Assessing value for money in sixth-form education, a recent report published found that academies are able to spend an average of £1,598 more per sixth-form student than sixth-form colleges. The report gives two explanations for this. The government provides funding to academies to meet their VAT, insurance and capital costs in full. Sixth-form colleges, on the other hand, must redirect funding away from frontline education to meet these costs: the average sixth-form colleges pays £335,000 per year in VAT alone.

MOST would be INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES stay away from STANDING in General Election because they can't afford the DEPOSIT. This deprives the Democratic function in Britain from many brilliant capable candidates.

The success of a country is judged by objective markers depicting economic, industrial, social, and cultural output, alongside the health and well-being of its citizens. The only mechanism people have to potentially secure this success is through the quality of a nation's operating democracy, and the central law making body at its heart. The latter is elected by 'informal promises' to hopefully achieve the best outcomes. In Britain's case, this duty falls on the workings of the House of Commons and ultimately by the quality of the party in government, supported in essence by a balance of 650 elected members of Parliament representing the regions and people of Britain. The British Parliament has been a historical role model, but deep and ongoing problems are now present. The system for electing MPs has not effectively changed for hundreds of years, the duties of an MP are not clearly defined and no task obligations are written down. This casual state is unheard of in every other walk of life. Many events are now challenging these loose foundations, change is badly needed to refresh and update the principles by which the Commons, government, and particularly MPs work. This is to ensure we have the most responsive central legislature that is fully equipped and in touch with a rapidly changing country, its people, as well as a very fast-moving highly technical world. Over the last decade or two, many calamities including financial, economic, banking, health, employment, infrastructure, education, as well as the very probity of elected members, have emerged as significant issues. In many cases, these issues fail the test of good government. Even now, we are unclear what expenses MPs are entitled too, what extreme views an MP can hold in office, whether MPs can be compelled to quality control, should they take on second and sometimes a third (or more) jobs, and why there are no basic qualifications which would make MPs 'fit for purpose'. All these points fundamentally return us to question whether the aspirations of the first and second paragraphs above are ever going to find success again. Not surprisingly, voter apathy reflects this deep impasse. This petition proposes that much greater tests on the suitability of people to become MPs must be put in place. We accept the principle that effectively any British citizen of diverse background can become an MP, but, we also suggest that as in any other walks of life where there is a very specific and demanding job to be done, the incumbent should be maximally prepared for the task in hand and certainly not merely possess 'casual well meaning' as the test for office. MPs will therefore have to be 'fit for purpose' in showing strong evidence of educational, vocational, and personal skills demanded both by their new job and by the electorate, and not just offer a test of arbitrary party loyalties to be finally selected. Hence, evidence that MPs can sit in our central law making House and are pre-endowed with the educational skills to steer economic and social reform to which the nation is entitled, becomes a pre-requisite. The issue is not therefore so much about female to male ratios, ethnic or indigenous grouping, or indeed gender orientation, but about exacting proficiency and technical competence, in the same way every other job in the country has rightfully become. The technical competence issue should now be raised as the central argument, whereby, only a person who is versed and learned in specified skills that are central to the demanding task in hand should be allowed to stand for Parliament. This will mean aspiring applicants must achieve set qualifications first, and for political parties to put in place a process where they steer prospective candidates through specific training before allowing candidates to stand. The qualifications will set the bar high, but Britons are especially well equipped to achieve this, as our educational history consistently shows. These qualifications, including all the subjects set out above, become preconditions of educational experience and attainment before finally sitting as an elected Member of the British Parliament. Furthermore, a special internal and external education, science, and culture committee should refresh this MINIMUM list of requirements on a regular basis, checking educational progress of elected members and demanding new updated units to keep pace with the changing world and the job types (secretarial/ministerial) which the member may be diversifying into. Sitting MPs will have to constantly learn and update skills too, this can be achieved as 'study within recess' periods and cover all the units newly elected MPs face. Learning and re-learning, up-dating and re-validation, becomes part and parcel of the discipline for a Parliamentary political career.

