Virgin Trains propose a reduction in staff numbers, replacing people with increased ticket machines. Maintaining existing staff numbers will protect jobs for local people. Ticket machines can not deliver the current level of customer service such as reserving seats for frequent travellers with season tickets or identifying the lowest cost ticket for customers.

Possible benefits to consumers are the trump card for those supporting TTIP. Despite the organisation's good work in other areas on behalf of UK consumers, 'Which?' is currently giving key support to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The narrow possible consumer benefits of lower prices are minimal compared with the potential broad consumer damage from this so-called 'trade' agreement. The dangers of lowered standards in chemical and food health and safety, the provision for corporations to sue our government for any regulatory changes that hit their future profits, the blocking of any renationalising of public services like the NHS plus expected job losses, are ways that TTIP will profoundly affect consumers beyond a few possible price reductions. 'Which?' is allowing itself to be used to justify this bill of corporate rights. A shift in the position of consumer organisations will potentially kill this deal and 'Which?' is our UK responsibility. We call for a boycott of 'Which?' until it changes its position and ceases to support TTIP.

Why are they needed? Gender is more complex than a simple male/female binary. For trans or androgynous people the simple everyday activity of using the toilet may be stressful. If their physical appearance doesn’t fit gender norms they may be challenged when using gendered toilet facilities, which can be very distressing. Obliging someone to use a designated accessible toilet isn’t acceptable, since it is sends the message that they are not a ‘Genuine’ male or female. It is also best to leave accessible toilets available for use by people with disabilities, some of whom may have an unpredictable and urgent need to use the toilet. .

On the 22 October 2014 Jonathan Ashworth, Labour MP for Leicester South, in a written question 211600 to the Secretary of State for Health about NHS spending on temporary workers? It was answered by Dr Daniel Poulter on 29 October 2014. Following the Francis report many trusts were required to increase their spend on temporary staffing to meet safe staffing levels. The Department expects trusts to have a strong grip on their finances, and manage their contract and agency staffing spend (including use of locums) responsibly through effective and efficient workforce planning and management and to minimise temporary staffing costs in future years. The amounts spent on agency and contract staff (including locums) in the National Health Service in each year since May 2010 are as follows: NHS Foundation Trusts 2010-11 - £854,700,000 2011-12 - £907,000,000 2012-13 - £1,101,000,000 2013-14 - £1,396,200,000 Total - £4,258,900,000 This means that over a 4 year period from 2010 to 2014 - £4,258,900,000 has been taken directly from the public purse and paid to privately run recruitment agencies for the hiring of contract staff within the NHS without any consideration for the effect this has on the end user. At a time when massive government cuts are being made to spending across the board on all public services, I think this is wholly wrong and quite frankly, obscene. When other public sector establishments such as schools and social care authorities and the exorbitant costs of hiring temporary staff in these places are also taken into account, this means that the only winners in this scenario are the privately run Recruitment Agencies. Similar comparisons can be applied to the Education Sector where schools are spending huge amounts of money on supply staff from private recruitment agencies. In response to the problem, I have developed a blueprint for change entitled ‘Share and Share Alike’ administered through a new social enterprise business called ‘Social Recruitment Solutions Limited’ that will recycle 60% of its Net Profit back into the system on a pro-rata, dividend basis and will also give a further 10% to charity. I want to make my vision a reality by garnering support from like-minded individuals who share my belief, to come together through the spirit of partnership and co-operation in order to make a real difference in the field of Public Sector Recruitment for the benefit of all UK citizens. We cannot affect the lack of council funding but what we can do is change the way recruitment is carried out through my New Social Enterprise Model. This model will save millions of pounds in the cost of temporary and permanent recruitment and at the same time ‘give back’ to the stakeholders who work within these sectors and also to charity. Using the figures provided by the government as mentioned before, £4,258,900,000, my new social enterprise business model will see the NHS get back £391,631,100 and the staff the same amount distributed on a pro-rata, dividend basis. In my area, the new Hexham General Hospital cost £54,000,000 over 3 stages. This means the money given back over the same 4 year period through using my model - 7.25 new hospitals could be built at no extra cost to the tax payer. I firmly believe that the time has come for change. We need to remember that privately run recruitment agencies have their place in the Commercial Sector but not within the Public Sector. Why should a hospital have to pay a £7,500 for offering a supply nurse a permanent contract? Multiply that by 100 (100 nurses) - £750,000. As far as education is concerned, I know that many supply teacher agencies are offering 2 for the price of one? How does that affect the professional status of a teacher? How does that make them feel? It makes them feel like a commodity to be bought and sold like a loaf of bread. These introduction fees that agencies charge for staff to be taken on full-time contracts can be up to 25% of their annual salary. It prevents schools and hospitals being able to offer permanent positions to temporary staff because they simply cannot afford to do so. This is part of the recruitment problem particularly in the NHS. My Social Enterprise model will not charge these introduction fees and as a result schools and hospitals and other public sector establishments will be free to offer permanent contracts to temporary staff if they wish to do so without being penalised by massive temp to perm fees. They will not have to think twice about offering staff contracts because it will cost them nothing. This model can be used by all NHS Foundation Trusts and all Schools and Social Care Establishments run by Local Authorities, across the whole of the UK with no geographical boundaries. It all depends on which local authority has the desire to change, the vision to make a difference and the courage to take the bull by the horns and do something about it.

