The development and use of renewable energy sources is required to protect the future of all who live and work in Gloucestershire from Climate Change. The current strategy of the Pension Fund administered by Gloucestershire County Council Pension Comittee to invest many many £millions in large fossil fuel companies is compromising the future of those of us who live in Gloucestershire and those who contribute to or are receiving GCC pensions.

It is estimated that supermarkets waste around 180,000 tonnes of food each year, with far higher waste in the supply chain caused by their unnecessary cosmetic standard policies, which contribute towards waste of around 3 million tonnes in the supply chain. In Norwich there are over 7,000 children living in poverty, with the effects of childhood malnutrition lasting a lifetime at a significant cost to the taxpayer, with increased spending on social services, criminal justice, healthcare and extra educational support arising from an upbringing below the breadline. The need to redistribute unsold food to those who can’t afford to feed themselves has become so urgent that a number of organisations have recently joined together to form Norwich Food Hub – which aims to collect food from supermarkets, bring it to a central city-centre location for sorting, and redistribute it to community groups helping those in food poverty. Since forming we’ve been in contact with over 15 organisations interested in receiving food, including 6 breakfast and after-school clubs for young children. By supplying to these groups alone we could be feeding over 250 people each day. Using food waste to feed the hungry is not a solution to food poverty. That should be addressed through fair and sustainable welfare policies. However whilst both food waste and food poverty co-exist we need to organise so that this food can be used to help people in need. Support from the Council would go a long way to achieving our aims and reducing food poverty in our city.

This issue has become important because of some of the stupid and I moral desisons taken by our representatives and the fact that now random and frequent drugs test are performed in many work places why should the house of commons and lords be exempt particularly as they should have nothing to hide from

There have been THREE occasions when MPs in the House of Commons have "Fillibustered". Hospital car parking charges for carers, inhumane treatment by private landlords towards their tenants, and now First Aid Training for children in schools are all issues that have recently been "Fillibustered" in Parliament recently. THIS MUST CEASE! It is NOT what our MPs were elected to do!

The Land Registry records the ownership of all land and property in England and Wales. If private companies get their hands on the Land Registry they’ll have one thing on their minds - profits. This could mean a hike in price for all of us, or a fall in standards because of cost-cutting measures. The Land Registry is a public service that is self funding and is not a drain on public finance. There's no need to sell it off to the highest bidder.

The political history taught in schools is hugely biased towards the actions of men. Shoehorning feminism and women's political achievements under the banner of "pressure groups" diminishes the important work women have done - and still are doing - to make politics more equal and representative. The new curriculum plans to only include one woman in the list of key political thinkers students will study - and the entire Suffragettes movement will only be taught in a section on pressure groups. Women have helped shape this world as much as men have and it's integral that we are recognised as political thinkers, as well as giving kids great female role models to look up to... whether they're boys, girls or anything else. When we remove women from the syllabus we teach young people that women have no impact on politics. At a time when fewer than one in three MPs are female this is a dangerous message to give out. The government has a responsibility to teach young men and women that every voice is important, not just the voices of those already in power. For the sake of the men and women of the future we need to hear about the women of the past. Stop airbrushing women out of our history.

This consultation has had no publicity at all and therefore few know of it. If there is to be such a document then all should know of it and what it means. This is the web page for it. It currently closes on the 23rd November https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/setting-the-mandate-to-nhs-england-for-2016-to-2017 This is about deciding on the future of the NHS. This is where I found out about it and until that day I didn't know it was taking place. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/19/nhs-mandate-england-consulation-deadline?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H&utm_term=138466&subid=13000417&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2

100% London teamed up with energy experts to come up with nine essential steps to a clean energy future for London. The mayor needs to stand with every Londoner, including businesses, schools, hospitals and local councils, to make sure we build a clean future for our city. Here’s what the new mayor should commit to do to make London 100% clean: - Fix up older homes, to make them warm and energy efficient - Invest in public transport - Create a network of renewable energy suppliers - Make cycling safe and accessible for everybody - A city-wide solar power strategy - Make freight carbon-free - Cleaner air through lower vehicle emissions - Use resources well, and recycle more effectively - Modernise our workplaces to make them energy efficient

The Big Lottery Fund is the largest funder of community groups, voluntary organisations and charitable causes in the country. It provides over £850m for people and communities most in need and benefits over 10,000 communities every year. Big Lottery Fund grants go direct to those who need them most. Now the Government plans to switch the money and devastate funding for the most needy at the very time it is taking other far reaching austerity measures which are making life even tougher for the same people. Why does it matter? The Big Lottery Fund is in the warp and weft of local communities and charitable causes across the country. Its funding benefits: -local groups supporting the disabled, elderly and those in poor mental health or with dementia -organisations tackling social ills including alcoholism, abuse, suicide and isolation or meeting social needs like getting online, accessing food banks or overcoming facial disfigurement -household name charities including Addaction, RNIB, Groundwork, Mind, NSPCC and University of the Third Age -programmes to help young people find jobs and be economically active -the life chance of babies though the Better Start programme -the quality of life for pensioners through the Centre for Ageing Better -supporting war veterans through Heroes Return -community centres, libraries and village halls run by the local community -everyday activities such as after schools clubs, scouts groups and community transport -the things that bring people together like the Big Lunch, community choirs, parks and allotments -everyone who wants to do something good for their local community - over 90% of funding is for less than £10,000 and given in response to ideas and proposals from local people and organisations -voluntary organisations and community groups - who receive over 95% of the funds

