This is an outrageous decision by the government that will hit at the heart of the hard working people currently in their forties. Another blow to the working class.

Most people now in their 40's have been affected by a state pension age rise from 66 to 67, but now, today, the government wants you to work until you are aged 68. This has been pushed forward years earlier than originally proposed. It was to be implemented in 2044 but will now be implemented between 2037-2039. This will have a direct impact on all UK taxpayers currently aged between 39 and 47 who were born between 06/04/1970 - 05/04/1978 - a total of 6 million people in the UK working population paying taxes and national insurance contributions. People within this bracket have already had their state pension age pushed forward 1 year by this government in it's current tenure which is punishment enough. You should be entitled to retire and enjoy the benefits of retirement at 67 without moving the goalposts. This opportunistic government has not only upped your age before you can claim back for your contributions - now it wants another year from you. I want to see the UK taxpayers protected by applying legislation that only allows one change to retirement age in a persons working age. 1 working career = 1 change not punishment. Please lets get this voted for and debated in Parliament.

It is tempting people who would not normally seek out gambling establishments to start what could lead to an addiction.

It will benefit local communities which rely on fishing and establish us as a coastal nation in our own right. It will bring economic benefits to our fishing towns and villages and provide security and employment for future generations. It will make the fishermen locally accountable for catches and help sustainability of our fish stocks.

To understand the Money Tree, see http://positivemoney.org/2017/06/magic-money-tree/ (who produced the picture above). A government is not a household where "money in" has to equate to "money out" for solvency. It is true that real resources are limited: oil, agriculture, fisheries, minerals, etc. as well people's time, energy and skill, but there is no limit to the government's capacity to create money, as money is not actually a real thing at all, it is a social construct that enables us to share these resources. It is known - from Bank of England papers as well as buried in economics texts - that MONEY IS ACTUALLY CREATED FROM NOTHING. Money is an idea to which we give value and number, and then we use it to distribute goods. We have to trust where it comes from. The government produces 3%, and the banks, private corporations, produce the other 97%. OOPS did I say that correctly? YES I did. Look up Positive Money or New Economics Foundation, or just "Money Creation". The ways in which money is created by commercial banks affects all other enterprises in which society is engaged. I call on you to ask the UK government to set up a parliamentary investigation into the impact that money creation by commercial banks has on society. Set up a commission to examine whether we currently have the right tools to deliver economic stability and to consider alternatives, including Positive Money’s proposal for Sovereign Money Creation. Whatever political perspective people take, many feel that something is very wrong with our society and our economics. It is time the monetary system itself was examined.

It is now widely reported that produce growers in the UK fear that their produce will rot in the field due to lack of seasonal immigrant workforce. Since Nigel's main campaign to get out of the EU was to limit immigration, and the impact that immigration has had on British jobs, it seems only fitting that he should also implore the British to take up the empty jobs that his actions have indirectly freed up. Part of making decisions is to take responsibility for consequences. Brexit rhetoric, uncertainty and economic impact have all led to less seasonal migrant workers this year; it may have not been Nigel's direct aim to free up seasonal work for Brits, but he can bring to bear a campaign of National pride to encourage Brits to actively seek out such jobs to ensure that produce does not rot in the field. Even if Nigel's view is that seasonal fruit picking is ideal for low priced migrant labour, it will take a long time for that workforce to want to return in sufficient quantity to the UK , and that seems largely a consequence of Brexit, and specifically his part in the campaign for it. So the only responsible thing for him to do is to mitigate this, perhaps unintended, consequence by calling people to the fields. Furthermore, it would be a really positive gesture if Nigel could spend his spare time leading by example and working in the fields. Then he could truly say that he had earned his pint by the end of the day.

The greater business community of Glastonbury gains a badly needed increase in revenue due to the Glastonbury Brocante Fair. Local hotels, B&B's, retailers, pubs, cafes, craft makers and artists all benefit from the huge influx of visitors to the fair. The loss of this fair will have a negative financial effect on the whole Town and the Mendip region beyond. The majority of traders at the fair are from this local community. Glastonbury Town Council has a responsibility to restore this fair.

