I believe that the government has totally misled the electorate regarding the introduction of the new state pension in 2016.Mr Cameron's pitch at the launch in 2013 promised that "the idea here is that for new pensioners in 2017 instead of the £100 or so basic state pension it'll be over £140" This promise has been repeated and reinforced by other government members such as Steve Webb and Ian Duncan Smith. Consequently, most people retiring after 2016 believe they will receive a state pension in excess of £150 a week. This is completely untrue and misleading. Firstly, anyone of the millions of people in an occupational pension were automatically opted out of paying additional state pension contributions .All of these people, providing they have paid 35 years NI, will only receive the old state pension of £113/week. Those who paid into "the additional state pension" will receive, quite correctly, what they would have been due under the old system The question to ask, therefore, is who actually is better off under the new system. The truthful answer is very few people. For the majority nothing changes. There will be only gradual increases to the state pension as people pay the increased NI contributions .Only in 30+ years will David Cameron's promise of equality for all be true. Unsurprisingly, the government has been" economical with the truth" It is all "smoke and mirrors"- a cheap headline and vote winner. My intention is to highlight the situation so that millions of people are not misled into expecting far more than they will actually receive. I want the government to admit their inaccurate rhetoric and publish a true and accurate guide of future state pensions.

Across the country, self-employed people who are low earners and therefore claim working tax credits have received letters from an organisation called Concentrix [a private, unelected and unaccountable body working on behalf of HMRC].These letters state that the recipients' self-employed status is to be investigated, and demand proof of hours worked. A person working alone from home will normally have no way to prove the hours spent on preparation, planning, strategising, thinking, social media, networking, paperwork, website management or any of the other daily responsibilities of a small business person. In the absence of this "proof", tax credits will be stopped. This will force many hardworking people to cease their business and become unemployed. Small businesses are the foundation stones of a strong economy. This policy will cause untold hardship and damage, not only human but also economic.

TTIP will have a major impact on the lives of the people of Haringey. * It represents a dangerous new step in the process of opening public services - including health and social welfare, housing, education and the environment - to unaccountable, private, corporations. * It undermines the ability of local authorities to impose minimum standards of employment, training, quality, environmental protection, energy conservation, or health and safety. * It ‘locks-in’ the current privatization programme and makes it extremely difficult for future local authorities to take back, ‘in house’, contracted out services.

The UK Government have assured us that any other transfer of sovereignty away from the Westminster Parliament should be put to a referendum. This treaty is a back door method of getting around this pledge to the detriment of our democracy and sovereignty.

This will focus everyone on the national democratic importance of elections and encourage participation. It would also raise children's awareness of the importance of elections so they can be more informed and interested by the time they are adults and have voting responsibility.

Scotland is part of the UK. Many policies affecting Scotland are decided by the Westminster government, and even some of the devolved policies are affected by Westminster, and SNP MP's vote on these matters. The SNP currently have 6 MP's and 2 MEP's. They hold 64 seats out of 129 in the Scottish Parliament. They have over 92,000 members. Polling suggest that in May the SNP could win up to 32 Westminster seats and could be the third largest party in Westminster. UKIP are being included in the debates. They have 2 very recent MP's and 24 MEP's. They have 42,000 members. The same polling suggests that they could win 3 seats at the election. The Liberal Democrats, by the same polling forecast could win 27 seats. The SNP could therefore have more seats than the LibDems and UKIP combined and have a greater impact on decisions on policy. I think people across the UK should be able to hear how the SNP could affect policies after 2015.

The Scottish Government is consulting on a bill to reform higher education governance. UCU Scotland wants to see: Elected chairs of governing bodies Governing bodies to be more representative and to include trade union and student representation An agreed definition of academic freedom to protect all academic and related staff

Following public opposition in May, the government has revised its regulations for the privatisation of children's social services. Now, companies (such as Serco, G4S, KPMG) only need to set up a "not-for-profit" subsidiary. This will not show any profit as the parent company will charge the subsidiary at a cost which it determines. The government says this is about innovation, but local authorities do not require outsourcing and private companies to be given contracts to generate innovation. There are experienced experts with all local authorities who do the work for the good of the children and not to make profit. Outsourced services often cut costs and make profits by employing fewer staff or less-qualified workers. Some councils might see this as a solution to the government's drastic funding cuts and in fact the government can direct local authorities to cease providing the services. This privatisation has to be stopped for the sake of all the children and families who need support and protection.

The Chagos archipelago is situated in the Indian Ocean, mid-way between India and Africa. Some 2,000 people lived on the archipelago, the majority on the largest island of Diego Garcia. Their ancestry on the islands went back to the 18th century. During the 1960s and 1970s British governments, both Labour and Tory, tricked and expelled the entire population of the Chagos, a British colonial dependency, so that Diego Garcia, the main island of their homeland, could be given to the United States as the site for a military base. This act of mass kidnapping by the British government was carried out in high secrecy, along with the conspiracy that preceded it. The last islander was deported in 1973. The 'deportation or forcible transfer of a population...a crime against humanity', is according to the words of Article 7 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court. These displaced people still in Mauritius and the Seychelles continue to suffer in poverty to this day and continue to exist in sadness, longing to return to their homeland. Many have died in misery, living in the hope of going home. In 2002, travelling with their new British passports, many of the Chagossians began to arrive in Britain, to bring their campaign to London and to escape the poverty of Mauritius. All of them wanted to return to the Chagos Islands rather than be in England. It is estimated that more than 2,000 Chagossians now live on the margins of UK society mainly in the town of Crawley, with a smaller community in Manchester. In both places they struggle to reconstruct their lives. Meanwhile dozens of jobs on Diego Garcia are being advertised in the Philippines, including posts for electricians, cashiers, mechanics, stock clerks, janitors, welders, firefighters, engineers and massage therapists. There have been no reports of these jobs being advertised in Mauritius, the Seychelles or the UK, where most of the Chagossian community live. We can’t help but wonder why.they have not been given priority for these positions in their own land. Since being illegally evicted, very few Chagossians have been able to get jobs at the foreign base in their homeland despite many trying. The hope is that the islanders be allowed to return to their islands as soon as possible before more of them die in a British imposed exile, never to see their homeland again.

