The recent case of Doug Paulley vs First Group ended with the judges ruling that the wheelchair spaces on buses do not need to be vacated by persons refusing to do so. Effectively they have ruled that persons using wheelchairs may be discriminated against by those who feel it is too much trouble to fold away a pushchair, or simply move to another seat. This throws the whole situation into confusion. The majority of persons using wheelchairs are doing so because they are not able to stand for long periods, if at all, and do not have the luxury of being able to fold their wheelchair away while on public transport. Able bodied persons can stand, pushchairs can be folded, and infants carried. Refusing to vacate the more easily accessible areas on buses and trains is discriminating against those who are physically unable to reach the other areas, and must be made an offence. There is no excuse for a wheelchair user to be denied transport in a situation where it is physically possible to accommodate them should other users show consideration. The current regulations are too woolly, and the manner in which they can be interpreted leaves them open to rulings such as the above, which renders them effectively null and void.

Most types of modern lighting emit Ultraviolet rays and Blue light which can be harmful to people who suffer from Light Sensitivity. https://www.anses.fr/en/content/lighting-systems-using-light-emitting-diodes-leds-health-issues-be-considered LED/CFL/Halogen Lighting can cause serious health consequences including the following: 1. Extreme eye pain for people who suffer from photo-sensitivity as these lights generate large spikes in the blue wavelengths. 2. Skin Cancer and other less threatening skin conditions such as burning sensation, rash, blisters. 3. Severe headaches (which aren’t migraines), nausea, inability to concentrate, unexplained exhaustion and other symptoms. According to French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (ANSES) the intense wavelengths in the blue part of the spectrum of light emitted by LEDs, and the associated radiation intensity, raise the question of new health risks related to these sources of lighting. In this context, ANSES published a report on the health effects of LED-based lighting systems in October 2010, along with recommendations intended in particular to improve controls on marketing of these products. https://www.anses.fr/en/content/led-%E2%80%93-light-emitting-diodes The expert appraisal carried out by ANSES showed that the risks of greatest concern, both in terms of the associated hazards and the probability of occurrence in a context of generalised use of LEDs, are related to the photochemical effects of blue light and glare. They are caused by: spectral imbalance (significant proportion of blue light in white LEDs); high levels of radiance5 (high brightness density per surface unit emitted by these very small sources). The photochemical risk is associated with blue light and the level of risk depends on the cumulative dose of blue light to which an individual is exposed. It is generally the result of low-intensity, repeated exposure over long periods of time. There is significant evidence of this risk. Populations that are particularly sensitive to this risk or that are highly exposed to blue light have been identified and include children, people with certain eye diseases and certain professional groups exposed to high-intensity light. On the basis of these findings, ANSES considered it necessary to restrict sales of LED light systems to the general public to those systems that do not involve higher risks associated with blue light than conventional lighting. Furthermore, ANSES recommends revision of Standard NF EN 62 471 on the photobiological safety of lamps to adapt it to the specific characteristics of LEDs, to take into account sensitive populations and high exposure groups including certain professions such as lighting installers, entertainment industry workers. Letters of support from UK based medical experts are available here:- http://www.spectrumalliance.co.uk/support-from-medical-professionals A consortium of charities represented through the Spectrum Alliance believe that around 2 million people in the United Kingdom are negatively affected by modern lighting. http://www.spectrumalliance.co.uk/faq Whilst energy saving modern bulbs may help in the campaign to reduce CO2 emissions, there are other negative environmental consequences to consider. A study (Environmental Science and Technology, January 2011) has found that LEDs contain lead, arsenic and a dozen other potentially hazardous substances. http://eclipse.lupusuk.org.uk/guidetoartificiallighting.htm http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/122-a81/ LED Lighting and Retinal Damage in Rats There are numerous cases of people suffering from a range of medical problems related to exposure to all new light bulbs. Increasingly people are exposed to these bulbs in most homes and businesses. Due to increased exposure, the problem will persist unless steps are taken to reverse the widespread installation of modern lights across the UK. As there are serious health consequences for a number of people right throughout the UK and the rest of Europe, it is imperative that action is taken to scrap the ban on traditional lights and reverse the EU wide installation of dangerous modern lighting. If modern lighting is installed in all public buildings and street lights, many people risk suffering serious, long-term symptoms which may mean having to give up their place of work unless adjustments are made. Please sign this petition to request that the EU Commission and UK Department for Energy and Climate Change agree to the following:- 1. Overturn the absolute ban of all traditional incandescent light bulbs. 2. Order a review and research into the health/environmental impact arising from the use of modern lighting including LED, CFL & Halogen. 3. Suspend the mandated requirement to use modern lighting throughout the UK and EU.

