We are repeatedly told that there is " no more money for..." The NHS Social Services Mental Health Services Schools Pensions and Welfare Benefits Libraries Youth Clubs Parks Swimming Pools ...and yet you can allow £4.5bn of our money to misappropriated and no-one is being held responsible?

Because it is simply wrong at a time when a lot of people are struggling to feed themselves and their families because of the 'cost of living crisis' that MPs should have their food and alcohol consumption subsidised from the public purse. At a time when public sector workers are having to resort to strike action to achieve a living wage, many people are having to choose between 'heating or eating', and there are an estimated 2,500 foodbanks in the UK, its Members of Parliament in 2023 enjoy an annual salary of £86,584, whilst members of the House of Lords receive a daily attendance allowance of £323, or £1,615 for a five day week In addition to their generous remuneration, MPs and Lords have access to no less than 19 catering facilities within the Palace of Westminster, all of which offer subsidised food - and alcohol. The terms "subsidised" and "subsidy" are used here and throughout in their commonly understood sense, of a commodity or service being made available at a discounted price that does not reflect their true value on the open market Following an Open Democracy Freedom of Information request last year, we now know, that that subsidy amounted to £17 million over the three year period up to 2021. It is reasonable to conclude, by taking the average annual cost of the subsidy of £5.6 million over that period, and adjusting for inflation, the equivalent figure for the period 2021 to 2024 is likely to be in the region £20 million. One can quibble about the precise figure but we know it is a sizable subsidy. This is not just about money though. The Open Democracy article about this can be seen here and should be read by anyone interested in this petition or contemplating signing it. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/food-poverty-parliament-mps-taxpayers-cost-of-living-subsidies/ As if the disparity between an arguably cossetted legislative assembly (generous 'expenses', subsidised travel, second homes, gold plated pensions etc), and those they make laws for, were not bad enough, matters are brought into even starker contrast when one considers the apparent callous indifference MPs show towards measures aimed at ensuring that those who do not benefit from food subsidies, receive adequate nourishment - not least schoolchildren. In January 2023 the Member for Coventry South Zara Sultana introduced a Private Members Bill to extend the eligibility for free school meals to all school children. This was prompted by evidence in her constituency and across the country as a whole, that children were coming to school hungry, (in response to which schools started Breakfast Clubs), and that additionally, many children brought in no lunch boxes, or if they did, their contents were nutritionally inadequate. The bill received its first reading in January 2023, and then came back to the Commons in March for a second reading. Prior to the vote on the second reading Zara Sultana wrote to the Prime Minister pointing out that it was estimated that four million children in the UK were in food poverty, and food inflation was at an all time high of 18.9%. Her efforts were in vain as the government effectively blocked the bill, with a second reading re-scheduled to June when Parliament is not even expected to be sitting. It appears therefore that whilst MPs, who are amongst some of the highest paid people in the country, are happy to receive a subsidy from the public purse for their culinary pleasure, including alcohol consumption, they are otherwise perfectly content to see children going hungry, but for a subsidy for school meals which would cost a fraction of the £20 million subsidy they benefit from. It has been argued that the subsidy benefits passholders and other groups working within the Palace of Westminster. However subsidised canteens are not standard for most workplaces, but in the case of the Palace of Westminster this does not include open access to the Members Dining Room which is restricted to MPs, and serves haute cuisine and fine wines at transport cafe prices - a recent menu for example featured "Oriental crispy lamb salad with plum dressing" for a mere £2.20 This contrasts very poorly with what most people have to pay in their workplaces for more modest fare. Nurses for example who have a much more physically demanding job nevertheless pay more for their meals than MPs as this article from Nursing Notes explains https://nursingnotes.co.uk/news/nhs-staff-pay-around-twice-as-much-as-mps-for-food-at-work/ There would appear to be an ethical and moral deficit in a legislative assembly, the ostensible purpose of which, is to serve the interests of the country rather than just their own, the sheer amount of the subsidy aside.

