I don't have a TV licence, I don't have one because I do not watch Live Television. I enjoy expanding my mind by reading books and listening to music and Podcasts, if there is a show i am interested in watching I will use Netflix and purchase the DVD. The proposed licence fee changes are unfair to those of us who do not watch live television, the fee pays for the BBC, so they can broadcast shows such as Eastenders, Pointless and Bargain Hunt. A great deal of shows are aimed to entertain elderly viewers, many of whom do not have to pay for a TV licence. Under the new proposals I would be forced to pay for a service I do not want and do not use. This is unfair. Why should people who decide to broaden their minds with books and music rather than watch 'Snog, Marry, Avoid' be forced to pay a lot of money to subsidise those who have nothing better to do with their time.

The Agency Workers Regulations (AWR), which came into force in October 2011, gives agency workers the right to ‘equal treatment’ with the same pay and other basic working conditions as equivalent permanent staff, but this doesn't prevent harrassment, bullying or discrimination. It is because the law that allows verbal termination of employment for agency workers makes them vulnerable to abuse at work place. Full details of the Regulations can be found at https://www.gov.uk/agency-workers-your-rights/your-rights-as-a-temporary-agency-worker The verbal termination of employment gives too much power in the perpetuators of these crimes who are most often the reporting officer or immediate senior employee. We need to prevent it happening in the workplaces and make sure that the employer fulfills duty of care towards an agency worker from day one to the last day. This would happen only if the agency worker is made aware of their rights from day one. That's why we need: a) Induction from the employer and not just the agency b) Written Termination letter from HR A verbal termination of employment doesn't respect dignity of labour and can be unprofessional. A written letter of termination gives an agency worker a dignified exit and a fair opportunity to address grievances, if any. It also encourages senior employees to follow procedures with regard to termination of employment of agency workers, instead of acting on a whim. A written 'employment termination letter' from HR could also be used as a reference by the agency worker for future employments. This would also help the agency worker to feel like a valuable part of the work force, who is respected for their contribution to the workforce instead of being written off as a disposable replacement worker. Also, If all the the councils and government bodies set an example by changing the way they deal with Agency workers, others may follow.

HMRC wrongly and unfairly applied favourable terms to the settlement of 1,100 individuals/businesses it identified from leaked HSBC Swiss files as having evaded paying tax, even though none of the 1,100 cases qualified for the favourable terms. Tax evasion is a criminal offence and the favourable terms offered included immunity from prosecution, penalties from 10% of unpaid tax instead of 200% and a claw back period of 10 rather than 20 years. These favourable terms have cost the British taxpayer up to £100million in tax revenue and the potential of further criminal prosecutions. However it is not too late. As the rules were wrongly applied the decision to offer favourable treatment can be overturned. We can still recover the correct amount of money owed to help fund our public services.

Public provision of water services in Scotland should continue to be a point of pride and a point of principle. Water is a service that should continue to be delivered for the benefit of the people. Public water provision in Scotland has resulted in the lowest average water bills in the UK for both households and businesses. Let's keep it that way by maintaining the responsibility and the benefits of water provision in the hands of the public sector here in Scotland.

There are estimated to be 1000 North Korean refugees living in the UK – that is an incredibly small number. But now the Government has confirmed that Britain will now automatically ship away the small number of North Koreans whom manage to escape from one of the world’s most oppressive regimes and make it to the UK. For North Koreans who do not have any information about the outside world when they escape the country, an option to choose another country to settle in should be guaranteed. A recent court ruling that means Britain regards all North Koreans as South Korean citizens and is likely to refuse them asylum. These people face amazing obstacles in order to escape the brutal regime, including famine (the arduous march), disease, forced labour camps, torture, reprisals on their families including the death penalty (North Korea has a guilt by association policy) and slavery both in North Korea and in China. For those that do cross the Tumen River into China thinking this to be their salvation they then find themselves sold into a life of slavery on the black market or hunted down by North Korean agents and the Chinese authorities to be forcibly repatriated to North Korea where death or starvation awaits. These people risk so much to escape such a ruthless regime in North Korea and Britain now decides not to help and to turn its back on the very, very small number that make it here? North Korea is in a category of its own when it comes to human rights violations. It is a totalitarian state where many people are enslaved and tortured. All forms of freedom of expression are repressed and people are purged using the death penalty, there is mass malnourishment and outside Kim’s Pyongyang it is commonplace for people to starve to death. Amnesty International reports that many North Koreans, including children, are detained in political prison camps and other detention facilities in North Korea. Conditions are dire. Torture is rampant and public execution is common. Many of the prisoners die of malnutrition and overwork. No refugee should be refused or prejudiced on language or cultural difference. Why should Britain cherry pick whom it helps in this way?

It is important that we cultivate a sense of responsibility and honesty within society and the example HSBC have set goes directly against the grain in that regard. We need them to show us how sorry they really are by contributing meaningfully, responsibly and honestly to the society they helped deprive of income.

This is important, because the false guarantee swayed members vote to support the Governments position. It is important to uphold the position that ministers that mislead the house should be sacked.

Already, over 1000 people have died, working in abysmal conditions and searing temperatures on poverty wages in the richest part of the world. It is predicted that if this rate continues, 4000 will have died constructing the facilities for the 2022 World Cup. Workers, upon finding that the pay and conditions are not as described when they were recruited, have told of their passports being retained by the construction companies, forcing them to stay. FIFA has consistently turned a blind eye to this because of the financial implications. It is time for the FA, for once, to put morals before money and unilaterally withdraw from the 2022 tournament. If a leading association takes the lead, others will follow. Human lives are more important than FIFA's arrogance and greed.

Imagine the constant noise, smell, pollution and increased traffic in our area. The proposed site is very close to New southgate Recreation Ground, Several schools, and Nurseries nearby, Oakleigh Road South is already very busy with traffic and Hundreds more lorries would increase Pollution, Noise, accidents and fires. Our environment will be severely compromised as people will be blighted by the constant noise, traffic congestion dirty smelly air which in time will make residents sick from the pollution, the roads will get damaged from the constant heavy traffic, not to mention the value of our homes going down.

We are all familiar with the constant calls which invade our privacy from Tele-Marketing Companies - more often than not from Offshore Calling Centres, such as those based in India who are outside of the reach of our laws. Despite these calls being frustrating, inconvenient & more often than not, downright fraudulent they are still used by leading U.K. based companies as a loophole to get around the Telephone Preference laws which are intended to prevent this. Although we may not be able to stop the Offshore Call Centres entirely, we can, at least, clamp down on those companies that use them. Give the law some power to clamp down on such companies & remove the ever increasing Western market for these Call Centres.

If we can't go to Daycare we just stay at home alone, watching TV all day, we are isolated, depressed and get no exercise. What is the point of getting dressed in the morning if there is nowhere to go? At daycare we have a hot meal, see smiling faces, we can joke and talk about our problems with staff and friends in a way that we can't talk to our family. This gives us joy. We are worried about the 2/3rds of elderly who have now left.. we want them back. The average pension is £120 a week, three days at daycare now costs almost half of our pension. If we don't come to daycare and become depressed and sedentary we are more likely to use expensive services such as personal care, GP surgeries and hospitals. Daycare is a lifeline, many of us cannot get out on our own. Support us to stay fit, healthy, happy and in our own homes - lower the cost of daycare, it will save the council money in the long run.

If this piece of legislation goes ahead then there will be virtually no way to stop nuclear waste dumps being foisted on communities around the UK without any way to challenge them - the Secretary of State would have overall power to enforce anything considered to be of 'National Significance'. This will remove the rights of local authorities to challenge the decision around where to locate these sites.