Shark populations around the world are in rapid decline. Sharks grow relatively slowly, take many years to mature and produce relatively few young. These characteristics make sharks, like this porbeagle, particularly vulnerable to over-exploitation. This vulnerability is exacerbated by the large and growing demand for shark fins and the general lack of management of shark fishing. Populations simply cannot replenish at the same rate as they are caught and finned to meet market demand. Banning the sale of shark fins and shark fin soup in the UK will be one step in the right direction to protecting all species of shark around the globe. It is cruel to leave sharks to die in the ocean with all of their fins removed from their bodies. Help put an end to the endangerment and cruelty to sharks and make the UK a better place.

There is an almost daily occurrence of speeding vehicle near misses with young children on Eden Lane. Sadly, we believe it is just a matter of time before a Child suffers a serious injury or worse at Eden Lane. Installing traffic calming measures on Eden Lane will hopefully prevent any future serious injury or death due to speeding.

Opening hours at Sandy Lane have already been reduced but the closure of Sandy Lane will mean residents of South Warrington are faced with journeys across the town, to recycle their rubbish. This only contributes to Warrington's traffic congestion, something we wish to reduce. Please sign this petition to urge the Council to keep Sandy Lane open - or provide alternative recycling facilities in South Warrington

Warwick house day centre in seaford East Sussex is under consultation for closure which was found out by carers for the clients who mainly suffer with dementia and disability and over 65 years of age. This was three weeks ago but a further document has been tracked back to October 2017 confirming it will close to save £59000. It is proven that without this service these clients will be isolated vulnerable and at risk, in addition many cannot cater for themselves so likely to cost escc increased costs for lunch and tea visits circa £1000 per week so no annual saving My mother attends she is 88 and this centre is a lifeline to her enabling her to remain at home with care in morning and evening and Monday to Friday she attends the centre is able to socialize exercise and be stimulated and receive lunch and tea of which she contributes greatly to her care financially. Remove this service she and her friends will be isolated at risk to Day to day tasks and her dementia condition will rapidly deteriorate. Most of this community have paid their due to this country for over 60 years and they need to be cared for in their final years, my mum has family around her but some of these clients have nobody, please stop this closure it is shortsighted and just escc balancing the books and saving the accountants jobs, my mum will really suffer if this centre closes please support

The citizens of Suffolk Coastal already pay significant amounts of council tax, in which waste disposal is included. There is no reasonable explanation to why we should be trying to find extra funds to support a service that is already included.

Benefit claimants are the largest section in society to be living in, or at risk of, poverty. This group of people are more likely to vote Labour. Calling into question their right to vote undermines democracy and normalises the view held by many that they are separate underclass who simply do not count. This is an outrageous affront to free speech and would set a worryingly dangerous precedent, as other societal groups could then be denied a voice as a result. ---- Further clarity : Same Difference (samedifference1.com) shared a poll from You Gov market research stating the following .. "Please say whether you think each of the following groups should or should not be allowed to vote in General Elections in the UK (Should be allowed to vote / Should NOT be allowed to vote / Don't know) Non-British citizens living in the UK ; British citizens currently serving jail sentences; British citizens aged 16 and 17; British citizens who receive more money from welfare benefits than they pay in taxes". https://files.38degrees.org.uk/items/files/000/001/366/display/benefit-vote.png

Our GPs should be accessible at our surgery, we shouldn't have to travel outside of our community to see our Doctor when we are unwell

With the increasing popularity of the North Coast 500 (NC500), promoted in part by Highland Council, we are seeing ever-growing numbers of visitors to the NW Highlands and these people also require access to facilities in order to avoid more cases of human waste being left by the roadside. As part of its budget proposals for 2018/2019 Highland Council are closing public toilets at the following locations in the county of Sutherland: Achmelvich, Kinlochbervie, Rhiconich, Scourie, Smoo Cave, Lairg, Kylesku, Talmine, and Tarbet. The total estimated savings come to just £67,000 per year yet we consider these to be essential services, both for local people and tourists & others visiting the area. Additionally, these closures will discriminate against the elderly, infirm, disabled, and those with long-term illnesses whose ability to do without a regular rest break is impaired. Highland Council's suggested alternatives, such as making use of facilities in nearby businesses and village halls, are both impractical and presumptuous. Do the decent thing, Highland Council: Scrap your plans to close these public toilets.

The preservation of the Sutton Estate is strongly supported by The Victorian Society due to its fine architecture, historic value and its contribution to the Chelsea Conservation Area. Furthermore, RBKC have given no explanation whatsoever for why the Estate was not originally included in the Conservation Area, since all other buildings of that period are, and as a result remain protected from demolition. The Sutton Estate is an Edwarian social housing estate completed in 1913, the largest ever built at that time, comprising 16 red-brick blocks, designed by renowned architect Edward Charles Philip Monson. It was founded in 1900 with the funds of entrepreneur and philanthropist William Sutton who left his fortune to provide housing for the poor. Clarion Group (who took over Affinity Sutton) propose to demolish the historic estate and replace it with an ugly modern block which The Chelsea Society calls “bland and lacking in character”, with a large part of the land to comprise luxury housing. James Hughes of The Victorian Society wrote in support of the estate's preservation, saying “Sutton Dwellings is an early example of social housing which makes a positive contribution to the local area and sits well with the 1915 Samuel Lewis Trust Dwellings opposite. With its handsome proportions it is unsurprising that many residents are unhappy at leaving...Affinity should spend its money on sensitive restoration rather than demolishing this early attempt to address inequality in London.” There has now been a date set, 9th May, for the appeal of their plan, which was rejected on the grounds that it did not provide enough replacement social housing. The new plan will still fall short in social housing by 70 apartments.

It’s important because this man has been in the UK since 1974 and has worked since 2006 and has paid all has National Insurance and Tax contributions. Now the Government are saying they have no record of him. Whether they do or they they don’t, this man has just been diagnosed with prostrate cancer and now the NHS have stopped his treatment and in other words left him to suffer or even die! We must take action. This is against our human rights

Thousands of people from Commonwealth countries, whose families were invited to live and work in the UK when our country needed them most, are now facing deportation. They’re entitled to citizenship - the problem is the evidence they need to provide is too difficult to gather. These people have served this country as citizens, working in hospitals, in public transport and many other walks of life. They have been here since they were children. Their parents came here, often at the invitation of the government, to address staff shortages in vital areas of public services. Their children and grandchildren live here. This is their home. The UK has a debt to pay them and our government should not be treating them with such callous disregard for their welfare and such disrespect for what they have contributed to this country.

We call for a meeting of the full Council to discuss openly all of the Brick by Brick projects. We request that the full council meeting, or an independent review, hear the petitions and objections against each of the planning applications in question - giving us, the residents, greater and more reasonable time to speak and be heard. We call for the launch of a thorough, impartial review of all Planning Department guidance and Committee decisions on Brick by Brick developments to: • Reduce the overcrowding, invasive designs & invasion of privacy • Consider our Communities’ delicate social infrastructure. • ensure architecture and design is in keeping with local buildings and the community's identity • Consider the significant impact in the loss of parking spaces caused by their forced removal and the significant increase in demand caused by the new homes. • Ensure that developments are not within a flood zone/investigation area. • Ensure all future planning meetings are chaired fairly, free from partisan pressure, with common sense prevailing.