As above too dangerous

In a country that is supposed to be democratic with a media that is supposed to be unbiased it is yet again being wholly biased with its 2015 debates. Asking the usual suspects and then inviting Nigel Farage whilst leaving out other parties is undemocratic and unfair on the electorate who want to hear all parties views and policies so they can make a fair and informed decision on who they want to run their country! : SNP who are now the United Kingdoms third largest political party 80,000 + and rising : Greens who are a bigger party than UKIP : SSP To name just three who deserve the right to be heard equally in the media debates or are the media and the parties invited afraid of the impact that will have in the actual polling stations on the day? We as an electorate demand that all parties are heard equally in the debates in 2015

There have been a lot of complaints from England about subsidising the other nations of the United Kingdom. There is also resentment from the other nations that England dominates all aspects of UK life, from parliament to the BBC and most other aspects of UK culture , language and political direction. As England subsidises the rest of the UK and must therefore be the richest and most able part of the UK, it follows that it must be the most capable of 'going it alone'. Removing England from the UK would therefore allow it to become more successful whilst also allowing the periphery nations, principalities, etc to continue to grow and prosper within the centuries old framework of the current United Kingdom. It will also allow England to make its own decisions on EU membership, immigration control, etc without affecting the position of the rest of the UK.

For too long we have sung "Flower of Scotland" in official capacities despite it not being our national anthem. While the song had a relevance in the late '70s and '80s, we now have a devolved parliament and a collective push to build a better Scotland. What does it say about us that we sing Flower of Scotland? Why then do we consider it appropriate to sing a song which mentions our nearest neighbours, as if to define ourselves, we can only do so by exclaiming what we are not? Why do we sing about an indecisive victory from 700 years ago and not the wealth of ideas, inventions and progresses we have given to the world? Why do we choose not to sing about the wonderful things that make Scotland such a great nation? Why do we choose to sing a slow, backward-looking dirge in an attempt to energise and inspire our sporting teams? It is time for the people of Scotland to have a national anthem that energises and inspires them and their sporting teams. It is time for the people of this proud nation to think about their national anthem and choose a song which better represents them

As more and more pressure is applied on the parents of the children of the future, more hate for this country, by its natives, is being passed down a generation. And soon there will be no patriotism, no english traditions and the necessity for royals, will be no more. It is time to simplify before England dies in the ashes of its own greed.

Kayaking is a wonderful peaceful and healthy form of recreation. But access to the river is very difficult and in places almost dangerous

Because of their nature, political parties will try to control this process so that it is in their best interest. The referendum in Scotland has unveiled a level of mistrust in Westminster. A commission at the request of Her Majesty The Queen would give people faith in the process.

The Unicorn is a symbol of Scotland. As one of the four free-thinking nation states of the UK, it should not be shackled. This implies that the unicorn is a kept animal or slave against it's will. The passport is intrinsic to identity, and the visual symbolism of a chained creature is not representative of the Nation of Scotland or it's people.

The harms of female genital mutilation in all of its forms are well known, and the practice is rightly legally condemned. It is accepted that children have fundamental rights to bodily integrity and self-determination that cannot be outweighed by the wishes of a parent to follow religious or cultural practices. Cutting a child's genitals is a serious affront to these rights, and it can cause irreversible physical and psychological harm. However, in law and public policy this obvious conclusion is only applied to female children, when it is both boys and girls who are at risk from genital cutting. It is our opinion that all children have this same right to bodily integrity, and that this should be reflected in the law. Opponents have claimed that infant circumcision is harmless and has no long-term consequences. However, evidence from the experience of adults circumcised as children, from scientific investigation, and from the statistics of boys who are left with serious physical side effects or who even die as a result of these procedures attests to the physical and psychological harm that it can cause. Genital cutting can affect all children, and can harm all children. It is well past time to make it a thing of the past.

Are you aware the government introduced new legislation last year making it mandatory that young people must stay in some form of fulltime education until the age of 17 years of age, next year it is scheduled to go to 18 years of age before being legally allowed to earn an income. Currently public transport within the UK doesn't reflect this, they are still going by the old law in regards to 16 years of age, The reason the age was set at under16 was because if mandatory to be in fulltime education for a further two years, it takes away their rights from earning an income of their own and the parents and guardians to carry the ever raising costs. This affects everyone either directly or by association, we are officially out of recession so no reason to make this happen as government seem to have not considered this fact. Even now when I contact my local authority which was recently criticized for the leader of the council in Bucks for awarding himself around £250,000,That is more than the prime minister earns by a lot, to run a county. Also Over £100,000 a year is going into the pay packets of 21 council workers across Buckinghamshire, each county isn't that different, as far as I am aware. Here is the link which also includes other county's pay awards to senior staff. http://www.mix96.co.uk/news/local/1359881/100k-pay-packets-for-21-bucks-council-employees/ I was informed they couldn't help given the triple dip recession taking away important public services, Proof that our triple dip recession is over is available at the following link, not sure why the government departments are still using the old excuses of why there is no money, Nor are they celebrating this with their customers that we should not need to pay more for less any longer. http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/Good-news-economy-better-recession/story-21941908-detail/story.html I thank you for your support in signing this petition & for passing it on in advance as I feel folk have had enough of all the shenanigans going on behind closed doors which always lead to us the people paying out more and getting nothing or very little in return. Thank to 38 degree’s for giving me the opportunity of setting up this petition in such a simple way & for all the amazing things you have achieved and will achieved as your organization clearly understands if we stand together we can make the change.

The proposal to abandon Net Neutrality on the internet in favor of a multi-tiered content-biased system is deeply flawed. It would: 1. create a system that inhibits technical innovation by allowing ISPs to choose which technologies their customers can access. 2. create a system that protects entrenched companies while penalizing the start-ups that have been the life blood of the internet. 3. limit access of non-profit organizations that cannot afford "fast-lane" fees. 4. penalize media companies that do not directly own cable or satellite access to consumers. The Internet has flourished under the de facto common carrier ISPs held until recently. It is time for the FCC to declare that ISPs are Common Carriers and hold them to that status. Please exam with an open mind, see the value in net neutrality, to business and private users equal access enables creativity and new business growth. A two tear access to the internet is bad for competion, R&D and the next generation of new world beating businesses. Professionals from the scientific community offer this view and as an MP you must listen to experts who are not in the pocket of lobbyists for example:- http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=75141 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/09/10/favorite_sites_looking_slow_today_its_a_net_neutrality_protest/

People should not have died in an incident that could have been prevented. There needs to be tighter legislation to prevent this ever happening again. Besides the 7 people who died there were others with life changing injuries and even those who appear to have no physical injuries still suffer mentally, this even had a huge affect on the emergency services who attended the incident.