Freedom of the press is essential for any functional democracy. The hacking scandal has exposed the UK's press urgent need for reform and effective regulation. The majority of the press want to self-regulate with a new body IPSO but the recruitment of William Newwman to the new IPSO board shows it will be business as usual for the press. Most people understand ,the risk of government involvement in press regulation as recommended by Lord Justice Leveson, but this represents continued contempt by the press for the 96 who died at Hillsborough. It seems you will never learn...

Cancer Research UK is holding a 'big weekend BBQ to beat cancer' - but unfortunately it's sponsored by Shell, a company responsible for BBQ-ing the planet, and for contributing towards some of the causes of cancer. There are plenty of companies in the UK who could sponsor Cancer UK's important work. But by partnering with a dirty energy company like Shell they are sending out a message that one of the world's biggest fossil fuel operations - which includes reckless plans to drill for oil in the fragile Arctic, and to carry on contributing to air pollution and climate change - is acceptable. Let's draw the line on Shell sponsoring Cancer Research UK - sign the petition! For more information on the event which Shell is sponsoring please read: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/support-us/do-your-own-fundraising/bbq To read the Cancer Research UK blog on air pollution please read: http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2013/10/18/the-link-between-air-pollution-and-cancer/ For more information on why Shell isn't an appropriate partner please read: http://platformlondon.org/oil-the-arts/ http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/tags/arctic http://www.shareaction.org/arcticshell

This is important because the voters of this country who only have the influence of a single vote at election time deserve to know who the influence peddlers are and who is paying them.

The only way the BBC will learn that we are disgusted with the overt bias they have given UKIP over the past year is to vote with our feet; well, remote controls. If viewing figures drop they may then get the hint. (This is also the best way to have a more pleasurable evening!)

Parks and green spaces have been shown to improve the wellbeing of local people and attract visitors from further afield. According to Bristol City Council's Parks and Green Spaces Strategy the centre of Bristol is lacking in green space, so temporary park closures would further deplete this green space. Parks are a Public Service owned and run by the council on behalf of the People of Bristol and should not be exploited as a way to generate revenue.

Because it is our ancestral home and we have a right to live there granted to us by queen Arthur

Numerous countries have now realised the benefits of this drug. They have taken it out of the drug barons hands an have organised it. They now have revenue and employment opportunities within this growing sector but the most important part is that it is saving lives. We need to forward think and not be bogged down with old ways of thinking regarding this wonder drug. It's the future of pharmacy.

The residents who live within TfL zone 6 who have London Freedom Pass are recognisable accepted to use all TfL transport and National. ENCTS passes are not. It is because some areas within TfL zone 6 are not managed bt the London Borough Councils. As we live within TfL zone 6 and managed by Tanridge Council (Surrey), those residents who live in London have Freedom Pass take their granted for using our nearest railway stations for free travel to/from London that our ENCTS disabled concessionary pass cannot. This is unfair. Have they met the Equality Act 2010 regarding our concessionary passes that are limited use whilst people with London Freedom Passes can be used everywhere in England including all TfL transport? I discovered that the funds for TfL are partly from the Central Government Fund where we pay our taxes, why we don't have this benefit?

Ignoring the rise in Green Party successes membership is an obvious move towards discrediting them. You are telling your readers that the Green Party is a negligible entity, which discourages them from voting for this party. This kind of partiality and political complacency is extremely disappointing in one of the most respected newspapers of the UK - a newspaper that likes to remind its readers of the prizes it's won.

Capitalism is an unrivalled humanitarian success story. But it could be better. Ownership of capital (assets) is declining at a time when returns are increasing; i.e. the rich naturally get richer. Returns on labour (wages) are decreasing; i.e. work is less rewarding. Yet, the quality of political debate on the subject of inequality has been abysmal, veering between an illiberal and unproductive pursuit of high earners to 1970s-style price and wage-fixing. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. A sensible, simple, tax system that rewards partnership structures and encourages widespread capital ownership of companies would: 1. Make work pay. 2. Reduce inequality. 3. Improve productivity. 4. Improve industrial relations. 5. Incentivise workers. In summary, as John Lewis said in 1957: " Capitalism has done enormous good and suits human nature far too well to be given up as long as human nature remains the same. But the perversion has given us too unstable a society. Differences of reward must be large enough to induce people to do their best but the present differences are far too great. "

This matters greatly because every day we are giving a terrible impression of our country to incoming business people, tourists and other visitors by the shocking inefficiency of our airport checks and controls. Often they are staffed by illiterate and surly staff. One short example: on Sunday 18 May at 0700, there were enormous queues at Heathrow Terminal 5 as hundreds of people queued at border control after disembarking from incoming flights. There were not enough staff at the individual inspection booths. Even people on 'Fast Track' were made to queue beyond any reasonable duration. People were shouting at security (Mitie) and Border Agency staff and those staff in turn were rude or dismissive. The security staff were patently ill-trained to cope with the situation. Those being made to go through security and scanning again (despite just coming off flights) were subjected to another huge queue and lengthy wait. The majority of bags were being checked for explosives. One Muslim woman on her way to Bahrain was in tears having just received bad news from home: she was ignored by security staff. A businessman from South Africa said he would never, ever again fly via Heathrow. When politely challenged, the man wearing the "Supervisor" vest was also dismissive and said if there were fewer retail outlets, there'd be more room for security controls. What a terrible impression of the UK. What are we thinking of?

The introduction of fees into the Employment Tribunal system has reduced the access to justice of many deserving people. The large reduction in claims, as shown by official statistics, is not mainly, as suggested, the elimination of ‘vexatious’ litigation but rather the actual prevention of access to justice of vulnerable persons. In a civilised society this is simply unacceptable and must stop at once. It is against ‘natural justice’. We ask that this divisive decision be reversed by removing fees, thus restoring traditional ‘fair play’ into the tribunal system.