We are deeply troubled by the imminent closure of the Glasgow Bipolar Hub. The Hub is a ground-breaking and much-needed resource for individuals living with bipolar disorder in Glasgow and beyond. Since its launch in 2020, the Glasgow Bipolar Hub has served as a beacon of hope and healing for countless individuals and families. As highlighted in the recent article "Bipolar treatment hub launched in Gorbals becomes first in the world" published in the Glasgow Times on 29th June 2020, the establishment of this hub marked a historic moment as the first of its kind worldwide. It not only showcased Glasgow's commitment to mental health care but also set a remarkable precedent for other regions. The Glasgow Bipolar Hub has played a pivotal role in transforming the lives of individuals battling bipolar disorder by providing specialized treatment, support, and a nurturing community. The hub's holistic approach, which combines evidence-based therapies, medication management, peer support, and educational programs, has yielded remarkable results. Through comprehensive care plans and personalized interventions, the Hub has helped countless individuals regain control over their lives and fostered a sense of belonging and empowerment. Furthermore, the Glasgow Bipolar Hub has served as a catalyst for destigmatizing mental health conditions. By raising public awareness and engaging in community outreach initiatives, the Hub has played a significant role in dismantling societal prejudices and promoting acceptance, understanding, and compassion. However, we have recently received distressing news that the Glasgow Bipolar Hub is being closed due to funding challenges and resource constraints. This disheartening prospect has left us deeply concerned about the welfare and well-being of those who rely on the services provided by the Hub. Closure would result in a devastating loss for individuals with bipolar disorder, their families, and the wider community. We believe that mental health care should be a fundamental priority for our society, and the closure of such a vital institution undermines the progress we have made in advocating for mental health rights. We cannot afford to let this beacon of hope extinguish when the need for accessible and comprehensive mental health support is more crucial than ever. We cannot allow this essential facility to be shut down. It is our responsibility to ensure that individuals living with bipolar disorder have access to the resources and support they require to lead fulfilling lives. By signing the Bipolar Hub Closure Petition, you can play a crucial role in urging the relevant authorities and stakeholders to take immediate action to save this invaluable resource. Let us join hands and stand together to protect the Glasgow Bipolar Hub, preserving a lifeline for mental health care and ensuring a brighter future for all those affected by bipolar disorder. How You Can Help: Sign the Petition and add your name to the growing list of concerned individuals demanding the continuation of the Bipolar Hub's services. Share Widely: Spread the word about this petition through social media platforms, email, and personal conversations. Encourage your friends, family, and colleagues to join the cause and sign the petition as well. Contact Local Representatives: Reach out to your local representatives, politicians, and influential figures to express your concerns and ask for their support in preserving the Bipolar Hub. Highlight the positive impact it has had on the community and emphasize the urgent need for financial assistance. Time is of the essence, and we must act swiftly to prevent the closure of the Bipolar Hub. By signing the petition, spreading awareness, and engaging with local authorities, we can make a tangible difference in the lives of those affected by bipolar disorder. Together, let us advocate for the continued operation of the Bipolar Hub and ensure that the necessary support and resources remain accessible to those who need them the most. Thank you for your attention and your commitment to this vital cause.

If the vehicle entrance goes ahead, it will be meters from the very youngest children at Chestnuts school, leading to increased pollution and disruption to them every day, as they play in their playground, as well as an even busier road to cross on the way to and from school. Despite deputations from children, parents and governors from the school to the council, the plans for the vehicle entrance were still signed off. The school was not consulted properly on the plans, which, as a major stakeholder, they should have been. A vehicle entrance in this position poses a serious risk on an already busy road to child safety and health. The creation of a new vehicle entrance here is in direct opposition to Haringey council's Climate Change Action plan, which 'targets a borough-wide reduction on carbon emissions which will improve living standards for all residents'. In addition, the planned vehicle entrance is in the same location as a planned zebra crossing which has now been put off indefinitely, after years of being promised by the council to make a particularly treacherous crossing safer. There is already a vehicle entrance into the development that can be used for vehicle access, a second one is not needed.

I have a child with a disability and we have mice and rats running around our home

The roads in and around Retford are absolutely atrocious. Over the past few months, the standard of the roads has deteriorated rapidly, causing extreme distress and disruption for the town's residents. Many potholes are on main junctions in the town centre and on the main roads, which receive a lot of traffic on a daily basis. In some areas, the roads are simply not fit for purpose. This problem is not just unique to Retford, but to the whole of Nottinghamshire - in recent years, Nottinghamshire has been named as the 'worst county in the country' for potholes/highway maintenance. Despite these warning signs, our Council has done very little/if anything to resolve this issue (some of the repairs that have been done have made the roads even worse!), and this petition is a way for our community to demand more should be done to rectify the problem. There have been many pledges by the council to rectify the issue, but with no results. The roads are now in need of urgent repair - in many cases, new sections of the road need to be re-surfaced. I strongly urge any residents from Retford to support this petition and make our voices heard. Simply reporting a pothole on the council website is not enough - they are not filling them in and the roads are deteriorating even more. This is not a political petition aimed at specific political parties - it is a petition for anyone who wants to see our concerns being taken seriously. We pay enough council tax (and road tax for those who drive) to ensure our local town and roads are well maintained. Where is this money being spent? Why is the town's basic infrastructure not being maintained? Enough is enough. It is time the council take accountability and sort the problem before any further damage is caused.

Property is being bought up by outsiders and used as a second home during seasonal time periods - leaving these towns with expensive housing markets and desolate centres during certain times of the year. It is unfair that locals should have to endure such financial and physical stress because of wealth being poured into their hometowns where their families may have lived for generations or where they have a strong sense of community

Most, if not all of the tenants in this block have young children and therefore, need to use a buggy. It makes it very difficult to leave and enter the building, especially for single parents. When I bid for this property I was told it had a lift but was not informed that there would be two sets of stairs to get to the lift (I was told I can not refuse this property offer when I came to view it). As a single parent, this is very difficult. Building a ramp would be safer and easier for all tenants with young children or mobility issues.

