It is important as people need to be educated how to treat the world around us.

To ensure those entitled get quick and necessary attention, whilst eliminating wasteage on salaries, purchases and other handouts

Democracy was not respected in the referendum of June 23rd 2016 and left thousands of British citizens without a voice. British citizens who had left the United Kingdom more than 15 years ago were not allowed to vote in a referendum that affected their lives greatly. This must not happen again. Those British citizens must have a voice in the General Election on June 8th 2017.

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths. Manchester has a real problem with housing. If you go out on any day in Manchester you will encounter a large number of people who have been forced to sleep on the streets. The number of homeless people is growing every day and lack of affordable housing is a large part of that. But this doesn't just affect them. More affordable housing will help slow the rise of house prices in ever budget. This is a crisis that affects EVERYONE Notes: [1] Current government policy says that developers can expect to make 20% profit on housing they build. That means that if a developer would make 19% profit on a development that included affordable housing, the developer doesn’t have to build any affordable houses. But because of competition laws these reports can be made secret meaning developers have free reign to manipulate the figures in their favour. [2] The Guardian: Revealed: how developers exploit flawed planning system to minimise affordable housing: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jun/25/london-developers-viability-planning-affordable-social-housing-regeneration-oliver-wainwright [3] The Bristol Cable: Councillors strike a blow for transparency regarding housing crisis: https://thebristolcable.org/2016/12/councillors-strike-a-blow-for-transparency-regarding-housing-crisis/ [4] 38 Degrees Weekly Poll: https://home.38degrees.org.uk/2017/04/07/weekly-members-poll-england-northern-ireland-wales/

It affords Trump credibility that is undeserved. Further it will add to the already large,tax payer bill for security for his visit.

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths.

Non Fairtrade chocolates and confectionery products are in reality unethical as unfortunately workers who produce them are not paid a viable income. Globally it does enable them to look after their families in a humane manner! Fairtrade offers them some security and a viable income. It is the very least we as consumers can do!

Because of their height, a small child, when waiting in line for their summer treat, will often be subjected to several minutes of poisonous gas from a diesel or petrol engine. Ice-cream vans tend to station themselves in parks and near playgrounds, meaning the health and safety of all children in the vicinity is compromised. We wouldn't allow a lorry to park next to a group of children and keep their engine running for hours on end, so why do we accept it from an ice-cream van? Several boroughs already insist on using electric vehicles to sell ice-cream in parks. We are calling for a blanket ban of diesel powered ice-cream vans in all parks and outside our homes. This is better for the whole community, including those selling those delicious 99s.

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths.

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths.

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths.

Many good tenants, who have never been late with rent and look after the property are often asked to vacate a property for various reasons. Sometimes the landlord wants to sell, or let it to his friend, or renovate it, or make it into two dwellings instead of one etc etc etc. But if the tenant is in no way at fault this causes them no end of expense and stress. This is happening to a friend of mine at the moment, and also to me. Its happened to me before and to many people I know. I am actually a landlady myself, I rent out a flat I used to live in, so I see both sides of the coin. But I still think if the tenant is not at fault then the landlord should pay compensation in the form of removal costs.