Traffic lights are needed to prevent accidents and possible disturbances of the peace. I have been personally involved in one person being injured at this 'Bottleneck ' and I have also been threatened and verbally abused by an irate driver who had to give way to me ! Reserved Parking Places are needed to allow residents a place to 'Park' when returning home etc. as there is just not enough room to 'Park'

The NHS is essential to the U.K.- it is at danger of ceasing if a commitment to increasing its funding does not occur immediately and sanctioned by the forthcoming budget.

I am Howard Bonnett. I act for and help asbestos disease victims throughout England and Wales. My petition is to ask the Lord Chancellor to bring legislation to reinstate the right for compensation for pleural plaques victims in England and Wales. Pleural plaques are a scarring of the lining of the lung. They are caused by asbestos. They are a marker that the body has reacted to asbestos. Victims of asbestos exposure can go on to develop pleural thickening, asbestosis or cancers such as mesothelioma and lung cancer. Compensation was available for pleural plaques from the 1980s through to 2007. Before 2007 those victims could get either full and final or a modest provisional damage settlement to ensure they preserved rights for future monies if they got worsening disease A House of Lords decision decided that pleural plaques were not an injury and should not attract compensation. They chose not to compensate what was described as “the worried well” The Scottish government reinstated rights for pleural plaques victims in 2009. In 2011 Northern Ireland followed suit. Compensation remains unavailable for victims in England and Wales. In the 10 years since the House of Lords decision many more thousands of asbestos pleural plaques victims have been diagnosed. None of them have any legal redress. So why ask for change now? The 2007 change in the law has had a massive affect on those affected. As the years pass the people able to help with claims reduces. In time former employers dissolve and records of employment and insurance disappear. Making claims get harder as time progresses. These many victims of asbestos disease continue to be deprived of justice. For all the more reason the right for pleural plaques victims to secure claims now, even on a modest provisional damage basis, is of great social importance. Depriving people of justice reflects poorly on us all as the Scottish and Northern Irish governments plainly saw. Victims of pleural plaques often know asbestos cancer victims. There is no expiry date for when asbestos can turn cancerous. My father was diagnosed with pleural thickening 20 years ago. He has suffered a pleural effusion this year. This was suspected to be mesothelioma. Fortunately tests have ruled this out – for now. Did the judges really think that this is one of “the worried well?”. Many thousands carry that same anxiety every day. Access to legal redress will not cure them or stop those risks. But it can give peace of mind and knowledge that financial provision can be made for the family. To help the many thousands of victims affected I ask the Lord Chancellor to start a process of legislation to give parity to those in England and Wales that victims in Scotland and Northern Ireland have enjoyed for years.

The EU referendum represented a low point in post war UK democratic politics. Only now are problems coming to the fore that were not considered in the referendum and not debated at the time. Oeople did not know the consequences of them and Brexit impact reports are being unacceptably hidden from the people. This is unacceptable and we need a final decision when we know exactly what Brexit means and that means the full terms of an any deal.

I know this Petition will be a touchy subject for those who have had to apply for a Spouse Visa in the last four years to allow a non-EU domiciled spouse into the UK from abroad. I have made every effort to keep this petition explanation short and hope my point comes across to your clearly and concisely, and that you will support my initiative to urge our fellow Minister of State, Rt Hon Brandon Lewis to look into this as a matter of urgency and bring about a change in pricing policy. Here is my Story: I, Andy Wilkinson am a UK Citizen and married my wife Sylvia Alexis in 2010 who was from Pretoria, South Africa. She joined me in the UK as my partner having acquired a spouse visa - costing around £600 in 2010. In March 2012, we decided to move to Cape Town for few years for a job opportunity for which I had been accepted. Late last year, my role came to an end, and we had to move back home. After reviewing the criteria for the UK Visa, it was obvious I would have to come back to the UK alone and find a job that qualified me for the financial requirement of the minimum income threshold which was required. In June 2017, we were set to apply for Sylvia’s Spouse Visa and was advised the cost to be £1,464 pounds. The Issue: Given the current recessionary economic climate in the UK, a huge population of the work force just about get by with what they earn (See my link to the Guardian’s newspaper below to see the income situation of UK Citizens). What happens when a UK Citizen finds their match from abroad, and have to pay £1,464 to bring them into the UK, this becomes a sticky situation an unaffordable price for many. Therefore a number of questions have come to mind? Why has the government which came into power in 2010, suddenly hiked the prices of a spouse visa for a UK Citizen’s partner. Ofcourse the government has an ambition of curbing the national debt, but penalizing UK citizens for having chosen a partner from abroad is not one of the best ways of doing it. A visa cost of £600 in 2010, and the same visa in 2017 costs £1,464. It would frustrate any logical minded person how the steep increase of 140% is justified. Or is the government simply trying to rake in as much money as it can from a situation they know the applicant has no alternative choice but to pay. I feel this is a penalization technique to those who have found their match from abroad. Ofcourse it will be argued that this has been a decision to curb exploitative marriages. But what about those who have been married for many years, those who have kids, certainly they cannot be labeled as exploitative – so why should they have to pay such a hefty visa cost? Finally, it may also be argued this is to stop UK Citizens bringing in partners from abroad. This cannot be something the government decides. It is every Human’s Right to marry whomsoever they wish. It is not justifiable for the government to apply strong charges, as if to punish a UK Citizen from marrying outside the borders of the UK. Referring back to the article by the Guardian, many people who have spouses abroad will have to wait, or pay the cost using expensive methods of credits (credit cards, loans etc), and this certainly can’t be a reasonable strategy. What do I want? I want your support to urge our Minister of State, Rt Hon Brandon Lewis, to look into reducing the cost of a spouse visa for UK citizens who plan to bring in their spouse’s from abroad. The visa costs should be designed so that they are equitable to all UK Citizens, not assuming everyone is a high income earner. (For I am not a high UK earner, but am grateful Sylvia has now joined me in the UK). I also understand that the government has taken a consultation process to determine fee levels for certain visas, but the visa that I am concerned is for UK Citizens who have/plan to bring their spouse from abroad. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/20/one-in-four-uk-families-have-less-than-95-in-savings-report-finds

