The actions of the NEC are so undemocratic they do not belong in this country. All across society they have excluded members and supports with bitter choices. This cannot be allowed to go on in The Labour Party.

UK has voted out of the EU and needs all hands to contribute to the national development. If illegal immigrants who are already in the United Kingdom are granted amnesty, they will play a major role in the development of the country. An amnesty could yield an additional millions of Pound Sterling a year of Income Tax and National Insurance receipts. Granting an amnesty to the illegal immigrants who are already in the country will bring them out of the shadows and into the real economy and they can contribute to the tax system. In the process of granting an amnesty, they will pay fines so the legalisation will not be dependant on a taxpayers’ money and it will be self-sustained, and also to have a proper criminal checks. The case of amnesty extends beyond economics. It is also a human thing to do. Regularising status to illegal immigrants avoid vulnerability exploitation and destitution as well as avoid creating a situation in which they are more likely to be pushed into the black economy. In extreme cases, illegal immigrants can slip into sexual exploitation and forced labour. The Prime Minister, Theresa May said , the government she leads will be driven not by the interests of the privileged few but promised to give more control over everyone's life in the country. Illegal immigrants really want to take up jobs to support themselves, their families and the national development but they are unable to do so as their lives are restricted in a multicultural country where the whole world look up to due to resident permit. Please grant amnesty to these illegal immigrants who are already in the country to live a normal life and to contribute substantially to the national economy.

The Sun newspaper is part of News Corp - Rupert Murdoch's media corporation. As such it is not only highly biased but has often published inaccurate, misleading or false information. It has recently been censored on several counts by the press watchdog the IPSO and ordered to publish corrections. • It promoted racial hatred by falsely claiming 1 in 5 British Muslims support jihadis. • A piece about Unite - Britain's biggest trade union was found to have 10 separate inaccuracies in just 1 article. • It encouraged animosity between football fans by printing falsehood about Liverpool supporters at the Hillsborough disaster. • It's owner has a direct audience and influence within the Tory leadership. • It advocated the use of gunships to stop refugees. • It has even put words in the queen's mouth by saying she was pro Brexit. Despite all this it has faced no real consequences and continues to spread misinformation, for example: about anti-semitism within the Labour party. Whilst we believe in freedom of the press, the people deserve media outlets that report accurately on their world so they can make informed choices as citizens. Lies should have no place in UK media. The Sun is lying to people en masse. We believe that the Co-op as one of the most ethical shops on our streets should lead the way in holding the Sun to account.

The government’s Prevent strategy, a centrepiece of its national counter-terrorism policy, is stifling the freedoms of children in classrooms across the United Kingdom and is counter-productive. It is leaving a generation of young Britons fearful of exercizing their rights to freedom of expression and belief and is counter-productive by driving children to discuss issues related to terrorism, religion and identity outside the classroom and online where simplistic narratives are promoted and go unchallenged. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQR0QZDPMvU Recent legislation in the form of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015 places an obligation on public sector workers, including teachers and child care providers to report individuals including children considered at risk of being drawn into terrorism based on their perceived association with non-violent extremism. Yet this obligation is based on a vague definition of extremism that includes opposition to ‘British values’, and a set of prescribed indicators of vulnerability to extremism that include ‘a desire for status’ and ‘a need for identity meaning and belonging’. Children in classrooms across the United Kingdom have been impacted by Prevent. For example, a 8-year-old boy was interviewed, without a parent or guardian present, and ‘cautioned’ for wearing a t-shirt with Arabic writing on it. Since the incident, the child is reluctant to return to school and is experiencing stress related health problems. A 16-year-old student with learning disabilities was referred to Prevent for borrowing a book on terrorism from the school library, and a 17-year-old boy who was questioned by police officers about his political and religious views after he was referred to Prevent for expressing solidarity with the Palestinian people. This 17-year-old student also discovered that the police had collected information on him without his or his parent’s knowledge or consent, and was told that this information would be held indefinitely by the police and may be used against him in the future. Prevent is jeopardising the rights of children in the United Kingdom to freedom of expression and education in the name of counter-terrorism. We’re demanding an immediate repeal of the policy. For more information on the impact that the Prevent strategy is having on children in the United Kingdom see Rights Watch (UK)'s landmark report Preventing Education? Human Rights and UK Counter-Terrorism Policy in Schools http://rwuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/preventing-education-final-to-print-3.compressed-1.pdf

It is important because the promises made under this deal was buildings would be constructed and maintain to a high standards. The report found out that many buildings were poorly built and many circumstances dangerous to the occupants. As usual no government minister,health board trust or local authorities wanted to appear on the programme to defend the PFI. As it stands the British tax payer will have to pick up the repair bills.

Too many innocent lives have been lost - Statistics ref BBC: In 2015 - Some 13,286 people were killed in the US by firearms, according to the Gun Violence Archive, and 26,819 people were injured those figures exclude suicide - There were 372 mass shootings in the US in 2015, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870, this is according to the Mass Shooting Tracker, which catalogues such incidents. A mass shooting is defined as a single shooting incident which kills or injures four or more people, including the assailant.. A third of the worlds gun crime is in America. How can Americans show the world that they are a nation of peace and freedom when you have so much gun crime, within America and unfair documented shootings of black individuals?. The world is looking on - observing America's gun laws with great pity - you do not need guns - to show you're a nation of peace - you need friendship and calm. If you believe America should make an amendment to their guns laws - to save lives - then please sign this petition and help make a difference. Thank you -Please share this on Facebook and Twitter.

It is important that the people of Britain stand up for real democracy, and most importantly, we owe someone who died standing up for true democracy justice! Now is the time to stand up for democracy in Britain more than ever before!!

