The continued exclusion of overseas pensioners from up-rating adjustments to their State Pensions means that the real terms incomes of those affected falls year-on-year. Over time this leads to hardship, poverty, loss of independence and loneliness. Some individuals have been forced to return to the UK, away from loved ones, just to get by. This policy also creates a barrier to pensioner emigration from the UK, as the prospect of a frozen pension means that many feel they simply couldn't afford to do so. Given the countries involved are largely in the Commonwealth, those in British Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic communities are disproportionately impacted. There is no dispute about the entitlement to receive a State Pension overseas. All British pensioners who have made the required NI contributions during their working life are eligible. The issue at stake is whether that pension is universally uprated or not. At the moment, the government's policy is inconsistent and unfair, with half British pensioners abroad getting up-rated and the other half excluded. This creates crazy anomalies i.e. uprating in the USA, frozen pensions in Canada. It is time for reform to give all pensioners the full state pension they deserve, wherever they live, and to end this injustice once and for all. A positive, and easily affordable, step forward would be for the Government to include all pensioners in the 2.7% State Pension up-rating to be granted this year, by withdrawing the Social Security Benefits Up-rating Regulations 2016 currently before parliament. CASE STUDIES: Anne Puckridge Former college lecturer Anne Puckridge, now 91, lived and worked in the UK all her working life, paying mandatory NI contributions throughout this time. In 2002, aged 77 she finally retired and decided to move to Canada to be with her daughter and grandchildren who had moved to Calgary in the 1990s. Fourteen years on, Anne, who served as an intelligence officer in the Women’s Royal Navy in the Second World War, is struggling to live on the frozen £75.50 a week rate, she was entitled to when she moved abroad. Anne now feels that she will be forced to move back to Britain, because her pension will no longer cover day to day expenses and she is increasingly reliant on her daughter to get by. Anne says: “It’s the small things, and the injustice, that is really getting to me. I value my independence, but I can’t go on living on the breadline and I don’t want to inflict this on my family. As well as ever-increasingly poverty, I feel a sense of stress and shame, which is affecting my health.” Abhik Bonnerjee Abhik Bonnerjee, now 73, moved from India to Glasgow in 1960. He worked in the UK for 38 years, in shipbuilding, steel manufacture and the food industry. He owned an Indian restaurant for 6 years. Abhik returned to India in 1997 and reached the State Pension retirement age in 2008 when it was paid at £87.30 a week. Having made all the required NI contributions, if Abhik still in the UK today he would get £115.95, 28% more. The decline in his real terms income has left Abhik concerned about losing his home. He now feels he may have to move back to the UK. Abhik says: “The current situation makes me very, very angry. The government are scaremongering… [The Minister] says it will cost a lot of money but it is only a tiny percentage [of the pensions budget]. The government should be doing more, especially for Commonwealth countries and MPs can’t explain why they are not.” Rita Young Rita Young, 78, lives in Peterborough in the UK. She retired in 2002, aged 67, having enjoyed a long career in market research and as a community volunteer. Rita’s son moved to work in Australia some time ago and now has a family there. Since being widowed Rita has wanted to join her son and grandchildren in Australia, but has felt unable to do so due to the prospect of a frozen pension. As she gets older Rita finds daily life increasingly difficult, especially as she doesn’t have a family around who she can call on. She is deeply saddened that she is not able to be with her family during the later stages of her life, and feels that it is a complete injustice that had her son moved to a different country (e.g. France or the USA) she would be able join him with a full UK pension. Rita has spoken at the National Pensioners Convention about the issue and is very active in her community. Rita says: “I worked and contributed to my State Pension all my life. It doesn't seem fair that the government can just stop uprating it because I want to be with my family.” Geoff Amatt Geoff Amatt from Abergele in Wales reached 100 last year. Geoff contributed to the UK economy all his life and fought for his country during the Second World War. Geoff’s daughter Jean emigrated to Calgary, Canada more than 40 years ago, yet Geoff was unable to follow in the knowledge that his State Pension would be frozen at the rate of leaving the country. £29 per week at the time. As a result Geoff has been separated from his two grandchildren and two great grandchildren throughout his retirement. He has lived alone, largely dependent on the state for care, since his wife died seven years ago. Jean says: “Frozen pensions are unbelievably unfair. Canadians get their pension uprated in they live in the UK yet we don’t offer the same for those moving in the other direction. The government is keeping families apart and I worry about my father left all alone in Britain while we’re thousands of miles away.”

At the moment pensioners are expected to live on Approximately £100 less per week than someone on the minimum wage working a 37 hour week. How is this fair a retired person should be able to heat their home eat well and enjoy their retirement. There is no justification or logic to setting the pension rate so low. Pensioners need the same amount of money as anyone else to live on their costs are greater not less.

It can not be right in a civilised and fair society that children should be placed in poverty and disadvantaged because of the failure by successive governments to effectively manage the British economy.

I will sadly loose the chance to make a difference as well as my livelihood. Within 6 months I will create my business with the need to employ people from the local community. With in 1 year I will be able to help my community sustainability in teams of job creation and long term employment prospects. These are just a few things I do: I am a local children's charity supporter and make regular financial contributions. I am a member of the Dudley Health Group. I am a weekly contributor to the local Dudley food bank. I also work alongside the youth of all nations to assist in there future growth and development. I am a chief church usher and I am an active church member of 13 years for the Dudley New Testament Church. I work closely with the Afro-carribean centre. Sending me back to Jamaica means l loose my formed friendships and community family, l will have nothing and I will be homeless. The deadline for the immigration tribunal to receive this is the 30th March 2016. Help me to continue to make a positive change and contribution to the UK future growth and to the future adults of tomorrow. Please sign this petition. And thanks for all the support. Dwayne Millwood.

