His request is simple; he wants to speak to you Mr Cameron, to present you with scientific evidence and to show you the social opposition to fracking, particularly from Lancashire where he lives, but he also acts as a passionate green voice for many people in the UK who feel the same way. He isn't a scientist, or a powerful politician or a celebrity; he is a regular everyday bloke who believes fracking is a very bad idea - today (4/12/2015) is his 12th day without food. He wants to talk to you about the exponential growth of support from regular everyday folks who don't have a voice on the telly, the radio or in the papers, but who want you and our government to deliver renewable, sustainable, safe options to power our country. He just wants to talk to you Mr Cameron - go and see him! * * * Gayzer has no PR or media team, no YouTube channel or popular blog page to help raise his profile. Please show your support for his plight; he is your next-door neighbour, he is the voice in the supermarket queue, he is the one who is putting everything on the line to try to protect the future of all of our children.

For those with neurological-developmental disorders, including mild autism and autism without a disability, there are no specialised community services for adults with such disabilities. Social workers and doctors are dealing with those with more mild to moderate learning and neurological-developmental, including asperger syndrome and autism without a learning disability, but have no specialist resources, therapy, or idea on how to support these specific group of adults. I want all local social services and NHS teams through England and in all counties to give adults with autism and asperger syndrome an allocated social worker or doctor that is specifically specialised in long-term developmental disorders. But many people with this disabilities are ignored, given the wrong support, or are forgotton. So the all the government, social services, and MP's needs to implement specialised community teams for adults with long-term and mild to moderate developmental disorders, with specialised social workers, psychiatrists, and advocacy teams. At the moment, alot of high-functioning autistic adults get classed as having more emotional or mental problems, if they do not have a learning disability label on top of their autistic diagnosis - but many autistic adults are not mentally ill, they have a neurological developmental disorder. So the government needs to stop throwing autistic adults into the mental health sector teams and start opening up specialised teams through out the UK that only deal with autism related disorders, including asperger syndrome.. Some areas do have adult clinics for asperger syndrome and mild autism sufferers, but many areas don't - Derbyshire, as I know, do not offer specialised social services workers or NHS staff to adults with asperger syndrome. You can get diagnosed with asperger syndrome now, in Derbyshire, for example...but there are not specialised teams available, so some of us with asperger syndrome get allocated into the mental health system which is unfair, and this means we don't get the proper treatment.. So all local authorities needs to now step up and make it law that all counties must have specialised community teams through the UK and not just in certain parts of the country. So many adults with autism and asperger syndrome, especially those that cannot access learning disability teams, are being left out and not receiving adequate long-term support from their local nhs and social services team. Many autistic and asperger syndrome syndrome adults need more long-term and specialised support, in order to gain the community support that they deserve. This will mean that adults with asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism could access proper treatment and social care. If we could have proper social care teams and NHS clinics that offer specialised support tailored around all areas of the UK, then we could get the right to lead a normal and healthy life. This will improve the quality of families, adults affected with asperger syndrome and autism, and any money can be put into getting adults with aspergers/autism into a good cause.

It isn't fair that 16 and 17 can't vote for who will make important decisions for their future. They should be able to decide who they want making these decisions as they also get affected by the changes. It isn't fair that people can make the decision on who runs their future but they can't so we think that the voting age should be brought down. Our reasons for this is 16 year olds already have many opportunities like: leaving school working full time paying taxes getting married having consenting sex and having a child leaving home joining the armed forces. They are also responsible for any criminal action and can go to jail. We think that all of these show responsibility and adultery so we don't understand why 16 year olds aren't seen as mature enough to do something as "simple" as voting. Another reason we have is people of this age have a bit of knowledge about politics and actually, a lot of people are interested in it. We have found out that a lot of people would vote at 16 if they had the chance and they don't want to wait another two years to make an impact in the government. The only thing is, a lot of people don't think that we are educated enough about politics. In our questionnaire, 18 out of 120 people said that they think we are. This would definitely need to be changed because they need to have a wider knowledge on the subject so they know about it before this action takes place.

Mr Cameron’s remarks yesterday about those opposed to the bombing of Syria, being terrorist sympathisers has shown the utter contempt that he has for over half the population of this country, not only is it untrue, it was an absolutely appalling thing to say, about the people he is supposed to be governing and as such should be immediately retracted, and a full apology given to the country from the House of Commons. A Prime Minister is expected to behave better than this, he should behave in a manner suited to his office. Not only has he let himself down, he has let the country down, and I believe he has let the House of Commons down. This has shown that by making comments like that about the people of this country, he is unfit to be our prime minister and should resign forthwith.

