The first step in challenging the toxic PFI/PPP contracts in Scotland is to end the secrecy and open them up to full public transparency. With full transparency, all of the facts will be public so that we can pursue: • Re-negotiation of the expensive debt repayments for PFI/PPP contracts • The freezing of any further public-private partnerships until a full inquiry has taken place into PFI/PPP Since the collapse of a wall at Oxgangs Primary School, 17 schools in Edinburgh have been closed to save children's lives from being placed at risk. The construction of these schools under Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and Public-Private Partnership (PPP) contracts allowed private companies to declare their own buildings safe while extracting Billions from the public purse in debt repayments. Yet there is an enormous lack of transparency over the correspondence between public authorities and these companies and the contracts they signed. The cost of debt repayments on PFI/PPP contracts is still rising and public-private contracts (including the new NPD model) are still being signed up to despite fears over the quality of buildings and the extortionate cost. We call on all parties and leaders standing for the Scottish Parliament to support four keys steps to open the books on public-private contracts: 1) Secure the release of the full contracts and correspondence between all Scottish public authorities and PFI/PPP companies, even when public authorities are not legally obliged to do so, so the public can judge for themselves what went wrong. 2) Secure the release of the legal and financial advice which underpinned the decisions by public bodies to enter into PFI/PPP contracts, including whether they took this advice from public or private consultancies. 3) Pursue debt renegotiation for PFI/PPP in all cases of misconduct and where contractual obligations have not been fully met or standards have been breached. 4) Freeze all further public-private partnership contracts until the causes of the Edinburgh schools scandal have been determined in full, and until a full inquiry has taken place into the financial and quality implications of the PPP model for public service delivery.

The Borough of Lewisham plans to develop a private rented sector (PRS) scheme on its site at Besson Street, which has been in public hands for decades. While a council-run PRS scheme does avoid the loss of social housing to Right-to-Buy, Lewisham have unfortunately decided to set 65% of starting rents at market level in this scheme, partnering with a private company that will profit from this. While Lewisham say profits will also fund council services, it will not address the housing needs of local people. In the midst of a housing crisis Lewisham should be using public land to help house local people afflicted by the crisis. While the Besson Street site is technically in Telegraph Hill Ward, it is more obviously part of the other areas north of Queens Road, which according to the GLA ward atlas are in the lowest median income bracket in London. This means that market rents in new-build housing will be well out of the reach of nearly everyone who lives locally. The result will be housing provided for higher income people from outside of the area. This will help drive a process of gentrification that will make the area more expensive for everyone. Given the diversity of the area, and the economic gap that - for historical reasons - exists between white and minority ethnic groups, this means the scheme will disproportionately disadvantage the ethnic minority residents who live locally. Lewisham even present this scheme, on a site which used to contain council housing, as one to help address the housing crisis. Whose housing crisis are they trying to solve? Those who lack new-build flats at market prices? There are plenty of such schemes being built all around Lewisham. The real housing crisis - among those on low incomes - is being ignored by this scheme. This is not what residents should expect of their local authority. We call upon Lewisham to use the Besson Street site to provide housing for those in most need.

