It’s been a while coming but it has been revealed that TerraQuest has been chosen by DCLG to partner with them in a joint venture to provide the ongoing delivery and commercialisation of the Planning Portal service. This has been quietly processed to avoid the public having their say. The joint venture has claimed it will not charge applicants or LPAs for using the Portal’s 1App planning application service [yet] and that a new and improved 1App and website will be delivered by TerraQuest’s prime subcontractor Civica, later in 2015. They say existing service will remain in place until the new website is launched – they promise there will be no disruption to the public, but how can privatisation of a core planning service be in the public interest? It is the intention to transfer staff to the new business before the end of the financial year however the JV is subject to final negotiation and therefore any questions regarding the process of commercialisation should be urgently directed to the Minister to question how the government can justify this conflict and prevent this public service being privatised. Why privatise something that is not intended to make money and that is presently free to everyone?

Because these charges would impede local businesses, especially hoteliers and guesthouse owners, whose guests would have to pay for parking whilst another hotel's guests down the road would not. One hotelier calculated that the parking charges would cost £8,000 per year, due to the amount of time their staff would spend explaining the parking situation to guests and administering permits.

He defends himself by stating that there were risks and saying he thought the people had the right know. But he completely ignored that rules are for everybody. They do not bend for any group no matter the opinion of those who work under them. By boasting about it in a speech to his rich cronies he has shown an arrogance beyond belief and total disregard for the Scottish people, by not allowing them to assess the risks (which he himself played a large part in manufacturing) for themselves to make up their own minds. Instead he wholeheartedly helped to build and promote possibly the most frightening and effective of the NO scare stories.

It is hard enough to make ends meet in the current financial state of the UK. Having banks charge exorbitant fees to make up for their losses when they have been fined for illegal activities is beyond belief. It must stop now.

It is making the lives of non-resident father's (who often experience debt, drink/drug problems, unemployment & PAS as a result of broken relationships) a misery, sometimes taking extortionate amounts of money direct from their wage packet, irrespective of being on an IVA programme, having massive travel costs to see their child etc). Also, the blanket 15% - often higher to address arrears which fathers often incur due to dispute with mother on separation - is unfair and should be lower. The mother often chooses to leave and has to bear responsibility for this. Plus she gets benefits for having children, so is doubly rewarded.

The hospital is used by many patients with chronic health conditions that require regular tests, meaning some people could pay large amounts in parking charges over the year. It amounts to a tax for being ill. Furthermore, all revenue from fines imposed goes to ParkingEye, the contractor managing the site, not the hospital.

At a time where council budget cuts are rolling back central support for households, Energy Solutions must be funded to provide vital, complex services to vulnerable families and individuals in crisis due to cold living conditions and fuel poverty. We can save £££s for the local authority, Public Health and the NHS. We ask the Council to fund a bridging period of at least six months, to allow discussions that will lead to a sustainable, results driven, funding programme based around savings made to departmental budgets as a result of affordable warmth measures and financial capability services.

At a time where council budget cuts are rolling back central support for households, Energy Solutions must be funded to provide vital, complex services to vulnerable families and individuals in crisis due to cold living conditions and fuel poverty. We can save £££s for the local authority, Public Health and the NHS. We ask the Council to fund a bridging period of at least six months, to allow discussions that will lead to a sustainable, results driven, funding programme based around savings made to departmental budgets as a result of affordable warmth measures and financial capability services.

Recent cuts have lead to unnecessary deaths, as funding has been cut too far back for these services to function. People with critical illness, such as heart and even strokes had to wait 15 minutes before an ambulance appeared. Police can not attend emergency calls, as manpower has been cut. A&E is over stretched with 4 hour queues as we had nearly 15 years ago, due to unnecessary cuts by East Cambridgeshire county council. People are being placed in unnecessary range and death, as emergency services have been cut far to far. Government has falsified their statements of supporting the NHS, as they talk about a few extra millions added this winter, when in fact they have cut NHS funding by £30 billion plus. This was a tactic to be able to say that the NHS needs to be privatised, which in fact will cost as far more than we have paid so far, as shareholders expect huge shareholding premiums. Be not be fooled. the NHS worked fine, not perfectly but it was good. It was just mismanaged by various governments in the last 30 to 40 years, but in particular in the last 20 years.

Surely, when so many people throughout Britain are in poverty regardless of how hard they try to work their way out of it, we can agree that to put massive amounts of public funding in to an obsolete defence system is unjustifiable, and to do so without the consent of the public is indefensible. Read more here: http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/labour-mps-to-snub-commons-trident-debate.116412304 http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/17/trident-future-election-agenda-costs-spiral-nuclear-submarines

Because I feel it is taking money unfairly from single parents to provide for their one or more children.

For our national identity.