A US -UK trade deal is likely to have a profoundly negative impact on the lives of people in the UK. Many regulations that have kept us and the environment safe will disappear along with animal welfare standards. A Trade Deal with the US will be in reality a trade deal between the U.K and ruthless multinational corporations that wield huge amounts of power. Most trade deals contain clauses known as ISDS clauses, (Investor State Dispute Settlement) clauses whereby governments can be fined millions of pounds if an investor's profits are reduced in any way and for whatever reason. Big business is likely to play a major but negative part in our lives in the future. Parliamentarians should be granted a final vote on the US trade deal; secrecy should be lifted in support of transparency and democracy.

Too often policies and decisions are made where there turns out that the politicians involved have some form of connections which could lead them to be biased. For instance, scrutiny of MPs’ interests shows donations and gifts from fossil fuel firms and climate contrarians and that there is a pattern that conservative MP's are more inclined to accept these donations. Members of the public should be able to challenge MP's decisions to accept certain donations.

Measures announced by the Chancellor on July 8th were touted to support young people through the economic repercussions of the Covid-19 pandemic. It included a range of measures, but very few were aimed young people. The £2.1bn "kickstart scheme" which will provide 6 month work placements to those at risk of long-term unemployment was dwarfed by the £3.8bn stamp duty holiday for home buyers. This is not the way to support a generation that will likely bear the brunt of what may be the worst recession in a generation. Young people have a much less stable relationship with the economy and so are disproportionately affected by economic crises. Following the 2008 economic recession, youth unemployment peaked at over 22%, compared to 8% for the population as a whole. We need an ambitious government intervention to prevent it from being even worse with this crisis. A successful scheme would include measures to create entry-level jobs - not placements - for those coming out of education, support for renters who make up the majority of young people and programmes to support young carers, apprentices and others who have been ignored by previous announcements. We have the chance to prevent a lost generation if we act now with ambition. Invest in young people today!

On 17th June this year "FAT CAT" Councillors at Kent County Council, during a vitual meeting of the full council, voted to award themselves a 4.2% increase to their basic allowances. In total £1.3million will be paid out to the 81 council members. This is despite having awarded themselves a 15% increase in their allowances less than two years ago and today announcing a budget shortfall of at least £50million over the next 12 months. Having already increased council tax by 4.4% for this financial year and having recieved £67m of Government emergency Covid-19 funding in March and May KCC continues to lobby Boris Johnson for more money and are considering yet another hike in council tax along with redundancies for council staff. Considering KCC's recent track record on financial dealings beginning with their considerable losses during the Icelanic banking crisis, £50m invested by the council which represented £32m from its own reserves, £16m from Kent Pension Fund and £1m from Kent Fire & Rescue Authority, this is an apalling state of affairs and MORALLY CORRUPT to boot.

It will save many peoples lives and restore some trust in the government.

It is important to separate aid to developing countries from diplomatic presence within them. Without separation, aid becomes a carrot to persuade developing countries to accept economic proposals which benefit the donor country. Aid is altruism, it is not commercial pressure. Merging the DFID and the FCO would be a return to colonialism.

This is important to prove the point of our government being in solidarity against racism whether black or white or whatever race. "This is not just insulting to the #BlackLivesMatter movement, it is deeply embarrassing for Dominic Raab. He is supposed to be the Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom." "This Government continues to shame us to the world."

On 17th June the Prime Minister announced a plan to merge DFID with the FCO, to be led by the Foreign Secretary. The stated purpose is to create a united department that will better promote British interests, to allow the Foreign Secretary to make decisions on aid spending in line with the UK's priorities overseas. In other words, to prioritise helping those who can help us in return. This means that the poorest and most vulnerable people, those who can most easily be seen to offer the UK little or nothing in return, will be pushed not only to the bottom of the queue, but all too easily off the queue altogether. UK charities have already united to condemn this move, condemning it as having been taken "without any process or consultation, and against the recommendations of both independent aid scrutiny bodies as well as the UK's development and humanitarian sector", and transferring the aid budget into "the hands of those with little expertise in global health systems, humanitarian response and disease prevention and eradication" (Stephanie Draper, CEO of Bond, a UK network for international development NGOs). Mark Sheard, CEO of World Vision UK, said it would "risk money being diverted to address UK foreign policy interests rather than alleviating poverty". A Google search of "DFID merger with the FCO" will provide many more, convincing arguments from UK aid and development charities. Of course DFID isn't perfect; no institutions are. But its ability to give aid where it is most needed in the world represents the UK's ability to express our common humanity, not only with those who can scratch our backs in return, but with all our fellow human beings especially the neediest. Please write to your MP now, making the points that: * Aid tied to the perceived national interests of whatever is the government of the day will be inconsistent and short-termist. * Although DFID, like all institutions, can always be improved, removing its independence and subsuming it under a trade-focussed body will both emasculate its expertise and remove its teeth. * Finally, our true "national interests" are best expressed in being both altruistic and, if we want to gather international kudos, in being seen to be altruistic. DFID gives us a good name in the world; merging it with the FCO will lose its identity and its good name.

This would put pressure on the Chinese regime not to enact measures that would allow them to extradite Hong Kong citizens to mainland china. They would in effect be extraditing UK nationals.

A ‘home’ is viewed by many as place of safety, security and comfort; but for some the aspect of safety can be taken away by the act of violence. The entity of a home then changes from a sanctuary to a place of dread and fear.

It is increasingly apparent and possibly crucial that the current administrators would benefit from a wider field of expertise to maximize our county's potential to reduce the harm of Covid 19. A cross party coalition in WW2 arguably harnessed all available strengths and created the turn in history that led to Britain's survival.

Without Committing to current UK standards a Post Brexit market could open the UK to a flood of cheap low quality produce and low animal welfare standards . This also could totally undermine the UK farming industry