Our environment is important to us and it's about time we started to realise this. We need to focus on renewable energy. I believe a stronger stance against fracking would also gain the SNP more support.

Increasing numbers of homeless people are being arrested for begging around the country. In 2013-14, 2771 cases were brought before the courts, a 70% increase on the previous year. Police use an archaic law which deems those found begging to be 'idle and disorderly'. Begging was made a recordable offence in 2003 against the strong criticisms of civil rights groups and homelessness organisations. Those prosecuted can be fined up to £1000 excluding court charges when found with just a few pennies. Those who have 'gathered alms' (that is, accepted money, food or other material goods offered to them) can be prosecuted under this same law with the same consequences. Some people are kept in cells for several nights. Although begging in and of itself is not an imprisonable offence, if the person is already on bail for another case a simple arrest for begging can lead to imprisonment. Those who are fined will inevitably have to beg more to pay off these fines, risking further arrests and fines, a punishment which stands out in its absurdity. Punishing the destitute for trying to survive is both costly and morally abhorrent. It is a waste of tax payers' money which is spent paying police who 'catch people out' in organised undercover operations, as well as on court cases to prosecute them. The minimum cost of bringing one case to the Magistrates' Court is £1000, meaning that in the year 2013-14, bringing begging cases before the courts cost the taxpayer at least £2.777 million. This is money that could be spent helping people rather than punishing them. Police also routinely move homeless people on under part 3 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014) which gives police the power to confiscate property and exclude individuals from a particular area for up to 48 hours, with the officer also able to impose by what manner and route the person must leave. Failure to comply is a criminal offence which can result in a £2500 fine or 3 months in prison. Refusing to surrender your property is punishable by a fine of up to £500. The two conditions needed by officers to issue a dispersal order are firstly, that the constable has 'reasonable grounds to suspect that the behaviour of the person in the locality has contributed or is likely to contribute to (a) members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b) the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder, and secondly, that the constable considers that giving a direction to the person is necessary for the purpose of removing or reducing the likelihood of (a) or (b)'. Given that begging is a crime considered 'idle and disorderly', the two laws in tandem essentially give police de facto power to exclude any homeless person from any area simply because they think it is likely that the person, being homeless, might beg there. The highly subjective definition of 'anti-social behaviour' as that which contributes or is likely to contribute to members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed reinforces this and even with the decriminalisation of begging, would still give police the power to move on any homeless person from any area simply because they believe doing so is necessary for the purpose of removing or reducing the likelihood of members of the public being distressed by seeing them. Seeing people forced to live on the streets is distressing to much of the public for good reason, but this compassionate distress means that under this definition a homeless person is considered to be exhibiting anti-social behaviour simply by existing visibly. The anti-social behaviour that causes the public distress is not caused by the homeless person however, but by the authorities' failure to provide people with shelter in a country that has 600,000 empty homes. As described by someone living on the street, being asked to move on when you have nowhere to go is like being asked to walk into a brick wall. These laws and their enforcement victimize vulnerable people who are already suffering the daily struggle of life on the streets or in insecure and unstable temporary accommodation. We believe that kicking someone for limping when it is you who cut off their leg is shameless and cruel. We believe that the government should be providing homes for the homeless, not handcuffs. We therefore call on parliament to repeal without replacement section 3 of the Vagrancy Act (1824), to amend part 3 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014) to safeguard homeless people from its discriminatory use, and for an ultimate end to the criminalisation of homelessness by any and all other laws that may be newly concocted or dug up for this purpose. If you have an MP who may be sympathetic, get in touch with them to push this issue to parliament. We launched this petition at our demo at Brighton Magistrate's court on the 20th January.

Why in 2016 when the government are looking to make cuts, should they be immune to the same austerity they force so many others to live with? Last year a reported 1.1 million people were forced into using food banks, this year they are trying to force our NHS to do more, with less. They have already attacked the disabled, and raised tuition fees for those looking to further their education while at the same time taking a pay rise. Why should they get to claim personal expenses? Especially when the average MP salary is £67,060. The UK average salary is reported to be £26,500, and yet you and I have to pay for our own food, our own travel expenses, as well as our own day to day living expenses. Whilst I understand that staffing costs make up nearly three quarters of the total MP expenses budget, staffing and office costs as well as reasonable long distance travel costs should be managed by the IPSA. Any other personal claims simply shouldn't be allowed. Let's stand together and remind the Government they stand in office to serve the greater goods best interest and not their own.

The Financial Conduct Authority recently dropped it's review into Banking Culture, reportedly under alleged Government pressure (or leaning) as reported by the BBC., however this is denied by the treasury. I ask that we pressure the government to reinstate the review. McDonnell said: “This will be a huge blow to customers and taxpayers who are all still paying the price for the failed culture in the banking sector that’s been widely attributed to be among the main causes of the crash and the scandals over Libor and price-fixing.” He said the FCA was making a “dangerous and costly mistake”. “The chancellor therefore cannot stay silent on this issue. It’s time he used his influence to keep this review going. Otherwise he’s letting down the rest of us who bailed the banks out and also allowing a signal to be sent to carry on regardless. Given the scale and severity of the failings in the financial sector and the criminal behaviour shown by some banks, the scrapping of the FCA’s review into banking culture sends the wrong message at the wrong time,”. Also The review was included in the FCA’s business plan for 2015, but was dropped after an initial assessment found it difficult to compare different cultures inside banks. The decision to abandon the review follows the resignation of the FCA chief executive, Martin Wheatley, after the chancellor forced him out in July. A permanent replacement has not been named to take over from Wheatley, who had flagged his tough stance towards the industry by warning he would shoot first and ask questions later.

