Darryl could be any one of hundreds of people in this city. He has clearly fallen through the cracks and is caught up in some Kafkaesque bureaucratic nightmare. He needs a home. He is not alone.

Nottinghamshire council and the police should be offering practical and emotional support to the most vulnerable to help get them back on their feet. Even if someone does have an addiction they should still be given 100 % support as it is an illness and should be treated as such, getting them the right help needed rather than isolating them further.

In February and March 2012 my 11 year old daughter, Sophie, was put in a ‘spit hood’ by Sussex Police officers on at least three occasions. Sophie has a rare neurological disability, similar to autism, that can cause her to act in ways that people find challenging. She can become very upset when she is over-stimulated and can sometimes spit out of frustration. I had never heard of a ‘spit hood’ until one was used on my daughter. It is a material bag that goes over someone’s head with a drawstring to tighten it. Sussex Police allows its officers to put spit hoods on anyone who is spitting, regardless of whether they are a hardened adult criminal or a terrified 11 year old disabled girl who isn’t in control of her actions. I cannot describe how traumatic it was for Sophie to be hooded by police officers. Due to her disability she finds it very upsetting to have someone even touch her head. Having strangers put a bag over her head when she was already extremely distressed was profoundly shocking for her and she still hasn’t fully recovered from the experience over four years later. In June 2016 the Independent Police Complaints Commission published its report into Sophie’s treatment by the police. It found that 11 police officers and one member of police staff had cases to answer for misconduct. However, the IPCC wasn’t able to criticise the repeated use of the spit hoods as this was authorised by Sussex Police policy. Obviously it is not a pleasant experience to be spat at; however, the risk to police officers needs to be balanced against the very real psychological and physical risks to children who are subjected to this shocking treatment. Several of the largest policy forces around the country, including West Midlands Police and Merseyside Police, do not authorise the use of spit hoods on anyone let alone on children. In 2009 a man died after he was placed in a spit hood and became unwell in a Peterborough police station. In the wake of national media coverage about Sophie’s case (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/08/ipcc-criticises-sussex-police-treatment-11-year-old-disabled-girl) Sussex Police confirmed that it would not stop its officers from hooding children. I think this is wrong. The police do an important and difficult job, but I don’t think they should be allowed to treat children in an inhuman, degrading and dangerous way. If you agree with me please sign this petition and call on Sussex Police to stop using spit hoods on children. Thank you. Note: names have been changed for legal reasons.

Please accept the advice from the soil association and other word leading scientists that glyphosate is harmful to health when ingested in any quantities and the use of it as a pre harvest dessicant has been shown to cause high levels of glyphosate in the grain and humans who consume wheat soya barley based products show significant levels of glyphosate in their urine. It is a WHO suspected carcinogen a hormone disruptor damages the gut biome and may contribute to auto immune disease. The EU has refused a full license and given only a short temporary approval to glyphosate and deprecates it's use as a dessicant. My wife and I both have developed auto immune diseases and we both were exposed to glyphosate spray mist directly and in our food through no choice of our own as it is almost impossible to buy glyphosate free produce. Products that may contain glyphosate from pre harvest desiccation include flour, bread, sauces ,pizza, pastry, beer, soy sauce, biscuits, any meals using wheat as a thickener (most do) etc ... https://www.farminguk.com/news/Soil-Association-writes-to-major-bread-companies-asking-them-to-avoid-glyphosate_42519.html

The State of North Carolina recently enacted House Bill 2 known as HB2. The bill prevents local governments in North Carolina from passing anti-discrimination laws, undoing those already in place. It also permits business owners to discriminate against LGBT+ people on grounds of religious belief, and demands that individuals use the public bathroom corresponding to the sex on their birth certificate, endangering transgender people. This is clearly a huge injustice to the LGBT+ community of the State, but also to those visiting who are now at risk. In 2016 we expect to see nothing but progress when we see LGBT+ rights in the news. Sadly this is not always the case, as we were reminded earlier this year by the passing of this bill in the State of North Carolina. I was dismayed therefore to see that our new Secretary of State for International Trade, Dr Liam Fox MP, has announced plans to open a UK trade office in the state capital Raleigh. Liam Fox must not press ahead with plans to open this office not just as an act of solidarity, but to pressure the authorities of North Carolina to undo these awful laws and keep British people out of harm's way. In response to the enactment of HB2 a boycott of the state has ensued, with musicians pulling out of gigs and businesses withdrawing investment. If the Department for International Trade opens a new UK trade office in Raleigh then this boycott will be undermined. Furthermore the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has issued a warning to LGBT+ travelers to the State of North Carolina. Brits working at the new office may be put at risk because of HB2. This is unacceptable.

