Closing down library services is a short-sighted and irresponsible plan. Public libraries are an essential part of a functioning literate nation and play an important role in the life of the community. Our libraries are where people come together: they are a place where people come off the street to read the papers or use a computer; where kids do homework; where parents bring their toddlers to encourage a love of books; where diverse groups can meet..the list goes on.

As you read this description,, a forest area the size of 20 football fields will be lost for paper production use alone. Schools use mountains of paper each day. The average secondary school produces 22kg of waste per pupil each academic year. The figure for primary schools is even higher at 45kg per pupil. Yet some schools simply discard of their paper wastage with their regular waste. To ensure environmental sustainability in the UK's independent and state education sectors, it is time to introduce strict legislation which will prosecute schools who do not introduce the necessary infrastructure to recycle all paper waste and introduce sustainable paper usage policies.

Today, I walked past a gentleman near the Watershed who was playing his trumpet to a jazz track. It was wonderful to hear live music of such good caliber being performed for the general public. I stopped to listen to at least three pieces, and I applauded for each one. I dug into my wallet and pulled out a handful of coins and tossed them into his tipping hat, then handed him my business card (I'm a private piano teacher) and told him to give me a call if he ever wanted an accompanist. Later this afternoon, I walked past a woman named Lily Bell, whom I've seen before in Broadmead selling her beautiful cards and prints featuring her original artwork. But today, Lily had no artwork to sell. Instead, she was writing with a fat black marker on a white piece of poster board, "POLICE HAVE TAKEN MY ART AFTER I KEEP PAYING LICENCE FEES. I WAS MAKING AN HONEST LIVING, NOW DEGRADED TO..." She didn't get to finish her sign because I began questioning her regarding the details. She explained that she has already applied for her street vendor's licence but hadn't yet received it. She had no proof that she paid for her permit, so the police confiscated her artwork. She is a peaceful woman who is homeless and trying to sell her original art to help make a decent living without panhandling or begging for handouts. And now, she has no artwork to sell, no place to live, and no where to turn. I think it is unfair that the police have taken what is rightfully hers in order to discourage her from selling on the street. She doesn't want a hand out--she wants a hand up. She needs her community to have her back.

In the interests of fairness, to punish all the children of a class because of misbehaviour of one or two cannot be acceptable. It demoralises the children who try hard to be good and are consistently well behaved members of the class. Many well behaved children find this collective punishment very upsetting and unfair. It also encourages bullying - in the sense that by using peer pressure as a form of control to bully the mis-behaving child into behaving because the rest of the class are expected to be upset at being punished for another child's poor behaviour. This is outdated and there are many better methods of improving behaviour from children.

The release of the Panama Papers has shown that tax avoidance/evasion is still a massive problem allowing the greed of a rich elite to rob HMRC of £10's billions which could be used to fund Education, Welfare or the NHS, instead of us having to have ideological austerity forced on us. No MP, and certainly no Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet member should be found to be making any kind of gain from offshore accounts/tax avoidance schemes so, In the interests of transparency and in the public interest all Cabinet/Shadow Cabinet ministers should make their Tax Returns public to show they are not using any tax avoidance schemes and there is no conflict of interest.

In recent years the NUS has become a laughing stock that many students no longer feels represents them or their best interests. The curtailing of free speech and a proliferation in censorship have made themselves uncomfortably common occurrences on a local and national level, this has to stop. Non-platforming speakers that the NUS does not see eye-to-eye with and creating "safe spaces" sterile of conflicting opinions doesn't solve anything, it is un-academic and makes UK University students seem like petulant children whenever we find an idea we disagree with. Students deserve better than this, we want debate, to challenge and be challenged, that is what University should be about. Not to be molly-coddled, and our fragile points of view "protected" from views that differ to ours. People with unacceptable views must be argued with, not banned. We also wish to see and end to the unbelievable representation rankings in the LGBTQI division. Recently it was decided that gay male students do not deserve the same level of representation in this division anymore because they are 'not oppressed enough', by NUS standards. An assumption that is not necessarily true to life. This is an unacceptable display of discrimination based on orientation and gender that the NUS has previously prided itself on stamping out, yet now is guilty of. Irony. The banning of certain items of clothing and decorations, especially at Universities such as Manchester truly trivialize the issues that the actions are meant to be in aid of and make a mockery of the real advancements in social justice that were achieved by our forebears. For these reasons I am calling for the NUS leadership to take in to account our collective displeasure with the direction the NUS has taken and demand that we be allowed to re-elect our national and local representatives in the near future. It should also be made clear where the candidates stand on the above mentioned issues: "Safe spaces", no-platforming, and LGBTQI representation, so that students may make an informed choice on who they elect.

There are a lot of MIND Service Users who have been seriously affected by reduced services, leaving them vulnerable and less able to cope

This is very important because of the fact that Donald Trumps ideals and proposition are flawed and are frankly ludicrous. For example: a Mexican / American boarder wall, a ban of Muslims entering the US, War on ISIS ( this issue need to be handled with care, not weapons) and finally women being criminalised for having abortions.

The above MPs are examples of unpopular unqualified Secretaries of State (SOS) and illustrate the obvious need for a move away from the "lucky dip" approach to assigning secretaries of states. In contrast, teachers and nurses have to study, have to complete Personal and Professional Development (PPD) reflective diaries in order to reflect, learn and improve their critical thinking skills and practice, as well as complete continued professional development (CPD). This would be done with reference to current peer reviewed articles and judged by qualified higher level academics. The same should be expected of those in positions of Power, like Secretaries of State (SOS). Here are alternatives to the "lucky dip" approach: The appointed must... 1. have an appropriate qualification in the field that has had a minimum of 1 year practice placement, or... 2. complete a compulsory six month practice placement, one month pertaining to different levels of practice in the field (that will help the person to obtain a holistic view of their area responsibility). Furthermore, five qualified advisors must be appointed (one for each year of office), who vote on the secretary's decisions. The appointed person in this option will be payed less as they lack the qualifications and the difference will be payed to their advisors, or.... 3. be supported by five (one for each year of office) qualified specialists put forward by the elected party, these are then voted in by professionals who work in the field.

Cadbury was a man who cared for his workers, by building them houses, whereas Kraft has made a lot of people redundant in the UK. The chocolate isn't the same as it was before Kraft bought it, therefore the name is a deception and should be removed.

It is up to the dog owner to decide whether they microchip their beloved dog. What is to stop a dog thief from mutilating a dog to remove the chip anyway.

Because we're not doing enough and hundreds of children are left unprotected, unmonitored and are going missing,