Year after year landlords and Councils have increased rents by at least 4%. This year many are levying 4% increases at a time when many ordinary people - 'hard working families' to use politician speak, are on minimum wage and who have not had a wage rise in 2 years. Private landlords and local Councils are proactively making people poorer as expenses increase and income remain stagnant. Just recently The Royal Bank of Scotland, that was bailed out by tax payers, has defended plans to pay £588m in staff bonuses despite suffering an £8.24bn loss in 2013 as it slumped into the red for the sixth successive year. Ross McEwan, its Chief Executive, is expected to earn £2.7m for simply doing a job he was brought in to do. However, the bank is still in the red, so he hasn't achieved the goal, yet he still receives more money in bonuses than most people earn in a lifetime. Barclays increased bonuses by 10% to £2.4bn. HSBC said it would increase salaries for its bosses to get around a European union cap on bonuses. Are we going to swallow this silently? We clearly are not 'all in this together'. Perhaps the worst offenders are those local Councils who are taking the easy option and passing on the costs of their central government funding shortfall to those in social housing and those who have to pay council tax - those who have the least ability to pay and do anything about the increase. It is sickening to hear politicians speaking about raising people out of poverty yet allowing this activity to continue.

ECO heating is just not affordable to most, with quotes of around £40,000 for a just a GSHP, and a loan on offer of £10,000. Disabled and living with no insulation, heating or hot water for two years I have battled the system, Grants, loans, ECO, Green Deal, all these well paid "helpers" are no help, EST, REA, RECC, NAPIT, TRUSTMARK, MCS, this list of "approved" installers, along with the energy companies, and the worst of all British Gas. No one cares or listens, pages of letters no one can explain why help that is on offer is not accessible. Meanwhile the government funded agencies continue to profit. The Energy saving trust tells you you must use an RECC approved installer, RECC is part of REA, why is the CEO of the EST also the boss of REA? Have you had problems trying to access the help to improve your insulation and heating? if so sign this petition, lets see if the DECC will listen.

An MP that responds to constituents concerns by answering letters, attending surgeries and hustings is upholding the democratic process. MP's that fail to do this fall short as a representative. I have sent 15 letters on a wide range of concerns including the human rights act, access to work, the NHS, the prison service, the UK border Agency, the future of our library service and the failure of the Green Deal. None have been answered or even acknowledged.

The original constitution of the Labour Party included a section known as Clause 4 which promised: "To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service." Tony Blair scrapped Clause Four as it did not fit in with his conservative ideals. It is time for the Labour Party to return to its original purpose and fight for working people and those least able to fight for themselves.

To restore financial Integrity and fairness with voters.

Our democracy is at stake. One political party is trying to ride roughshod over the will of the British public.

Benefit sanctions target the most vulnerable in our society - like the parent who had their benefits stopped after missing an appointment because their baby was in intensive care for example. A total of 466,000 people were hit by sanctions which saw them barred from claiming Job Seekers Allowance for an average of between four weeks and three months. However, 2,000 repeat offenders were hit by significantly harder sanctions and had their benefits stopped for the next three years, including 49 single parents and 978 people under the age of 24. A statement from Mr Boles withdrawing the comments followed remarks to his local newspaper, suggesting the Tories could amend the current sanctions regime. Nick Boles said “In the run-up to the election there is not a lot we can do, but we can get the case studies together where the sanctions seem to be most unreasonable … The beginning of a parliamentary term, when people are looking at things afresh, is the best time to make a change.” But what happens after the elections? The government do as they wish and the people who vote for them remain trapped in the sanctions, left to go without basic needs such as Food and nappies. The Trussell Trust Charity who run the local Foodbanks and The Grantham Passage pick up the people effected by Sanctions and Benefit cuts. The case studies are there and the people are real. Infact Gill Thompson and Cathie Wood have come together through impossibly tragic circumstances. Both of their brothers died, hungry, with no money to buy food, after their benefits were stopped. How many more people need to die? Would we leave an animal without food, No? The owners would be prosecuted. As a Grantham constituent who votes I would urge Nick Boles and fellow MP's to start supporting the people who vote instead of showing they care more about the party line and climbing up the party ladder. Look at repealing these benefit Sanctions before the Election.

This is important because the poor are getting so far deeper into poverty.

It is still legal to discriminate against people in Northern Ireland in relation to the provision of goods, facilities and services on the basis of the person's age unlike in Britain and the Republic of Ireland. Older people in Northern Ireland endured the 'Troubles' for many years and looked forward to the 'peace dividend', only to find that their elected representatives can't agree to give them the same protection under the law as is enjoyed by older people in the rest of the UK & Ireland. The Northern Ireland Executive includes a proposal to introduce legislation to outlaw age discrimination in its Programme for Government in 2011, but has so far failed to get agreement in the Assembly for this over the last 4 years. Prof. Mark Lawler of Queen's University Belfast has described how many older people were being denied possible life saving and enhancing cancer treatments each year purely on the grounds of age.