The Current First Past The Post Voting System Is Out Dated & Doesn't Represent The Choice of the UK Voters Alternative Voting System Removes The Two Party Problem (aka Spoiler Effect), the need for Tactical Voting & gives smaller Political Parties to be represented in Parliament More Information below, "The Alternative Vote Explained" by CGP Grey (Video) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE Alternative Voting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting

Wales is part of great Britain.

Sky lanterns may look pretty, but the frames can kill or harm farm animals, and the candles are a major risk to crop yields and buildings. They are also a potential danger near airports as they can distract pilots, and the Coastguards are concerned as they can be mistaken for distress flares. They add little to enjoyment, and the problems with them far outweigh any fun people find in them. They should be banned.

Hundreds of thousands of people (in the UK alone) are affected by, or die from cancer every year. If Mr Smith honestly believes what he has written then I suggest he should speak to people who have suffered/are suffering from this horrible disease, or who have nursed people or loved ones through their illness, what their feelings on continued research into a cure for cancer are. Mr Smith has written a blog, which the BMJ have seen fit to publicise, entitled "cancer is the best death": http://bmj.co/1BqiNFv. How and why he feels about this issue is, I grant, his opinion which he is entitled to. However he doesn't take into account the feelings and emotions of those who have dealt/are dealing with this horrible, debilitating illness either in themselves or in friends or loved ones. If he genuinely believes that research into cures and treatments for this disease are a waste of resources, maybe he should talk to those who are only with us today because of that research? To imply that wishing for a quick death is, essentially, selfish is ridiculous. I lost 3 grandparents suddenly and one slowly to leukaemia and I feel that, having seen the pain and suffering of the slow, debilitating and, ultimately, dehumanising death for the person who died from leukaemia (as well as the suffering of those who loved them and felt so utterly helpless), a short lived or sudden death is much to be preferred for all concerned. If we can't be selfish in death then when can we be? I would also like to point out that only in the final stages of this disease can it be made painless, for most the progress of this disease through the body is far from painless. We call upon the BMJ and Mr Smith to acknowledge the offense this article has caused, apologise for publishing this article, and consider removing it from their website.

We have critical levels of pollution, congestion and obesity in London. Our children have the highest levels of obesity in the EU. In Holland and Denmark where more than 50% of children cycle to school they have less than half the obesity levels. Children and adults are also suffering from health issues caused by dangerous chemicals from car exhausts. At present cars dominate our roads in Central London even though the large majority of households do not own a car (69% in the city, 63% in Westminster). Many more people would like to cycle and walk but find the number of deaths and injuries from motorised traffic off putting (tragically 1,216 fatal and serious injuries in London the year ending June 2014) Please help us make this radical change in London's transport system and reclaim the streets for pedestrians and cyclists to enjoy without fear.

People use high street payday loan companies because they are desperate and cannot find alternative ways of raising money when they need it, i.e. for funerals etc. I saw a high street payday loan company proudly advertising an APR of 2000%. This is obscene. We need government introduction of caps these thieves can charge. And we need help to set up credit unions to help needy people. I have worked in a christian debt advice centre and have seen single mothers with credit card debts of £70,000. How was she allowed to run up so much debt?

I have a neurological condition called Charcot Marie tooth disease type two which there is no cure. I have been prescribed Bedrocan products from Holland twice by my consultant physician but when I tried to bring my medication back it was confiscated by the Border Force. I am not doing this for myself but for all the other sick and poorly people across the UK.

Failure to undertake appropriate identity checks makes it very easy for criminals to use a stolen identity to obtain goods on credit. Victims of identity fraud now have to report the crime to a central fraud investigation unit who may or may not decide to investigate. This delay can lead to more uses of the stolen identity which can adversely affect the victim's credit rating and lead to tremendous levels of stress as letters arrive demanding money for goods obtained on credit. Common routes used for this type of fraud are mobile phone companies, store cards and catalogues. In theory, the current security checks should minimise criminal opportunities, however many shop and call centre staff do not always check fully at the point of sale. If it were mandatory for a verifiable photo ID such as passport, citizen card or driving license to be part of the application process this would help reduce identity fraud. Shops whose staff do not run the appropriate checks, thus resulting in a fraudulent application succeeding should also have to compensate the victim for the stress caused.