This is important because the living standards are unsafe for young people and parents to live in. It is also singling out the residents living at the properties giving them next to no connection to their families and friends

With hindsight it is obvious that there is no separation of pedestrians from heavy traffic ... nothing but a small curb ..... We want to stop the terror attack on the Westminster Bridge and similar locations by adding buffers to prevent traffic mounting the curb deliberately or by accident Public safety demands safety measures now

Your pension is a right not a benefit, we pay all our working lives into it and therefore should have a right to take it at its value when and at what age we choose to retire. It is a myth that people are still fit to work over the age of 60 or 65 in a lot of cases and a lot die before being able to claim their pension. It is a money making exercise by current Government. Your pension is your right not a benefit

A SOCIAL care service supporting vulnerable people across Maldon and the Dengie is to be axed. One Support, which provides social care to around 1,600 elderly and vulnerable residents with physical and mental health problems, is due to be completely removed from the Maldon and Dengie areas by March 31. Carers visit clients at least once a week to help them manage their day-to-day life, including organising finances to helping carry out household jobs. The programme is a subsidiary of One Housing, which helps create homes and support people to help them live better and healthier, and is jointly managed by Essex County Council and Moat Housing. However, those who receive the support have been informed that the service will no longer be provided, as part of planned cuts of £713,000 to social care in Essex. It is understood ten staff will lose their jobs.

We served our country and for many years.

Makes me soooo cross, the Government supposedly give £530 per week to care for our elderly to private companies but only pay £60 per week to relatives that are willing to cover it, and now not enough places for the elderly that need it, pay higher rates to family that are willing to do the job thereby ensuring the best care for our loved ones...problem sorted !!!!

Prior to Storm Desmond I hadn't really comprehended what was involved or what was needed; before, during and after such an event. I thought that within a few months people would be okay, insurance companies, local and national government would step in, support and pick up the pieces. In the real world this isn't really what happens. Now 17 months down the line as an organisation we have over 650 flood affected clients on our books. We have supported over 20,000 homes and businesses throughout the UK with physical, email, social media and verbal support when they have been in crisis, emergency or disaster due to floods and other emergencies. This has accumulated a total of 104,000 volunteer hours over the past 17 months with little to no funds. We are now in a position that we need to find funds to keep going, with the continued ongoing support and needs of those who were flooded, physically, mentally and emotionally many are still suffering greatly. We have run on a shoe-string the past 17 months with only £153,000 in funding and donations spent to date. This only goes to show that we are extremely frugal with all funding and use every penny to it's best advantage. Overheads are as low as we can possibly make these with limited paid staff, relying on volunteers to make the organisation run. It's not "If we flood again, it's WHEN we flood again!"

We have to go before a judge on the 14th July to fight to keep our family together due to cruel immigration rules that threaten to split our family up. We have to submit lots of paperwork to support our case and justify why we should be allowed to remain together as a family here in the UK. As part of that submission we would dearly love to show them how many people do NOT support this treatment of genuine, loving families and indeed, who cannot understand the logic of splitting up a family. A 16mth old baby's future and birthright at stake.. On the 28th June, a few days after Brexit, the sanctity of my family was seriously put under threat when we received notice from the Home Office that Carlos, my husband who is an Ecuadorian born citizen, was refused the right to remain in the UK with me, his British wife and our British son, Thomas, who was only 6 months old. The ripple effect of this inhumane decision has been profound – the mental, emotional, physical and financial impact on us has been something that no family should be put through. When we should have been enjoying these first precious moments as a new family, we have been living a life of uncertainty and despair - and going deeper and deeper into debt. What is tragic about this is that we are not the only ones – there are thousands like us living the same nightmare every day. Forced to go to court to fight to keep our family together A year on and we have only just received a court date to go before a judge to fight the right to keep my family together here in the UK and we would love your support in asking the Rt Hon Rudd to see reason in this madness and overturn this decision and save taxpayers money on a costly court hearing. With Carlos unable to work - because immigration rules forbid Carlos to work, study or even volunteer - he is now Thomas’s main carer and their bond is very strong – and it would be extraordinarily cruel to tear them apart. Our 16-month old Thomas needs his daddy more than ever. I have gone back to work but on a basic salary, that barely covers basic/ essential living costs, we have spent all the savings and credit available that we had just to get through the last 16 months. Thomas and I are British and we want to be allowed to live here with all the freedom of choice a normal family has. As parents, Carlos and I would like to provide for our son as any normal family would be able to. A genuine family who wanted to raise Thomas in a country where he had access to basic human rights such as healthcare and a decent education, we had the rug pulled out from under us that day. They had decided that Carlos could go back to Ecuador, I could go back to full time work and my parents could look after Thomas – with no regard for our child’s welfare and what that really meant for Thomas and us in reality. In the real world, it meant a 6-month old baby would lose his daddy,a father would lose his son and a family would be forced to spend a MINIMUM of a year apart - as we tried to fulfil the minimum requirements with no guarantee at the end that it would be successful. Ecuador is a developing country where healthcare and education costs are at a premium and if we were forced to move there Thomas would lose his right to a good education and a better future. If we don't protect the sanctity of our family what else do we have? “It is estimated that at least 15,000 children have been affected by changes to the financial requirements of the Immigration Rules implemented in 2012. Children, most of whom are British citizens, are suffering distress and anxiety as a result of separation from a parent. This is compounded by the overall stress, anxiety and practical difficulties faced by the family unit. The Children's Commissioner Report, Family Friendly 2015 This February, a Supreme Court hearing has ruled that the government's lack of due consideration for the welfare of any children in family migration cases has been unlawful and have now been told to review this aspect of the application process. Although it maintained the minimum financial requirement of £18,600 was lawful, how this figure was achieved for the application (that the whole amount had to be earned by the UK partner) was unlawful and also needed reviewing. In our case, a person in an office was deciding the future of my son who they had never met. It seemed to us that instead of safeguarding the family unit, our Government seems to be using families like ours to bring down net migration figures and this is morally reprehensible. Ministers talk of protecting taxpayers and the benefits system in a bid to justify their actions yet all my husband has wanted to do is work – doing anything – to pay into the economy and provide for his family which is a basic human right and a basic human need. United Colours of Great Britain Great Britain has a long history of travelling overseas – and colonising many countries all over the world - enjoying the benefits of that presence in foreign lands and it seems somewhat ironic that our government is imposing highly restrictive immigration rules on families born out of this freedom of movement. In a nation that celebrates multiculturalism and talks about the important role of the family unit on the well-being of our children – the future generation - we are now faced with our son having his father callously torn away from him in the name of keeping net migration figures down. Please sign our petition and help us secure our family's future We are also crowdfunding to raise the funds to pay for our legal fees as due to our situation we can no longer afford them. If you wish to donate please go to: https://www.generosity.com/fundraising/help-keep-our-family-together--5/x/8785818

