To the residents of Exeter, people who work in Exeter and visit Exeter, together with those who love Exeter… In an increasingly commercialised world, people should have the freedom to choose when they are exposed to advertising. In public open spaces we should be free from private and commercial interest and advertising should not be allowed to disfigure our city. We are Citizens not Consumers. Imaging how much more beautiful our city could be if it were not covered up by ugly advertising hoardings. Sao Paulo, Auckland, Bergen, Alaska, Hawaii, Maine, Vermont, and 1,500 towns throughout the world have already banned external advertising. In the UK, Bristol has a campaign to ban outdoor adverts. Plymouth has already banned adverts for pay-day loan companies, whilst Leeds, Newcastle and Bristol are considering it. We should add our wonderful city to the growing movement to reclaim our open spaces. CONSUMER PRESSURE: Excessive advertising encourages us to run ever faster on the treadmill of modern consumer life with damaging consequences. It contributes to growing consumer debt and to the consumption of ever increasing amounts of the earth’s finite resources. Additionally advertising is increasingly sowing the seeds of unhappiness by persuading the consumer to be dissatisfied with what they have got, and so creating an artificial need to buy the next thing. Evidence from the Good Childhood Inquiry indicates that the most vulnerable groups to commercial pressures - children and young people - show higher rates of mental health problems. Removing advertising in public spaces, such as billboards, would free us in our outdoor environment from the pressure to consume and allow us to see previously obscured parts of our city. Any remaining empty spaces can be reclaimed for the purpose of art, poetry and inspiring social campaigns (e.g. volunteering, encouraging recycling). VISUAL POLLUTION: Currently there are laws on air pollution, noise pollution and light pollution - now is the time to take back our city from this visual pollution so that we can be citizens rather than just consumers. There is no doubt that the removal of advertising can change the appearance of our city enormously and allow us to see parts of the city previously hidden to us, opening up new exciting vistas. For more information see – “The Advertising Effect” http://www.compassonline.org.uk/publications/the-advertising-effect-how-do-we-get-the-balance-of-advertising-right/ Joint campaign by Exeter Friends of the Earth and Steady State Devon

This is a totally unnecessary decision and shows the Government does not value hard working nurses and health care support workers and are relying on their good nature and dedication to just accept it. A recent pay review body recommendation to increase MP’s salaries was accepted but then it was MP’s voting for their own pay increase! Please sign up to our petition so the Government knows how bitter a pill they are trying to make us swallow.

Rents in London are unaffordable. We can’t afford to live here. We are sharing bedrooms with strangers and commuting for four hours a day. We are spending over 75% of our salaries on rent. We are being evicted and made homeless as we can’t afford rent rises imposed by our landlords. A rent cap is the quickest way to reduce rents and make homes affordable. It’s vital that the Government gives the Mayor of London the power to introduce a rent cap so we can afford to live in London. We should not have to choose between food or a home. We want a rent cap which is similar to council housing rents. For example: - Room in shared house: £75 a week - Studio: £95 a week - One bedroom property: £120 a week - Two bedroom property: £145 a week - Three bedroom property: £170 a week - Four bedroom property: £195 a week

1. South East is over crowded, expensive and takes up too much of the UKs resources. 2. If Parliament were not in the South East resources would be shared more equitably. 3. Manchester is the second largest city in England and could expand to balance the disparity between the South East and the North of England. 4.To work this has to be a permanent move, not a Parliament that sits sometimes in London and sometimes in Manchester. 5. Manchester is more accessible for regions such as Scotland and Northern Ireland. See:- http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/04/westminster-manchester-democracy-parliament