Since July 2013, the EU and the USA have been negotiating on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment partnership (TTIP). These negotiations are to determine which goods and services TTIP will apply to. These negotiations are in secret. MEPS, and MPs are not allowed to see the documentation. As tariffs between the EU and the US are low anyway, the main focus is on increasing trade through the harmonisation of standards as this will supposedly stimulate the economy.. What this actually means could well be a lowering of environmental standards and standards regarding hazardous chemicals and food safety, and labour rights, to the detriment of the majority of the population. TTIP also includes usage of the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS). This allows corporations to sue Governments if a government passes a law which could infringe on the profit that that corporation expects to make. In the past, with other Trade agreements, the ISDS has been used to overturn democratic decisions by all levels of governments at significant public cost. ISDS provides for the usage of secret private arbitration tribunals which are held in secret, and there is no possibility of appeal against decisions. One case where a government has been dragged before an ISDS tribunal as a result of a decision by a local authority has already happened: In 1997, the US waste management company Metalclad sued the Mexican government as the municipality of Guadalcazar , in San Luis Potosi State , had rejected their application to run a hazardous waste depot. In spite of San Luis Potosi declaring the area a nature reserve, Metaclad sued Mexico , who had to pay a fine of $15.6 millions. This was possible under the Investor State dispute settlement, part of NAFTA, and also in TTIP.* Fines have been up to billions of dollars and the cost of an ISDS case averages $ 8,000,000. If governments start passing laws and making decisions out of fear of being sued by corporations then this will have a devastating effect on democracy, especially in times of austerity. Sourcing of supplies and employment by local governments is badly needed to local economies and TTIP could prevent this happening. Although local authorities would be bound by whatever will be in the final TTIP treaty, there has been no impact assessment of the effects of TTIP on local authorities, neither has there been any consultation of local governments or organisations representing local governments. They have not been allowed to scrutinise negotiation documents. What is especially important for local authorities is that under TTIP procurements for goods and services would have to be tendered across the entire EU and US area. Very likely is that the winners would be multi-national corporations. Local firms simply would not get a look-in and money otherwise supporting the local ecnomy and providing local jobs would go elsewhere. And besides, under the ISDS clause in TTIP any attempt by a local authority to reverse this could result in the UK being sued before a secret ISDS tribunal. This has already happened I other countries (see Metaclad suing Mexico because Guadalcazar council turned down a hazardous waste dump). We would like Barnet to join the hundreds of local authorities across Europe have declared themselves TTIP-free zones including over 26 local authorities in the UK including Conservative-run North Somerset,, 64 in Spain 450 in France and 300 in Germany, including Barnet's twin town Siegen-Wittgenstein.

The present system is grossly unfair. Everybody benefits from Local Government expenditure but only a few have to pay, and then regardless of their income. Many of the poor subsidise many of the rich. Sharing a home should not exempt any of the occupants from assessment/payment.

The 1987 Act legally prevents thousands of UK Veterans from proper compensation............This must change and soon! You are urged to comply with the Prime Minister's vow to review this unfair payment rule (PM Question Time: 04 Nov 2015). For example: Fred Minall aged 74 joined up at age 15 and served 8 years in the Royal Navy as a mechanical engineer. He was heavily exposed to asbestos whilst working from the age of 16 years in engine and boiler rooms and machinery spaces or compartments on 4 of Her Majesty's Warships at home and abroad. Prior to his diagnosis he was a fit 74 year old man who enjoyed travel, caravanning and sport. At this date he is extremely fatigued, has no interest and is unable to partake in any exercise, e.g. 4 months ago he could swim 40 lengths of a swimming pool, now cannot swim at all because of exhaustion. He has been reduced 'overnight' to a feeble unwell man and has just started 18 weeks of chemotherapy which may or may not be effective. Fred is just one of an estimated 2,500 people who have or are likely to be effected by this fatal disease following exposure to this lethal asbestos. You will agree that all service personnel deserve to be recognised for their commitment to the country and should receive the same level of compensation as all civilians and all other Armed Forces service personnel after 1987. You may agree, that the MOD was negligent having the knowledge that this mineral substance was highly dangerous by allowing their personnel to work in a dangerous environment without warning of its dangers, without protective clothing or protection to their airways. Now they must suffer the consequences for their innocence.