As part of its claim to be a modern democracy, the UK has a nominal commitment to defend freedom of speech and freedom of the press. This implies accepting the right of those with alternative views to have their voices heard, even if those views challenge governments and vested economic interests.

Because these people are youngsters

To discourage people from gambling

Fast food is a health hazard. It is definitely unhealthy, non-nutritious, and contains huge amounts of fat. It is dangerous to health, causing obesity and heart attacks amongst other problems. Far too many people are using them for the source of their main meal of the day. The health problems caused cost the National Health Service millions of pounds a year. As with smoking, prevention is better than cure.

Barrowland Park provides a public open space for Glasgow that acted as a key gateway to the east end of the city - on a key route to Commonwealth Games venues. Barrowland Park is a typical example of what a commonwealth games legacy should be. It cost £725,000 of public money and is an excellent example of what was needed to make the east end of Glasgow more welcoming. The park is well used and many visitors from all over the country as well as locals have commented on how it enhances the Gallowgate. To remove the park would be an unbelievable waste of public money!

To support vulnerable and sick children and their families. There are many dreadful diseases and afflictions that mercifully most of us have neither knowledge or experience of. The NHS can only do so much; often there is no effective treatment or cure. The children and their families have to endure and need support to do so. Quality of life for children with life limiting or terminal illness if so important. Support for their families and siblings is vital. Sadly too many children have no or inadequate families and as a society we need to support them to develop into mature citizens who are "whole" and can lead fulfilling and worthwhile lives not only to their own benefit but for the good of society as a whole

Teignbridge District Council intends to issue a compulsory purchase order to force a a farmer off his farm in Devon so that they can use the land for a country park for SANGS (sustainable alternative natural green-space). The farm land has been farmed by the same family for over 60 years, and is a mixture of arable, sheep and cows. The council maintain that they are required to offset the loss of land a couple of miles away, and that they need to provide alternative green space. However, putting a park on this farmer’s land would require car parks to be built, possibly another road, and people using it would need to drive there. Warren Farm is adjacent to South West Water’s sewage works, and we understand that Natural England advises that ‘Sangs’ should not be in close proximity. (Appendix 4: Natural England SANGS Guidance dated 03.07.07, "SANGS must be free from unpleasant intrusions (e.g. sewage treatment works smells etc"). Cllr John Goodey, of Teignbridge District Council, states that Warren Farm would be the ideal location for the SANGS (necessary because of the 1,200 new homes being built in Dawlish), and that it ticks all the boxes for Natural England. As well as being adjacent to a sewage works for South West Water, it is Grade 1 agricultural land. In Exminster, still managed by TDC, the land for SANGS was provided by the developers when they built all the new houses there. If Cllr Goodey states that this SANGS location is ideal as it would protect the nature reserve at Dawlish Warren, why did Teignbridge D.C. give permission for houses to built there a few years ago - Sandpipers Court - if they are so concerned. The farm has been farmed with countryside preservation to the fore for the last decade, and it is a habitat and feeding ground of the endangered cirl bunting, and also the endangered snipe. The way that the Warren Farm is managed benefits the local environment and wildlife through countryside stewardship, and should be promoted and recognised. How can it be morally justified that a council can force a farmer off his land and out of business in order to provide land for green space in order that developers can build houses on other green space? The land is being usefully used for agriculture, and is not an eyesore, and there are public footpaths across and around some of the fields. It is both morally and ethically wrong to prevent a farmer from growing food on a well-managed farm in this world of food shortages. There is land currently for sale in close vicinity, why can the council not buy that land which is actually for sale? Another option would be to open up the Cofton woodland walks to the general public - the land is presently already parkland and goes down to the Warren, and this could be arranged with the owners without putting them out of business. Alternatively, Cllr Humphrey Clemens is a tenant farmer on farmland owned by Devon County Council, part of which is on the coast adjacent to Smugglers' Inn, and has excellent, possibly even better coastal views than Warren Farm. This land is already owned by Devon C.C., so should be a much cheaper option, and would have the added benefit of attracting people away from the Dawlish Warren nature reserve, and thereby protecting it. Britain...imports 40% of the total food consumed and the proportion is rising (http://www.foodsecurity.ac.uk/issue/uk.html, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council), so why are we getting rid of quality farmland, if this plan by Teignbridge DC goes ahead. If this compulsory purchase order of quality working farm-land is allowed to go ahead, what is there to prevent Teignbridge District Council issuing further compulsory purchase orders in the future? We the undersigned hereby oppose Teignbridge District Council's proposed compulsory purchase order of Warren Farm, and urge you to use your powers in Government to prevent this.

I feel that this is a truely shocking piece of news that the BBC are keeping this money in a bank account gaining interest and investing it in other things and all the while they want us to keep donating. The Slogan for the appeal say's All the money raised goes to children in Need. I beleave this is a kick in the teeth to many wonderful people who spend hard earned cash to donate to such a wonderful cause. Please tell the BBC to get this money to those who need it and stop making money from it for themselves.

The UK Wild Otter Trust believes that by installing road warning signs and tunnels under new and existing highways that have been identified as having an Otter population, we can reduce the number of deaths caused by traffic. Currently, we are losing hundreds if not thousands of Otters to road traffic collisions every year and this will rise as the volume of traffic increases and the Otter population grows.

Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council is attempting to save money by drastically cutting the staffing levels of its library service to the point where we question whether it is in danger of breaching its obligations under the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964. It is proposing to reduce the opening hours of libraries at a time when it is also requiring Wirral residents to communicate with the authority digitally via the internet. Residents who cannot afford broadband must rely on computers in their local libraries. The people who are trained to help them are the very librarians whose jobs are under threat. These proposed cuts will disproportionally affect the poorer people of the borough and also young people who use libraries for research and as a safe,supportive and quiet place for completing.homework and projects. At a time when the NHS is flagging up that the underlying cause of many illnesses is isolation and loneliness, our Local Authority is planning to restrict access to a valuable service which provides community cohesion and support to thousands of the most vulnerable people in our borough.

It saves so much energy. Everyone needs the lights on now at 5pm but not everyone is up at 7am! Lighter later campaign run by 10:10 in 2010 was nearly successful. Now people think more about energy and extra leisure and I think it could be successful now if an MP were to introduce it.

Returning fireworks to the visual performance of the true firework production professionals (1970's/'80's) WON'T reduce emergency service costs; (most firework accidents are stray rockets, rockets don't always go BANG. SO colourful non noise producing fireworks can still go into a crowd); reduced work sickness (anxiety / depression won't be reduced, as anything else can cause bouts of this to come on also) Why is this important? Fireworks with an explosive bang excite ex-service people, I now plenty that buy these fireworks themselves!. Pets and people go missing around the time of Diwali, Halloween, Bonfire night , Eid, New years (all), other parties they also go missing around any other time of the year. I would say if you let animals out during these seasons legislation on noisy fireworks won't keep these pets safe as the owners can't do what is best by them for these few weeks a year?. The loud bang is necessary to the firework's impact if that is what you like. You could argue that the colourful part isn't necessary to the effect of a fire work if your are blind or not interested in pretty colours. . Please save our planet's freedom of choice and get this noisy element kept. Let's enjoy the whizz ssshhhh of fireworks and embrace the shotgun effect.