It is imperative in a democracy that the electorate are informed by a news media that is unbiased and can effectively present news in a balanced way. It is concerning that staff at the BBC are appearing to manipulate the news and it is vital that this publicly funded institution is not using its position to abuse the public trust. The revelations in a recent blog by BBC producer Andrew Alexander, was very clear about how staff at the Corporation manipulated news to “make an impact.” This resulted in a member of the Shadow Front Bench Stephen Doughty, resigning live on air during the Wednesday 6th January 2016 edition of The Daily Politics. The blog went on to express how staff were delighted to have seen how this story was brought up by the Prime Minister in his exchange with the Leader of the Opposition. “As Andrew Neil handed from the studio to the Commons chamber we took a moment to watch the story ripple out across news outlets and social media. Within minutes we heard David Cameron refer to the resignation during his exchanges with Jeremy Corbyn. "During our regular debrief after coming off air at 1pm we agreed our job is always most enjoyable when a big story is breaking – but even more so when it’s breaking on the programme” There is considerable disquiet that the BBC is not fulfilling its public duty to report the news in a fair and balanced way. This has come to the fore since the election of Jeremy Corbyn as the Leader of The Labour Party. This blog by Andrew Alexander will cause concern everyone who cares about the unbiased reporting of the news.

Mears helps the elderly to remain in their own homes. Elderly neighbours and relatives have found this service vital when they did not know who else to turn to. The cost is reasonable and the workmen are very good and caring.

No parent should have to hold their children and comfort them as they die, or be told that their child has been harmed by someone who is supposed to love them. But that’s exactly what I had to experience 10 years ago when my sons Jack and Paul were killed by their father after a family court judge granted him unsupervised contact with them, despite my warnings. For the past nine years, I’ve been campaigning with Women’s Aid to ensure children are at the heart of every decision made in the family courts and their voices, wishes and feelings are heard. I’ve been to Downing Street and the Houses of Parliament to help get key changes through in the Domestic Abuse Act.  In 2017, we saw new guidance published for judges making decisions about child contact in cases of domestic abuse. And in 2020, the Government committed to make the family courts safer for adult and child survivors. But years later, we’re still waiting for true reform to keep children safe now and for generations to come.  That’s why I’m calling on the new Labour Government and family courts to ensure, once and for all, that decisions made about parental contact do not allow known abusers to have unsafe contact with children that puts their lives at risk.

We call upon all Staffordshire landowners to support the vaccination of badgers to address concerns about Tuberculosis (TB), culling is not the answer. There have been ongoing governmental trials to kill badgers in Somerset, Gloucestershire and Dorset and was extended to six other Counties in 2016, a further 11 cull zones in 2017 and further expansion this year and expected to include Staffordshire. Killing badgers as a method to prevent bovine tuberculosis (TB) as well as being inhumane and barbaric is scientifically proven to be ineffective. The government’s own figures, which were quietly released on the last day before Christmas, show TB in cattle to be rising in and around cull zones. In 2017 19,274 badgers were killed with 20 – 40,000 more expected by the end of 2018. The Welsh Government's approach has been far more successful by focusing on improved testing and movement controls in cattle. New incidents of bovine TB in cattle are now down by 28% in Wales with a 45% cut in the number of cattle being slaughtered. This now leaves 94% of the welsh herd TB free, without killing any badgers. Please say no to the badger cull and show the UK Government that we will not let badgers be murdered. Vaccination and cattle control must be implemented.

We The TAXPAYERS Need to Change UK Banking Culture and STOP Product Mis-selling, Dodgy Loans, LIBOR Rigging and Huge Bonuses. Jail Crooked ‘Fat Cat’ Bankers Don’t Reward Them! The Government’s Financial Conduct Authority has dropped a major investigation into bank pay, promotion, bonuses and other incentives. Osborne said he knew nothing about this - so SIGN this petition to ask him to reverse this decision! USA & Iceland jail crooked Bankers Vietnam shoots crooked Bankers The UK rewards crooked and inept Bankers! UK banks brought our country to it’s knees with a £1.3 TRILLION debt, and we, the taxpayer, bailed them out. It’s time for a change. We need to make banking accountable, responsible, fair and honest, AND, once more, COMPETITIVE. Dodgy and irresponsible bank lending and too much bank leverage led to the 2008 financial crash! How many times does the taxpayer/uk population have to be kicked? Had the Bankers not brought the country to its knees in 2008 what state would the NHS and other public services be in right now? - Better funded for sure. How deep would the cut's need to be, had it not been for the 10's of billions to keep Banks afloat due to fat cat greed and arrogance. The Bankers have stolen your money, robbed your pensions, over-stated their profits, manipulated their share prices and raised new capital under false pretences: Accusations any normal businessman would have been sent to prison for. From 2001 to 2013 - 100,000 small UK businesses were mis-sold hundreds of billions of dodgy loans by Clydesdale/Yorkshire Bank, RBS, Barclays Lloyds & HSBC related to a rigged/ non-existent Libor rate! These mis-sold loans loaded with massive hidden charges have destroyed many thousands of these businesses, and continue to do so. Some of the banks have washed their hands by offloading these loans to American vulture funds to break up these businesses. PPI Mis-selling affected many millions of us, but still the banks get away with it with new scandals continually surfacing. Banks were being brought to book for PPI, but the Government has now decided to water down/cancel it’s own investigation into banking culture. Sign this petition which asks George Osborne to restart the Financial Conduct Authority investigation into banking culture.