People are under threat and we owe our thanks and should give them safety. I am and was against this war but these people are being let down by our country - they are not at fault, the UK is.

The Long Walk to Patchway....The Long Walk to Freedom Many migrants in Bristol are required by the home office to sign in regularly at a police station. Until recently, people reported at Trinity Police Station, near central Bristol. Since 1st October 2014, they have had to travel all the way to the new station in Patchway. Many of the people signing are applying for asylum in the UK. Only those in receipt of support from the Home Office are entitled to travel costs. Destitute asylum seekers either have to walk all the way (a 14 mile round trip for some) or beg lifts or bus fares. "I have a daughter aged 3 and she goes to school in Soundwell from 9am till 12. On my signing day, Tuesday, she misses school, because I have to be at Patchway between 10.30 and 11.30. From Easton it takes 1 hour30 minutes each way. It is not possible for me to take her to school in Soundwell, then go to Patchway and return in time to pick her up at 12. So she misses school. When I signed at Trinity Road she didn't miss school, because the journey was not so long." S, Bangladesh Students are forced to miss college classes. Disabled people find it difficult to travel to Patchway using public transport. Furthermore, the majority of people who sign will not abscond as they are dependent on accommodation via the home office, churches or friends and want to resolve their case positively. They don’t want to do anything to jeopordise this even when faced with detention. Making people sign up to weekly seems unnecssary, and degrading. It is all too common for people claiming asylum to have to wait years and years for their case to be resolved. Many who are initially refused go on to win their leave to remain in the UK. This long wait is due to problems with access to good lawyers, interpreters, a "culture of disbelief" in the Home Office. During this long wait, people have to keep signing every week. Each time they go, there is the chance they will be detained, taken to a detention centre and deported. Signing is a stressful experience for all, traumatic for some. "Before, I could walk to Trinity in 5 minutes, and I signed once a month. Now I have to sign every two weeks at Patchway. I don't have NASS support so I have no money for a bus ticket (which costs £4). It is 6 or 7 miles to Patchway. I have a problem with my ankle and it is too far to walk.. My friends have to help me to get there. My case is ongoing so I should have NASS support" E, Ivory Coast We fear that the difficulty of accessing signing will increase the likelihood of people missing signing dates and this is counterproductive for everyone.

As part of Stonewall's 'No Bystanders' campaign, it was revealed to me that 75,000 young people will be bullied every year because they are gay, and of this number, 21,000 will attempt suicide. This figure is unacceptable, and the only way that it can be lowered is through education. As an eighteen year old, soon heading off to University, not once during my school career have I been taught that it is acceptable to be gay, bisexual or transgender - the possibility that myself, or any of my classmates may be LGBT is entirely ignored. It is for this reason that many young people struggle to come to terms with the fact that they are gay, bisexual or transgender, and it is for this reason that young people continue to bully their peers for being LGBT. The physical and psychological wellbeing of young people is of the utmost importance, and the education system has a responsibility to LGBT youths that cannot and must not be ignored.

Tony Blair was awarded the "global legacy award" by Save the Children US. Apparently this is for his "commitment to Africa". But the former prime minister is central to Sir John Chilcot's inquiry into Britain’s controversial and protracted war in Iraq. Earlier this month, it emerged that Blair had signed a multimillion pound contract with a Saudi Arabian oil company in 2010 to broker secret deals on the firm’s behalf with Chinese state officials. The revelation raises serious questions over the former PM’s diplomatic role as Middle East envoy, and his personal vested interests in the region. Then earlier this year, Blair managed to successfully quash a Serious Fraud Office investigation into alleged corruption regarding an arms deal with Saudi Arabia. It is for these reasons that Tony Blair should not be awarded Save the Children’s Global Legacy award. His “legacy” in Iraq overshadows his achievements in Africa.

Julian Assange and Wikileaks provided a very important service to the whole world by exposing the extent to which the US National Security Agency (NSA) is invading everyone's privacy, among other things. He should not be forced to spend the rest of his life in the Ecuadorian embassy in London when there is a simple solution. Why have the Swedish prosecutors refused to see him over here, given that there are so many of his supporters who would be willing to pay their costs. He has not ben charged with any offence in Sweden - they merely want to question him over rape allegations.

