Do you find yourself ‘fighting’ with your child to get their Sparx Reader homework done? Are you seeing a child who used to love stories now viewing reading as a stressful chore? You are not alone. ​As parents, we know that the journey to becoming a reader isn't always easy. For my own daughter, now 11, it took years of careful, dedicated work from her primary teachers and us as parents to help her find the 'spark.' We spent countless nights finding the right books and building her confidence until she finally saw reading as something enjoyable. ​Tragically, since starting Sparx Reader at secondary school, that progress has been undone. ​At just 11 years old, she now refuses to read, telling me: 'There’s nothing fun about it anymore.' When reading is reduced to micro-quizzes, algorithm-driven targets, and the constant fear of 'red flags' or missing a weekly goal, the magic of the story is lost. It has become a task of compliance rather than a moment of discovery. ​We are calling for a change. ​While we support the school’s goal of high literacy, the current app-based model is turning our children off books at the very age they should be falling in love with them. The research from the OECD (PISA) and the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) proves that 'reading for pleasure' is the greatest predictor of success—yet this system is making reading a source of anxiety. ​By signing this petition, we ask leadership at The Stanway School to: ​1. Acknowledge the negative impact Sparx Reader is having on student engagement and parental stress. 2. ​Trial research-backed, non-app alternatives (such as Reading Passports or teacher-led 'Book Talks') that prioritize the experience of reading over data points. ​3. Protect the progress made in primary school by fostering a culture where books are enjoyed, not just 'completed.' ​Let’s work with the school to ensure our children leave Stanway as confident, lifelong readers—not just students who know how to pass a digital quiz. ​Sign today to help us bring the joy back to reading.

With the current political chaos in the US and Trump’s failure to adhere to international norms, and given his apparent obsession with the Monarchy, calling off this visit would send a powerful message that his behaviour is not acceptable. A visit could also put the King and Queen’s lives in danger. Trump has also recently claimed that Nato troops in Afghanistan "stayed a little back" and avoided the front lines. This is a slap in the face to all the British service personnel who served in Afghanistan and the 457 who lost their lives. Giving Trump the prestige of a royal visit after he has so brazenly insulted our veterans and their sacrifice would be a disgrace. 

Across the country, ordinary people are being forced to pay thousands of pounds a year for public parks, roads and communal spaces on top of their council tax.  This happens on so-called unadopted estates, where councils approve new developments but never take responsibility for maintaining the public spaces created. Instead, the costs are passed permanently to residents through uncapped service charges. These parks and roads are: • open to everyone • promoted by councils as public amenities • part of the everyday fabric of towns and cities Yet the bill is quietly pushed onto a small group of households – families, key workers, pensioners and first-time buyers – many of whom are already struggling with the cost of living. Although initially well-intentioned, Councils are complicit in arrangements that have pushed costs onto some of the poorest in society, with the risk of pushing their constituents into poverty.  Case study: Elephant Park, Southwark Elephant Park is a major regeneration development with a large central park that is open to everyone and promoted as a public space. But local residents are paying for it privately. For a small one-bed flat in South Gardens, the typical 2025–26 service charge is £6,202. Around 15% of this goes towards public parkland and surrounding roads.  That means almost £1,000 a year paid by one resident towards public spaces, on top of their council tax. This is double charging: ordinary people paying twice for parks and roads that are meant to be public. This is a national problem, not a one-off Residents across the country are affected  from major regeneration schemes to new housing estates and garden communities. Examples raised publicly include developments in: • Elephant Park (London Borough of Southwark) • St Edeyrn’s Village (Cardiff) • Vickers Green (Crayford, London Borough of Bexley) • Garden City (Kent) • Church Meadows (Great Broughton, Cumbria) • Carleton Meadows (Penrith, Cumbria) • Elm Farm / Wymondham New Estates (Norfolk) • Brookdale Estate (Aiskew, North Yorkshire) • Queensgate Development (Stockton-on-Tees) • Wynyard Park (County Durham / Teesside) • Lodge Hill Development (Chattenden, Medway) • Hoo Peninsula New Estates (Medway, Kent) • West Myreton Estate (Menstrie, Clackmannanshire) • Greenbelt Estates – Kirkcaldy (Fife) • Greenbelt Estates – Kilmarnock (East Ayrshire) • Fairfields Estate (Milton Keynes) • Whitehouse Park (Milton Keynes) • Kingsbrook (Aylesbury Vale, Buckinghamshire) • Cranbrook New Community (East Devon) • Great Kneighton (Cambridge) • Trumpington Meadows (Cambridge) • Northstowe (Cambridgeshire) • Barking Riverside (London Borough of Barking & Dagenham) • Chobham Manor (Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, London) • East Village (Stratford, London) • Newhall (Harlow, Essex) • Sherford New Community (Devon / Plymouth) • Poundbury (Dorchester) • Upton (Northampton) • Cambourne (Cambridgeshire) • Meridian Water (Enfield, London) • Kidbrooke Village (Greenwich, London) In every case, the pattern is the same: public infrastructure paid for by a small number of residents, with no cap to the their charges.  Parliament has heard the evidence In a recent House of Commons debate and evidence sessions on property service charges, MPs heard directly from residents paying for unadopted roads, parks and communal land. During that debate, Rebecca Paul MP made a clear recommendation: Councils should be mandated to adopt unadopted parks and roads.  This would end the practice of residents paying twice and close the planning loophole that has allowed “fleecehold” estates to spread. The evidence is clear. The solution has been stated publicly in Parliament. What’s missing is government action.  What we’re calling for We call on the UK Government to: • Mandate councils to adopt unadopted public parks, roads and communal spaces • Reform planning and Section 106 rules so public infrastructure cannot be permanently funded by residents • End double charging where people pay council tax and private service charges for the same services • Protect residents from uncapped, unaffordable estate charges Public spaces should be funded publicly, not hidden on household bills. Ordinary people should not be used as a substitute tax base. 

