Persons who have savings of £16,000 or more cannot claim certain benefits, such as Income Support, JSA or ESA. So why, when this Government is introducing some severe austerity measures against the poorer members of our society, are Members of Parliament, especially millionaire Members allowed to draw a salary and expenses from the Public Purse ?

These nurseries are outstanding and a fabric of the local communities, part of the community history and cohesion. Some have been running for over 30 years, with dedicated well trained staff teams. All 4 remaining provide affordable childcare to children with different type of needs i.e special educational needs, parents on low -medium income, lone parents, students, residents that may require support. Closures will affect parents ability to work, study, lone parents. Disruptions will affect the children's well being. They offer children quality care and are alternative to often overpriced private sector nurseries. Poverty of families in Tower Hamlets is increasing, so is the younger population of children under 10, yet there appears to be no long term planning by The Council of how to support the outstanding nurseries to continue their work within local community. Please support our petition and campaign Save Our Nurseries - Tower Hamlets.

Simply put this is undemocratic, if you allow UKIP, who's popularity mainly exists down in the South of England to take part in the UK general election debate, then you should for democratic purposes allow the SNP leader to take part in this debate also.

Our students are our future

Because more than 20 families are about to be made homeless with nowhere to go. These are mainly nurses and people who work in schools and local care services and are on modest incomes. Most have paid their rent and lived in their perfectly good homes for years. They are receiving no assistance from the Mayor in finding new homes. Because of local rental costs, most will have to move away and remove their children from local schools. This is social housing controlled by the Mayor that should be preserved: not destroyed in favour of high price luxury housing! See BBC report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29574993

As opinion polls and recent election results predict that the general election next year will be close run, with no party winning an outright majority being a likely outcome. In this environment smaller parties, who themselves are seeing a large right in voter interest and memberships, are likely to perform vital roles in the formation of coalitions next year. These parties address the overall trend of voter apathy as well as a challenge to the traditional 2 (or 3) party system. As such the television debates offer a vital opportunity to get more voters involved in and aware of changes in the political system and increase declining voter turnout. It's possible to see from the below link that TV debates can help this considerably. http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm The Green party is an established party (founded 1990) which has one MP, one Lord, three MEPs and holds 160 local council positions. Membership for the party is over 20,000 with a rise of 45% in membership this year. This rise has been particularly big amongst the youth demographic which has seen a 100% rise in the last year. As this is a key demographic that has low voter turnout and highest levels of voter apathy, it is the responsibility of media outlets to help this demographic engage with politics. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/20/green-party-support-media-ukip http://greenparty.org.uk/news/2014/10/03/green-surge-membership-of-the-green-party-up-45-in-2014-alone/ The SNP is also an established party in Scotland (since 1934) which has 6 MPs, 2 MEPs, 421 local government positions (as well as their members in the Scottish Parliament) and 80,000 members. They have been called the 3rd biggest political party in the UK. Their membership too has since a large rise in membership over the last few years, partly due to the referendum, but has seen membership double since the referendum. They too are particularly popular amongst the apathetic youth voters and their credentials in increasing voter turnout is very much proven in the context of referendum. http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/snp-members-double-since-independence-referendum-1-3549827 http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/21/scottish-referendum-massive-voter-turnout-means-politics-changed-for-ever UKIP is too an established party (since 1993) with 1 MP, 24 MEPS, 370 members of local government and 48,623 members. They have seen a 3800 member rise in 2014. UKIP has been extensively covered by mainstream media in 2014 due to the European Parliament elections and recent defections from the Conservative party. UKIP have been representing themselves as a party that wants to decrease voter apathy and have had positive results at shaping the political debate in recent months. http://www.ukip.org/ukip_membership_crashes_through_35_000 http://theday.co.uk/politics/wind-of-change-blows-through-uk-politics

The Green Party has had an elected representative in Parliament since 2010 and therefore must be treated in the same way for broadcast debates as all of the other parties. This is vital for our democracy and will encourage voter participation and help to challenge voter apathy.

The long-standing and ongoing exclusion of the Green Party from the national discourse has not stopped it being the only national party that's still growing, other than UKIP. This demonstrates it is striking a chord with many voters, and is being held back only by the lack of fair coverage. Democracy and balance can only be enhanced by including the party in political discourse at all levels.

It's unfair and contrary to Allotment legislation. It breaches an agreement that governs prices in Edinburgh. It will make allotments unaffordable. It is prejudicial against the poor, disabled and elderly. It would make Edinburgh allotments the most expensive in the UK. It is contrary to healthy living policies of Council and Government.

As we approach one of the most crucial elections in our history, at a time when our country is changing in very many ways, it is crucial that ALL democratically-elected voices are listened to. It demeans the intelligence and commitment of the voters of the UK to restrict access to political views, and to the very many good people who have chosen to give their lives to creating change for the better in our country.

On November 21, MPs will vote on a Private Member’s Bill aimed at halting the spread of privatisation across the NHS. Clive Efford’s Bill would scrap the worst parts of the Government’s Health and Social Care Act of 2012. The 2012 Act unleashed privatisation by imposing competition law on the NHS and exposing services to bids from private companies. Clive Efford’s Bill would rein in privatisation by • Removing competition requirements and regulations • Preventing the NHS watchdog Monitor acting as a competition enforcer • Restoring the Secretary of State’s duty to provide National Health Services • Shrinking what NHS hospitals are allowed to earn from private patients – currently up to half their total income! This petition has been launched by Stockport NHS Watch. We will deliver it to all four of Stockport’s MPs and lobby them to stand up for the NHS on November 21. We cannot stand and watch the NHS being stolen from us!

After the debacle of Rail privatisation and the fall in the level of service witnessed over the last decade on our railways, the last thing we need is a purely profit driven ownership of Eurostar looking merely at the short term in order to provide a return at any cost to their investors. This privatisation is purely ideologically driven and takes no consideration of the needs - short or long term - of Eurostar or, especially, it's users.The Governments of France and Belgium are considering increasing their share of the ownership of Eurostar (at British tax-payers expense as the profits will all go to alleviate the tax burden of other countries) whilst ours is so driven by an ideological distaste for any nationally owned service that they will press ahead with privatisation at any cost and regardless of the value of that privatisation to the current owners of the service - you! It must further be asked, can we trust a civil service which oversaw the huge loss to taxpayers through the undervaluation and mismanagement of The Royal Mail and RBS (where even according to the Telegraph taxpayers faced a loss of £1bn and £10bn respectively)? Please show Mr Osbourne and the Treasury your dislike of this half-baked plan to rush through privatisation before the next election.