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.

It has been almost forty years since the UN recognised that referring to migrants as 'illegal' is dehumanising, discriminatory, and above all, incorrect. Since 1975, the UN has used either 'undocumented' or 'irregular' to refer to migrants that 'do not fulfil the requirements established by the country of destination to enter, stay, or exercise an economic activity'. As Editor-in-Chief of the BBC Tony Hall has the mandate to implement this change and correct inaccurate reporting. The BBC continues to use the term 'illegal' with no justification. A headline as recent as 15 May 2014 reads: 'Illegal migration to EU rises by nearly half'. As a public service broadcaster and influential media organisation the BBC ought to abide by its own clear editorial guidlines that say: 'We...are committed to achieving due accuracy in all our output...Impartiality lies at the core of the BBC's commitment to its audiences'. Unfounded discrimination against migrants is a clear breach of these standards. Human Rights Watch recently observed, 'The term “illegal”...reinforces prejudices about nationals of a particular country or persons of a particular race.' The term incorrectly suggests that migrants are criminals and encourages prejudiced views about those individuals. Cecilia Malmström, European Commisioner for Home Affairs clarified the issue in 2010. She said, 'Let me be clear about my vocabulary...illegal migrants do not exist. People may come to the EU and might be required to use irregular ways...but no human being is illegal'. This petition supports the use of the word 'undocumented' instead of 'irregular' as 'irregular' retains connotations of otherness and deviation from a perceived norm, marking individuals as abnormal and continuing to estrange migrants. For more information see: http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/06/24/dispatches-why-we-should-outlaw-illegal http://picum.org/picum.org/uploads/file_/TerminologyLeaflet_reprint_FINAL.pdf http://www.un.org/esa/population/migration/index.html

The four-day event every August is Europe's largest balloon fiesta, and is a celebration of a gentle and fairly low-carbon way of getting up in the air. It's a wonderful sight to see the balloons in the sky above Bristol. As such it is a lovely event that local people can support and be proud of. Having a helicopter flying noisily around disturbs the peace of the area, going on all day long on an otherwise peaceful summer weekend. Visiting fighter jets make a horrendous noise for tens of thousands of neighbouring residents, and terrify wildlife. The jet that buzzed over for 20 minutes on the Friday afternoon this year made a deafening noise, shook the earth, shattered the peace over a wide area, and left the unpleasant smell of burnt aviation fuel. These noisy forms of aviation burn huge amounts of fuel, flying in the face of Bristol's credentials as European Green Capital 2015. The extreme noise they produce is at odds with an otherwise peaceful and beautiful event.

The area is one of abundance wildlife and varied plant life and wild flowers. It holds a huge population from shrews to badgers. Aquatic life,songbirds, grass snakes, slow worms, common lizards, adders, it is regularly used by members of the local community and walkers. There is a public right of way/footpath which it seems developers want to incorporate into their site, the pathway existed in 1840 for certain and possibly before. This area also forms part of the Dawley Heritage trail. Road access is poor as is street lighting and it would create a significant hazard having the entrance impede the junction with an historic railway bridge which is currently suffering from vehicle strikes even now.

We, the undersigned members of Unite, were disappointed by Unite's decision, announced on 2 July 2014, to urge the Labour Party to commit to holding a referendum on the UK’s membership of the European Union.[1] We believe this decision by Unite's Executive Council was a mistake. It does not reflect our wishes, it was taken without consulting Unite's members, and it demonstrates race-to-the-bottom politics. We believe the UK should remain a member of the EU because membership enhances UK workers' rights, including via the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.[2] We believe the best way to ensure the UK remains a member of the EU is for political parties to reject referendum calls and instead make the case for continued membership. With no referendum, there would be no risk of the UK exiting the EU. We note that the Conservative Party rejected the Charter when previously in power, and that it is only thanks to the Labour Party that it covers UK workers.[3] We note that because the Conservatives have committed to a parliamentary vote in favour of an in/out referendum on the EU, the only realistic prospect of avoiding such a referendum and saving the Charter is for the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats to commit themselves against such a vote.[4] The Liberal Democrats have already done this.[5] We emphasise that neither this petition, nor the act it requests, brings any injury to or discredit upon Unite or any member of Unite. On the contrary, the act requested would strengthen Unite by demonstrating Unite's commitment to the EU's protection of worker's rights, and would help to forge a Labour Party that will provide a real alternative to the Conservative Party in opposition and at the next General Election. REFERENCES: [1] http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/unite-urges-labour-party-to-hold-eu-referendum/ [2] http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/charter/index_en.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charter_of_Fundamental_Rights_of_the_European_Union&oldid=614017036#Legal_status [3] http://socialrights.net/community-charter-of-fundamental-social-rights-of-workers/ [4] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/02/david-cameron-eu-referendum-pledge-disaster [5] http://www.libdems.org.uk/european_election_manifesto_2014 Image source and license: https://secure.flickr.com/photos/skuds/3736995016/

Parents are often paying this tax for ten years; during which children can need three pairs of shoes a year. This is an unreasonable burden on household budgets already under strain.