Not only will TTIP effect our NHS and democracy nationally, TTIP will have significant implications for local public services. It will open up access to central and local government services to be bought up by big corporations. Measures by Lewisham Council which are designed to promote local employment, foster environmental protection or protect public health could be challenged in the extra-judicial trade tribunals, whose decisions are unchallengeable and made by trade lawyers, not judges. Lewisham is opposed to the TTIP, defending basic public services for solidarity and social redistribution.

It's great to see that Ofcom have involved The English Greens however, their failure to involve the SNP who are currently the UK’s third largest political party with over 93,000 members and even more importantly are the ONLY political party in the UK to hold a Majority Government, This alone you would think entitles the SNP to be heard by all UK voters. Unfortunately NOT.... In Ofcom's failure to contact the SNP in their consultation ahead of the General Election also represents a failure of democracy in the UK, Ofcom needs to recognise that the SNP hold a majority government and are the UK’s third largest political party and involving them in Broadcast of Political Debates is key to ensuring fair media coverage in the run up to the 2015 May 7th General Election.. Ofcom must show the voters of the UK that by including the SNP they are showing that they are unbiased and plan democratic coverage of the run up to Broadcast of Political Debates in the 2015 General Election that will determine the future of the UK, By excluding the SNP, Ofcom are denying fair representation which is a democratic right and should be considered as bias media coverage by denying every UK viewer the right to decide what is right or what is wrong for their country during these Broadcast of Political Debates. LEND SNP YOUR SIGNATURE... LET'S TOGETHER HELP GET THEIR VOICES HEARD BY ALL UK VOTERS.....THEN DECIDE WHAT'S BEST FOR THE UK.. AUSTERITY, POVERTY, FOODBANKS, ZERO HR CONTRACTS MUST END.... SAVE THE NHS.. A LIVING WAGE IS A RIGHT FOR ALL UK CITIZENS... PLEASE SUPPORT OUR CAUSE AND SIGN...THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR LENDING YOUR SUPPORT.

Homelessness can be fatal. To London as a city as well as people like Kinga (who was Kinga ? - see below). Never mind cup-cake shops, London needs pop-up tenancies. Far from a social scourge, squatting of empty commercial and publicly-owned residential property was a dynamic and beneficial element of London's housing ecology for many years. It enabled young people to live cheaply in the capital, kept premises from dereliction and drove the regeneration of much of London. In particular, it directly enabled the growth of the arts and cultural sector of which London is now supposedly so proud. It was the start of the rehabilitation - and gentrification - of Islington, Camden, Notting Hill and Brixton to name just four examples.. Recent anti-squatting legislation inspired by a few sensationalist instances citing 'rogue migrant' activity - and the emergence of opportunistic, privately owned so-called Guardianship scams (which charge high rents and offer no security or rights whatsoever) has: destroyed an age-old counterbalance to the unassailable right of property owners to allow good property to lie empty, completely destroyed our city's ability to support innovative communal group living on any scale, enabled uncontrollable inflation of rented living space, encouraged profiteering by wholly unsuitable buy-to-let landlords driven young people out of London or onto the streets. Short-life housing schemes were once common in London, run by local authority housing departments and Social Landlords (housing associations), these schemes brought homeless people and empty property together within a simple legal framework that recognised squatters rights for an agreed period of years in exchange for the basic maintenance of property by occupants. Many of the housing associations operated as co-ops set up by squatters themselves. Now that Housing Associations have developed to be social landlord property owners themselves, with fully fledged legal capacity, such schemes would be easier to operate now than before. It is ironic that such a simple idea, needed now as never before, has been so lightly let go. Squatting saved 70's London. Breathing new life into run-down areas, enabling arts business start-ups, allowing people to live together in ways other than single living, coupledom or three/four people sharing a huge rent in exchange for a shelf in a fridge. London needs squatting back; for housing, for experimental living, for affordable lifestyles for those putting vocation above income. Without it our city is hollowing out as developers take control and young people leave. Without squatting, London would not be the vibrant place it has grown to be, but may not be for much longer. Squatting saved London. And it saved many Londoners.( It certainly saved me. I was a squatter in the 70's for 8 years.) And it would have saved Kinga. Kinga was a 22 year old law student we (staff of The Cockpit Theatre in Marylebone) found sleeping, blue with cold, in the carpark next door just before Christmas. She died the following day after returning to the streets for her last night hoping to be picked up by a homeless charity. Drugs and relationship breakdown were part of her story, but basically she had just fallen through all the cracks - just as any of us could. All of us who met her know the key element in her tragedy was having no roof of her own.