The recent case of Doug Paulley vs First Group ended with the judges ruling that the wheelchair spaces on buses do not need to be vacated by persons refusing to do so. Effectively they have ruled that persons using wheelchairs may be discriminated against by those who feel it is too much trouble to fold away a pushchair, or simply move to another seat. This throws the whole situation into confusion. The majority of persons using wheelchairs are doing so because they are not able to stand for long periods, if at all, and do not have the luxury of being able to fold their wheelchair away while on public transport. Able bodied persons can stand, pushchairs can be folded, and infants carried. Refusing to vacate the more easily accessible areas on buses and trains is discriminating against those who are physically unable to reach the other areas, and must be made an offence. There is no excuse for a wheelchair user to be denied transport in a situation where it is physically possible to accommodate them should other users show consideration. The current regulations are too woolly, and the manner in which they can be interpreted leaves them open to rulings such as the above, which renders them effectively null and void.

No. 7 Bruce Grove is one of the most important historic buildings in Tottenham. It is one of a pair of grand Georgian town houses in classical style. It lies within the Bruce Grove Conservation Area, and is one of the buildings that lines the important approach from Tottenham High Road to Bruce Castle Museum. It is the only building in the whole of Tottenham to bear an English Heritage blue plaque, which commemorates Luke Howard, the ‘Namer of Clouds’, who lived there in the 19th Century. The building is nationally listed, but it is also on the English Heritage Buildings at Risk Register, because of its current derelict condition. This is a tragedy, and the building is currently an eyesore that blights the whole area. Tottenham Civic Society is calling for the urgent rescue of 7 Bruce Grove, to save it from further structural decline, and to restore it to its former glory. The restoration of the building would encourage economic regeneration of the area, and help transform perceptions of Tottenham. Planning permission was granted in 2013 for the building to be restored to its original outward appearance, the interior converted into new flats, with the building of some new homes in the rear garden. It is our view that this planning permission should be acted on as soon as possible in order to save 7 Bruce Grove.

Young people need safe places to socialise. A place where there are reliable adults, no drug pushers, opportunities to try new activities and learn new skills. Many other facilities would be beyond the financial reach of the very youngsters who most need them.

In the UK a party can make pledges before an election and immediately do the opposite after taking office and the electorate can do nothing about it for 5 years despite the fact the party got elected based on the original pledges. Examples from the 2010 UK election include the Tories announcing they had no plans to put up VAT and then announcing an increase to 20% 1.5 months after it, pledging no top down reorganisation of the NHS and then publishing a White paper 2 months after the election doing exactly that. Personally I would consider getting votes on the basis of pledges that you have no intention of keeping as fraud, given how quickly the 2 examples above came after the election it seems unlikely that there was a unexpected change of circumstances to account for the change. Since we can't deselect MPs that break pledges they made to get elected, any pledges made in the manifesto should be legally binding since it is those pledges that got them elected, it is possible that a change of circumstances may occur which make carrying out a pledge they made less viable, a process should be put in place to give the government an option to revisit the electorate to get authorisation to break the pledge rather than the current carte blanche to ignore the pledges they gave to get elected. A computerised system could be put in place to allow for referendums to do this to be carried out cheaply, this could be via the internet or via public terminals in council buildings for example. The system could also be used by the electorate to block legislation they didn't agree with subject to a minimum percentage of voters taking part. The current situation encourages parties to make pledges before an election that they know they have no intention of keeping, a change in the law to make them legally enforceable unless they revisit the electorate would force them to be kept whilst still allowing for the pledges to be amended if circumstances should change.

The mostly Spanish-speaking workers are employed on pitiful wages to clean Saatchis' offices because the work was outsourced to COC. The cleaners have no resources or understanding of the byzantine system they are in, and the costs of mounting an employment claim are far beyond them. Saatchis are an extremely rich corporation and, by outsourcing the work to a firm that has failed because it did not pay the taxes it owed, they retain a huge moral responsibility to make good the damage done by their own policy. They must be shamed into paying up! A typical example of the workers affected is Francisco Javer Horedia, who earns the princely sum of £800 a month from two cleaning jobs: 15 hours a week at Saatchis and 12.5 hours at another firm; he is unable to find full-time work. Could you survive on such wages? More details on the workers and their situation can be found here; http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/dec/07/saatchi-cleaners-fight-unpaid-wages-low-pay