In the UK we are being edged to 'obedience' at all costs, by our media and by the way we are being divided and taught to hate each other. WE need to act together to protect our rights and liberties. Just a couple of examples follow- please read. 'The multinational security company G4S failed to maintain basic human rights standards and protect asylum seekers from harm, the complaint lodged to the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.' There has been massive "ankle tagging" fraud by BOTH companies. 'Inappropriate' youth restraint where 14 CHILDREN were assaulted (fines were made against them) and were 'found responsible for the outbreak of violence at Manos Island detention centre but never held to account' (The Telegraph, The Guardian). The proposal to allow powers of arrest to Serco and G4S, private companies who have broken laws and acted inhumanely sends a shudder down the spine. Not only does the privatisation of 'security' smack of fascism- these faceless companies are for profit- not for our welfare The powers that government award themselves in suggesting this go way above their remit- many of the government have interests in these (and other privatising companies) but once again who asked us? We really need to make some noise and be in agreement that we won't let this happen. Let the government go back to the money tree and find the required amounts to recruit and train more police- because if we need more 'security' then the providers should belong to the UK, not be in private profit making hands. Following the appalling sights around the world and most recently the heinous operations in Spain against the Catalonian's and their democratic rights- the image of men hidden by full face 'protective' helmets is enough to make us realise what could happen here. Once they have this power it can not be taken back- who wants to live under the threat of those guys turning up whenever we 'disobey'? Think it couldn't happen here? Want to wait and find out- or spend a few moments to tick this petition showing disapproval and demanding a great big 'NO' to this proposal.

The Spanish police’s behaviours were violent and totally disproportionate. This was not policing by consent. The primary role of the police should be to protect and serve the people, not act as a para military arm of which ever government is in power. The events were unacceptable in a western democracy. There needs to be some form of accountability, otherwise a potentially terrifying precedence has been set.

The NFL games are now broadcast weekly on the BBC. Protests also took place in the UK last week when the NFL players played at Wembley on September 24. With further games scheduled to be played at both Wembley and Twickenham this season, the opportunity for Theresa May to publicly condemn President Trump's racist comments is now. Failure to denounce dangerous and divisive rhetoric sends the poor message to UK citizens that it is acceptable to hold racist sentiments and marginalise minority groups.

• A Reduction in speed levels will make a for a safer environment for residents and road users alike • It will improve the character of the area and quality of life of all residents • It will contribute towards a cleaner environment by reducing levels of noise and air pollution In addition, as the estate has only one road in and out, the 20mph zone can be easily contained within a defined area.

Standing for long periods of time at work can cause many health problems, including pain in many areas of the body (such as the back, legs and hips) as well as varicose veins, problems during pregnancy, heart and circulation issues and more. This does not even begin to cover the issues people with existing health conditions may face. More than eleven million workers in the UK are standing for a prolonged period of time, risking their health and unable to take the weight off of their feet.

Most other schools have 9 sessions per lesson over the course of two weeks, and some have 8, but Penglais only have 7 due to funding. It is important to have at 9 or at least 8 over two weeks as when it comes to exams we will be less prepared than other schools in Wales, and if they score higher marks in the exams, overall we will fall below and not get the results we deserve. The study sessions that have been used as a replacement do not offer the support of the classes to help towards exams

Poverty is a fundamental part of society, even affecting Scotland. In particular, poverty affecting children was announced to be rapidly growing. Recent statistics show an increase from 1/5 to 1/4 children in poverty, meaning an approximate 260,000 children are officially classed as in poverty. Despite the lack of publicity on the issue, this epidemic affecting dozens of families nationwide, and we need your support to convince local MSPs to consider the small cause. Spare change of £5 per child to create a big change, taking hundreds of families out of the grip of poverty.