Malcolm Burge set fire to himself in Cheddar Gorge, after being told he was subject to court action for £800 by Newham Borough Council, after his Housing Benefit was cut in half. Malcolm had written often to Newham Borough Council to tell them that he couldn't pay, he had never had that amount of money, and that he was suicidal. Also, David Clapson, who died after his benefits were stopped. He then had no money for food, had no money for electric to keep the fridge going that had his insulin in. The coroner stated that David had no food in his stomach and £3.44 in the bank. Esther McVey (The previous Employment Minister) stated to MPs that there is no link between the deaths and the sanctioning policy and that 'we ensured that all of our processes correctly'. If there is no link between the stopping of benefits and the deaths of 49 benefit recipients, why won't the DWP release the reviews? The sanctioning policy needs to reviewed when used in relation to vulnerable people, not used as a blanket policy.

This anomaly means private delivery companies look cheaper, but are not. My hospital neurology dept "saves" £250k a year on VAT on beta interferon alone this way, but the private healthcare provider offers a lamentable service, not turning up, letting patients run out of meds, etc. There are few companies to compete, and the NHS cannot afford to take service back. Jeremy Hunt and HMRC know about the unfair advantage private companies have, but ignore it. This means the NHS is paying £200 million A YEAR on drugs to the Treasury in VAT. Why penalise the NHS? Let the NHS compete fairly!

Because I want to go back there I went there in 1991 and I loved it made friends felt secure and I even had a lovelife from there I miss not being there it has up set me to pieces and I never fill good out doors any more I only fill in place when I am there. I fill out of place anywhere else So this is the place for me and I will fight any Council rule books and Laws until I can have it back Give me back the dignity I deserve.

The sure start centre hurst green has been told that they will be closing it down.so we are doing a petitons to save our local childrens centre which is used by many parents and children arounf the local area.please sign the petition so we can get as many signtures to take to the council and show them how many people use the sure start centre.we will also have a petition for people to sign in the sure start centre.without the sure start centre people who use the sure start centre will have to travel to hamsey green or lingfield

Crime, accidents,injuries and a general feeling of not being safe on our streets after midnight is not something the people of Colchester should be having to suffer, especially when we still all pay council tax but it seems to give us less and less in return. The switching off of the lights at Midnight even has an effect on local businesses, as people going to pubs and clubs etc, are making plans to leave early so as not to be going home in the dark. The chief executive of Essex County Council earns £210,000 a year!

Currently two very vital depatments are under threat of being privatised. Sterile Services who ensure that all the instruments and medical devices used in the trust and throughout the county in GP surgeries,minor injury units etc are sterilised to a very high standard. Also the IT department who are responsible for all patient data and all computer systems that are used in the trust. Do you want a private company having all your personal medical data? I for one do not!. It is important that the people of Cornwall get the service that they deserve. This is your NHS!

It's important to stop the further corporatistaion of food through GMO, especially by such a well known advocate, Jamie Oliver, that trades on the back of his beliefs in organics and the organic movement.

JSA claimants have the right to have someone with them when they go to the jobcentre, and the agreement that they make with the Jobcentre (their Claimant Commitment) has to be reasonable and consider their circumstances. In the Arbroath case the agreement was far from reasonable, but when Tony, who had accompanied the claimant to a prearranged meeting, attempted to help negotiate more suitable terms, the Jobcentre manager responded by telling him to leave the building and calling the police. By the time the police came, Tony and the claimant had already left (with the promise of a further meeting), but he was still arrested and charged. This has serious implications for Tony personally and also for benefits and welfare activists everywhere. This example of harassment of welfare activists is far from an isolated incident. We demand that welfare activists are not prevented from conducting their work and nothing be put in the way of benefit claimants’ fundamental right to advice and representation.