Grade I listed Leaden Hall was built for the C13th architect for Salisbury cathedral, Elias Dereham, to serve as a model for other canonries in the Close.  Although largely rebuilt in the early C18th, it includes elements from that original building.  It was probably the first residential building on Salisbury Cathedral Close and forms an essential part of that precious, protected setting. In the early C19th the artist John Constable regularly stayed at the Hall and painted many fine pictures of the house, its gardens and landscape, as well as his famous views of the cathedral, some of which include the house.  Extraordinarily, much of that garden - a rare example of a designed landscape for a smaller Georgian house - remains. Salisbury Dean & Chapter, having neglected the house for many years and allowing it to fall into a state of severe disrepair, have now applied to convert the building into a modern office block for themselves.  To get the insulation and floor loading levels required for a modern office, as well as some reconfigurations, substantial interventions would be necessary that would destroy or obscure historic fabric and alter the appearance of the building.  They would raise the ridgeline of the roof that faces the cathedral close and remove a chimney that forms part of its historic façade.  This will irreversibly change the appearance of the Hall, its setting and the other important historic buildings on Salisbury Cathedral Close. The application also includes a proposal to build a large-scale, new archive building immediately next to the house, in its kitchen garden.   This will destroy the Georgian kitchen garden - a very rare surviving example of one in an urban setting - which renowned artist John Constable painted.  The proposed new building will stand forward of the façade of the Hall, interrupting the established building line and impacting the protected setting of the Hall and other Grade I listed buildings on the Close.  The lofty single-storey building will abut, and in the next two decades be within the flood plain.  This means that the irreplaceable medieval manuscripts it is intended to house will be put at unacceptable levels of risk. If this application is approved it sets a extremely dangerous precedent for heritage protection in England.  The applicant has delayed urgent repairs to the important Grade I building seemingly in order to use the building's poor condition as an excuse to push through a scheme that causes harm to the historic building, but delivers no public benefit.   If the application succeeds, other owners of Grade I buildings might do the same. Please act now, by signing this petition to alert the Planning Committee to these serious concerns and urge them to do the right thing and reject this harmful proposal. Please note the donation button on this page funds 38 Degrees, not our campaign - if you are able to donate to our campaign work, please click HERE NON-UK SUPPORTERS 38 Degrees is a UK platform and requires UK post codes with signatures. If you are non-UK and would like to support our cause - please sign here instead https://saveleadenhall.org/sign-our-petition-as-a-non-uk-resident/