Parliament is currently considering spending at least two billion pounds on renovating the Houses of Parliament. The building is increasingly unsafe to use, with falling masonry, asbestos, fire hazards and many other dangers. Spending this amount of money to keep an out of date system hobbling on would be indefensible. This is the ideal opportunity to change not only the home of Parliament, but the way it works. The Government say they want to make the North of England an economic powerhouse: now is the opportunity to make a move in that direction. A new purpose built campus would be a start. A modern debating chamber - such as we have in Scotland, with a design to make it less confrontational - would be a start. Apart from the chamber, offices, committee rooms etc,. the campus should also include flatted apartments for MPs who have to travel. These would be furnished to a comfortable, but not luxurious, standard and would be free to use, so there would be less opportunity for the suspicion of fiddled expenses. This could be extended to including an on-campus dining system where a number of restaurants would be available. MPs would be given a daily allowance when staying on campus to attend committee meetings or plenary debates. These could be paid for by a customised debit card system. This would allow them to budget by dining in their apartments at times, or going out at others. The cost of security would be less, with all MPs under one roof whilst they were at "Northminster". The accommodation area of the campus would be secure and private for the safety and convenience of MPs and their staff: the debating chamber would be open to the public, as well as being visible on televsion as now. One big advantage for all of us, including MPs and their constituents, would be that the new system would be designed for video-conferencing and electronic communications generally. This would reduce the inconvenience and cost of MPs having to travel as frequently as they do now. Of course, there would be a need for occasional plenary sessions, but these could perhaps be reduced to one week in four or something similar. There would still be a need for a presence in London, for the meeting and greeting of foreign dignitaries etc., so Number Ten could continue to function as the Prime Minister's residence. There might also be a need for similar official residences for one or two senior figures in the Government, but apart from that MPs would live in their constituencies - at least we'd hope so - and use a mixture of new technology and visits to "Northminster" to carry out their duties. There are, of course, already plans afoot for a high speed rail link: this would enable MPs from the south of England to travel efficiently from their constituencies, as required, and would mean MPs from Midland, North of England or Scottish constituencies had shorter distances to travel. I firmly believe that this would a) help the general population to see they were getting value and relevance from their MPs, b) bring an outdated and much-lampooned mediaeval system of government into the twenty-first century and c) bring economic benefits to an area which apparently feels left behind in modern Britain.

Five Quarter want use the North East as a testbed for undersea coal gasification (UCG), an experimental method of squeezing out the remaining drops of coal. They have received licences to test down the NE coast from Amble to Hartlepool. Five-Quarter claim that what they are planning is Deep Gas Winning. They admit that the rocks around the gasification chamber will fracture. This means they are fracking as well as gasifying. In tests run in Australia UCG wells were found to leak the same substances to groundwater as can be released by fracking. There are dangers of blowbacks and explosions. Many test have failed. It has never been used on a commercial basis. The gas produced is syngas or coal gas. It is a mixture of methane (natural gas), carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and hydrogen. They plan to pump it back into the hole they have made using Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). This is another process that has not been fully tested. Surely it would be better to use renewables and not produce the CO2 in the first place? There is of course the carrot of job creation. Any jobs created by UCG/fracking will be highly specialized. However, if the same amounts of money were to be invested in renewable energies and/or home and public building insulation, which the public have been shown to prefer as the majority of surveys have shown. There would be far more new jobs and far fewer environmental concerns. We don't want our coastlines to die.

Swimming is an essential skill that can save lives, promote better health, and be an enjoyable hobby for all people, of any age, gender, or cultural background. For example, disabled people with limited land movement particularly find swimming an essential activity. If this pool closes, the sole remaining one is far too small to cope with everyone who would wish to use it, services would have to be limited there, to allow for lessons, clubs, and a reasonable amount of time still allocated to public use. Derby is a city of approx 250,000 people, one public swimming pool in town is not enough. There has been other options and suggestions made by local people, but they feel that their opinions are being ignored.

Pay to Stay is unethical and immoral. UK consumers regularly select their grocery and other purchases, through consideration of welfare for workers, animals and the land, such as FairTrade and Organic practice. Blackmailing suppliers to pay money to supply Premier Foods is corrupt. UK consumers have the right to publicly boycott Premier Food products until you commit to using fair procurement practice.

Would you prefer a multifunctional venue that could host films, orchestras, bands, dance, theatre, and community events in the heart of Hemel Hempstead, as did the much-lamented Pavilion, rather than merely a multiplex cinema? (as currently proposed by DBC). If so, please sign this petition to Andrew Williams, Leader of DBC. Yours sincerely, Mike Ridley Chris Ridley Instigators, “Hemel Hempstead Hub”. (HHH) Please forward this petition to all your friends, and let’s bring back the cultural heart of Hemel Hempstead!

Many skateboarders and BMX riders rely on Hartsdown Skate Park to practice their sport. As well as being one of the first of the 1970's historic skate parks in the country, this is a very important place for many people. Many young local people start skating and riding here, it's a social meeting place as well as a place for sport and artistic talent. World professional riders and skaters have learned their sport at this very spot. Thanet District Council have proposed to move the skate park elsewhere and to demolish and fill in the original site. It's far more sustainable and cheaper to repair and upgrade the existing site than to destroy it and make a new one in another location.

The Chancellor has pledged to extract "every drop" of oil from the North Sea. If all countries in the world do this, we will head for runaway climate change of well over two degrees. Oil resources are tempting. But leadership at home and abroad means all countries - particularly rich ones that have built their economies on a century of fossil fuel use - have to start making big choices. The Chancellor has announced "radical" and "significant' cuts to the tax rate for North Sea oil and gas companies. But the rate of tax wasn't high enough in the first place: fossil fuels cause climate change and air pollution, yet companies don't pay anywhere near the full costs of the damage these cause. The Chancellor should increase, not decrease, taxes on oil and gas, alongside throwing all of his financial and economic levers at building a world-leading secure, sustainable and clean energy system as a matter of urgency.