For two and a half years we have been trying to find out the circumstances surrounding the death of our son, Andrew, in France in September 2010. Throughout the process of organising a post mortem, trying to work with the French authorities to understand what happened, and trying to work with the Foreign Commonwealth Office we have been faced with many struggles and barriers in gaining access to all the answers we, as a family, need about Andrew’s death. We are currently at the third stage of appeal, desperate to understand the circumstances of our son’s death, but the Foreign Office is refusing to release this information as they claim it could damage relations between France and the UK. Andrew was living in France with his French girlfriend. He was heavily medicated without choice, for a degree of paranoid schizophrenia. He wanted to return home to the UK but his partner prevented him from doing this. The day before he was found dead he told his partner that he wanted to return to the UK. Even in the weeks before he died he had spoken to family members about returning home. Andrew could talk to anyone, he saw everyone as a friend. In the UK he always enjoyed people’s company and this was denied to him in France. From the age of 12 he played chess and before and after he studied Maths at Leeds University he played at County level. He worked at PGL activity centres and loved his guitar. His company will always be missed. As a family we not only feel we have a right to this information, but that any family in the future who may go through similar circumstances in finding out about a loved one’s death in the UK or abroad should have access to all information in the case. The Foreign Office should only be able to withhold information if it’s in the interest of national security, not because they want to prevent embarrassment as seems to be the case in our terrible situation, a situation many families find themselves in. We therefore ask William Hague to please appeal to the Information Commissioners Office to rule in our favour and finally release to us all the details of Andrew’s death. We want him to stop allowing the Foreign Commonwealth Office to use the broad language in Section 27 of the Freedom of Information act to refuse to release information to grieving families who need to understand the details of their loved ones death. The UK government’s need to save face should not be put above its citizen’s need for answers during such a traumatic time.

Last year, student Cait Reilly and unemployed driver Jamieson Wilson, took the Tory led coalition to task over their controversial Workfare programme arguing that it was unlawful. Three Judges found that regulations under which most of the Tory led coalition back-to-work schemes were created are unlawful. The main issue is that the Tory led coalition lost this case and they lost because they failed to provide sufficient and legal information about Workfare to job-seekers. It is estimated that 231,000 people were originally affected by their decision and had their benefits sanctioned (ie stopped). The morality of the Workfare system is not being debated here (although flaws of the system are outlined below). This petition is about the abhorrent behaviour of the Tory led coalition that followed this decision and their decision to retroactively change the law. On 19 March 2013, a Bill was rushed through the House of Commons which will change the law (that they broke) retroactively thus enabling the Tory led coalition to avoid having to repay the money that they illegally took from job-seekers - an average of £550 per person. The issue here is threefold: Firstly, the Tory led coalition (assisted by Labour and Lib Dems) are trying to retrospectively change the law to protect themselves from their own flawed policies. By retrospectively changing the law they can ensure that no law has now been broken and thereby avoid having to repay those who they illegally sanctioned. This behaviour is morally repugnant and vile and cannot be allowed to happen. Secondly, there seems to be a complete media blackout on the story and the Bill was rushed through, the day before the Budget - one may argue in an attempt to bury it? Thirdly, the Workfare scheme is fundamentally flawed and has been shown not to be an effective tool to get unemployed back in to work. The problem is there are no jobs for people and the Tory led coalition is deflecting this fact away by demonising those looking for work such as Miss Reilly and Mr Wilson. There is plenty of evidence to show that workfare claimants are replacing real jobs. Since this WP came in, many retail giants and the Royal Mail have used workfare so they don't have to offer overtime to their existing workers. Asda recently put all their part-time staff on contracts which guarantee just 4 hours work a week. Many shops are run by workfare. This whole scheme is about exploiting labour - the workfare claimants are being exploited for free labour; the existing workers are being exploited by losing hours and pay; and we are all being exploited when what we buy is making profits for corporations which are using what is effectively indentured labour. People who are fortunate enough to be paid for their work are afraid of rocking the boat lest they be replaced. These schemes guarantee a cowed and compliant workforce, paid or not, who will be reluctant to unionise and unwilling to protest in case they lose their jobs. Meanwhile, taxpayers' money is being poured by the billion into the coffers of welfare-to-work companies and corporate profiteers, and Labour seem to be OK with this in principle. These are extremely important issues and cannot be ignored.

