Councillor Willie Young has now used twitter twice to send hateful twitters to people, both of which have used the theme of disabilities against the individual. The use of using these actions goes against the disabilities act as it falls as harassment and makes derogatory remarks of a disabled nature.

This service is used by a lot of local residents every day to go back and forth to London where they work. Without the 797 they will have to use the train at nearly double the cost. The students at Herfordshire University will be affected in the same way. Patients having to go to major London hospitals will be in the same situation. Old aged pensioners with freedom passes won't be able to use it in the train and won't be able to afford the train fare. Arriva operates the 757 service from Luton to London -Victoria. They run 45 coaches 24 hours daily. If Arriva says that they are discontinuing the 797 because it is not economical. The same applies to the five 757 services both ways between 1.00am - 5.00am in the morning. Arriva could cancel these five services and instead run a minimum 797 service which in the end will be more profitable for the operator. This way customers of the 797 won't be so badly affected by Arrivas decision.

After Abu Dhabi's leading royal Sheikh Mansour committed to investing in the UK, at the opening of a new £150m football academy by Manchester City Football Club, the Chancellor wanted to do the same. This is important to campaign against because there are currently almost 1,000,000 people in the UK who are having to resort to food banks to survive whilst the Government splashes £50 million on something that isn't a priority.

NHS and Wefare Benefits are vital and should not be short changed for a political agenda

Because buggies can be folded up. Some wheelchair users are bound to their wheelchairs for LIFE as they are disabled. Mothers or fathers can push buggies and can always wait for another bus.

When you see disabled people out and about it's not always apparent how hard it is to get about my daughter is a wheelchair user and she is ill which is what has made her disabled so if she is having a reasonable day health wise we go out as there are plenty of times when she is too ill or in hospital for treatment

Approx 90% of the members are OAP plus a number of members are registered as blind or partially sighted.

This campaign seeks to protect children from emotional abuse caused by parents conducting Family Disputes in Courts. Schools ignore the abuse children suffer when one parent separates them from the other through Family Courts. Losing a parent is mortifying for every child. Courts decide this chiefly from badly written Cafcass Reports. These delays MUST stop. Judges meeting children will help, but only a professional Inspectorate will guarantee this.

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.