I want to tell the story on behalf of two people, with the same disability, whose PIP, or Personal Independence Payment, reports and outcomes were totally different. This petition is anonymous because the claimants cannot cope with the additional anxiety and stress of being named. I recently attended assessments for both claimants. One received 14 points and is therefore now in receipt of PIP. The other person with exactly the same condition received NO points at all. Both are diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome, which is an autistic spectrum disorder. Both were born with this highly complex, incurable and debilitating condition. Both, therefore, have a social communication and developmental disability, very often accompanied by poor mental health. Both suffer from associated problems of depression, paranoia, OCD, anxiety and stress. Both have the same problems with engaging with people face to face, verbal and written communication, dressing and undressing, bathing and washing, preparing food and planning and following journeys. So why the vast difference in the outcomes? I witnessed two very contrasting face to face interviews within the space of just six weeks. The difference between these two experiences was astonishing. 1) There was variation between the scripts and the questions covered. 2) There was a tremendous difference in the knowledge, experience and understanding of autism. 3) The atmosphere and approach in the second assessment was noticeably less understanding. The two outcomes completely reflected these variations. One received NO points at all and the other 14. One now receives PIP and the other does not. I also want to tell you about the steps in arriving at a decision: The final decisive face to face assessment with the 'Disability analyst', on which the outcome appears to be determined. 1) The PIP hearing took forty five minutes. 2) It was conducted by someone who did not know the person being interviewed, a real problem for people on the autistic spectrum. 3) It was carried out by someone who appeared to have little or no knowledge, experience or training in autistic spectrum disorder. 4) It was conducted by someone seemingly with no concept of how to carefully structure questions , communicate or interact with a claimant with autism. 5) The assessor's report, unseen by the claimant, is then sent to the DWP to confirm the decision. In contrast, the other evidence, was provided by a number of sources who know the individuals well. A close family member with thirty years experience of this lifelong, incurable disability, and additional input from autism and health professionals. 1) A PIP questionnaire was completed by both. In the case where no points were awarded this was by the designated advocate, a very close relative, because of the inherent communication issues. 2) It took considerable time and effort filling in the many pages of this PIP form with the claimants concerned, making sure the information was detailed, accurate and truthful,. 3) Supportive evidence from professionals was provided of the diagnosis of Asperger's, and a number of associated mental health issues. Many people on the autistic spectrum suffer poor mental health, such as severe anxiety, stress and depression. 4) All this took considerable time and effort from all the people concerned in order to truly reflect the significant level of impairment. 5) We filled in each different section of the form to clearly described the high degree of incapacity of the claimant to complete the tasks. YET, by awarding NO points at all, that information appears to be: 1) Totally negated in one case, and endorsed in the other. 2) Judged true in the first and false in the other, 3) Suggesting the claimant is legitimate in the first and a liar in the other. This is very distressing and offensive to everyone concerned. I have therefore started this petition because as the observer (not the named person) I want to know: 1) How two people with the same diagnosed disability and associated mental health issues can receive such contrasting PIP assessment outcomes? 2) How a claimant's mental health can be assessed accurately and appropriately in under an hour? 3) That people with autism to be fairly treated. In the light of my own concerns and the very serious issues highlighted in the Dispatches programme 'The Great Benefits Row' (Channel 4, 11 April 2016), please sign this petition. Please join me in calling on the new minister for the Department for Work and Pensions(DWP), Stephen Crabb and the Government to carry out an urgent review into the whole PIP assessment system.

https://vimeo.com/163562207 The Coal Exchange, which stands proudly amongst its peers, has long been left to fall into disrepair. The building is battered and worn after years of decay. When people talk about this building, they will often talk of its past grandeur and place in history as the centre of the world’s controversial coal industry. The building ensured the flow of funds were channelled through her hallways, providing thousands of families with the means to feed and clothe their children. In many cases, what was seen as the centre of their community would also be the very reason to shorten their fragile lives. Whatever your thoughts are on this magnificent building, good or bad, you cannot deny it plays an integral part of the ancestry of Cardiff and wider-Wales. Many of the UK’s listed buildings no longer serve their original purpose, and developers do not wish to go into the detail that is required to save them. What they would prefer to do is sit in their ivory towers, looking no further than the plans strewn across their desks, with their fleet of advisors who serve to sterilise their new structure. This is not our intention. Signature Living and I intend to keep this building as close to the structure as possible. We certainly will not be changing any of the exterior walls, apart from re-engaging them with the building. It is widely known the rear of the building has had to bear the ingress of large amounts of water over many years, which has caused her wooden joints to not only rot, but to disengage from the main structure. This, along with the roof, will be the first of the tasks we set out to complete, as timing here is of the essence. With a listed building, such as The Coal Exchange, it is essential to preserve the structure as was intended when first erected, whilst ensuring it is self-sustaining – with the latter, arguably, being a primary aim for the building. Further Reading http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/pictures-show-just-how-wrecked-11192088 http://lawrencekenwright.co.uk/coal-exchange-closed-business/ http://lawrencekenwright.co.uk/plans-return-coal-exchange-former-glory/ http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2016-04-08/cardiffs-coal-exchange-to-be-200-room-luxury-hotel-and-events-venue/ http://www.walesonline.co.uk/whats-on/whats-on-news/how-cardiffs-coal-exchange-look-11152558

As this means that families who get free travel will have to pay ridiculous prices.

