Wick pool was built for the people by the people on land donated to the community and the people of Wick raised the money over 20 years to build it. When the School pool fell into disrepair the Public Pool was used by the school-children. A new School-build was later proposed to include a new pool and library. But the public pool was to be sold. Despite a petition from over half the adult population, the Highland Council's proposal to sell the Public Pool on its prime riverside site (and move the library) went ahead. There has been little public consultation, public concerns have been ignored, information is difficult to find. We don't know: what access there will be for adult swimmers, many of whom like myself use the pool to support their health and fitness how those who use the disabled facility will be able to use the new pool what transport would be available or when how the sale money will be spent if this sale is forced through. Now there are problems over the design of the new pool which renders it less suitable. Where we had, though the efforts of the people of Wick, two pools in full use, we are now offered part time use of a pool in a school in a less accessible place. Many people have signed an on-line petition through 38 Degrees. But not everyone is on the internet, so there is a paper petition in some cafes in Wick. Also if you know anyone who cant use the internet but wants to petition for their pool, it would be great if you could help them sign on 38 Degrees within the next 2 weeks. Many thanks for all the support, This is not a good deal for us. We want our pool back.

The area around the Blundell provides a focus for the community. With the pub now closed and boarded off due to vandalism, the scout hut and Air Training Corp are both vulnerable to the increased vandalism the Winter will bring. The takeaway and shop become unsafe in the evening especially during Winter months due to increased youth disorder. Bring back the Dell.

Legal Spark was formed as a result of the crisis in legal aid. People were going without representation because they could not afford a lawyer. This is particularly the case for disabled people. No one else would do this type of work, as it was deemed too expensive, not financially viable and also too complex. Daniel Donaldson, a disabled Solicitor, set up Legal Spark with the Support of the Scottish Institute for Enterprise under their Young Innovators Challenge 2015 programme. Daniel wanted to develop creative solutions to help people access justice and to fix the exclusion that disabled people face from the legal system. Daniel spent one year talking to the Law Society about this issue, highlighting that it was important that everyone could access a lawyer. Legal Spark consulted with the Chief Executive (Lorna Jack), the Head of Professional Practice, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar (James Ness) and the Secretary to the Civil Legal Aid Quality Assurance Committee (Hannah Sayers) amongst others. A document was prepared that explained what Legal Spark was planning to do. The Law Society accepted this document and did not object. The Law Society encouraged Legal Spark and found their approach "refreshing" and "innovative". Legal Spark was granted permission to do Legal Aid work in November 2015, and a compliance certificate was issued in December 2015. Legal Spark began helping the many disabled people that needed their help and began to have success. In April 2016, the Law Society decided that they had made an "error" and instructed Legal Spark to stop all Legal Aid work by Thursday 30 June 2016. By this stage, Legal Spark had a number of clients, with active and complex cases, some of which were about to go to Court. "A" is one such client. They had experienced awful disability discrimination from a University. They were not given adequate support to help them during a course, and had to leave. Additionally, Legal Spark uncovered evidence that the University's staff had used "unprofessional language" in their approach to "A". This case has now been lodged in Court. "B" is another client adversely affected by this decision. B is also disabled and is housebound. They had tried to find a lawyer for sometime but because of their rural location in the Highlands there were no Solicitors available to help. Legal Spark took on this case and was successful (in part) in achieving a resolution for B. However, because B had been adversely affected by a decision of Highland Council, and had lost out financially, the case may need to go to Court. B is unable to find anyone else to help them. These are only two examples of where Legal Spark is making a difference, there are others too. Since establishing Legal Spark, Daniel Donaldson has not drawn a salary and has used some of his own money to sustain the Legal Practice while it develops and is able to stand on its own feet. Legal Spark has also grown to enable it to employ staff and provide much need paid employment to some disabled people and unemployed law graduates. The Legal Aid certificate meant that Legal Spark could help people who could not access help elsewhere. Now "A", "B" and other will have to go without representation because of the Law Society of Scotland's failures. The Law Society's Chief Executive (Lorna Jack)says that they have to act in the public interest. The Director of Regulation (Philip Yelland) shares this view. 1. Where is the public interest in denying disabled people representation? 2. Also, where is the public interest is giving permission to do Legal Aid work only to revoke that permission 6 months later? The Law Society say that there are other Solicitors who can help, however this is not true. Legal Spark contacted 134 Civil Legal Aid lawyers with advertised specialism in discrimination law. Even the biggest Legal Aid firm in Scotland could not help. The Law Society has said that this will cause Legal Spark’s disabled client’s “inconvenience”. This is an offensive comment; they have never met any client, they have ignored client’s opinions, and also refused to acknowledge that they will suffer substantial prejudice in their cases because of the Law Society’s decision. This petition is addressed to the Law Society and the Scottish Legal Aid Board. It is important that you fulfil your roles correctly. Overturn your decision to stop Legal Spark doing legal aid work, remedy the mistake you have made and apologise. This is the only way you can restore public trust and continue to say you act in the public interest. Allow Legal Spark, and their clients the opportunity to continue to work together for the public interest and tackle the horrors faced by disabled people on a daily basis.

