It is important because it has become a health hazard to the public and local communities, as well as causing rotten smell. Vermin and the list goes on

It's barbaric, inhumaine and cruel, Enough is enough. Let England stand above the rest and be a Great Nation. Stand tall and show the world CRUELTY for Vainity is NOT acceptable.

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths - They should NOT be allowed to hide their Bad Maths!

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths.

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths. Manchester City Council has scandalously allowed Circle Square, on Oxford Road's former BBC site, to create 677 apartments but require no affordable housing. Similarly, First Street South, near the Mancunian Way, will comprise 624 new flats, but requires no affordable housing. Either of these locations could have housed the new MMU campus in Hulme, but instead the Council GAVE land to MMU - land which was previously covered in trees, grass and wildflowers. It's time that Manchester City Council stood up to these developers instead of cosying up to them - close the "viability" get-out clause! I'm not the only one who is angry with the Council over this issue: http://ilovemanchester.com/2017/03/23/we-need-more-than-luxury-and-skyscrapers-campaigners-to-tell-new-council-chief.aspx

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths.

Current planning law states that if a developer will make less than 20% profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less than 20% profit on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths.

Temple Newsam Park is a free public park to be enjoyed by everyone. Should these plans go ahead, the facility will enhance the park and bring more visitor from Leeds and further afield to the House and Farm. There may be a requirement to improve car parks but the overall impact of traffic in the area should not increase significantly. Groups are staggered when starting the tree top adventure course, therefore they will be staggered when arriving and leaving. The adventure course will bring both tourist revenue and employment to the area. As can be seen in the picture on this petition, a very small proportion of the estate will be used for this venture. It is also being situation in what is already a noisy section of the park so noise pollution should have zero to no impact on the peacefulness enjoyed in other areas of the estate.

It is very important for parents and carers as they are being charged more by companies at a particular time of year (school Holidays) when the prices are cheaper at other times through the year.

Starbucks are: TAX DODGERS http://fortune.com/2016/03/11/apple-google-taxes-eu/ UNETHICAL http://www.justmeans.com/blogs/starbucks-most-unethical-coffee-chain-in-the-uk UNHEALTHY https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/starbucks-coffee-and-your-health-bucking-starbucks-experience On campus services should focus on value for Students, fair and ethical trading practices and support for the local community. Not to support a company with a history of ethical and environmental abuses, one which aims to drive out local business and which profits from horrible foreign working conditions.

Requesting a GRC or doctor's letter is in breach of the Equality Act 2010. "By changing their name trans people automatically have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment under the Equality Act 2010" (uktrans.info - http://uktrans.info/attachments/article/292/transqualcerts.pdf), creating the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. This effectively means that Pearson's requirements are discriminatory, as well as in breach of the Equality Act 2010. Trans individuals already experience enough discrimination trying to live life day-to-day, and several people I have contacted have also experienced discrimination at Pearson's hands. It's time to change to a level playing field so that we, as trans individuals, receive the qualifications we worked hard to gain, in the correct, accurate gender and name.

SimSimi has quickly become one of the U.K.’s most popular apps. Yet, this chat-box is often used to bully others. In fact, it allows users to anonymously programme a series of messages – regardless of how abusive, violent or explicit these may be – so that they are received by the targeted victim as soon as s/he logs into the app and searches their name. Due to the anonymity of these messages, it is next to impossible to hold bullies accountable. For these reasons, schools and even police forces in the U.K. have had to resort to sending letters to parents in order to warn them about the app. Even though SimSimi is restricted to people who are 17 years old or older, many children who are much younger than that have been able to download it. Most parents are unaware of the fact that ‘Simi Simi’ is dangerous for their children and that they could be at risk of bullying, which is bound to have serious implications on them. SimSimi must be banned before it causes even more damage. A few years ago the website Ask.fm was banned – but only after a few teenagers had committed suicide following the bullying they experienced using it. We must be quicker this time to ensure the same does not happen again.