This is important because the General Public of the UK are not being given a fair and accurate picture of the clear failure of the WP to provide what the public are paying for through their taxes. People are not fully aware of the "sanctioning regime", seemingly endorsed by the DWP Provider Guidance Notes and the detrimental impact it is having on the health and well being of many of the most vulnerable people in society. These tactics are actually creating barriers to work, rather than removing them. People should be aware that the DWP Provider Guidance is constantly being updated to strip the unemployed of their rights under the Data Protection Act 1998. It is also being used as a license to cut welfare expenditure by providing more avenues and extra guidance on how to issue more sanctions against WP participants. There is more information contained within the DWP Provider Guidance relevant to sanctioning people correctly, than there is information relative to helping people back into suitable full time employment. Where are our priorities? For too long now, our government has discredited the unemployed in the UK, creating a negative stereotype for everyone on benefits, including those who are doing their utmost to find work with very little support from this Work Programme. Two contentions are being widely overlooked here: a) Jobseeker's allowance is a taxable income b) No person would be able to claim anything from the welfare/benefit safety net, if they could not prove on a regular basis that they are doing everything they can to find suitable full time employment From reading the DWP Statistics, this is what they should say: 1.41 million people have partaken in the work programme 16.6% managed to find work regardless of whether this work was found through the WP or not 22,000 people – that’s 1.5% - managed to stay in employment long enough for the WP provider to claim the maximum amount of job sustainment payments. 219,000 people, roughly 15% have returned to the Jobcentre still looking for work after being on the Work Programme for over 104 weeks. [source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/work-programme-statistical-summary-december-2013] It is clear from interpretation of the evidence that the success rate has been approximately 1.5%. The ‘corollary’ is that the failure rate has been 98.5%. The DWP Provider Guidance: 8. Providers are required to present all of their customers with a leaflet explaining the Departmental position in respect of consent to contact an individual’s employer. (A fair processing notice) 9. DWP now has a designation order in place that allows the Department and Providers to contact the customer’s employer directly to validate employment details for the above benefit groups. 10. There is no longer a requirement for you to obtain customer consent to allow DWP to contact a customer’s employer or for you to contact an employer in connection with Outcome or Sustainment payments. 11. You may also share this information with the Department for Work and Pensions. [Source: Chapter 9, Work Programme Provider Guidance] This begs the question – of the 1.5% of participants that did find suitable full time employment, how many of these people found the jobs themselves, only for the WP to take the credit and get paid, even in cases where the WP provided no assistance whatsoever? This failure has come at great cost to the tax-payer, and it seems people are generally misinformed and are allowing 'celebrities' to dominate the discourse on welfare reforms, rather than listening to those of us who are already on the receiving end. No moral conscience can simply walk on by and allow the suffering of their comrades. "When a complaint is freely heard, deeply considered and speedily reformed, then is the utmost bound of civil liberty attained, that wise men look for" (Milton, 1644) Please note that, not being experienced myself in the realms of ESA benefits, I don't feel that I qualify enough to really discuss that in much detail. But what I can say is that there was a risk highlighted by the National Audit Office upon the introduction of the Work Programme that people who the WPP's deem "easier to help back into employment" will always receive the help first. This is because the WPP's are paid on a target basis and by helping those who they deem easiest to help first, they can achieve their targets more easily and hence get paid more readily. THIS RISK IS NOT BEING MANAGED PROPERLY. The reasons the WP have provided for not managing this risk at all is that they "treat everybody equally", however in reality, this is clearly not the case and my argument is supported by the official statistics. It follows then, that if you are a person who needs extra help to find employment, unfortunately the WPP will get round to helping you last. This is disgraceful, it is unfair and it is unethical.

The Bombed Out Church is an Iconic Space in the City of Liverpool; it represents many of the struggles of the City over decades. It's not a simple a shell - It is a living, working monument to the people of Liverpool.

