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.

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths. ___________ As a recent graduate taking my first steps in my career, I'm considering long term housing rather than long term renting. Many like me are doing the same in Birmingham, but sadly we may be being cheated of feasible means of settling in our nation's second city. Bottom lines left unchecked don't add up to fair societies. Let's hold companies accountable to their legal responsibilities in required affordable housing. -Sam, Campaigner

Our only chance of creating an alternative to another full term of cuts, privatisation and the destruction of the NHS is to unite the left under a coalition government.

It affords Trump credibility that is undeserved. Further it will add to the already large,tax payer bill for security for his visit.

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths.

We are seeing more people who are losing heart and morale about working in a job that most feel should be rewarding. People go into the health industry to make a change, but they are being exploited to the very limit. We are struggling for staff in all areas and less are wanting to train due to being able to earn more in a supermarket than a hospital.