This will allow people on low in come to change there tax on a car without having to purchase more tax than they need to, as it is if you change your car 2 weeks into the month I.E due to right offs you have to pay for 2 weeks of the month on tax for the new car that you have all ready paid for. By allowing people to change there tax to a different car then they will not be charged for tax that was never needed as they did not have that car at that time.

(To skip the history of this issue please scroll to **) In 2016 the government passed a bill called the "Investigatory Powers Bill" (now the Investigatory Powers Act). This bill replaced the UK's old RIPA (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) from 2000, which referred to the powers the UK police and security services had when it came to collecting, monitoring, intercepting, etc - electronic communications from any UK resident, or person currently in the country. The bill effectively makes it legal for the government to spy on everyone in the country, at their will, as well as conducting mass surveillance of the entire country (which they have renamed to "Bulk Collection", as this tends to make people less concerned.) This bill was hugely opposed by those who knew about it, however it wasn't widely known about due to the government precisely timing when they bought it to parliament to coincide with much bigger issues (such as BREXIT). When this bill officially became law it was referred to in headlines as "The UK now has a surveillance law that is more suited to a dictatorship than a democracy". Now the Conservative party are trying to sneak through an expansion of this bill. When the IPAct was bought into power the Conservatives said on numerous occasions said they would not ban or undermine encryption (by implementing backdoors etc) Theresa May personally said "We believe that encryption is important. It is important that data can be kept safe and secure. We are not proposing in the bill to make any changes in relation to the issue of encryption and the legal position around that. The current legal position in respect of encryption will be repeated in the legislation of the bill". ** However the following has document has made its way into the open (article link on page): https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/04/uk_bulk_surveillance_powers_draft/ Technology and apps like WhatsApp and Signal rely on strong encryption to keep our messages private. Weakening the encryption or inserting backdoors is an enormous risk for the entire UK, as the same encryption that keeps these messages safe, also secures things such as bank transactions, social media login, emails, etc. Theresa May usually refers to her famous "double lock" system. Meaning these kinds of things must be authorised by both the home secretary (for example) and a judge. The problem we have seen with this is that these people are not experts in these fields, so rather than question who, how, what, where, when and why they just rubber stamp it. The USA has a court that their surveillance has to go through. This court has rejected 0.03% of all requests ever made. Companies like Facebook (who own WhatsApp) have previously shown their dedication to keeping their users privacy. For them to disable encryption for the UK means anybody messaging that person is also vulnerable, which could cause WhatsApp the shut down in the UK. They may also refuse the request, which could then lead the Government to ban WhatsApp. Please join with me in getting the government to withdraw these plans, and work with an expert in the field to attempt to come up with an approach that keeps us all secure as well as sparing our privacy. Thank you.

Why are the bus fares in Chester so varied? Blacon to the bus station is around £2 all day travel to travel 2 miles in distance, but from Kingsway to the centre costs £3.40 all day travel and its only an extra 0.6 of a mile in travel how can it cost this much? I could get to Ellesmere port from Chester at £4 all day travel and you are travelling 6 miles! That's only and extra 60p and I am travelling an extra 4 miles in distance!!! Who has worked these fares out?? And how can 0.6 of a mile cost more then 4 miles?! I do not understand how they work the bus fares out and why certain places are charged way more. Fares need re looking at and a fairer price needs to be set. Not adding an extra £1.40 to travel just over half a mile but to travel an extra 4 miles it only costs 60p! Its ridiculous and something needs to be done.

These cuts are unfair and further disadvantage people who are in a position of need. Approximately 660,000 UK social housing residents have been impacted by the cuts (Fullfact, 2013). This has had significant negative impacts on lives across the UK, leaving thousands of people desperately struggling to pay rent and make ends meet. Hundreds of thousands of residents have gotten into rent arrears, resorted to food banks, and been kicked out of homes they have lived in their whole lives. This is drastically immoral and WRONG. Sign the petition to help us rid the unfair Bedroom Tax!

Plans to sell off Oswestry's council houses were voted against ten years ago. Our attitude to this has not changed. Oswestry needs more social housing, not less. We want investment in building new homes in the right places for our community whilst protecting our heritage.