Michael MacDonald was arrested on the night of the 16th February when he was at home alone looking after his young son. The arrest followed an incident earlier in the day when MacDonald, known by friends and colleagues as 'Don', engaged with Nick Forbes, the the Labour Council leader, in the street. 'Don' wanted to discuss with Forbes, the effects of the cuts to Newcastle's youth services, which the youth worker fears will have a devastating effect on the most vulnerable residents of the city. Don was not threatening to him. He didn't swear. He only tried to explain to Forbes, as a professional youth worker, the effects these cuts would have on the city's services. The actions taken by Forbes and the police are not what we expect of those who are meant to serve and protect the residents of Newcastle. It is important that situations involving the police as outlined above are not allowed to occur, which serve to intimidate and disturb the people of Newcastle who exercise their right to peaceful protest and freedom of speech. Although a minor offence, if charged Don would be left with a criminal record and there would a black mark against this hard-working and well respected community worker. Don was served a fixed penalty notice under Section 5 of the Public Order Act, but has returned this notice to the court and has stated his intention to fight the accusation. His arrest has serious implications for public protest and freedom of expression in Newcastle and nationally. We stand with him against this attack on the right to protest. The accusation is unjust, meant to intimidate and is preposterous. It is clear that: 1. A civil servant has used their authority to demand an arrest. 2. The police have removed a family man from his home in the middle of the night when he had sole responsibility for his six year old child, detained him for four hours on the basis of a minor charge, during which time he was encouraged to accept a fixed penalty fine for doing nothing more than exercising the rights we all have as residents of Newcastle. Initial signatories: John McDonnell MP Kate Hudson, national secretary Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament Jerry Hicks, Unite Grassroots Left Dot Gibson, National Secretary Pensioner Convention Bill Bowring, Haldane Society Socialist Lawyers Andrew Burgin, vice chair Coalition of Resistance

The wrongful arrest and detention of Palestinian children has a long history and is contrary to UN, EU and UK law The International Declaration of Human Rights protects and enshrines the rights of childre as does the UN constitution The treatment of Palestinian children in detention is in breach of both of these for further info please go to: www.palestinecampaign.org

The 'big four' supermarkets: Asda, Morrisons, Tesco and Sainsburys do not pay the Living Wage. These companies employ around 900,000 people meaning that together they employ the second largest number of people in the UK after the NHS. The Living Wage is “the threshold at which people can live above the poverty level with a sufficient safety net to provide for quality of life”. We need to ask these supermarkets to pay their staff the living wage. Big companies don’t like bad publicity. 38 Degrees members put pressure on the Olympic sponsors who were dodging their tax in the summer, and they caved to public pressure. We need to shame them into paying their staff a wage which affords them dignity and shows that they’re worth more than the legal minimum. Sign this petition to show the CEOs that you think they should pay their staff a wage they can live on! Together we can work together to lift people out of poverty. These supermarkets can afford it! The salaries paid to their CEOs are evidence of this. Justin King, the CEO of Sainsburys, receives £3.2 million a year; Philip Clarke of Tesco, £6.9 million; Dalton Philips of Morrisons, £4 million; Andy Clarke of Asda's pay is not in the public domain. If they can afford to pay their bosses this much, they can afford to pay their staff a few pounds more an hour. Tesco announced sales of more than £1 billion a week and annual profits of more than £3 billion despite the impact of the global downturn. Sainsburys opened five supermarkets, 28 convenience stores and two extensions, adding 267,000 square feet to its estate over the last three months. If they can afford to expand to at this rate, they can afford to pay their staff more. The Living Wage is beneficial to employees, employers and taxpayers. It prevents working poverty and the exploitation of low-paid workers. Taxpayers top up the low wages of supermarket workers by £50 a week in tax credits. If all low paid workers earned the living wage, the government could save £823 million a year by decreasing welfare benefits. It’s not just those who are unemployed who are in poverty, it’s also those in work who just don’t earn enough money to pay for the basics. One-fifth of women and one-seventh of men earn less than £7 per hour. More than six million working adults in Britain are living in poverty. Since the beginning of the Living Wage campaign in 2001 led by Citizens UK, they have lifted 45,000 people out of poverty and put over £210 million into the pockets of some of the lowest paid workers in the UK. *UPDATE* I have made a short link if you'd like to share the petition on Twitter: It is http://bit.ly/Big4LW745

**UPDATE: Job Done! (House of Bishops statement 11 Dec 2012). Many thanks to all supporters - keep praying!** 42 out of 44 Dioceses have voted for women bishops; the House of Laity vote clearly did not reflect the democratic wishes of the membership they are supposed to represent. A year's delay will enable Dioceses to reflect again, and make their views even clearer to their Synodical representatives.

