of millions of pounds worth of pension funds. This is now seriously out of hand and desperately urgent. Too many families have been destroyed and hurt, pensioners can't afford to eat are paying bills, over 12 suicides and people taking nervous breakdowns and families losing there homes and there's been no help or support from the government. The Ark victims AND the Capita Oak victims have for many months been asking the Police, Action Fraud, TPR, the Pensions Ombudsman and the government to take action and nothing has been done. Please Help Now http://www.roundtownnews.com/index.php? http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article1445014.ece?shareToken=278303c72da7ebd57fab5c5cd9ffcefb http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04t0sk8/xray-series-14-episode-9

It is completely unfair and immoral that workers who suffer an injury in the workplace are punished by receiving warnings due to sickness level. Accidents can have a bad enough effect on a person, but making them worry about getting a warning due to an accident that wasn't their fault in inexcusable. This has to stop. People should be able to feel safe at work, but in reality the employer can punish you due to their failings, this is not right. Let's change this common practice.

The way that the shared spaces on The Crossings in Stafford are currently being left, with overflowing bins full of dog mess, and poorly maintained green space is unacceptable and a health risk to the people who use it - the people of the area deserve better.

So many people face becoming Homeless. Including families with Children.

UNISON’s recognition agreement with Catalyst gives members a strong collective voice in the workplace. • Statutory powers of negotiation and consultation – on terms and conditions, pay, TUPE, redundancy and all the issues affecting our working lives. • Paid time for trade union duties so our stewards can fully represent members’ interests. • Health and Safety reps have statutory powers with regard to H&S issues. • An independent trade union is the only body which can truly hold management to account.

These youth services are nationally recognised for their outstanding work with the young people of Hull and have served the community for 30 years. They are accessed by the city's most vulnerable young people and are highly valued by all of those who have used them. The councils current proposal will see the price rocket from £2 a session to £50 denying the young people from Hull's most deprived areas access.

In June 2001- The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that two MAXIMUS employees filed discrimination complaints against the company. The employees stated that MAXIMUS is so lacking in diversity that the companies minority employees referred to it as "White Castle". July 2007- MAXIMUS settled a lawsuit brought against it by the United States government for involvement in falsifying Medicaid claims for $30.5 million. September 2011- MAXIMUS INC. was sued by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for disability discrimination for failure to promote a female employee because it regarded her as disabled. MAXIMUS settled the lawsuit in August 2012. Is this really the right company to take over from ATOS to assess ill and disabled people for their ability to work.