There is no evidence to support that the building of further border defenses at Calais will help resolve the border situation, and will rather put refugees at further risk of injury and death. We need better political dialogue around the safe passage of refugees into Britain. As one of the wealthiest countries in the world, it is Britain's responsibility to care for those affected by wars, poverty and conflict, particularly those that Britain has had a direct hand in creating or maintaining through defensive interventions and the arms trade. Britain's responsibility includes caring for the displaced citizens of those countries on our home soil. The Calais jungle and other migrant camps in the Calais area are a human rights sore on the conscience of the West. The first-step solution is to stop the building of a pointless wall on the UK border in Calais, the second step will be to remove the UK border from Calais and back into the UK. This will ensure a safe passage of refugees into their destination country. The border situation is not going to be solved by building a pointless wall. The camps exist in Calais because the UK has pushed its border controls into France, to try and stem migration into the UK. Since the defenses were built in 2014, net migration into the UK has increased, as have the residents of Calais and the documented border crossing attempts. This proves that these controls have little or no impact on migration into the UK. The UK demonstrates a rigid, racist border control policy by not allowing migration form outside the EU into the UK where people can seek asylum through legal means. This results in people being trapped on the border in Calais living in slum conditions, attempting dangerous crossings to try and reach family and asylum in the UK. Building walls and increasing border defenses has yet to be proven as an effective means of dealing with refugees and migration. Instead it puts pressure on neighbouring countries and fractures international relations with these countries. Stop the building of a pointless wall in Calais, and take our border back onto our own soil. #pointlesswall #Calais #stopthewall ----- Il n’y a aucune preuve soutenant que la construction de défenses frontalières supplémentaires va aider à résoudre la situation à la frontière, et cela va plutôt mettre les réfugiés dans une situation où ils courent plus de risques de blessures et de mort. Nous avons besoin d’un meilleur dialogue politique autour de possibilités de passage sûr des réfugiés vers la Grande-Bretagne. En tant qu’un des pays les plus riches du monde, il est de la responsabilité de la Grande-Bretagne de prendre soin des personnes affectées par la guerre, la pauvreté et les conflits, particulièrement ceux dans lesquels la Grande-Bretagne a une implication directe en les créant ou les maintenant par des interventions défensives ou par les ventes d’armes. La responsabilité de la Grande-Bretagne est notamment d’accueillir des citoyens déplacés sur son propre sol. Les campements existent à Calais parce que le Royaume-uni a déplacé ses contrôles frontaliers en France, pour essayer d’empêcher la migration vers le Royaume-uni. Depuis que des défenses ont été érigées en 2014, la migration nette vers le Royaume-uni a augmenté, comme le nombre de réfugiés présents à Calais et les tentatives documentés de franchissement de la frontière. Cela prouve que ces contrôles ont un impact limité ou pas d’impact sur la migration vers le Royaume-uni. Le Royaume-uni fait preuve d’une politique de contrôle des frontières rigide et raciste en n’autorisant pas l’immigration de l’extérieur de l’Union européenne de personnes qui peuvent demander légalement l’asile. Avec comme résultat des personnes bloquées à la frontière à Calais vivant dans des conditions misérables, essayant dangereusement de franchir la frontière pour rejoindre leur famille et tenter l’asile au Royaume-uni. Il faudrait maintenant prouver que construire des murs et accroître les défenses à la frontière sont un moyen effectif de traiter la question des réfugiés et de la migration. Cela met plutôt sous pression les pays voisins et brise les relations internationales avec ces pays. Arrêtez la construction d’un mur inutile à Calais, et reprenez votre frontière sur votre propre sol. #pointlesswall #Calais #stopthewall

I am a carer.I was looking after a lady with Autzimers when she became violent and distraught and attacked me.I called an ambulance for her thinking they could help.They called the police and she was dragged off screaming frightened and becoming more violent.She was handcuffed and locked in a cell for at least 2 days before she was referred to a hospital.This poor lady was now a criminal as she attacked a police officer out of fear.I cant believe this was the answer to helping a vunerable person with a mental health issue.