The proposals were developed in consultation with the local community, prioritising feedback from rough sleepers at the group's weekly Love Kitchen. Love Activists hope to gather 1250 signatures to force the council to debate the proposals at a full council meeting. Reasoning/Rationale: 1. In May, the Supreme Court ruled that when local authorities make vulnerability assessments, a 'homeless person' should be compared with an 'ordinary person who is at risk of becoming homeless'. There is no doubt that any homeless person is 'significantly more vulnerable' than an ordinary person, therefore everybody living on the street should be assessed as being in priority need. The judgement also made it clear that while councils are often under huge financial strain, this must not be used as an excuse for avoiding their legal duties. To guarantee duty of care and legal obligations are met, all local authorities must provide permanent housing for anybody living on the streets. 2. Housing first pilot project had a 70% success rate in Brighton & Hove - helping 7 out of 10 people with high support needs into accommodation. 3. Extended winter provision: additional services provided over a period of time e.g. every night from November to March. If the material resources exist to provide shelter from a severe weather emergency, economic arguments against keeping the shelters open are not as powerful as the humanitarian ones for opening them. (Copy & pasted from 'Homeless Link') Humanitarian Response: SWEP should be applied responsibly to prevent death at all times; 3 consecutive nights at zero or below is the minimum requirement. Local authorities should consider factors such as wet weather and wind chill, snow coverage and duration of extreme weather when looking at provision. Preventing deaths on the streets is the aim of the protocol, so if this demands more beds and a longer response the local authority should do everything it can to prevent harm to individuals. Economics cannot change the weather any more than economics can determine people's relative vulnerability to each other. 4. It doesn't have to be severely wet to have a severe impact if you're sleeping on the streets. Severely windy, wet weather is an emergency, as is extremely hot, dry weather. Homeless Link offers advice and guidance to BHT, St Mungo's and Brighton & Hove City Council. Currently their minimum definition of severe weather is when the temperature drops below zero for three consecutive nights. (Copy & pasted from 'Homeless Link') There is no strict definition of what counts as ‘severe weather’. Local authorities should proactively identify any weather that could increase the risk of serious harm to people sleeping rough and put measures in place to minimise this. This includes extreme cold, wind and rain. It is important not to presume when, or in what form, severe weather will occur. Sleeping rough is never comfortable, but the suffering is exacerbated by all elements It doesn't have to be severely wet to have a severe impact if you're sleeping on the streets. ('Homeless Link') http://www.homeless.org.uk/sites/default/files/site-attachments/Winter%20provision%20guidance%202015-16.pdf 5. If this doesn't happen there will be no truly affordable places to live and more people will inevitably become homeless. 6. This would make use of empty properties, keep people safe and avoid waste of tax payers money, private money and time spent on security, policing and court costs. (Copy & pasted from 'Homeless Link') In addition to the direct risk associated with severe weather, local authorities should work alongside other local statutory and voluntary services to identify and mitigate actions taken during severe weather that can increase risk for those sleeping rough. For example, people may choose to sleep in riskier places, such as in bins, where they can find cover. They may also enter buildings or property illegally, or increase their substance use as a coping mechanism. 7. No single authority can successfully move to implement all of these measures, because if they 'move first', their service capacity would risk being overwhelmed by people migrating to that local authority. Therefore, we must work towards implementing these measures nationally. [email protected] twitter.com/loveactivists_ facebook.com/loveactivistsbrighton

The con-trick has been engineered by Recruitment Agencies, whereby the pay-rate they initially promised to their temp/contract worker is greatly reduced due to them using "Umbrella Pay Schemes" who are the middlemen, to pay their employees. Unfair pay Payslips are often confusing and the cost of employer's national insurance and processing of pay is then passed onto the temp/contractor by the "Umbrella Payment Scheme;" all because the Recruitment Agencies don't want to shoulder the burden of being the actual *'employer.' Many contractors/Temps are also being forced into becoming an unlimited company - this action isn't always practical for the temporary worker as many jobs may only be for few days. *THIS NEEDS TO STOP AS IT AFFECTS, NURSES, CONSTRUCTION WORKERS, TEMP OFFICE EMPLOYEES, THE LOW PAID and ALL OF THOSE WHO ARE JUST SURVIVING due to not enough permanent employment or the need to have flexible working hours Thank you kindly I hope to help not just myself, but others in a similar situation. I am employed by a Recruitment Agency and have been contracting via agencies for sometime; each week I am paid by an "Umbrella Pay Scheme" (Recruitment Agencies middleman). This scheme deducts their "margin" of £30.00 weekly from my pay along with *other deductions. Citation: - Under the umbrella company arrangement the burden of paying both workers’ and employers’ National Insurance contributions (NIC) reportedly fell on the workers, leaving some of them worse off by as much as £100 a week. - See more at: http://www.staffingindustry.com/eng/Research-Publications/Daily-News/Wales-Government-to-stop-use-of-umbrella-payroll-companies-on-all-future-construction-projects-32788#sthash.F7AMjyQs.dpuf

We feel that Donald Trump's unrepentant, persistent verbal attacks on various groups of people based on nationality, religion, race and physical abilities are a huge detriment to RGU. Hate speech must not have a place in academia, in politics or on the world stage. We are confident RGU will agree with the petitioners, and act swiftly. We would also note the brave opposition of Dr David Kennedy to this degree at the time it was bestowed.

