Three months ago, the World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), concluded ‘Glyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans’. The newly recognised dangers of Glyphosate come against a background of increased use in the UK – not just in farming but also in public parks and other urban areas to kill weeds. On 15 July, new figures analysed by the Soil Association were released at a scientific briefing in London showing Glyphosate use in UK farming has increased by 400% in the last 20 years and it’s one of the three pesticides regularly found in routine testing of British bread - appearing in up to 30% of samples tested by the Defra committee on Pesticide Residues in Food (PRiF). The Soil Association is now calling for a UK ban on the use of Glyphosate sprayed on UK wheat as a pre-harvest weedkiller and its use to kill the crop to ripen it faster. The scientific panel included Professor Christopher Portier, one of the co-authors of the World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer’s (IARC) recent report which determined Glyphosate’s status as a probable carcinogen, who reiterated the IARC’s conclusions, and said: “Glyphosate is definitely genotoxic. There is no doubt in my mind.” We also heard from Dr Robin Mesnage of the Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics at Kings College in London, who revealed new data analysis showing Round Up, the most common brand of Glyphosate based herbicides, is 1,000 times more toxic than Glyphosate alone due to the inlusion of other toxic chemicals in its mix. Finally, Claire Robinson, an editor at GMWatch.org gave the international perspective looking at moves by other counrtries to ban Glyphosate; “Outside the United Kingdom, the reaction to the WHO IARC report has been dramatic. Some retailers in Switzerland and Germany have removed Glyphosate products and France has committed to do so by 2018 and German states are calling for an EU wide ban. The Danish Working Environment Authority has declared it as a carcinogen and El Salvador and Sri Lanka have banned it and the Colombia government has banned aerial spraying on coca crops.” Peter Melchett, Soil Association policy director said; “If Glyphosate ends up in bread it’s impossible for people to avoid it, unless they are eating organic. On the other hand, farmers could easily choose not to use Glyphosate as a spray on wheat crops – just before they are harvested. This is why the Soil Association is calling for the immediate ending of the use of Glyphosate sprays on wheat destined for use in bread. “We heard today that we shouldn’t rely on regulators to protect our health, the battle will be won by consumers ensuring retailers and bread manufacturers insist their products don’t contain any Glyphosate. Although the quantities found are below the official safety level, that limit was agreed before the latest scientific findings about the dangers of Glyphosate. The Glyphosate spraying season starts now, and in the interests of human health and the quality of British bread, the government needs to call a halt to the spraying before it starts.”

The Secretary of State for Health has recently gone on record to demand a 7 day NHS, at a time of crisis of recruitment and retention in General Practice as well as unprecedented levels of burnout amongst staff across the Health Service. As such, it is important to restore a sense of being 'all in this together'. Seven day availability of MPs will go some way to achieving this.

Over the past few years, the Ministry of Justice has sought to dismantle the public's access to justice - be it by Legal Aid cuts, Judicial Review destruction or the appalling Dual Contract system. The British media have stood silent, they have been complicit by that silence in the MoJ's destruction of the Criminal Justice System as we know it. They have failed in their duty to call the Government to account for its numerous failings in this area. Judicial Reviews of Government mismanagement and other failures come and go with barely a whisper. Legal Aid strikes occur with virtually no news coverage. Courts are in chaos. Solicitors are going out of business. Barristers are going bankrupt. The media keeps schtum. Prime example: BBC 5 Live were due to interview Franklin Sinclair of Tuckers Solicitors on the morning of 20th July re legal aid cuts, dual contracting and current industrial action. However, it would appear that as the MoJ - the party on the "other side" of the conflict - has refused to participate in the interview, the interview has been cancelled. That would appear to give carte blanche to Govt departments to stifle complaint and debate about the dismantling / destruction of the Legal Aid system and Criminal Justice System. They cannot be called to account in the media do not report what is going on - for example the significant and substantial disruption caused by the action to date but disingenuously denied by the MoJ. How can we, legal aid lawyers, engage with the other side and with the public if THE public service broadcaster in this country remains silent on the topic with minimal to no reportage? How can the public be properly informed? How can the MoJ be scrutinised and called to account? Very simply it can't be and it won't be unless the media, especially those such as the BBC with fine traditions of impartiality and scrutiny, fulfill their duties and refuse to give in to Governmental tactics such as this blatant stonewall by the MoJ. First they came for the lawyers. Next they will may come for you. You never think you will need a lawyer.... but when you do, it may be too late. Encourage debate, don't stifle it!