Major housing developments in Ilford South are being advanced by the Council at an alarming rate. In the Draft Redbridge Local Plan 2015-2030 it is proposed that 10,000 units of housing will be built in Ilford South in the next 15 years. This is about 74% of the total housing proposed for Redbridge. This is a heavy burden for the south of the borough and a bias in allocation. Ilford is at a critical point in its history where the pressure on the council to meet housing targets is driving ill-conceived and insensitive high-density developments. There are grave concerns about this due to the following: There will be a huge increase in population in the already most densely populated part of the borough. There are already pressures on public services such as education and health facilities; transport and parking and this will add to the pressures. There will be the negative effects of multiple high rise buildings in terms of overshadowing, invasion of privacy, wind tunnelling etc The high-rise buildings and the residential mix proposed are not suitable for the specific housing needs of the local area and we fear the definition of 'affordable' will simply not be realistic. As part of this plan, the development of the Harrison Gibson building in Ilford High Road is currently being consulted on. This proposal includes a high-rise of 30 storeys, the same as Pioneer Point. Please look at our sister petition regarding this. Read more in the Ilford Recorder http://www.ilfordrecorder.co.uk/news/politics/residents_fears_over_development_in_south_of_redbridge_1_4600711

This will help decrease the democratic deficit in the UK, and will abolish the argument that 16+ year olds are clueless about politics. Our aims also include to educate the basics of taxing, saving and living well with money, eradicating debt in our future generations lives.

More & more family homes are being turned into multiple occupancy housing, squeezing up to 10 small bedsits into one terrace house. Conditions are poor to dangerous for the tenants, extra stress is put on the local community & services. Council resources are drained as some landlords are claiming around £1200 pm per bedsit, meaning that more than double the number of people could be housed decently if the coucil stopped dealing with such landlords. People deserve safe, secure, affordable council housing. The following should help give an example of how this affects both tenants & neighbours. An existing development has already caused problems such as raw sewage backing up into our property, rats, mice, anti-social behaviour, noise, rubbish spilling out into street etc. Tenants I have spoken with live in cramped, damp, unhealthy conditions and are somewhat reluctant to speak out against the landlords. In our direct dealings with the landlord, he has not taken remedial action without council involvement and has been agressive at times. At least 2 further developments are underway within doors of each other, with the developers exploiting loopholes in planning to increase the number of available bedsits. Everyone suffers - except the slum landlord.

Do you need to know? I have experienced racism. For a white English native this is probably unusual. For me, the thing that I most wanted was for a load of random people to come up to me and tell me they're glad I'm here. When you hear one racist outburst, you immediately feel that many people must think the same way but don't express it. You wonder what proportion of people begrudge your presence. In my experience, the people who aren't racist are embarrassed by those who are. They feel that it's better to just ignore them and act as though they don't exist. But what is really needed, is for people to come and admit, yes there are some, but not me, and not me, and not me, and not me. WE are ALL happy that you are one of US.

After a closely fought contest, and the final result which is beyond contention, we must confront the prospect that a portion of the referendum campaigning was based on misinformation, and sometimes outright lying. This petition seeks to draw attention to this, given that the tactics used in this referendum on both sides, such as scaremongering, will more than likely be utilised again, and are damaging to the democratic character of this country. We ask that powers against these be expanded from its current form: “While we have regulatory duties relating to campaign spending, including in relation to political advertising/election material, we have very few powers to deal with the content of material published by candidates and parties, or their general conduct. In most cases we will not be able to deal with such complaints, which should instead be made directly to the party or candidate responsible for the material.” http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/complaints