The recent Labour Party conference agreed four conditions that would have to be satisfied before military action could be supported. None of these have been satisfied: 1. Clear and unambiguous authorisation from the United Nations. As reported by the BBC, UN Security Council resolution 2249 carried last week does not provide a legal basis for military action by the UK and does not invoke Chapter VII of the UN charter authorising the use of force. 2. A comprehensive EU-wide plan to provide humanitarian assistance to the consequent increase in the number of refugees. In fact, the EU refugee plan is unravelling and the approach to refugees is highly fragmented. 3. That bombing is exclusively directed at military targets directly associated with 'ISIL'. There is evidence that around 90% of drone strike victims in other conflicts were unintended casualties. 4. That any military action is subordinated to international diplomatic efforts, including the main regional powers, to end the Syrian civil war. The shooting down of a Russian plane by Turkey in addition to differing approaches to the Assad regime and a continuing multifaceted conflict make a broadly-based, sovereign Syrian government that could retake territory currently controlled by ISIL a diminishing prospect. We would all like to see the defeat of IS. The future of the Assad government should be determined by the Syrian peoples alone and not by Western intervention. What is certain is that further bombing will increase the humanitarian crisis and cause civilian loss of life. Recent wars have created the sort of stateless societies in which terrorist groups like ISIL can thrive, as recently admitted by Tony Blair when he stated that the invasion of Iraq created the conditions for the rise of ISIL. Jeremy Corbyn was elected by 59.5% of voters. It's time to stand by the democratically expressed will of the party members.

Thousands of innocent people will die and the refugee crisis will escalate, pushing us all towards a never-ending conflict. The vast amount of public money that this military action will cost could be well spent elsewhere. War only escalates more war, please listen to the voice of reason.

This is important because these are vulnerable people who often don't have a voice. Clearly the city council just want to get rid of them from the city. Everyone surely has a right to bedding! Rather than criminalisation, the council should do more to help.

Torbay is being sold off by our Council, piece by piece, to the highest bidder. The Pavilion has been allowed to fall into disrepair by our self-serving Council, in an apparent bid to force the public into consenting to the sale of the site (including the community green space Cary Green) for the princely sum of £1, to be destroyed by developers. Oldway Mansion, has also been left closed to the public and rotting, after being sold to developers 3 years ago. Another public facility stolen from the hands of the public. The old Hollicombe gas works has been sold off for redevelopment, at great risk to the health of surrounding residents. The Council is refusing to answer Freedom of Information requests for residents to be adequately informed about the levels of toxic dust measured around the site (presumably because it knows that these are far higher than it assured us all they would be). The pursuit of profits and kowtowing to big business appears to be more important to this Council than the health and wellbeing of residents of the Bay. For 2 consecutive years, the Mayor has shown contempt for the people of Brixham, refusing to pass on a £67,000 central government grant meant for Brixham (against the recommendations of the former Minister for Local Government, Kris Hopkins). This year, council tax will be rising by 2% while the Bay faces sweeping budget cuts, including £920,000 from children's services, £331,000 from highways and maintenance, £292,000 from Community Services, and the complete removal of funding for the Crisis Fund. Up to 50 council jobs will be lost as a result of these cuts (no doubt affecting low-paid frontline staff, rather than directors and heads of departments). In short, we will all be paying more, but getting a lot less for our money. Money is no object to the Coucil when it comes to beach huts, however - it managed to overspend by £600,000 on the Meadfoot and Oddicombe beach huts scheme. In a few months, when we are dodging potholes on roads that resemble a lunar landscape, please remember that the council incompetently blew nearly twice the £330,000 in cuts to Highways on a few seaside sheds for the wealthy minority who can afford them. Torbay businesses are being told that services once seen as fundamental will no longer be included in the extortionate business rates they pay to the Council. On top of these, the Council wanted businesses to pay a compulsory further levy to a private company who failed spectacularly in their previous attempt to provide these once basic services. The Council wanted this so much that it wasted £100,000 of taxpayers' money in a failed attempt to advertise the BID campaign, and undemocratically attempted to swing the 'Yes' vote by giving its 46 public car parks and toilets a vote! Are these the actions of a Council acting in the interests of the people who elected it? It is time this Council is reminded that it works for us, the taxpayers, not vice versa. It has a duty to all of us - those who voted for it, and those who didn't - and it is time that it was held accountable for its failure to uphold that duty. Please sign if you agree and want action.

Because the Sun routinely headlines lies & mis-information that promotes race hatred & misunderstanding in the UK. The front page headline used on 23/11/2015 for instance may be mathematically correct but and its a big but, this depends what question was asked of the people they polled. The question is at best skewed. It's a general question and not specific. The question asked was "How do you feel about young Muslims who leave the UK to join fighters in Syria?" It didn't ask for instance which side these young people would be fighting on or if they would be jihadists. The Sun helpfully misguide their readers by adding a photograph of so called "Jihadi John". You can make your own complaint here too: https://www.ipso.co.uk/oxbxApps/app/complaint1.html