I am sure many of you are aware of the measures that the Govt has in place to root out the supposed fraudsters claiming Disability and Sickness Benefits. Samuel Miller has taken the time to make a complaint on behalf of the British People and has provided a long list of links to support this. If a Canadian is going to put the effort into helping us, surely we need to speak up with him. The United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has investigated the United Kingdom Government. Their report, released on 24th of April 2024, shows the committee is appalled by reports of deaths linked to benefit claims that it says have a disturbingly consistent theme. (https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CRPD%2FC%2FGBR%2FFUIR%2F1&Lang=en) Further, a Freedom of Information Request made by The Big Issue in 2023 showed that in the last 10 years, £350m has been spent trying to uphold decisions made by the DWP regarding Personal Independence Payment and that 68% are then overturned at Tribunal. This suggests a possible £320m waste of money. (https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/disability-benefit-appeals-pip-universal-credit-cost-dwp/ )  In addition, According to an interim Parliamentary Report on Suicides, one suicide is estimated to cost £1.67m. (https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmhealth/300/30005.htm) and according to research carried out by Professor Barr, which was presented to The Commons Work and Pensions Committee “the work capability assessment (WCA) was linked to about 600 suicides in just three years.” (https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/dwp-ignored-hugely-alarming-research-that-linked-wca-with-600-suicides-mps-are-told/ ). Thus, the 600 suicides over a three year period has cost Britain £1,002,000,000 or £334m per year. Sadly, according to the Interim Report on Suicide Prevention “those who have lost a loved one due to suicide are more likely to commit suicide” and that for every suicide, a “minimum of six people will suffer a severe impact”. That is a potential minimum of 3600 families and friends affected by a suicide who will try and seek help from their GP etc, adding further costs that may not be recognised by The Government. Unfortunately, Professor Barr said it was not possible to examine the impact of universal credit on mental health, and whether it had also led to suicides, because DWP was refusing to release the data needed to carry out that research “when it is within its power to do that and it would be possible to assess those impacts”. Another complainant, Craig Bulman, has said that "The persistent cruelty of the government has driven me to submit the UN report to the International Criminal Court. I contend that these actions may constitute crimes against humanity as defined under Article 7 of the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court Act 2001, Schedule 8, Article 7. It is my sincere hope that the International Criminal Court will consider launching an investigation into the actions of the United Kingdom Government from 2010 to 2024. Such behaviour is wholly unacceptable in a civilised and democratic society. We, as a democracy, pride ourselves on upholding the rule of law—a cornerstone of our values—and it is utterly inconceivable that any agency or government department could justify conduct that inflicts profound harm on vulnerable populations. This is not the standard of governance we expect, nor should it ever be tolerated."   "Since 2010, successive Conservative governments in the UK have orchestrated policies that not only marginalised but systematically dismantled the safety nets for the disabled and vulnerable. This severe and sustained assault has led to unprecedented scrutiny from the United Nations, marking the first time a member state was investigated for potential human rights violations against disabled persons. The UN's damning findings echoed the chilling narratives captured in John Pring’s pivotal book, 'The Department,' which lays bare the harsh realities and sometimes fatal consequences of these policies that have not just failed but actively harmed those most in need of protection, exposing disturbing truth about The Government’s responsibility and the real human costs of austerity." If you would like to make your own complaint to the ICC, and submit evidence, you can do so using this link https://otplink.icc-cpi.int  While you have your health, none of this matters. One simple mishap could expose you to this chaos. Please share this Petition as much as possible.  http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2012/09/23/united-kingdom-government-denounced-for-crimes-against-disabled-people-to-international-criminal-court-in-the-hague/ UNCRPD investigates UK Govt  https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/oct/20/un-inquiry-uk-disability-rights-violations-cprd-welfare-cuts Ian Duncan Smith and Chris Grayling reported to Police over fitness to work tests. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/iain-duncan-smith-police-assessing-possible-investigation-into-dwp-ministers-over-fit-to-work-tests-a7020471.html UN probe into Disabled Human Rights violations http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/13648683.Revealed__contents_of_dossier_which_sparked_UN_probe_over_disabled__human_rights_violations_/?ref=twtrec Did David Cameron admit multiple murders to Andrew Marr? http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2015/04/20/did-david-cameron-admit-multiple-murders-to-andrew-marr/ Why the U.K. Government Has Failed the Disabled Community http://www.newsweek.com/uk-government-has-failed-disabled-community-461517 The increasing death toll due to the loss of benefits. Telling it as it is https://mzolobajluk.wordpress.com/2015/09/14/the-increasing-death-toll-due-to-the-loss-of-benefits/ The Mirror "Tory Welfare Cuts grossly violated rights of disabled people" says the UNhttp://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-welfare-cuts-gravely-violated-9215742 "Ken Loach's Film is not true to life" comment reposted from original article by fairer society. http://www.afairersociety.uk/2016/11/07/its-a-fact-ken-loachs-film-is-not-true-to-life-it-doesnt-show-how-bad-it-really-is/ UN urged to act after Conservative Government refuses to act http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2016/11/13/un-urged-to-act-after-conservative-government-dismisses-report-on-disability/