There is a climate of fear and insecurity in all areas of employment this, opportunistic, cynical attempt to off-set costs will add to that. Furthermore, workers should not be given a double penalty: lost wages plus the burden of paying for cover while they are sick. No businesses should feel this is an acceptable response. This is a chance for the government to demonstrate a modicum of support for struggling workers.

The homeless crisis in Brighton is shocking. With the rising cost of living and rent hikes in the area homelessness has visibly increased. There are people living in shop doorways on almost every street and alley way. They are begging for money for food with absolutely no way out of their situation. It is virtually impossible to get a job when you are homeless and in offering the homeless a home we give them a second chance at life. A chance to get a job and live with the dignity and respect we all deserve.

Claire says, "This is important because the people using these facilities are the friends and family of people from our community. With the amount of housing being built this problem can only get worse and it is our parents and grandparents who will be the ones to suffer. "The most vulnerable in our society deserve the best care and facilities that we are able to provide. The care provided by Eskgreen and The Hollies is second to none but they provide that care in spite of the chronic under investment made by our council and government."

The closure of Clay Cross Jobcentre will cause extra hardship to those who currently use it. Local people are already struggling under the burden of many cuts and loss of support. If Clay Cross Jobcentre was to close then claimants would have to attend either Markham Jobcentre in Chesterfield or Alfreton Jobcentre for their normal appointment once a fortnight. It will cost claimants £4.20 to travel to Chesterfield and back by bus or £6 to and from Alfreton. Single JSA/UC claimants are receiving £73.10 a week and this extra cost is equivalent to a 4% cut in benefits not to mention the extra time it takes. Single Mums and Dads and new families will incur extra inconvenience when children have to travel as well. While travel will be funded for claimants needing to sign on more than once a fortnight, the travel time for claimants signing each day (as is common at the start of a claim) will be more than 5 hours a week which is time that could be spent looking for work, or doing an activity that would help them increase their employability. A local mum said “My children will suffer if I had to spend more time traveling and I can’t see how we can make ends meet if we had to pay out another £6 a fortnight.” On the closure of Jobcentres the DWP states in its own proposal that: “…it is a reasonable expectation that claimants travel to an office within 3 miles or 20 minutes by public transport of their existing jobcentre.” According to the DWP own information the shortest distance is 5 miles and a minimum of 35 minutes travel by public transport to the two stated Jobcentre offices. All claimants who are job searching need somewhere to get online and our local library has only a few public terminals with limited opening hours. Several claimants we spoke to would be unable to meet their Claimant Commitment Agreement if the jobcentre was to close. These claimants are being set up to fail and the resulting sanctions will only make a bad situation worse. Clay Cross Jobcentre is a vital link to those claiming benefit locally and the closure of this office would only create more suffering in an already deprived community.