The magnificent Brighton Hippodrome needs your help to save it from being wrecked. It is a unique theatre building, listed Grade II* by English Heritage because of its historical and architectural significance. It was converted into a variety theatre in 1901/02 by Frank Matcham, the leading theatre architect of the time. It is one of only three theatres of its type in the country. It is of national importance. After closing as a variety theatre in 1965, it was a bingo hall until 2007. The stunning interior, however, is still in remarkable condition, with very little deterioration. Nonetheless, the Hippodrome is top of the Theatres Trust list of Theatre Buildings at Risk. Suddenly, in mid 2013, a proposal to convert the building into an eight-screen cinema emerged. The plans involve demolishing the stage, the fly-tower, all the back-stage facilities, the stalls and the orchestra pit. Without these it ceases to be a theatre. Please sign the petition to help to keep it intact. English Heritage has a statutory responsibility to protect listed buildings. It says any changes should be reversible. The proposed changes will make this impossible. No one so far has tried to produce a scheme for restoration for its real purpose: live performance. It would be a national scandal if the opportunity to save the Hippodrome were squandered because of misinformation and short-term gain. Please sign this petition to allow the Our Brighton Hippodrome campaign to produce that missing theatre proposal, for presentation to the Council, to English Heritage and the developers. We have the knowledge, we have the experience and we have the contacts. All we need is time. Read about the campaign, see the full details of our objection and see pictures of the Hippodrome Website: www.ourhippodrome.org.uk Facebook: www.facebook.com/ourbrightonhippodromepage Twitter: https://twitter.com/ourhippodrome The developer’s plan for conversion (not restoration!) to a multi-screen cinema: www.brightonhippodrome.co.uk/

We, the undersigned, are students, alumni and staff of Royal Holloway, University of London concerned about the recent pay rises awarded the Principal Paul Layzell. In 2012-2013, Professor Layzell was awarded an £8,000 pay rise of 3%, which he is yet to justify and we still do not know whether he was in receipt of a pay rise in 2013-2014.

The Jam Butty Camp has provided generations of Salfordian school children with the experience of a holiday by the sea, many of which would have never had the chance of a holiday under normal circumstances. Over the years it has supported our City and so when under attack we come to its aid and in turn support it. The camp is just as much a part of Salford as the Civic Centre you all inhabit, and should be protected at all costs. The purpose of this facility is just as relevant today as it was when it was first set up, and by the councils own admission the City and its people are suffering from the austerity cuts, and for many children this will be the only chance they have of having a holiday away from City life. This camp holds a special place in the hearts of many Salfordian's and should be immune to the Councils cuts on the grounds it provides a special service to Salford which is priceless.

Evesham is a lovely town with much potential! The Evesham area has a population of over 52,000 with over 23,000 living in Evesham town itself. We need more good, popular shops in our town centre to keep our town alive!! We all know what lovely scenery and historical buildings are here for townsfolk and tourists to enjoy but we need to offer more selection in the town centre itself. If you care about our town and would like to be able to do your shopping in your town, please show your support for the above companies to open shops here!

Bees pollinate 70% of our food crop and their numbers are dramatically falling. Over the last 100 years, the UK has lost over 75% of its Bee population but human population has nearly doubled from 38 million to 63.7! This will keep increasing and with their numbers falling, Bees cannot keep up with the task of pollinating our food supply which we rely on. We are asking the Government to provide financial support for farmers and beekeepers who in return will invest the money in their bees to encourage their maintenance and growth. Also, it may encourage others to take it up if there is a financial incentive. If we do not help bring back the Bees, our food will become more expensive as pollination of crops reduce. This is also a global issue so without our own Bees, what will we do when other Countries cannot pollinate enough crops for export to us? At present, the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs provides free training for amateur beekeepers but this is not enough. We are asking you to sign this petition and share it with your friends. We need a 100,000 signatures for the idea to be presented in Parliament so financial grants for beekeepers can be discussed. Thank you for signing :) Carmen and Sam

Access to Work isn't a benefit and doesn't incur a cost to government - in fact it brings money into the treasury, yet Deaf and disabled people are having their support allowance capped or cuts made (meaning they can no longer afford to use qualified interpreters or the support they need). This places jobs at risk and has already resulted in job losses and demotions. People currently in work are potentially being forced out of work and onto benefits, which goes against everything the government is telling us they are trying to achieve. Deaf and disabled people bring a vast amount of skill and talent to our workforce that we can't afford to lose. We want to ensure that full support is provided, and people are enabled to gain, maintain and progress in their chosen careers. Personal choice and control needs to be handed back to the experts on Deaf and disabled access needs in the workplace - the individual Deaf and disabled people who use the scheme We want to ensure Deaf and disabled people are not subjected to a glass ceiling due to lack of support.