The independent documentary that was screened on BBC 2, "You've been Trumped" made the case that land belonging to the residents of Menie has been stolen by Donald Trump by way of forceably taking over land that does not legally belong to him. The documentary showed the bullying tactics that were used and that the local council, Grampian Police force and the Scottish Government allowed this to happen without any intervention. Nobody, regardless of how much money or influence they may have, should be allowed to forceably take over anybodies land or property.

This is so important for childrens lives of those who were granted a Freeing Order for Adoption and which may have been granted after the 28th September 2010 cut off date. It left a legal 'loop-hole' which means the Freeing Order (which frees the child from his or her birth family legally) may not be fully valid, so any Adoption granted on the back of such a Freeing Order may not be totally watertight legally. This has many implications for the future of such children and the Scottish Government needs to make this legislation totally clear. My family are suffering financially and emotionally because of the uncertainty this has caused, we have been waiting more than 2years now for clarification. Please sign the petition to help put pressure on the government to clarify things once and for all. Thank you.

Cleaners are as integral to the team as shop assistants, managers, and directors. Outsourcing the cleaning services is demeaning, discriminatory and clearly counter to your founder's vision. We are grateful to Polly Toynbee for alerting us to the situation in a recent Guardian article. For some of us, it is so unjust and morally repugnant that we intend to boycott John Lewis, Waitrose and Greenbee until this injustice is put right - and encourage others to do likewise.

The law is a discriminatory one which relies on an individual police officer's judgement and, as such, is open to abuse. The police officer is open to criticism for misuse of the order and under 16 year old's are vulnerable to overzealous application and miss-accusations. The discriminatory nature of the order encourages the hatred and fear of young people and allows some to feel justified in discriminatory attitudes toward them. It encourages those who have suffered at the hands of badly behaved youths to believe that they are all like that and to become more afraid. It will only serve to alienate young people and make them feel that the police are there simply to control them but not to protect them. Already young people in Bangor are avoiding going out to the cinema and to after school clubs for fear of being caught in the curfew or of being beaten up by the marauding gangs that this order implies are on the loose in the city center. Bangor is a lovely historic place with much to offer young and old alike. It suffers from very little anti-social behavior apart from a very few people in limited areas and the usual after pub and club problems present in all cities. It is suffering in the downturn from an empty high street (the longest in the country) but there was no rioting in Bangor last year, the out of town JJB sports, PC World etc were not ransacked as was seen in other towns and cities across the UK, so why Bangor? There was no consultation with the public or even their elected representatives on the City Council. This is despite the ACPO guidance that there should be consultation with the effected community and a Rowntree report, which concludes that these laws have only been effective where consultation and involvement had taken place. This law is badly worded, heavy handed, discriminatory and draconian and it should be stopped now!

The age of criminal responsibility in England is one the lowest in Europe, and the statistics show that we are in danger of criminalising too many children and young people. The age of criminal responsibility needs to be reviewed in light of the standards set by the UN Convention and these international comparisons. Young children are simply not capable of the sophisticated mental reasoning required to be held fully responsible for criminal actions, and we need to take a far more "welfare based" approach in dealing with young people who commit serious crimes. Furthermore, there is concern among neuroscientists in this field that the age of criminal responsibility in the UK is unreasonably low given the emerging understanding of how slowly the brains of children mature, and the evidence of individual differences suggests that an arbitrary cut-off age may not be justifiable.