Many independent studies have stated the many health risks associated with weedkiller sprays: http://permaculturenews.org/2012/11/01/why-glyphosate-should-be-banned-a-review-of-its-hazards-to-health-and-the-environment/ ; http://www.drugwatch.com/2015/11/18/roundup-weed-killer-causing-cancer/ ; https://www.rt.com/usa/316995-usa-workers-sue-monsanto-roundup/ ; http://www.naturalnews.com/051450_glyphosate_cancer_risk_Monsanto.html . Street spraying provides a massive risk to all pavement users, especially dogs and young children, and is also contributing to ever decreasing bee numbers. Furthermore, it is undemocratic. Residents are not being advised of when or where spraying will take place and there is currently no option to opt out of having the area around your property sprayed with carcinogenic chemicals that have numerous health risks.

As only weeds grow either side of that path maybe consider widening it making much more accessible to local nursery, school children and the local elderly residents. Come the summer the nettles grow and last summer were 4ft tall for a lengthy period of time before cut back. Long nettles hardly a safety net for the numerous excitable Young children on scooters and bicycles. After all are we not constantly striving to promote children being active? A high volume of children use this footpath daily and it's in a terrible condition. Also many local elderly residents use this footpath. Yesterday mid morning I tripped on this uneven and unsafe footpath and suffered mild head injury and a nasty bruise to my chin. I work as a Teaching Assistant in the local school and arrived visibly upset and shaken. I could have been that elderly resident, expectant mother or other.

No two schools are alike. But the government doesn't seem to agree. It wants to rush through plans to force every single school in England to become an academy the type of school paid for by taxpayers, but run by businesses, sponsors or trusts. Many teachers and parents are already standing against the plans, saying that they're "a step towards privatisation", ignore local views, and could force some schools to close. One size does not fit all, and local parents and teachers should have a say in the future of our school. ------ If this isn't your local school, click here to sign your local petition, or start one if no-one else has yet: https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/start-a-campaign-for-your-school

There is a growing community of allotmenteers, who, driven by need, have taken to cultivating their own crops. Some people have spent years to transform what was essentially waste land into arable soil, and have often spent a considerable amount of time and money in order to reap the benefits of home grown organic fruit & vegetables. Recently, we have heard of numerous councils serving notices that they are reclaiming these valuable resources to convert into building land. In many cases, allotments are utilised as a way of not only growing food, but also as a way of keeping fit (something that the government is keen to promote!), so it makes no sense, other than to reap financial rewards, to close them. Whilst there are waiting list of several years to secure a plot, it is obvious that this is a popular, and worthwhile, leisure facility. Please take action to stop this practise now, before it is too late to stop the rot!!! In these times of austerity and obesity, allotmenteering is a way to grow healthy produce, and to reap the rewards of an outdoor activity which also promotes physical fitness.

It is widely recognised that junior doctors are the lifeblood of the modern NHS. They are the consultants of the future, and through years of dedicated training provide a truly 24 hour a day, seven day a week service. The proposed contract undermines safe working practices, reverts to a previously failed system and has been roundly rejected by the workforce. It is openly discriminatory against female doctors. The proposed changes are based on flawed analysis of data that suggests a “weekend effect” and while we are keen to improve safety in hospitals across the UK, this contract will harm patients, harm the workforce and harm the training of junior doctors. Further to the overwhelming rejection of this contract by junior doctors, they have huge support from consultant colleagues, multiple Royal Colleges and the public as a whole. Please publicly reject the imposition of this contract at Central Manchester NHS Foundation Trust and call for new negotiations without pre-condition in a mark of support for the hard working and dedicated staff of these fine hospitals. For more information about why the new contracts are unsafe and unfair, please visit the BMI website: http://oneprofession.bma.org.uk/ On Behalf of the Support Junior Doctors Manchester Campaign. To find out more please join our facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1704071369861870/permalink/1708719502730390/?comment_id=1709001592702181¬if_t=group_comment_follow¬if_id=1461101572281468

After the £4.6 million pound cuts to our services there will only be 23 public toilets in Gwynedd and they are already few and far between. This will make shopping and other commutes for a range of people difficult or catch them out possibly leading to embarrassing and preventable accidents. As someone who suffers from Crohn's disease this is important for me knowing that I and many others often need Immediate access to toilets.

This is of the upmost importance as the road is very busy with traffic and my little girl and as many other need the safety of a school crossing patrol near to the school is a nursery which provides an after school facility in the area for children attending Calderwood. They now have to.provide a bus as the road crossing is dangerous. This removal will also cause more congestion with cars at the local school and parking is very limited as it is just now