So residents can safely cross a busy road.

Most people love and want a dogs & dogs love people. Unfortunately some people behave badly towards dogs and this needs to stop. I care about this deeply because sadly I all too often see it with my own eyes the crulty aimed at innocent dogs and I can't bare to see vulnerable animals hurt. It so easy to get a dog which can attract people who do not have the best interest of the dog at heart. More stringent rules may deter those people.

We implore you to join us in our campaign as we believe that adequate housing is a basic human right. Many asylum seekers have fled from persecution and violence, experiencing extreme trauma in the process of being displaced from their original homes. It is vital that they get support and the human right to the safety of their own home.

Victims do not choose to become victims. They become one. They are already dealing with trauma and fear for their own safety, so it is critical that they have equal rights in court. The current justice system in Scotland appears to protect the perpetrator more than the victim. The good news is that Scotland is now working on criminal justice reform, and the new bill has recently been published. However, having Victims Commissioners is not enough. Victims need to be defended by lawyers too. Why is it essential to provide solicitors for victims? Here some points: Numerous cases of domestic abuse and harassment are dismissed for lack of evidence. Prior to trials, however, the Crown Office never hears the victims' story, to check if there is any extra evidence or witnesses that could be added to the case. No one ever inquires about their emotional, psychological, or even financial consequences that they face (for example, some stalker victims may struggle to hold a job). Often, a clear picture of the damage is not fully portrayed in court. Therefore, a lawyer has the potential to alter the game. Someone who contacts victims following the police report and advocates on their behalf thereafter. They will collect additional information and evidence to provide to the Crown Office so that they can make a more informed judgement regarding whether or not to continue the prosecution. A lawyer will also provide victims with information about the legal process, what to expect, and their rights (such as the right to request a review) and advise them on the most effective strategy to move their case forward. Victims are required to appear in court as witnesses, but they are not required to have legal representation because they have been called to court "just to share their story." However, this is incorrect. A distinction should exist between a victim and a witness. Victims are those who have suffered as a result of abuse (of any kind), and the situation has had a greater negative impact on their lives, whereas an ordinary witness may not necessarily be emotionally invested in the story. This indicates that there is no appropriate support in place for victims. They should be treated as victims until the contrary is confirmed. Their wellbeing should be safeguarded, and an attorney could assist with that. Due to the psychological pressure survivors experience in court, they may be unable to fully articulate themselves. The experience is overwhelming. No one really prepared the victims for the experience. For the very first time, they share their story in front of the judge. Perpetrators, on the other hand, have their stories heard, they are prepared for the experience and they also have an opportunity to prepare their defence with the assistance of their attorneys. Sharing a traumatic experience is never simple, especially in a courtroom, and it can be especially intimidating for women to do so in a room full of men. A lawyer with prior knowledge of the case could also encourage the victims to tell the complete story and make the process easier for them on an emotional level. Abusers have the right to an attorney who gets paid to manipulate the truth. The abuser's attorney is permitted to victim-blame and accuse survivors of wrongdoing in order to portray them as immoral while defending their clients' innocence. Furthermore, they are permitted to discriminate (especially against women) and adopt an inappropriate attitude and line of questioning to prove their client's innocence. While, in the other hand, there is no one to advocate for the victims' right. This is especially problematic in jury trials, where charismatic attorneys may convince jurors that their clients are blameless by leading them to misinterpret the evidence. If perpetrators' solicitors are permitted to have such conduct, then the victims' legal representation must be equally robust in order to give victims' stories the appropriate weight too. This will balance the rights from each party. Additionally, for how the system stands now, victims may experience additional psychological or emotional trauma in court. A victim's attorney will advocate for victims' rights in court, to prevent further traumatization, and put an end to victim-blaming and discrimination. Many victims suffer from PTSD after experiencing court and this needs to end. Since victims are only required to appear as witnesses, they do not have the right to hear all the evidence presented in court. The crime is not "their case" but rather the case of the Crown Office. On the other hand, abusers have the right to access all court-presented evidence. Providing victims with solicitors will ensure that they have equal access to information. For the same principles, victims have not right to appeal for the judge's decision while abusers can. Having an attorney ensures that victims will have the same rights. The victims' attorney could also assist them in pursuing monetary compensation. In many cases, such as stalking, victims have an economic impact. For example, if their work performance declines and end up losing their job. Because they did not choose to be victims, victims should also be eligible for compensation. In conclusion, as highlighted above, in the courtroom the power dynamic is unbalanced -abusers have more rights than victims. Mandating solicitors for victims could be a game-changer and also play an essential role in preventing violence. Victims must have someone to argue their case and advocate for their rights. For yourself, for our daughters, mothers, sisters, nieces, grandmothers, and all other victims of abuse and stalking regardless of gender. I stand by your side. For a fairer Scotland. And I hope you will stand by our side too.