People with facial differences are faced with discrimination every day. Peoples perceptions and attitudes can be discriminating and demoralising. People with facial difference should be treat equally with the same opportunities as everyone else. Have laws and policies to protect them from negative attitudes and protection from bullying and unacceptable behaviour from society

We currently face a problematic situation where there is a schism between the laws that protect patients within the NHS and those that relate to private healthcare when an injury is sustained by a patient due to negligent treatment. Private healthcare patients are commonly led to believe that the care they are paying for will exceed the highest standards offered by the NHS, and assume that the claims made in company mission statements, advertising literature and company accounts have to be correct and true by law. Unfortunately, this is not so. In cases where patients are treated wrongfully or negligently private healthcare patients currently have less access to adequate redress and compensation than NHS patients. This is partly because liability insurance for surgeons in the private sector is discretionary rather than mandatory meaning that cover can be withdrawn – even retrospectively – leaving patients without the possibility of compensation. The petitioners therefore ask Parliament to legislate to require all private healthcare providers/companies/institutions to have liability insurance covering compensation for negligence in the work of their employees and of freelance healthcare professionals working on their behalf or practising on their premises. Furthermore, private healthcare providers/companies/institutions should be obligated to ensure that the surgeons they provide to perform procedures are not only correctly qualified and competent, but also not under investigation, suspension or other disciplinary action from other private healthcare providers/companies/institutions or NHS authorities. At present legislation is insufficient, allowing one private healthcare company to permit their legal representatives to write in a legal defence document that they were ‘under no obligation to provide competent surgeons to perform surgery at the hospital’ and had ‘no duty to protect patients from harm, and risk of injury’. The Petitioners would like to add that legislation should be put in place to ensure that no surgeon under disciplinary procedures can work anywhere in the UK (NHS or private sector) until the issues for which they are being investigated are properly and completely resolved to the satisfaction of the GMC, the patient(s) and in the case of fatalities the patients' families. We ask Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt and the Department of Health to close the legal loophole which allows for private healthcare patients to be left without protection or redress when things go wrong. With an increasing role played by private healthcare companies fulfilling NHS contracts we must put public safety first and ensure that private healthcare companies are obligated to provide clinical excellence for all their patients, to be transparent in their investigation of complaints and to provide proper protection and redress if things go wrong. We must not allow negligent practice to run rife in the private sector, and we cannot allow ruthless profiteering without responsibility to permeate our NHS.

During a time of rapidly increasing tension and violence in North Birmingham in 2011 Tariq agreed to speak to the crowds despite having very recently lost his son in the violence: "Basically I lost my son," he told the crowd. "Blacks, Asians, whites - we all live in the same community. Why do we have to kill one another? "What started these riots? And what's escalated? Why are we doing this? I lost my son. Step forward if you want to lose your sons. "Otherwise calm down and go home."

A speed awareness can modify and change driving behaviours, fines /points are less effective. Might save more lives on the road!

Small companies are already under massive strains with various levies/taxes/regulations compliance costs and often only make a small profit. When thieves steal goods from them they will struggle to replace those goods, which are often essential to trade and may force them to become unemployed through no fault of their own. Small businesses need support!

In February and March 2012 my 11 year old daughter, Sophie, was put in a ‘spit hood’ by Sussex Police officers on at least three occasions. Sophie has a rare neurological disability, similar to autism, that can cause her to act in ways that people find challenging. She can become very upset when she is over-stimulated and can sometimes spit out of frustration. I had never heard of a ‘spit hood’ until one was used on my daughter. It is a material bag that goes over someone’s head with a drawstring to tighten it. Sussex Police allows its officers to put spit hoods on anyone who is spitting, regardless of whether they are a hardened adult criminal or a terrified 11 year old disabled girl who isn’t in control of her actions. I cannot describe how traumatic it was for Sophie to be hooded by police officers. Due to her disability she finds it very upsetting to have someone even touch her head. Having strangers put a bag over her head when she was already extremely distressed was profoundly shocking for her and she still hasn’t fully recovered from the experience over four years later. In June 2016 the Independent Police Complaints Commission published its report into Sophie’s treatment by the police. It found that 11 police officers and one member of police staff had cases to answer for misconduct. However, the IPCC wasn’t able to criticise the repeated use of the spit hoods as this was authorised by Sussex Police policy. Obviously it is not a pleasant experience to be spat at; however, the risk to police officers needs to be balanced against the very real psychological and physical risks to children who are subjected to this shocking treatment. Several of the largest policy forces around the country, including West Midlands Police and Merseyside Police, do not authorise the use of spit hoods on anyone let alone on children. In 2009 a man died after he was placed in a spit hood and became unwell in a Peterborough police station. In the wake of national media coverage about Sophie’s case (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/08/ipcc-criticises-sussex-police-treatment-11-year-old-disabled-girl) Sussex Police confirmed that it would not stop its officers from hooding children. I think this is wrong. The police do an important and difficult job, but I don’t think they should be allowed to treat children in an inhuman, degrading and dangerous way. If you agree with me please sign this petition and call on Sussex Police to stop using spit hoods on children. Thank you. Note: names have been changed for legal reasons.

Children are living in poverty!

Philip Green's behaviour in relation to BHS has yet again highlighted the loopholes and weaknesses in UK law governing the handling of money and finance. Green's behaviour is not untypical and it is clear that there are people who will always seize opportunities to make themselves wealthy with no heed for the consequences to other people and to society at large. The law needs to be changed to take account of this inevitable human behaviour so as to prevent the damage that arises from it. Removing Green's knighthood may satisfy a need for revenge but it does not even approach solving the problem.

This matters to the people you have impoverished. It matters to the whole of the business community that you have disgraced. It matters to the nation which cares for its reputation as a global leader in corporate governance. It ought to matter to you that your name is vilified and is become a byword for amoral greed. It matters to me because it matters.

There is some concern that Facebook and Twitter are being manipulated in order to undermine political debate in the UK. Many people who suggest this are accused of being paranoid or conspiracy theorists. Facebook and Twitter have the resources and data to confirm whether or not this is true, and if it is true to confirm whether or not it is a technical breach of their Terms and Conditions. It is also within their power to indicate the likely source of such a campaign. By conducting such an investigation and publishing the results, 2 of the largest media organisation in the world have a powerful opportunity to send a message about what is acceptable behaviour in political discourse on social media, and more broadly to make a strong statement about the value of fairness and honesty in democratic society.

I am a carer.I was looking after a lady with Autzimers when she became violent and distraught and attacked me.I called an ambulance for her thinking they could help.They called the police and she was dragged off screaming frightened and becoming more violent.She was handcuffed and locked in a cell for at least 2 days before she was referred to a hospital.This poor lady was now a criminal as she attacked a police officer out of fear.I cant believe this was the answer to helping a vunerable person with a mental health issue.

We need to get the Ministry Of Transport to pursue VW (in the courts if necessary) and get them to give the UK Owners the same priority and compensation as they have given to the American owners (obviously they were frightened of the American legal system ). We appear to have been sidelined as not important and the UK Government has not promoted our case at all. I drive a VW van and have had only a single letter to tell me my vehicle would have to be re worked to bring it into line , but since that letter a few years ago I have not heard a word. About time some butt kicking was done in high places .