Currently our health service is in crisis and are failing to deliver a service that we, the tax payer are paying for. The mill stone of PFI is bringing the national health service closer and closer to the door marked private health service and this Government is pushing it closer and to closer to this door unless we stand up and be counted. Make no mistake the smoke and mirror of free at the point of delivery is just that smoke and mirrors and by tomorrow we will no longer have a national health service. Waiting times are through the roof, Junior doctor being victimised and bullied into accepting a new contract not fit for purpose by Jeremy Hunt. Ambulance services on their knees and patients are suffering and dying because of staff shortage and stretched resources to pay off the PFI bill and not because Junior Doctors do not work, which they do, on weekends. The PFI are forcing Health services to make cuts across the board and this is to reduce the wage bill so that share holders are paid there dividends at the end of the month. So if we want to save our health service then we need to nationalise the PFI dept and to this end we need to be patitioning our local MP's to suppor the nationalising of the PFI's

That we the Fisherman and Farmers of Scotland have No Confidence in Richard Lochhead to stand and fight for our industries that are an important part of our rural economy, an important export earner for Scotland and vital to our food security

The Credit industry in the UK already has plenty of tools to use when pursuing debtors who will not pay their debts, to the point of getting a County Court Judgement and then engaging Bailiffs to go after the debtor or repossessing property. In addition, they are under a duty to work with debtors who find themselves unable for whatever reason to pay their debts as originally agreed and to find more suitable ways of repaying the debt. The fact that a company will sell an old debt for a fraction of its face value means that the debt has already been written off and all options for collecting the debt have failed. Almost without exception, these companies do not exercise any form of due diligence to find out whether the alleged debt is still valid. In many cases, it isn't. Instead, they write threatening and intimidating letters to potentially vulnerable people about old debts which may well have been forgotten about. This practice is unfair given the vast array of tools already available to the credit industry. It is not in the interests of the Credit Industry because the debts sold have already been written off. The practice is born of sheer greed and benefits nobody except the companies engaged in it. For that reason, it needs to be banned.

Mr Osborne declared the agreement with Google was a "major success". I would like Mr Osborne to get millions more "major successes"

This is important because it is a government handout to vulnerable people. The Government should not be charging VAT on the grant

The UK government's £130M tax deal with Google means that Google have effectively agreed to pay only a 3% corporation tax rate for the past 10 years. This is much lower than the 20% rate many other businesses have to pay in comparison. This is clearly unfair and demonstrates the UK government will treat rich powerful companies, who may benefit their political agenda, more favourably than those who have little or no influence. The secrecy of this deal is a cause of national concern and needs investigating by an independent body which has the power to veto it should due cause be found. Google is not alone in this. Other large multinational companies have found ways to avoid paying their fair share of taxes too. But if the Google tax deal can be stopped in its tracks, this could also prevent similar unfair arrangements being made with them. Margrethe Vestager, the European Union Competition Commissioner, is reported to have offered to launch an investigation into this Google tax deal if requested. By signing this, we are jointly asking her to do so on behalf of all the honest UK tax paying public.

Why in 2016 when the government are looking to make cuts, should they be immune to the same austerity they force so many others to live with? Last year a reported 1.1 million people were forced into using food banks, this year they are trying to force our NHS to do more, with less. They have already attacked the disabled, and raised tuition fees for those looking to further their education while at the same time taking a pay rise. Why should they get to claim personal expenses? Especially when the average MP salary is £67,060. The UK average salary is reported to be £26,500, and yet you and I have to pay for our own food, our own travel expenses, as well as our own day to day living expenses. Whilst I understand that staffing costs make up nearly three quarters of the total MP expenses budget, staffing and office costs as well as reasonable long distance travel costs should be managed by the IPSA. Any other personal claims simply shouldn't be allowed. Let's stand together and remind the Government they stand in office to serve the greater goods best interest and not their own.

The Lake District is the country's most lucrative tourist spot after London. The damage caused by the December floods to the A591 have effectively haemorraged the cash flow to vital tourist towns. And yet the Government tell us that the necessary repairs cannot and will not be finished until May.... The Lake District holds such a special place in the hearts of so, so many people and just now, like poor Peter Rabbit, both the place and the people must be feeling 'given up for lost' and more than ready to 'shed big tears'. The Lake District holds not only hearts but also livelihoods.... The owners of the Lakeland businesses are not just 'playing shops' for a hobby or pastime.... Whole families take part in the day to day running, organising, stocktaking and customer relations, and with no reasonable access for tourists (the A591), shops and businesses will be bankrupted and some very special places, for example the famous 'Grasmere Gingerbread Shop' will close and may never be able to re-open. Grasmere without the gingerbread? A whole generation of children who will never know the bedtime rhyme 'to bed to bed and dream about the gingerbread'?. The Government appear to be happy with their role of Mr McGregor, and unless the necessary repairs to the A591 are completed quickly, then many traditional Lakeland shops and shop owners, may just end up if not actually put into a pie, then either exiled or left to fade sadly away to a derelict whisper on the fellsides.