Blackpool Tower is not simply an attraction — it is the defining symbol of Blackpool and a nationally recognised heritage landmark. Under current management by Merlin Entertainments, the Tower has steadily lost the character, dignity, and sense of occasion that once made it special. Long-standing traditions that reflected pride and heritage have been removed, presentation has been standardised, and key parts of the Tower are no longer reliably open throughout the year. These decisions may reduce operating costs, but they have also weakened the Tower’s identity and diminished the visitor experience. The Tower’s decline does not exist in isolation. When its presence is reduced or hollowed out, Blackpool itself suffers — through loss of atmosphere, reduced off-season tourism, and damage to the town’s reputation. A landmark of this cultural importance should not be treated as a generic, seasonal attraction. We call on Merlin Entertainments, working with Blackpool Council, to: 1. Publicly recognise Blackpool Tower as a heritage landmark, not a standard attraction 2. Restore heritage presentation, atmosphere, and standards that reflect the Tower’s historic importance 3. Commit to reliable, year-round opening of core Tower experiences wherever safety allows 4. Engage openly with the public and local community about the Tower’s long-term future 5. Prioritise long-term cultural and economic value over short-term cost cutting Blackpool Tower matters. Protecting its heritage is not nostalgia — it is essential to the future of Blackpool itself. “Local issue with national heritage importance” Blackpool Tower is more than a tourist attraction — it is the heart of the town’s identity and a symbol recognised across the UK. Its heritage, traditions, and unique atmosphere have drawn generations of visitors, supporting local businesses, jobs, and the wider tourism economy. When the Tower loses its character, closes off key experiences, or strips away its historic presentation, it is not just the attraction that suffers — Blackpool itself loses a core part of its cultural and economic vitality. Protecting the Tower’s heritage ensures the town remains a place people want to visit, preserves jobs and revenue year-round, and safeguards a landmark that is central to Blackpool’s story and pride. This is not just about Blackpool though. This is a landmark and part of the heritage of the whole of the UK... Could you imagine the Eiffel Tower being taken over and run down so badly that it made Paris into what Blackpool has become? 

Thousands of jobseekers are wasting huge amounts of time, energy, and emotional investment applying for jobs, only to find out at the interview stage that the salary does not meet their needs. Phrases like "Competitive Salary" are misleading and hide the true seniority of a role. Transparency stops the unfair practice of low-balling candidates based on their "salary expectations" rather than the value of the job. It saves time for both the recruiter and the applicant. In 2024, I was made redundant after working for a large financial institution for 25 years in mid-senior roles. So far I have been unsuccessful at finding a new job, despite my experience and qualifications. For most applications, I am asked about my salary history or expectations. Even when I explicitly state I am happy to accept significantly less, sometimes £20-25k less I can tell employers are afraid I will 'walk' as soon as a better offer comes along. In several cases, I wouldn't have applied for a role at all had I known the pay wouldn't meet my financial needs. Listing the salary upfront would have saved everyone's time For example, one role required three days in the office. Because I have mobility issues and don't drive, the commute would have cost me £260 a month in taxis, but the employer was unwilling to negotiate on this. It was heartbreaking to receive a rejection email after investing so much time preparing, researching, and tailoring my CV for a job that was financially unviable from the start.

Public footpaths in Enfield and across the country are becoming dangerous to walk on. The uneven paving and broken concrete create serious trip hazards, especially for the elderly and infirm. As a pensioner, I am now afraid to leave my rented home unaided because I fear tripping on the uneven pavement and injuring myself. Going out for food shopping should not be a frightening experience. Everyone deserves to walk in their community without taking their life in their hands or fearing a fall due to careless maintenance.

Seasonal celebrations are meaningful because they are limited in time. When retailers rush ahead, they dilute the excitement, anticipation, and cultural significance associated with these holidays. Instead of fostering joy, this practice contributes to consumer fatigue and a sense that traditions are being reduced to marketing cycles rather than moments to be genuinely enjoyed.

To protect drivers from charges that could have been avoided by holding owners and car parks more accountable for ensuring correct, visible signage, and to prevent profiting from this.

