I know this Petition will be a touchy subject for those who have had to apply for a Spouse Visa in the last four years to allow a non-EU domiciled spouse into the UK from abroad. I have made every effort to keep this petition explanation short and hope my point comes across to your clearly and concisely, and that you will support my initiative to urge our fellow Minister of State, Rt Hon Brandon Lewis to look into this as a matter of urgency and bring about a change in pricing policy. Here is my Story: I, Andy Wilkinson am a UK Citizen and married my wife Sylvia Alexis in 2010 who was from Pretoria, South Africa. She joined me in the UK as my partner having acquired a spouse visa - costing around £600 in 2010. In March 2012, we decided to move to Cape Town for few years for a job opportunity for which I had been accepted. Late last year, my role came to an end, and we had to move back home. After reviewing the criteria for the UK Visa, it was obvious I would have to come back to the UK alone and find a job that qualified me for the financial requirement of the minimum income threshold which was required. In June 2017, we were set to apply for Sylvia’s Spouse Visa and was advised the cost to be £1,464 pounds. The Issue: Given the current recessionary economic climate in the UK, a huge population of the work force just about get by with what they earn (See my link to the Guardian’s newspaper below to see the income situation of UK Citizens). What happens when a UK Citizen finds their match from abroad, and have to pay £1,464 to bring them into the UK, this becomes a sticky situation an unaffordable price for many. Therefore a number of questions have come to mind? Why has the government which came into power in 2010, suddenly hiked the prices of a spouse visa for a UK Citizen’s partner. Ofcourse the government has an ambition of curbing the national debt, but penalizing UK citizens for having chosen a partner from abroad is not one of the best ways of doing it. A visa cost of £600 in 2010, and the same visa in 2017 costs £1,464. It would frustrate any logical minded person how the steep increase of 140% is justified. Or is the government simply trying to rake in as much money as it can from a situation they know the applicant has no alternative choice but to pay. I feel this is a penalization technique to those who have found their match from abroad. Ofcourse it will be argued that this has been a decision to curb exploitative marriages. But what about those who have been married for many years, those who have kids, certainly they cannot be labeled as exploitative – so why should they have to pay such a hefty visa cost? Finally, it may also be argued this is to stop UK Citizens bringing in partners from abroad. This cannot be something the government decides. It is every Human’s Right to marry whomsoever they wish. It is not justifiable for the government to apply strong charges, as if to punish a UK Citizen from marrying outside the borders of the UK. Referring back to the article by the Guardian, many people who have spouses abroad will have to wait, or pay the cost using expensive methods of credits (credit cards, loans etc), and this certainly can’t be a reasonable strategy. What do I want? I want your support to urge our Minister of State, Rt Hon Brandon Lewis, to look into reducing the cost of a spouse visa for UK citizens who plan to bring in their spouse’s from abroad. The visa costs should be designed so that they are equitable to all UK Citizens, not assuming everyone is a high income earner. (For I am not a high UK earner, but am grateful Sylvia has now joined me in the UK). I also understand that the government has taken a consultation process to determine fee levels for certain visas, but the visa that I am concerned is for UK Citizens who have/plan to bring their spouse from abroad. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/20/one-in-four-uk-families-have-less-than-95-in-savings-report-finds

