It is important because many millions of claimants are being unfairly penalised by the government when they claim jobseekers allowance whilst they are actively seeking employment. If you begin a new job then you are paid from the first day of your employment. Why shouldn't it be the same for claimants of jobseekers allowance?

We need to give youngsters (as well as as mature students) a fair footing in life. It should not cost to improve oneself and, in doing so, society at large.

The 1999 Finance Act introduced the Cycle to Work scheme, a Government backed tax exemption scheme that allows employers to loan cycles and cyclists' safety equipment to employees as a tax-free benefit, which the employees can purchase at ‘acceptable market value’ at the end of the loan or hire period. The exemption was one of a series of measures introduced under the Government's Green Transport Plan to promote healthier journeys to work and to reduce environmental pollution. The scheme has proved very successful, with over 1 million employees participating. However, walking to work is also very healthy option for one’s commute. With even less manufacturing involved than cycling, with less embedded carbon associated with it, walking to walk can claim to be even better for the environment than cycling. Walking is obviously not an option for longer journeys, but for journeys of a few miles, a walk of up to an hour a day is a choice that can greatly improve health, take even more cars of the road and safe money on fuel or public transport fares. May 2016 is National Walking Month. In promoting this initiative the British Heart Foundation cites a ‘physical activity specialist’ as saying: "Walking is a fantastic way to keep active and maintain a healthy heart as it is fun, flexible and free.” Although correct on the health and other intangible benefits, regular commuting by foot in Britain cannot be described as ‘free’; it requires good quality, waterproof footwear and necessitates an investment in durable wet weather clothing. I therefore suggest a campaign to lobby government to amend the 1999 Finance Act to include a ‘Walk to Work’ scheme, whereby employees can gain benefits similar to those provided to cyclists by the Cycle to Work scheme, to acquire good quality, waterproof footwear and outer wear to make their regular walk to work more pleasant and beneficial.

All too often we hear stories about failing care systems. A lot of the time the workers have been blamed for inadequate care.... What you don't hear of, is how little support these workers have. Also, just how little investment goes into training! if any at all. These workers endure incredibly unsociable working hours. Providing high quality care is not easy under this pressure. Higher pay would enable these workers to "share the load". Having teams able to work more manageable hours and still be able to afford to live. Local authorities and care agencies MUST be made accountable for ensuring ALL staff are properly trained regularly. They make massive profits and don't seem to invest in the workforce. This will have a knock on effect to the quality of care people receive. Overworked staff cannot provide the best quality care. I myself am a working private personal assistant. 12 years experience. NVQ 3 qualified. I work within a team which is crumbling because people cannot cope with the unsociable hours or cannot get enough hours to make a decent amount of money. All the while this is going on, the care or a vulnerable, elderly and frail lady has to be maintained. Meaning I work throughout the day until 11pm and start again at 8am. Not easy 7 days a week and juggling a family too! There is a clear link between low pay of care workers and poor quality care. The simple answer to raise standards of care from my experience is to increase workers pay. It is a demanding job role and it should be recognised as such.

It is widely recognised that junior doctors are the lifeblood of the modern NHS. They are the consultants of the future, and through years of dedicated training provide a truly 24 hour a day, seven day a week service. The proposed contract undermines safe working practices, reverts to a previously failed system and has been roundly rejected by the workforce. It is openly discriminatory against female doctors. The proposed changes are based on flawed analysis of data that suggests a “weekend effect” and while we are keen to improve safety in hospitals across the UK, this contract will harm patients, harm the workforce and harm the training of junior doctors. Further to the overwhelming rejection of this contract by junior doctors, they have huge support from consultant colleagues, multiple Royal Colleges and the public as a whole. Please publicly reject the imposition of this contract at Stockport NHS Foundation Trust and call for new negotiations without pre-condition in a mark of support for the hard working and dedicated doctors employed by the Trust.

