The government have announced they are removing the NHS bursaries for student nurses, midwives, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists, podiatrists, radiographers, dietetics, ODP's. This means we will be left with THOUSANDS of pounds worth of debt, which could take years to pay back from a salary which has been repeatedly frozen and capped. Healthcare degrees are like no other, we work 50% of the time on placement and 50% in university. Our hours are long and demanding both academically and professionally. To have our bursaries removed is insulting and upsetting. Furthermore, these loans will act as a deterent for people going to university who do not want to be saddled with extortinate debt. Healthcare courses appeal to a wide range of students from all back grounds and these high costs are very daunting. Already people are saying they are fearful of these costs meaning people are losing their dreams. This is NOT fair.

64% of us don't want student loans to be privatised - the government needs to listen. This plan doesn't make financial sense and needs to be scrapped. Martin Wolf from the Financial Times explains ‘Why the UK should not sell its student loan book’: “The UK Treasury is, it is reported, considering the sale of parts of its student loan book. This provokes a big question: when should the UK government sell such an asset – given that it is both immortal and solvent? The best answer has two parts. First, it must be believed that the asset would be better managed by the private sector. And, second, it must be believed that this superior private management can only be introduced by selling the assets – rather than introducing some type of private management contract. Thus, if the government decided to privatise the Royal Bank of Scotland, it should be because the value of the business would be higher under private ownership than it would be under public ownership. What the government paid for RBS shares is irrelevant: those are sunk costs. Similarly, the case for selling the Royal Mail is that it would be more valuable as a private business than in government hands. What of the student loan book? Would a buyer be able to offer more to the government for this stream of income than it is worth in public hands? No, because no private party has a lower borrowing cost than the government, since the government is the most creditworthy entity in the country. So the value of the student loan book to the government, given its low discount rate, is higher than to any potential private buyer. That might not be the case if the Treasury suffered from a genuine – as opposed to a purely artificial – borrowing constraint. In that case, the marginal cost of borrowing might be much higher than the average cost. That could justify selling existing assets, to replace them with more valuable assets. But the government suffers from no such borrowing constraint. So why do it? It is yet another example of a bigger problem: the manic concentration on the government’s overall debts – the totemic public debt ratio – rather than the whole balance sheet. Selling the book flatters the net public debt level in the very short term. Yet who would be impressed with a company that reported only its debts, but not its assets? It is not a sensible way to manage one’s activities. The student loan book should be left exactly where it is."

It isn't fair that 16 and 17 can't vote for who will make important decisions for their future. They should be able to decide who they want making these decisions as they also get affected by the changes. It isn't fair that people can make the decision on who runs their future but they can't so we think that the voting age should be brought down. Our reasons for this is 16 year olds already have many opportunities like: leaving school working full time paying taxes getting married having consenting sex and having a child leaving home joining the armed forces. They are also responsible for any criminal action and can go to jail. We think that all of these show responsibility and adultery so we don't understand why 16 year olds aren't seen as mature enough to do something as "simple" as voting. Another reason we have is people of this age have a bit of knowledge about politics and actually, a lot of people are interested in it. We have found out that a lot of people would vote at 16 if they had the chance and they don't want to wait another two years to make an impact in the government. The only thing is, a lot of people don't think that we are educated enough about politics. In our questionnaire, 18 out of 120 people said that they think we are. This would definitely need to be changed because they need to have a wider knowledge on the subject so they know about it before this action takes place.

Because for many staff working in Universities their pay is squeezed while others are paid extortionately. Wage rises have not kept up with inflation, staff face job insecurity and regradings, and privatised services often pay only the legal minimum wage for working at the same site. Meanwhile private remuneration committees set the highest wages without criteria or accountability, at up to 25x the pay of staff at the same institution and pay rises of up to 40% per year. It's just not fair! This campaign is led by UNISON.

There's already a shortage of UK trained nurses and the withdrawal of bursaries and introduction of loans will be detrimental in recruiting people for training. It will lead to even greater crisis in health care provision.

Because the Sun routinely headlines lies & mis-information that promotes race hatred & misunderstanding in the UK. The front page headline used on 23/11/2015 for instance may be mathematically correct but and its a big but, this depends what question was asked of the people they polled. The question is at best skewed. It's a general question and not specific. The question asked was "How do you feel about young Muslims who leave the UK to join fighters in Syria?" It didn't ask for instance which side these young people would be fighting on or if they would be jihadists. The Sun helpfully misguide their readers by adding a photograph of so called "Jihadi John". You can make your own complaint here too: https://www.ipso.co.uk/oxbxApps/app/complaint1.html