In the UK we are being edged to 'obedience' at all costs, by our media and by the way we are being divided and taught to hate each other. WE need to act together to protect our rights and liberties. Just a couple of examples follow- please read. 'The multinational security company G4S failed to maintain basic human rights standards and protect asylum seekers from harm, the complaint lodged to the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.' There has been massive "ankle tagging" fraud by BOTH companies. 'Inappropriate' youth restraint where 14 CHILDREN were assaulted (fines were made against them) and were 'found responsible for the outbreak of violence at Manos Island detention centre but never held to account' (The Telegraph, The Guardian). The proposal to allow powers of arrest to Serco and G4S, private companies who have broken laws and acted inhumanely sends a shudder down the spine. Not only does the privatisation of 'security' smack of fascism- these faceless companies are for profit- not for our welfare The powers that government award themselves in suggesting this go way above their remit- many of the government have interests in these (and other privatising companies) but once again who asked us? We really need to make some noise and be in agreement that we won't let this happen. Let the government go back to the money tree and find the required amounts to recruit and train more police- because if we need more 'security' then the providers should belong to the UK, not be in private profit making hands. Following the appalling sights around the world and most recently the heinous operations in Spain against the Catalonian's and their democratic rights- the image of men hidden by full face 'protective' helmets is enough to make us realise what could happen here. Once they have this power it can not be taken back- who wants to live under the threat of those guys turning up whenever we 'disobey'? Think it couldn't happen here? Want to wait and find out- or spend a few moments to tick this petition showing disapproval and demanding a great big 'NO' to this proposal.

The Spanish police’s behaviours were violent and totally disproportionate. This was not policing by consent. The primary role of the police should be to protect and serve the people, not act as a para military arm of which ever government is in power. The events were unacceptable in a western democracy. There needs to be some form of accountability, otherwise a potentially terrifying precedence has been set.

The NFL games are now broadcast weekly on the BBC. Protests also took place in the UK last week when the NFL players played at Wembley on September 24. With further games scheduled to be played at both Wembley and Twickenham this season, the opportunity for Theresa May to publicly condemn President Trump's racist comments is now. Failure to denounce dangerous and divisive rhetoric sends the poor message to UK citizens that it is acceptable to hold racist sentiments and marginalise minority groups.

• A Reduction in speed levels will make a for a safer environment for residents and road users alike • It will improve the character of the area and quality of life of all residents • It will contribute towards a cleaner environment by reducing levels of noise and air pollution In addition, as the estate has only one road in and out, the 20mph zone can be easily contained within a defined area.

Standing for long periods of time at work can cause many health problems, including pain in many areas of the body (such as the back, legs and hips) as well as varicose veins, problems during pregnancy, heart and circulation issues and more. This does not even begin to cover the issues people with existing health conditions may face. More than eleven million workers in the UK are standing for a prolonged period of time, risking their health and unable to take the weight off of their feet.

Most other schools have 9 sessions per lesson over the course of two weeks, and some have 8, but Penglais only have 7 due to funding. It is important to have at 9 or at least 8 over two weeks as when it comes to exams we will be less prepared than other schools in Wales, and if they score higher marks in the exams, overall we will fall below and not get the results we deserve. The study sessions that have been used as a replacement do not offer the support of the classes to help towards exams

Poverty is a fundamental part of society, even affecting Scotland. In particular, poverty affecting children was announced to be rapidly growing. Recent statistics show an increase from 1/5 to 1/4 children in poverty, meaning an approximate 260,000 children are officially classed as in poverty. Despite the lack of publicity on the issue, this epidemic affecting dozens of families nationwide, and we need your support to convince local MSPs to consider the small cause. Spare change of £5 per child to create a big change, taking hundreds of families out of the grip of poverty.

Their is a lot of upset and disbelief which can upset a lot of families who may be in a chain of buying and selling and giving unnecessary costs to all those people involved just as we ourselves have found out this week, Solicitors , Packing, Removal people costs and items bought ready for the new home, in our case three families have bee affected by the actions of one of these horrible people.

In a modern world where retail and consumer spending habits are moving towards online shopping, North Ayrshire Council is proposing to spend fifty five million pounds on purchasing a shopping centre that struggles to fill its retail spaces.

Every time MPs persist in this disgusting behaviour they cheapen our democracy. They trivialise the important issues that affect many ordinary people in the UK. I believe it is an important reason why politics and politicians are held in such low esteem by the general public. Our democracy deserves better than this.

Why have a session in which the PM is meant to be held to account when she/he is permitted to side-step questions to avoid providing a clear answer? An unanswered question is as useless as an unasked question!