It is important to remove the fee so that most families can be able to make application especially as more children could be further trapped in destitution and limbo if they could not afford such payment in other to regularies their stay, and will therefore continue to be supported by their respective local authority with continuous burden on the tax payer.

Keeping our society fair means that people need accurate information on which to make an informed decision about the issues they care about. In the recent referendum on the EU both Leave and Remain campaigns were supported by the press in spreading disingenuous information to suit an agenda. The news media spread misinformation and outright lies instead of reporting facts. Several retractions have since been made in tiny panels tucked away where they cannot be seen without a headline. To help the news media uphold the high editorial standards which they aim to meet I think it is important that there is a cost to them for lying to the public and that retractions, apologies and correction are clear and visible. The Editors' Code of Practice can be found here: https://www.ipso.co.uk/editors-code-of-practice/ It states that "A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and — where appropriate — an apology published. In cases involving IPSO, due prominence should be as required by the regulator." We believe that 'due prominence' should impact upon the publication to a degree that encourages due diligence. Please sign the petition if you agree.

Virgin’s brand values - being honest, decent and playing it straight - are totally at odds with the Sun’s track record of misleading reporting, and of playing one group off against another in pursuit of a divisive political agenda. Last year, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights raised serious concerns about a Sun article likening migrants to “cockroaches". He said this was typical of “decades of sustained and unrestrained anti-foreigner abuse, misinformation and distortion” by the UK media. Yet since then, the Sun’s demonisation of immigrants has only intensified. The hate campaign reached new heights during the European Union referendum. An upsurge in scare stories about EU migrants was followed by a wave of violence against immigrant families. Virgin’s founder, Sir Richard Branson, has previously spoken out against the “anti-refugee and anti-immigrant rhetoric... gaining support in many of the richest nations”. With racist attacks on the rise, it is vital that we all now unite against the hatred and division that has been poisoning our public discourse for so long. As one of the UK’s leading companies, Virgin Media has the chance to take a bold stand for unity and tolerance. By pulling your advertising from the Sun newspaper, you can send a strong message that this aggressive rhetoric has gone too far. In doing so you can position yourself as a company that not only stands out from the crowd, but also stands up for the vulnerable and maligned.

UK has voted out of the EU and needs all hands to contribute to the national development. If illegal immigrants who are already in the United Kingdom are granted amnesty, they will play a major role in the development of the country. An amnesty could yield an additional millions of Pound Sterling a year of Income Tax and National Insurance receipts. Granting an amnesty to the illegal immigrants who are already in the country will bring them out of the shadows and into the real economy and they can contribute to the tax system. In the process of granting an amnesty, they will pay fines so the legalisation will not be dependant on a taxpayers’ money and it will be self-sustained, and also to have a proper criminal checks. The case of amnesty extends beyond economics. It is also a human thing to do. Regularising status to illegal immigrants avoid vulnerability exploitation and destitution as well as avoid creating a situation in which they are more likely to be pushed into the black economy. In extreme cases, illegal immigrants can slip into sexual exploitation and forced labour. The Prime Minister, Theresa May said , the government she leads will be driven not by the interests of the privileged few but promised to give more control over everyone's life in the country. Illegal immigrants really want to take up jobs to support themselves, their families and the national development but they are unable to do so as their lives are restricted in a multicultural country where the whole world look up to due to resident permit. Please grant amnesty to these illegal immigrants who are already in the country to live a normal life and to contribute substantially to the national economy.

The Chilcot Report has been hidden from the public view by the elections of both Labour Party and Consevrative Leaders. The Media have not had the time to promote Chilcot s findings, debate or even discuss what should happen to Tony Blair . Many of the wives and families of the Armed Forces involved in the Alfagistan action have been short changed with limited publicity and to reach outcomes.