The UK's National Wildlife Crime Unit is badly underfunded. A recent FOI request revealed an actual annual income of only £515, 203 - allowing them to employ 10.6 "full time equivalent" staff (which in fact equates to 11 staff members). This is across the whole of the UK! No wonder wildlife crime in the UK is rampant. Hen Harriers are regularly shot over grouse moors and nobody is prosecuted, to cite just one example. If the NWCU are going to do an effective job of preventing (and prosecuting) wildlife crime in the UK they need to be far better funded

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths.

With effect from 1st April 2017 18- 21 year olds will no longer be entitled to Housing Benefit. We know that many young people rely on housing benefit to keep a roof over their heads. These young people do not choose to become homeless. They are often forced out of home because of domestic violence or family breakdown

Network Rail has a programme of closing non-vehicular Rail Level Crossings, ostensibly to improve safety, although many have no safety issues and the resultant closure or diversion of Public Rights of Way (Footpaths and Bridleways) will severely damage the public's ability to enjoy our wonderful countryside. The process is currently being pushed through in the Anglia region, with 63 crossing closures proposed for Essex alone, but eventually every part of the country will be affected. This scale of closures would have a devastating and unprecedented effect on our Public Rights of Way, destroying or degrading many established routes. Often these are historic paths and most are older than the Railways themselves. Mott Macdonald, the consultants being used by NR, are employing a legal device called a Transport and Works order and involves:- Closure of a large swathe of crossings at a time. No opportunity for the case for each crossing to be tested at a public enquiry. Only a limited programme of consultation in which many local people and the public at large have no knowledge of the plans and their implications. Only limited options being presented and no opportunity for consultees to argue for alternative approaches. Some of NR's solutions destroy the pleasure in using the path, such as diverting it long distances beside the railway, but some are dangerous in themselves where pedestrians are to be directed along roads without verges. Where statistics show a genuine safety issue then action may be necessary but in many cases this is not the case. And if NR were genuinely concerned with safety and not just the convenience of banishing the public from its estate it would be proposing bridges, tunnels, and other safety devices at points of concern, rather than their draconian and undemocratic approach.

There is no crossing facilities at all other than several speed bump crossing zones on earlsgate, with several in place on the same road. The lower end of the village has no crossing provision at all. All children utilise the church on a daily basis, plus there are vulnerable adults in the village that would gain some independence if they could cross the road safely to get to the shops.

The new government policies that came into force yesterday have been assessed as pushing an extra 200,000 children into poverty. One of the changes effectively punishes the 3rd child and treats them differently to their older siblings. It also places unbearable pressure on the mother to put in an official form whether she has been raped or not. Given that most rapes go unreported, or do not reach court due to the high attrition rates for sexual offences, how exactly are women in this position supposed to be able to prove their rape? How many women will choose not apply rather than relive the trauma of the assault? This new approach also penalises parents who already have a 3rd child, and who may need state support in the future due to their circumstances changing. Only their first 2 children are eligible for financial support, again effectively discriminating against the 3rd child. This is blatantly unfair, and against the rights of the child and the mother. It's crucial that this change is challenged and if necessary taken through the courts and all the way to the ECHR- for the sake of children and families. This needs to be challenged by all political parties to send a strong signal to the Government that it cannot get away with treating its citizens in this cruel and inhuman way.

Child poverty is leading cause of poor life chances and without the vital support of tax credits and universal credit child element many children will suffer hunger, social exclusion, deprivation. These policies unfairly attack women and children and cut the link between need and social security.

With the nhs crumbling around us and the number of people on the streets with nowhere to live...... it's stupidity of the highest order to spend 500 million on cosmetically redesigning a passport which works fine as it is

The methods of animal husbandry are important in UK. The type of acceptable animal husbandry will be seen all over the world and we need to be proud of our humane development of British animal welfare.

Displacement caused by gentrification is exacerbated by developers greed for increased in land values. Gentrified areas cover 1/16th of London's area (Akinson, 2008).In a number of instances (Heygate Estate, Aylesbury Estate and Carpenter Estate) whole communities have been displaced in the process of physical renewal. Many areas of London have been occupied by the middle classes causing the original working class residents to be displaced (Glass, 1994). Developers magnify the problem by creating indirect and direct causes of displacement. Developers are directly avoiding the social housing needs of the city (Booth, 2016). Their new buildings put pressure on the housing market leading to the indirect pricing out of low income individuals (Atkinson, 2000).Developers are even willing to pay fines implemented due to the lack of social housing as they see the beneficiaries in avoiding their implementation (Wainwright, 2015; Booth, 2016). Private developers benefit, from gentrification, at the expense of communities in London. The City Claim back campaign is worried everyday Londoners will be displaced, by the greed of developers, through gentrification.

It is abhorrent that in a country as wealthy as ours, a man has been allowed to die on the streets of Glasgow because he had nowhere to go. Glasgow City Council website states that: “As a minimum, the council will arrange for you to receive: Advice and Information Temporary Accommodation” We demand that Glasgow City Council acts immediately to fulfil it's duty to the people of Glasgow. Everyone who presents themselves at a Council facility as homeless, should immediately be provided with somewhere safe and warm to stay, until such times as they are able to find permanent accommodation. Furthermore, we demand an end to the policy of abandoning our friends who are deemed to have made themselves intentionally homeless. This unfairly punishes people unfamiliar with the law or who are victims of bullying by rogue landlords.

Children from nursery age 3 years up to high school age 16/18 safety & well being.