The building, which started life in 1888 as Dunstable Grammar School, has a Grade II listing but such a listing does not guarantee the building’s safety. It’s not unknown for developers who buy such buildings to leave them to deteriorate over a number of years and then to apply to the relevant council to have the listing set aside because of the condition of the building! Demolition can follow. The Facebook groups 'Dunstable -- Preserving the Past for the Future' and 'Dunstable Ashton Grammar School Campaign' are keen to ensure that not only the exterior but also the interior, which contains many beautiful architectural features, is not lost. The school is owned by Ashton Schools Foundation, which has put the site up for sale for housing development. Some of the school annexe buildings will be lost but it would be criminal if the main building and its features were also lost, especially as so many iconic buildings in Dunstable have already been demolished, and particularly as the town desperately needs a museum to keep its heritage alive. Please help us to preserve the building that educated such wonderful stars as the Oscar-winning Gary Cooper, Sam Kydd and the silent-screen and veteran talkies actor John Stuart, as well as Khawaja Nazimuddin (Prime Minister of Pakistan), Mike Bannister (chief pilot of Concorde), Roger Parrott (who played Neville Chamberlain in the film The King’s Speech) and Kevin McCloud MBE (presenter of Channel 4’s Grand Designs), who is already taking an active interest in preserving the school.

The political history taught in schools is hugely biased towards the actions of men. Shoehorning feminism and women's political achievements under the banner of "pressure groups" diminishes the important work women have done - and still are doing - to make politics more equal and representative. The new curriculum plans to only include one woman in the list of key political thinkers students will study - and the entire Suffragettes movement will only be taught in a section on pressure groups. Women have helped shape this world as much as men have and it's integral that we are recognised as political thinkers, as well as giving kids great female role models to look up to... whether they're boys, girls or anything else. When we remove women from the syllabus we teach young people that women have no impact on politics. At a time when fewer than one in three MPs are female this is a dangerous message to give out. The government has a responsibility to teach young men and women that every voice is important, not just the voices of those already in power. For the sake of the men and women of the future we need to hear about the women of the past. Stop airbrushing women out of our history.

Well I think nowadays students are targeted to pay in the system from an early age. I think that Education should be free or the loans should at least be halved than what is expecting of them today. I am really concern as I see I have my daughter who started this year and in 3/4 years time she will end up with a debt of £36000 + interests. In contract in France University fees are free what don't we follow their example. There isn't a single night when I go to bed and not thinking of my daughter. People might say it is ok but before their children end up paying only half of fee that is required for a year study. I am trouble by it as I am working mother who know the difficulties of life and how hard to have to work in order to have a good lie. I am stressed and so is my daughter. If she has decided to find a job after Six Form then she would have end up in a low paying job and struggle like her mum. I think the rich should be the one penalised and not the lower class.

A STUDENT RAILCARD COSTS £30, BUT DOES NOT COVER TRAVEL AT PEAK TIMES. THIS MEANS THAT, WHEN LECTURES START AT 9AM, THE CARD CANNOT BE USED, AS IT ISN'T VALID BEFORE 10AM.

At the end of last year the much loved University Settlement building in Splott was acquired by local property developer John Smart. His aim is to demolish the building and erect an inappropriate high block of flats. The University Settlement building was built in 1904 to house a movement that provided an education for all at the beginning of the 20th century in an age where this would have been unattainable and unaffordable for most working class people. Latterly it was the first St Illtyd’s Catholic Grammar School for Boys. The building, designed by renowned Arts and Crafts architect Robert Weir Schultz is the only remaining example of a University Settlement in Wales. Please join our eleventh hour petition in an appeal to John Smart not to demolish and the planning department of Cardiff City Council and Llywodraeth Cymru not to allow the destruction of this unique building. Mae adeiladau hanesyddol Anheddfan y Brifysgol wedi dod i feddiant y datblygwr eiddo lleol John Smart. Ei fwriad yw dymchwel yr adeilad ac adeiladu twr anaddas o fflatiau. Adeiladwyd adeilad Anheddfan y Brifysgol yn 1904 i roi cartre i fudiad oedd yn gyfrifrol am ddarparu addysg i bawb ar ddechrau’r 20fed Ganrif mewn oes lle na fyddai hynny o fewn cyrraedd trwch y boblogaeth. Dylunwyd yr adeilad gan y pensaer nodedig Robert Weir Schultz a dyma’r unig enghraifft o Anheddfan Prifysgol sydd wedi goroesi yng Nghymru. Ar yr unfed awr ar ddeg, a fyddech mor garedig ag arwyddo ein deiseb sy’n apelio at John Smart i beidio dymchwel, ac adran gynllunio Cyngor Caerdydd a Llywodraeth Cymru i beidio caniatau dinistr yr adeilad unigryw yma.

4 is far too young for a child to enter full-time education, as they may not fully comprehend what is required of them, creating additional stress for their parents and teachers (and themselves). It is recommended that ages 4 to 6 be reserved for kindergarten education to prepare children more effectively for school per se.