Wrongly convicted, served time for someone else's crime, then exonerated. So now we compensate them so they can re-start the lives that were stolen, don't we? NO! The system which made such huge errors has thrown them on the scrapheap, hoping they will never resurface. Read their stories, below. Please sign and share onwards, This is not lawful, nor is it moral. *Martin Foran, served two prison terms, totalling 19 years. Both convictions quashed. He has terminal cancer, caused by poor medical help in prison!: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-29658936 *Victor Nealon, served 17 years, 7 years over his tariff because he would not say he was guilty. Now being told to pay legal costs because he had the affront to seek compensation: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/wrongly-convicted-men-launch-new-case-against-the-justice-secretary-9985773.html *Barry George, a mentally disabled man, served 8 years for the murder of Jill Dando. Acquitted on appeal; retried and unanimously found NOT GUILTY. Told he has not PROVEN his innocence. He will not give up his fight for justice; for Jill and for himself: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2358815/Barry-George-loses-compensation-bid-wrongly-convicted-Jill-Dandos-murder.html *James Boyle was falsely accused of committing sexual offences in his past. He was finally released in February 2010 after a lengthy battle to clear his name; his case is yet another example of a wholly innocent man who has had his life turned upside down by a corrupt system. He continues to be denied restorative justice, and continues to fight his cause to have his reputation restored. - See more at: http://www.miscarriagesofjustice.org/case-files/fighting-for-justice/jimmy-boyle#sthash.W4Kpmlfz.dpuf These are the names and cases of some of those who were wrongly convicted, and who served long prison sentences for crimes committed by someone else. All of these people have recently been refused compensation under Section 133 of the Criminal Justice Act. This act, amended in 2012, now excludes many wrongly convicted, released people, and is a travesty of our Justice system. It takes away our fundamental right to be presumed ‘innocent until proven guilty! This right is enshrined in our legal system, and by the European Court of Human Rights…Barrister Baroness Helena Kennedy called the change “an affront to our system of law” when the Bill was debated. “When people have wasted long periods of their life in jail for crimes they didn't commit, the least society can do is provide some compensation,” said Sadiq Khan, the shadow Justice Secretary. (The Independent) The Presumption of Innocence. This appalling decision has been further compounded by the, seemingly arbitrary change to another of our laws, the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill, by The Right Honourable Chris Grayling MP (Chris Grayling is not a member of the judiciary, neither does he have any legal expertise), further damaging the rights of people claiming compensation for wrongful imprisonment, by saying “you must ‘prove beyond reasonable doubt that you are innocent.’” In the criminal justice system of Britain, there is no facility or framework to prove one’s innocence, one is presumed innocent at trial. Indeed the defendant is told by their legal representative that they have nothing to prove…it is for the prosecution to prove guilt, ’beyond reasonable doubt.’ The same situation applies at retrial, when testing the remaining evidence after the quashing of a conviction by the Court of Appeal. “YOU HAVE NOTHING TO PROVE!” To tell an already victimised and marginalised person to ‘prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that you are innocent’, is unlawful, and unobtainable under our legal system. We must stand up for them. These people have suffered enough for the mistakes of the justice system…they deserve justice. They need to be compensated for having had so much taken from them: Their right to a family life, their right to liberty, careers, homes and possessions, etc. Families are shattered by wrongful conviction, and these relationships often cannot be healed. Many people lose everything they have ever owned! Money is needed to rebuild these lives, and it cannot be done on £46.00 (given when they are released). We cannot continue turn our backs on them; sweeping them under the carpet, like dirt. These are innocent people…we must help them. Please tell the Secretary of State to reverse these perverse decisions, THEY DESERVE COMPENSATION - NOW!

