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.

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

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!

I find it shameful that when people look at our country, they see people making money by squeezing the education system, lowering the amount of money spent on each child. These academies have caused job losses for many teachers and the quality of schools has declined, speaking from personal experience. This new industry needs to see tight restrictions and needs to be open and transparent for us to inspect and scrutinise. Without this, we run the risk of seeing many people missing out in the highest quality of their education and cause a large decrease in the number of good, trained and experience staff that can keep standards high. Despite what David Cameron has said about schools improving under academies, this does not make them better places, reform to a state controlled system, with changes to ofsted, can easily improve standards.

Sailing is so widely participated in and offers such a physical, technical and tactical challenge. Team GBR won the first ever Paralympic Sailing Gold Medal in 1996 - it has been a lifeline to some people and it really should be in the Paralympic Games!

Builders are lobbying the government to keep planning policy as it is. They say that their industry depends upon Greenfield sites being available to build on, without the need to use up Brownfield sites first. This is causing misery across the country. We find that builders are cherry-picking the green fields on the edges of towns, because these are the easiest and most profitable sites to develop. Meanwhile, Brownfield sites are left to rot, or remain for years as piles of rubble in the heart of towns. There are alternatives to the present policies which would keep builders in work, provide apprenticeships, supply just as many homes, avoid conflict with communities and would halt the relentless encroachment upon our precious countryside. Please lobby the candidates for the coming general election to support the following proposals: • To bring back the sequential testing of land, so that applications to develop Greenfield sites can be turned down if alternative Brownfield sites exist. • To award grants for the decontamination of industrial land. • To give incentives to councils and builders to renovate empty homes. • To encourage the building of higher density homes on Brownfield sites, where this would not impact on the light and space of neighbours. • To increase the tax threshold for renting out rooms to lodgers, so that there is less single occupancy of homes. • To provide funding for the merging of houses, when this is appropriate, e.g. in large areas of high density housing, where a better mix is needed. • To follow one of the main objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework: of ‘allowing people and communities back into planning’. There is rigour in complying with the rest of the framework – why not with this? Merely inviting people to comment on proposals is not good enough - communities should be genuinely involved in the planning process.

A new owner is in the process of taking over the Brighton Hippodrome site. Brighton and Hove City Council (BHCC) gave planning approval to convert the Hippodrome into an eight-screen cinema, restaurants and retail units. We are told that the scheme is not going ahead. Vue Entertainment, the company that was to have operated the cinema, is no longer involved. This means that the magnificent Grade II* listed theatre, designed by Frank Matcham—the finest unused theatre in the country—will be left with no plan to save it other than the one being developed by Our Brighton Hippodrome (OBH). The BHCC City Plan names the Hippodrome as one of the key venues in the city’s cultural infrastructure that should be protected and enhanced ‘for their existing use or potential for such use’. It is long past the time when BHCC should issue an urgent repairs notice to protect one of the most important buildings in the city from further deterioration. Meanwhile, the city council should give its full support to enable OBH to complete its plans for restoration of the Hippodrome for live performance and as a major community asset. With BHCC's backing, OBH will be more able to raise the funding for restoration and will be in a stronger position to negotiate with the site’s owner. A restored Hippodrome would add considerably to the local economy, serving the residents of the city and the county and attracting valuable tourist spending with shows that cannot currently be presented in Sussex. A petition on 38 Degrees in favour of theatre restoration has achieved over 11,500 signatures. BHCC should acknowledge the massive public support for revival of the iconic Hippodrome for live performance—and the preference of most of the council’s own elected members for theatre restoration, if possible. It IS possible. The community can make it happen and the council should help achieve this aspiration. Read about the project at ourhippodrome.org.uk Contact the campaign at [email protected] Become a member of the campaign at ourhippodrome.org.uk/join Donate to the campaign fighting fund at ourhippodrome.org.uk/donate

The Prime Minister made a personal promise to cancer patients at the last election that they would be able to access the treatments their doctors recommended. In response, the Cancer Drugs Fund was introduced in 2010 to ensure cancer patients in England were able to access new, innovative treatments that weren't currently available on the NHS. This was an enormous step forward for thousands of patients with advanced or rare cancers, giving them access to treatments that enhanced their quality of life and gave them precious extra time with their families. Yet, from March 13 2015 8,000 cancer patients will have this access to vital treatments cut off. NHS England has recently announced that it will remove 25 treatments from the Cancer Drugs Fund, with effect from March 2015, meaning nearly 8,000 cancer patients a year will be denied life-extending drugs condemning them to an early death and denying the opportunity to improve their quality of life. These changes are a backward step in treatment for advanced cancer and rarer cancers. Doctors will be forced to tell their patients there are treatments that can prolong their lives but they will no longer be available. The Government and drug companies must sit down and find a way to guarantee access to cancer treatments at a cost which is affordable to the NHS. The NHS should be there when you need it the most and the Prime Minister should stand up for cancer patients.