This man was an ordinary Muslim shop worker who - in January 2015 - was caught up in the post Charlie Hebdo assault on a Jewish supermarket in Eastern Paris. He showed supreme courage in hiding several Jewish people and then escaping to inform the Police of their situation and the layout of the store. His brave actions undoubtedly saved the lives of these people and also quite possibly those of police officers as well. His story has been mocked by some right wing commentators in France and disbelieved by others. Although his actions are truly heroic he has never claimed himself to be a "Hero".He has never received any recognition from either the French or Israeli governments. This man was incredibly brave and his supreme human action means that his life will probably be in danger from those extremists who would wish to silence him. As such, he deserves full recognition and honour from both the French and Israeli governments.

Would you like to attend the funeral of one of your loved ones only to hear the sounds of a neighbouring barbecue or a loud stereo? Would you like to live next door to a constant funeral procession, with all the associated sounds coming through your windows daily? The Scottish Government is proposing to allow crematoriums to be built and operated directly next to your house in their new Burial and Cremation (Scotland) Bill. The Local Government and Regeneration Committee will meet on January 6th to review their proposals. The Scottish Government have made a huge oversight in their new Cremations and Burials Bill: they have removed the requirement for any minimum distance to be upheld between crematoriums and homes. This is a vital protection for the privacy of mourners and home-owners and a minimum distance must be upheld in law. In the Government's own consultation paper on the bill (which they put out to industry experts to pass comment on their plans) 75% of respondents recommended to keep a minimum distance of 200 yards (see Q11 in this document: https://goo.gl/8PlZ93). The Consultation Report states: "Respondents were strongly in favour of retaining a significant minimum distance. Many who commented considered that the most important factor for retaining a minimum distance was to ensure privacy and dignity for both home owners and mourners. A substantial distance would also ensure adequate provision for memorial gardens and car parking." This petition asks the Local Government and Regeneration Committee to ensure the 200 yard minimum distance is upheld in the new Bill. Already in Haddington, East Lothian, the local planning authority has granted permission for a crematorium to be built in anticipation of the new law - construction has not begun yet but it will soon if the Bill is passed by the Committee this petition is addressed to. For the crematorium in question; there are several neighbouring properties, including a dairy farm. The closest home is only 45 yards away and has bedroom windows below the level of the proposed chimneys in line with the prevailing wind! The proposed car park for the crematorium is directly next to the garden meaning that both the home owners and mourners would have a huge lack of privacy. Imagine walking to your loved-one's funeral and hearing children playing or people laughing? Imagine trying to relax in your garden whilst mourners walk by. Also, emissions from crematoriums are still not entirely understood - particularly and most worryingly in the case of mercury which is present in tooth fillings and is extremely toxic to humans and animals. The Scottish Government hope that by removing the requirement for any minimum distance to be upheld between a crematorium and a home that local planning authorities will make the correct decisions on a case-by-case basis. However, the above development is a case in point that this does not work: East Lothian council owns the building in which the proposed crematorium is to be built and they have wanted to sell it for a number of years. They have agreed a deal with a crematorium developer to sell the building and therefore have a vested interest in ensuring everything goes smoothly in the panning process and, as such, have ignored local businesses and home-owners concerns and ignored all of the numerous negative impacts the development might have. They have abandoned due diligence in the pursuit of profit. If the Scottish Government allows this Bill to pass without upholding the minimum distance of 200 yards which is recommended by it's own consultation then it is condemning not only the people of Haddington but also countless others in future to have their homes and businesses - never mind the funerals all over the country - severely affected. The Government's job is to create legislation to protect people in all aspects life and if this Bill is passed into law without upholding any minimum distance between a crematorium and homes/businesses then the Government will fail in it's duty to the people of Scotland. It is clear that Local Planning Authorities are subject to prejudice and therefore fail to protect the people of Scotland given what has occurred in Haddington, East Lothian in anticipation of the new law being passed. Please uphold the minimum distance of 200 yards!

When so many people are reliant on food banks and tax credits and the number of people living on the poverty line is rising it is disgusting that we should be wasting money on subsidising cheap drinks for MP's.