Shortfalls in taxation (I.e.the funding for public services) is directly attributable to the global tax policies of companies who think HOW they trade doesn't matter. We should not accept tax dodging as an inevitable consequence of free trade. Director and shareholder behaviour will only change when transglobals realise these aggressive and anticompetitive policies are unsustainable. Moving, with immediate notice, to 'name and shame' will help consumers to make informed choices in future, and will cost offending transglobals both new and loyal customers as well as their reputation with shareholders and markets. If shareholders cannot create ethical and sustainable policies on their own account, they will have to be encouraged by Governments to do so. As Government is aware, the EU The Anti Tax Avoidance Directive sets out a comprehensive framework of anti-abuse measures, containing five legally-binding anti-abuse measures, which all Member States should apply against common forms of aggressive tax planning. This includes measures to deter profit shifting to a 'low / no' tax country, to prevent double 'non-taxation' of certain income, to prevent companies from avoiding tax when 're-locating' assets, to discourage artificial debt arrangements designed to minimise taxes and the additional safeguard of the anti-abuse rule designed to counteract aggressive tax planning. As an absolute minimum measure today, Government should immediately escalate a 'name and shame' policy to encourage consumers to be aware, so consumers can use alternative brands or local companies who fairly pay taxes in markets they sell to. With Liam Fox looking to resurrect a new version of the dreadful TTIP or dubious CETA with the US, involving potentially highly contentious ISDS, we should demand to know why so many huge US companies play on this kind of uneven tax playing field, as well as make it clear that this is a global problem which individual nation states ARE willing to take on, in order to protect local competition and essential services for UK citizens. UK Government should take a lead in saying we welcome trade and business, but not at any price. Pay to play!! Irrespective of the status of Brexi by 2019, the UK MUST ensure that it applies the EU Anti Tax Avoiance measure from 1 January 2019 ,which provide the minimum level of protection against corporate tax avoidance throughout the EU, while ensuring a fairer and more stable environment collectively for UK and European businesses in competition with transglobals brands. In doing this, Government will need to distance itself from the antidemocratic influence of the far right press, as their vested interests are in continued tax avoidance loopholes, irrespective of whether their owners are British citizens, foreign born or foreign domiciled. The first priority must be to protect British companies and British public services.

The Government has already committed to an additional 5,000 new GPs by 2020 but is not enabling this to happen: it takes 6 years to train a Medical Student and there is currently a severe shortage: practices cannot recruit due to crisis of supply. Meanwhile the UK's population is increasing daily with economic migrants and refugees & our infrastructure is failing. We have an over reliance on overseas Medical Students and urgently need to increase our intake of UK Medical Students to Universities by extending their intake now.

40,000 jobs+ are at stake. The wellbeing of families in Port Talbot, Rotherham, Corby, and Shotton is at steak. Wales and the North have already suffered with the closures of the coal mines. Unemployment brings misery, poverty and low self esteem which can lead to mental and physical illness. I live in Devon but my family comes from South Wales. Let's all support each other no matter where we live!

George Osborne has announced plans to take £70 a week away from thousands of people with disabilities, by cutting Personal Independence Payments (PIP). For many of us, this will mean losing the crucial support which enables us to get out of the house. Many people in our area would be hit hard by this cut. This petition calls on our local MP to do all they can to stop this cruel and unfair plan. Please, show your support for local people with disabilities and help stop the cuts to PIP.

For some self employment is chosen, for others, in this current climate, it is the only way of having an income, for some adoption is chosen and for others it is their only chance to have a family. An independent report by Julie Deane OBE recommends that self employed people should be given the same rights as those that work for an employer. This has been seen by parliament and so far ignored. I am proud to be self employed, I am also very much looking forward to starting my family however and whenever it happens but I know that without the same support the my employed friends get, we could struggle. This is unfair. The current government is very proud of the rise in self employment. It is one thing that has made the unemployment figures look better over the last few years. The entrepreneurial spirit is something to be proud of. It is time to bring adoption, maternity and paternity pay for self employed people in line with that of employees.

Many people working in heavy manual and industrial jobs, and many women who expected to retire aged 60 started working full time aged 16 or less, their life expectancy is generally much less than people who started work later in life. They have also exceeded the maximum number of qualifying years N.I contributions by nearly 50%

Without this funding, two generations are disadvantaged: young parents who want to improve their education and skills, and their children who will also miss out on valuable early years education before age 2.