Over 80% of people in Britain now believe the gap between rich and poor is too big. The UK’s current tax system exacerbates this inequality. These are two of the findings in a report about the tax system in the UK by The Equality Trust entitled ‘Unfair and Unclear’ http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/attachments/resources/Unfair%20and%20Unclear_0.pdf The report concludes ‘The gap between perceptions, preferences and reality when it comes to the UK’s current tax system should be of deep concern to politicians. Building a system that is fit for a fair society must now be a priority.’ Major tax reform to tackle inequality does not seem to be in any party manifestos for the election in May 2015. (Just minor window dressing!) Do you want a tax system in Britain which favours the rich or do you want a tax system which delivers fairness and opportunity for all? The poorest 10% in our society pay a much higher proportion of their income overall in tax (because of taxes like VAT and Council Tax). This is not generally realised because the tax system is so complicated. Is it not time to rebalance this? Austerity has been borne by the poor, while the rich have prospered. Is this not an outrage which should be redressed? We are told time and time again we cannot afford basic living standards for the poor, and yet we can afford massive remuneration for the rich. The ability for everyone to own a home, once a flagship Tory policy, has become an impossible dream as house prices have been forced up because of irresponsible lending, second homes, ‘buy-to-let’ and building luxury accommodation for the super rich to have as an investment, often lying empty. The system is broken and major action is necessary. I, as a concerned voter who does not see anyone to vote for, wish to see specific measures like these being adopted: 1 A ‘Making Tax Fair’ Bill to be drawn up to change the tax distribution in line with the Equality Trust’s broad recommendation: o From poorest 43%; mid 36%; richest 36% (of income) o To poorest 15%; mid 22%; richest 39% (of income) as a contribution to all taxes (inc VAT, Council Tax, Fuel Tax, etc as well as Income Tax – see report for list of all taxes) 2 A wealth tax on the richest 1%, to help redistribute the vast wealth amassed over the last few decades, gained while the rest of us were in austerity, and while the system has been designed to make the rich richer. 3 Action from government to force corporations and rich individuals to pay the tax they owe. It has been government policy since the 1980s to allow large tax breaks because of the ‘trickle down’ effect. We have known for a long time this is a myth and in fact the flow goes up not down. But the tax breaks are still in place! (War On Want are leading a campaign on Tax Dodging specifically to address this – click here if you haven’t supported it already http://www.waronwant.org/news/latest-news/18270-tdbcampaign) 4 A tax on luxury property left empty. It is a scandal that parts of London are left uninhabited, property having been bought by members of the super-rich elite as an investment and then left vacant. Often local people are evicted to make way for these. 5 A tax on second homes left vacant more than half-time. It is a scandal that local people cannot buy homes because of inflated prices. 6 A review of ‘buy-to-let’ to make it prohibitive, so that the conditions are reversed that led to the prediction that by 2032 more people will have to rent (at inflated prices), than own their own homes Please lend your support by signing the online petition. If enough of us do, we can put pressure on the next Government to act responsibly to ‘rebuild a tax system fit for a fair society’, and significantly alter the nature of the debate during this election. When you sign the online petition, we will present it to all political parties and ask for a response to be published pre-election. I believe in ‘wealth-for-all capitalism’, where people in all walks of life can work hard to achieve individual rewards while contributing to the ‘common-wealth’. Together we create one nation which works for everyone. I despise the ‘greed-is-good capitalism’ experiment, begun in the 1980s. It has ended where many predicted it would – many greedy and selfish people have worked the system to their own advantage, with government acquiescence, at the expense of everyone else, having amassed vast personal fortunes, and having looted the infrastructure of the country. Two nations have been created – the very rich and the very poor. This will continue after the election unless the 99% of us, who do not benefit, put pressure on to stop it happening!’ Please add your voice to this online petition so that we can reverse this process and again create Britain as a fair society. PLEASE SHARE WITH AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN!

Adverts for cigarettes were banned on British television in 1965, because it was deemed that smoking was not only bad for the individual, but also other non-smokers who inhaled their smoke passively. It strikes me that cars are no different. A report in 2013 by the UK government indicated that 21% of UK greenhouse emissions were caused by petrol and diesel cars. However, we are constantly bombarded with adverts on television for new cars, a very small fraction of which are hybrid or electric. If Ofcom were to only allow hybrid and electric car adverts on television, it would send a signal to car manufacturers that if they want airtime on British TV, they need to invest in more sustainable technology. It would increase sales of hybrid and electric cars in the UK, which would drive demand for more public electric car chargers. It would would help to change the zeitgeist of the nation towards more sustainable ways of commuting.

Too often, passengers have to wait in all sorts of weather because a bus is late or cancelled. Then, two or more appear together, why?. There is a scheme by City Council, if the bus is more than 15 minutes late the bus company will pay you. This does not work because the bus company decide. If you have a concessionary card it says 'funded by HM Government with your Local authority' and there are no two trips which means more profit for the bus company. That means our tax money. Finally, Castle Meadow, which is supposed to be a pedestrian zone, has so many buses that often even the buses cannot move.