Dr Gilbert worked tirelessly trying to save the children of Gaza during the recent bombing campaign by Israel, the Israeli government are attempting to silence him for speaking out about the atrocities that he witnessed first hand, Dr Gilbert carried out great humanitarian work in the most difficult of circumstances, banning from entering Gaza for like is tantamount to a kind of punishment and is certainly not the actions of a 'democratic government' http://bit.ly/1sMZrV3

There are many people speaking openly online about the fact that this is far from historic and is still going on now and as well as parties from both houses the suspects go into the church and royal family at the highest levels. if a small amount of the allegations are real then we have the right to know and the appropriate parties should be removed from office and society. If any of us were suspected you would be in custody NOW, there wouldn't be an "inquiry" into it simple POLICE ACTION and that's what we need

George Orwell wrote "some animals are more equal than others". Did you know that government grants to FCA and its predecessor FSA (UK’s financial services regulator) statutory immunity from liability to damages? You do now! Why? Only government could tell you. But it won’t! FCA's not immune from prosecution. Nor is it immune from liability to costs of successful litigation. It’s only damages. Bizarre! UK Courts are forbidden by law to award any damages against FCA, however much damage has been done by it. The immunity gives carte blanche to damage citizens’ interests. None may sue for redress. The law provides that FSA/FCA maintain a public register ACCURATELY at all times. Years ago, FSA falsely displayed two individuals on that register as directors of a large national firm. It then publicly censured that firm for gross professional misconduct. That censure's published on the same register! Nothing's changed since; the false data and public censure remain on that register today! Damage to those individuals’ reputations is immense; the knock-on effect on their business has been devastating. FSA upheld the individuals' complaint. It admitted to MISLEADING register users, acting UNFAIRLY and publishing UNCLEAR data. Case closed? No! FSA refused to remove the data, believing it also to be “LEGALLY AND FACTUALLY CORRECT"! Yes, that’s right; "MISLEADING, UNFAIR AND UNCLEAR", but "LEGALLY AND FACTUALLY CORRECT"! That takes some doing! (don’t try this at home)... But FSA, protected by law from suit for damages, got away with it. What a way for a major UK industry regulator to behave! FCA endorses FSA’s position. It enjoys the same immunity. The individuals referred their case and the immunity issue variously to the Independent Complaints Commissioner, Ministry of Justice, HM Treasury, their MP, the Information Commissioner, their MEP, the European Commission, Council of Europe, the Parliamentary Ombudsman and even the Prime Minister – all to no avail. This immunity seems inviolable; no one dares challenge it! The police don't have such immunity. Nor does NHS. Nor does the Serious Fraud Office. Nor do the armed services. Nor do other UK industry regulators. Even GCHQ is not immune from liability to damages! Human rights legislation affords citizens equal treatment under law and by Courts, including the right to justice and a fair trial. This is enshrined in UK's Human Rights Act, the European Convention on Human Rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; UK GOVERNMENT IS A SIGNATORY TO ALL OF THESE! But how CAN citizens be treated equally and exercise rights to justice and fair trial when their government bars Courts from awarding damages? Does government care? No. It maintains the status quo without explanation, claiming “contentment” with current arrangements. Government invited an international law firm to submit a consultation paper. Published at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmtreasy/writev/1574/fca38.htm , it is deeply critical; it demands that the immunity be scrapped and FSA/FCA made more accountable. Government ignored ALL of its criticisms and recommendations! Were this typical Government behaviour, laws might never change! Only by rescinding this immunity can justice be done and be seen to be done. FCA will lose nothing if it’s removed. It would instead rely on Professional Indemnity insurance, just like everyone else has to do. Parliament stands to gain credibility by abolishing it. We ask everyone who's concerned about this threat to citizens’ rights to support this petition and publicise it as widely as possible until Parliament sits up, listens and removes this unfair privilege. Please share this on Facebook, Twitter et al and with your friends and colleagues; we need all the support that we can get! As the National Lottery's catchphrase once had it – “it could be you!”…

Britain first are a far right hate group that promotes racial and religious hatred via their website and Facebook page. The number of their likes, even though fake, gives them a veneer of respectability and increases their global reach. The comments on their posts are of the vilest hate speech imaginable. Facebook needs to investigate Britain Firsts page and remove their fake likes.

Fracking carries significant risks. Strong evidence suggests risks of significant health and environmental damage, damage to the quality of home and family life—and damage to property. Fracking releases pollutants into the air and risks polluting water supplies. Stories come in from all over the world. The evidence is well supported and researched. Families can't drink water. Cattle die. Children suffer. There are also risks from fumes, vibration, heavy traffic, from light pollution, and much, much more. The UK government is ignoring important democratic and human rights considerations in its 'dash for gas'. Human rights to health, to a healthy environment, to enjoy wellbeing don't even figure in the debates. On top of this, ordinary people, many of whom have never, ever protested before, are being subjected to underhand tactics designed to intimidate them and which violate their civil and political rights. Enough is enough. The UK government has important responsibilities under human rights law. It is time to ban fracking until a full human rights impact assessment has been made, based on the best evidence, and independent of the companies with an interest in fracking the UK.