Barbecues on London Fields have been trialled for several years and were approved again for 2017. Barbecues are banned in most of the parks of London on safety and health grounds. It is the only park in Hackney where the Council overlooks their own strict bye-laws banning fires in parks. As a result, London Fields is now popularised through social media to the point that on a sunny summer weekend it attracts thousands of visitors and tourists from all across London and beyond. The smoke from BBQs and fires makes it impossible for residents neighbouring the park to open their windows on hot summer days. Depending on the wind, dense smoke carries across the park in different directions - into houses and flats, up to the Lido or across the children's playgrounds. The smoke is unpleasant and represents a significant pollution risk, especially for people with breathing difficulties. A highly toxic particle known as PM2.5 is released into the atmosphere when burning barbecues. There is no safe level of PM2.5 and it can: * suppress lung function in children * cause heart disease and strokes * cause and aggravate asthma * cause lung cancer [Source: "Every Breath We Take", RCP / RCPCH pub. Feb 2016] In the summer of 2105 an investigation by King's College London pollution team showed toxic PM2.5 air pollution levels during barbecues on Highbury Fields, Islington, to be up to 3 times the kerbside levels at one of London's busiest roads in Marylebone. In 2013 a study involving 312,944 people in nine European countries revealed there was no safe level of particulates. Hackney Council has an air pollution plan (http://www.hackney.gov.uk/air-pollution) and an air quality action plan (http://www.hackney.gov.uk/air-quality-action-plan) - and does nothing to stop toxic smoke over children's play areas in the Fields. Anti-social behaviour is an ever-present worry with small groups staying in the park overnight. Mounds of litter are left behind, overflowing the many extra bins provided. On Sundays and Mondays, parts of the park are unusable by local residents until clear-ups are undertaken, bins are left on fire and discarded food attracts rats. Every summer this costs Hackney council-tax payers a potential £80,000 or more in extra bins, refuse disposal, signs, security and damage repairs to the park. According to an FOI request, £57,000 alone is paying for a security firm to watch just the BBQ area all summer long*. To put this in perspective - if the park charged 800 visitors every week for the whole summer £5 to BBQ (15 weekends) it would only raise £60,000 - and not cover those costs. And the security is there only on weekends - and BBQs are lit every day during the summer. London Fields is a small park. It just cannot sustain this pressure on such a tiny piece of land. It is time to call an end to a failed experiment and treat London Fields like any other Hackney Park – a green space which visitors should respect and use with care. Local people should not have to dread sunny weekends. And what if there were no barbecues? Well, they are no real loss to anyone; *picnics* are rather similar in nature but much less annoying and polluting - and they are fun, cheaper, eco-friendly, no smoke, no fire, less mess (except perhaps for egg sandwiches) and they can be eaten anywhere, in any park, in any neighbourhood, not just a tiny, barren corner of London Fields. So please sign this petition and share with your friends on Facebook, Twitter and email - and in the street - to ask the Mayor and Hackney Council to end this abuse of the Fields. * Hackney Council claim the security is for the whole of the park; this is not what the security staff say - or do.

Bernard was stabbed as he tried to protect Labour MP Jo Cox. He showed true British spirit in tackling the man with a gun and a knife. So many people today would stand by and let things happen, but this 77 year old pensioner was incredibly brave and had the guts to do something. The George Cross is the highest bravery honour that can be given to non-military personnel. Good people need to be recognised.

Like me you were probably angered and saddened by the disgraceful scenes of English football fans in Lille mocking and humiliating begging children. One seven year old was even reported to have been forced to down a pint of beer in exchange for a handful of coins, others to fight for the 'prize' of small change. It is possible that a number of these children were refugees fleeing the conflict in Syria. Imagine fleeing your homeland, maybe losing contact with your mum and dad and walking across Europe only to be confronted by this cruelty and indignity. Wherever the children are from, the sight of wealthy men getting their entertainment from humiliating children reduced to begging on the streets was repulsive. Like you these scenes made me feel ashamed to be English, ashamed to be a football supporter and powerless to do anything. The French police are unable to stop this behaviour until a crime is committed. However, the Football Association does have it in their power to identify and ban supporters from buying tickets for its games and frequently works with the police to prevent them from travelling abroad. It also has the power to speak out, through its officials, manager and players, against this behaviour which shames us all. But I am writing this two days after the first reports and it has done nothing. There is a precedent to this: earlier in 2016 PSV Eindhoven supporters were caught on camera similarly humiliating people begging in Madrid. The PSV Eindhoven club immediately issued a video and written statement promising to identify and issue banning orders to those involved. You can read their statement here: http://www.psv.nl/english-psv/news/article/gerbrands-these-are-not-our-moral-values-and-ethical-norms.htm There is no reason at all why the English FA can't do the same. By not speaking out and not pursuing those responsible the FA are effectively saying that the experience these children have gone through doesn't matter. Please sign below and let's encourage the FA to send an important signal that we have not lost our compassion and humanity and that bullying children cannot go unpunished. Thank you.

On 24th July 2016, Go North East will remove the 11 and 11a bus services. These buses provide vital links between villages in Western Gateshead with Newcastle City Centre, including Blackhall Mill, Chopwell, High Spen, Greenside, Crawcrook and Ryton. Without the 11 and 11a services, local people face severe difficulty when travelling around their local area. I commute from Ryton to the Scotswood Road area of Newcastle every weekday. With the removal of the 11 and 11a buses in July, there will be NO direct bus from Ryton and several surrounding villages to Newcastle City Centre. Go North East have proposed to replace the cancelled services with a new 10x route, which will serve local areas 'at peak times' only: as an example, the new 10x from Ryton to Newcastle is only running at the 'peak' time of 7.25am - 7.55am! Go North East evidently believe that offering a replacement bus service for only 30 minutes a day on week days is enough. This is incredibly unreasonable: customers have found that the early morning 11 and 11a services are currently so well-used that it is often impossible to find a seat on the bus! The reason that Go North East give for axing these essential services is that 'the number of people travelling on the service 11 as whole means its not viable to continue running it.' (sic) With the forthcoming proposal of more than 400 new homes in Ryton alone, Go North East should be investing in our local area, not removing vital services from long-suffering residents! Please sign this petition and encourage your friends and family do the same - hopefully, Go North East will realise how important these services are to our local communities and scrap plans to remove them.