We were witnessing an important, serious and extremely sombre moment in our nation's history. A time when we are being asked to cast our eyes back on decisions that have led to loss of life, loss of limb and loss of family both here and in Iraq. In addition to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed, 179 British service personnel and 23 British civilians lost their lives as a result of the conflict this country entered into in 2003. The Chilcot Report was commissioned so that we could responsibly, maturely and with gravity look back and reflect on those events and to draw lessons for the future. The families of British servicemen and civilians killed in Iraq have awaited this day for answers, so that perhaps they may find some closure and to allow their grief to finally end. And in that forum, at a time when respect for the dead was of the utmost importance, Ian Austin felt it appropriate to act like a schoolyard bully and to attempt to shout down the moving statement made by the Leader of the Labour Party. The utter disrespect that Ian Austin has shown towards Parliament, but much more importantly the bereaved, is quite frankly disgusting. _________________________________________________________________________ This petition has been started by a member of public and not 38 Degrees. 38 Degrees is a non-party political organisation, with no links to any political parties. If there's a campaign that you'd like to run why not start your own petition here: http://38d.gs/start-your-petition

We have seen politics take a shift in the UK, but I believe if we keep the same old voting system, then real change will not happen. Parliament must be more accountable to the people and the people must feel they can be a full member in the process. The recent ER referendum showed people what to be engaged with issues, but first past the post creates safe seats and people feel disenfranchised and don't bother voting. PR will give people the same connection as the referendum did.

The Brexit referendum result has meant that we, the British people have no idea what our government plans to do on our behalf. We need a say in the changes that are to come about.

Legal Spark was formed as a result of the crisis in legal aid. People were going without representation because they could not afford a lawyer. This is particularly the case for disabled people. No one else would do this type of work, as it was deemed too expensive, not financially viable and also too complex. Daniel Donaldson, a disabled Solicitor, set up Legal Spark with the Support of the Scottish Institute for Enterprise under their Young Innovators Challenge 2015 programme. Daniel wanted to develop creative solutions to help people access justice and to fix the exclusion that disabled people face from the legal system. Daniel spent one year talking to the Law Society about this issue, highlighting that it was important that everyone could access a lawyer. Legal Spark consulted with the Chief Executive (Lorna Jack), the Head of Professional Practice, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar (James Ness) and the Secretary to the Civil Legal Aid Quality Assurance Committee (Hannah Sayers) amongst others. A document was prepared that explained what Legal Spark was planning to do. The Law Society accepted this document and did not object. The Law Society encouraged Legal Spark and found their approach "refreshing" and "innovative". Legal Spark was granted permission to do Legal Aid work in November 2015, and a compliance certificate was issued in December 2015. Legal Spark began helping the many disabled people that needed their help and began to have success. In April 2016, the Law Society decided that they had made an "error" and instructed Legal Spark to stop all Legal Aid work by Thursday 30 June 2016. By this stage, Legal Spark had a number of clients, with active and complex cases, some of which were about to go to Court. "A" is one such client. They had experienced awful disability discrimination from a University. They were not given adequate support to help them during a course, and had to leave. Additionally, Legal Spark uncovered evidence that the University's staff had used "unprofessional language" in their approach to "A". This case has now been lodged in Court. "B" is another client adversely affected by this decision. B is also disabled and is housebound. They had tried to find a lawyer for sometime but because of their rural location in the Highlands there were no Solicitors available to help. Legal Spark took on this case and was successful (in part) in achieving a resolution for B. However, because B had been adversely affected by a decision of Highland Council, and had lost out financially, the case may need to go to Court. B is unable to find anyone else to help them. These are only two examples of where Legal Spark is making a difference, there are others too. Since establishing Legal Spark, Daniel Donaldson has not drawn a salary and has used some of his own money to sustain the Legal Practice while it develops and is able to stand on its own feet. Legal Spark has also grown to enable it to employ staff and provide much need paid employment to some disabled people and unemployed law graduates. The Legal Aid certificate meant that Legal Spark could help people who could not access help elsewhere. Now "A", "B" and other will have to go without representation because of the Law Society of Scotland's failures. The Law Society's Chief Executive (Lorna Jack)says that they have to act in the public interest. The Director of Regulation (Philip Yelland) shares this view. 1. Where is the public interest in denying disabled people representation? 2. Also, where is the public interest is giving permission to do Legal Aid work only to revoke that permission 6 months later? The Law Society say that there are other Solicitors who can help, however this is not true. Legal Spark contacted 134 Civil Legal Aid lawyers with advertised specialism in discrimination law. Even the biggest Legal Aid firm in Scotland could not help. The Law Society has said that this will cause Legal Spark’s disabled client’s “inconvenience”. This is an offensive comment; they have never met any client, they have ignored client’s opinions, and also refused to acknowledge that they will suffer substantial prejudice in their cases because of the Law Society’s decision. This petition is addressed to the Law Society and the Scottish Legal Aid Board. It is important that you fulfil your roles correctly. Overturn your decision to stop Legal Spark doing legal aid work, remedy the mistake you have made and apologise. This is the only way you can restore public trust and continue to say you act in the public interest. Allow Legal Spark, and their clients the opportunity to continue to work together for the public interest and tackle the horrors faced by disabled people on a daily basis.

As the ringleader of the Brexit campaign he has no right to stay in the European Parliament. He is an embarrassment to the UK and offensive to our European counterparts. He has run away now that the referendum has happened as have the others, the best he could do is give up his seat in a house he doesn't want to be in. Equally he should never be allowed to stand for this role again. As his campaign was based on the lie of diverting a false amount to the NHS he should divert any pension from the EU (that he has pushed us to leave) and give it to a charity associated with the NHS.