Any of us could lose our jobs, become disabled or find ourselves struggling and in need of help, and we will hopefully all grow old, so let’s change our language when we talk about ‘state benefits’. Change the term to ‘state support’ and we start to talk about it for what it really is. Whilst the government is not likely to make the change (it would highlight how morally corrupt their policies have become), I hope this campaign will raise awareness about the true nature of social support and show the government how proud we are as a nation to have a welfare system, and that we are determined to protect it. Let’s show the government that we haven’t lost our compassion as a nation.

This represents a fundamental change to the society that can be considered to be "British". Any move, unsupported by referendum, to follow through with this seismic change to to the social environment represents a complete disregard for the wishes of the general population. This is nothing short of a conscious, deliberate attack on our way of life.

Too many residents with dementia are denied regular access to outdoor spaces, eg gardens, patio areas, around the nursing home. The barriers I come across are "they feel secure inside"; "they may fall and hurt themselves" Sadly these residents only feel secure indoors because they have been locked in under DOLS regulations, for months and years , on end; the same could be said of prisoners in Belmarsh ! they would feel insecure outside after being locked away for ages ! The only way some of these residents with dementia experience the outdoors is if family or friends take them out; due to age and infirmity , family sometimes cannot manage this. People with dementia are no different from others in their need for sunshine and Vitamin D; in their need for emotional and spiritual uplifting by experiencing wind in their faces, hearing birdsong; looking at flowers and colours; in their need for mental and sensory stimulation; in fact they need these benefits more so than others who have the liberty to go where and when they please. people in nursing homes are prone to osteoporosis, (fragility of bones) , partly because they do not have exposure to sunshine, and also to exercise. I see them languishing in wheelchairs often for the whole day; pale certainly; apathetic often, in need of sensory and mental stimulation; Half an hour twice a day in the garden in the company of a care assistant would make a big difference to their lives. My husband is in a lovely nursing home, with kind staff and carers; he is fortunate that I can and do take him out regularly ; even in inclement weather; not everyone has the same opportunity.

The future and demonstration of opportunity for all not just those who are commercially viable as a being in this capitalistic society.

It's important because David Cameron wouldn't let us use his dog for animal testing, so why bread animals to be so cruel!

- The proposed pylons will be massively visually intrusive in what is one of the few beautiful, unspoiled parts of the UK left. - They will harm the environment and local wildlife. - They will be hugely damaging to the tourist sector in Dumfries and Galloway, a key driver of the local economy. - The pylon line will seriously affect house values and the ability to sell houses for miles around due to its size and visual impact. - Other alternatives, such as putting the line underground or under the sea, are available and could be adopted.

Sir David, now in his ninetieth year, has contributed so much towards our understanding of the natural world. He is the consummate broadcaster, and his recent interview (on his 89th birthday) with President Obama has shown him to be a strong advocate for understanding climate change. As an expert communicator, unique broadcaster over so many years, and for his potential contributions in the Upper House (in regard to the environment) he is worthy of consideration of a Peerage in the next New Year's Honours

David Cameron lied to the Commons and to the British people over the UK’s Armed Forces involvement in Syria and must resign. He knew UK pilots were involved in US-led bombing missions of Isis targets in Syria, even though Parliament had expressly rejected British military involvement in the country in 2013. This along with his catalogue of lies and deception over a great many policies and other action outline that he cannot remain in office.

No American has ever been extradited for a crime allegedly committed physically on US soil - so if the alleged crimes Lauri has committed took place in the UK, should his trial not also? The judicial frameworks for due process in the United Kingdom exist to process these cases. The UK-US extradition treaty, used to uphold a so called "special relationship", has been historically one-sided. There is absolutely no guarantee Lauri will receive the standard of healthcare he requires in the United States. In the spirit of what has been an cruel and underhanded case, the prosecution responded to concerns regarding Lauri's well documented health problems both mental and physical by continually seeking to undermine the opinions of medical professionals who state extradition is not in Lauri's best interests. Theresa May pardoned Gary McKinnon in 2012, blocking his extradition to the United States on the grounds of Human Rights. What is so different about the Love vs USA case? As McKinnon said in 2015, "It would be tragic if the ladder used to rescue me from extradition was kicked away from the next person who needs it". "Lauri is adamant he will not come to the US to be prosecuted. One need only look to the cases of whistleblowers and activists such as Jeremy Hammond, Barrett Brown, Aaron Swartz and Chelsea Manning to know the US legal system is not about justice, but about retribution. Lauri is also concerned about the extensive use of solitary confinement as punishment in the US legal system. The prolonged use of solitary confinement has been ruled torture by every major human rights group, and yet is still used as a routine form of punishment for even the most minor infractions without concern for the mental health of the prisoner. It is clear from recent examples that there is no potential for anything remotely resembling justice to come from an extradition order to the US in a case such as this." -- freelauri.com