What is the cause for concern? Recent amendments to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill risk going far beyond the vital goal of safeguarding children and instead normalising the creation of permanent surveillance capability within personal devices used in the United Kingdom. Amendments tabled in December 2025 would: mandate tamper-proof system software on smartphones and tablets supplied in the UK, enabling on-device scanning of content to prevent CSAM; and require highly effective age-assurance for access to VPN services, meaning individuals would be required to prove their identity in order to use privacy-preserving tools. Protecting children is a shared and non-negotiable objective. However, these proposals would require surveillance and identity-linking capability to be built directly into consumer technology by law. Once such capability exists, its future expansion becomes a matter of political decision rather than technical feasibility, creating a serious and lasting risk of scope creep far beyond the original intent. The concern is not the existence of VPN services themselves. The concern is that accessing privacy and security tools would require users to surrender their identity, fundamentally altering the relationship between individuals, technology providers, and the state. This undermines anonymity, weakens digital security, and creates permanent records of lawful private behaviour. Of particular concern is that these measures are being advanced within a children’s welfare bill, rather than through the Online Safety Act framework, where changes of this scale and technical impact would reasonably be expected to undergo full public, technical, and civil-liberty scrutiny. Introducing device-level inspection and identity-binding powers in this way limits transparent debate and democratic accountability. The United Kingdom has long upheld the principle of policing by consent.   Mandating inspection-by-design and identity-linked access to personal technology replaces that principle with enforcement through architecture, where compliance is unavoidable, invisible, and no longer meaningfully contestable. This represents a fundamental shift in how authority is exercised in a democratic society. This petition does not oppose child protection. It calls for safeguarding measures that are targeted, proportionate, transparent, and subject to proper parliamentary scrutiny, without embedding permanent surveillance or identity-tracking infrastructure into private devices and everyday digital tools. We are calling on: 🔹 Lord Strasburger, a long-standing and respected critic of surveillance creep and technology-based overreach, to oppose any amendment that mandates on-device scanning or identity-linked access to privacy tools under the guise of child protection. 🔹 MPs and peers across all parties who have previously defended privacy, civil liberties, and the principle of policing by consent, to publicly challenge these proposals and ensure they are removed or fundamentally rewritten. We call on Parliament to: Remove or fundamentally amend any provision that mandates on-device scanning or surveillance-capable software; reject measures that require individuals to identify themselves in order to access lawful privacy and security tools; and ensure child-safety policy does not create permanent, expandable surveillance or identity-tracking infrastructure by default. Protect children — without turning personal devices or privacy tools into mechanisms of surveillance.

Everyone is aware of the atrocities that occur to marine life in Sea World and other marine parks all around the world. Please stop the UK from advertising these holidays and prevent the parks benefitting from the British people’s money.  These highly intelligent creatures should be protected and left in the oceans with their families and not forced to perform. UK banned animal circuses so why allow advertising SeaWorld or other animal entertainment holidays and activities? Marine life should be protected and left alone to play a very important role in the oceans and help protect us from climate change. All sea life has a vital role of protecting our planet and humans disturbing it is playing a catastrophic part in the global climate crisis. 

I am one of 62 former Vodafone franchisees who lost almost everything. I took out loans to franchise three of Vodafone’s shops, only to have the rug pulled out from under me when commission rates were abruptly slashed. The impact was devastating. My revenue collapsed, and the stress was so severe I ended up on a heart monitor. My family feared I would take my own life. I am not alone; many of my colleagues have faced financial ruin, depression, and the risk of losing their homes. For another Vodafone franchisee and lifelong supporter of the company, Adrian Howe, the pressure appears to have become overwhelming. He is believed to have taken his own life in 2018, leaving behind a devastated family. In the weeks before his death, his family have said he was deeply anxious due to severe financial pressure, having been required to secure what he believed was an unviable second store against the family home. Adrian should never have been put in that position - franchisees need better protections.  From coffee shops to the Post Office, thousands of local business owners have zero protection from this kind of corporate pressure. We take the risk, but the big brands hold all the power. Ministers have promised to look into these "harrowing stories." We need to make sure they don't just look, but act. Please sign to join our call on the Government to follow through on creating strong and robust statutory protections for franchisees.