Public libraries are currently under attack as never before. Quite apart from the imperatives of cutting council spending, some people question the point of public libraries. With the advent of the internet and the ebook, public libraries are described as out-dated and of being a luxury we cannot afford when other services are facing financial pressure. However, “The National Literacy Trust says that children who go to a library are twice as likely as those who don’t to read well. It is not just picking up a book. It is the social experience of reading, talking about the books, browsing, comparing what you have read with family and friends. Librarians open doors to new worlds, new possibilities. Children and adults do not just need information to thrive as thinking beings, but stories. Libraries are not in decline because of some natural, historic progression, but because of the monstrous cultural vandalism of savage cost-cutting." (Alan Gibbons) The community aspect of libraries, including storytimes/rhymetimes and free picture books is especially important for new mothers and their children. For many children the library is the only place they will ever be physically engaged with all the possibilities there are on the shelves. “That is why many small children’s activities are based in library buildings, a resource not to be found or replicated anywhere else. Having a space where the sole purpose is to engage with words and pictures, to create memories that last a lifetime, is a delight and not to be given away lightly.” (Ann Chambers) Even leaving aside books, the lack of access to the internet can reduce exam results by a grade. Public libraries can provide that access to children who do not have it at home. Borrowing of children’s books is increasing. Education is for adults and senior citizens too – senior citizens use libraries for education (notably, the U3A), students for quiet study, those new to computers for computer training. Libraries offer everyone a safe place to meet others, to use resources they could not otherwise afford and to strengthen the local community. The long-term effect of closing our libraries for a short-term monetary gain would be catastrophic for our towns and villages.

There is far to much food waste when we have people going hungry. All stores should be required to donate unwanted food to charities and to food banks. It should apply to any supermarket with a footprint of 400 square metres or larger. If companies flout the law they are to incur fines. Supermarkets are to sign a donation deal with charities, which will be able to increase the quality and diversity of food that they currently get and distribute. In terms of nutritional balance, they currently have a deficit of meat and a lack of fresh fruit and vegetables. This will hopefully allow food-banks to push a fresh source of nutritional quality food to people and families in need.

We, the undersigned, care deeply about the arts, and equally the natural environment and the rights of humans around the world. We believe arts and cultural institutions should break their ties with oil companies such as BP, a company which has caused repeated environmental catastrophes, including the Deepwater Horizon spill, and been implicated in numerous human rights violations. Furthermore, BP is turning a profit on the continued extraction of dirty fossil fuels, pushing us towards runaway climate change, whilst lobbying against environmental laws and clean energy alternatives [1, 2]. By accepting sponsorship from BP, cultural institutions give the oil giant much-needed positive publicity, and help it to obscure the destructive reality of its activities with a veneer of respectability. At the same time, oil sponsorship taints the reputation of the institutions that accept it. We recognise the vital importance of arts funding, particularly after public funding cuts. However BP sponsorship provides less than 1% of the annual income of the British Museum, Tate, and Royal Opera House, and just 3% of the income of the National Portrait Gallery [3], yet BP are allowed to place their name and logo alongside the names of these institutions, on their website and in exhibitions (despite many artists and arts workers having strong views against such branding) [4, 5]. BP needs these institutions far more than they need BP. This is the 26th year that BP has sponsored the Portrait Awards, through an agreement with the National Portait Gallery (NPG) in London. Fortunately this agreement is due to end this year. The NPG could choose not to renew the agreement, and to find a more appropriate sponsor for the Portrait Awards. However, negotiations about renewal are already underway. The NPG will not drop BP as a sponsor without strong pressure from the public and the arts sector. We need to act now. Over its 26 years of sponsorship, BP has repeatedly caused great harms to the environment and people; it has been responsible for multiple deadly explosions and oil spillages, including that of Deepwater Horizon, which killed 11 people, decimated ecosystems and livelihoods in the Gulf of Mexico, and resulted in the largest corporate fine in history [6]. It has traded with oppressive regimes from Azerbaijan to Libya, and has even been implicated in torture in Colombia [7]. It has recently expanded into tar sands, an extreme form of energy production which contaminates water and tramples on indigenous rights [8]. Worldwide, fossil fuel companies have currently laid claim to five times the volume of oil, gas and coal that humanity can burn without causing dangerous and destructive levels of global warming [9] - despite this, BP has stated that it will continue to explore and exploit new reserves of oil and gas into the future. In 1989, the National Portrait Gallery ended its eight-year Portrait Award sponsorship agreement with tobacco company John Player [10]. It is time for this national cultural institution to show such moral leadership and forward-thinking once again, by cutting ties with BP. As a partner of the National Portrait Gallery, the Scottish National Portrait Gallery can influence this decision. We call on this respected national cultural institution to put pressure on the NPG to find a more appropriate sponsor, and to refuse to host the BP Portrait Awards until a new sponsor has been found. For more information, please see: http://bp-or-not-bp.org/ http://bp-or-not-bp.org/scotland http://platformlondon.org/p-publications/picturethis/ References 1. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/may/02/bp-deepwater-horizon-oil-spills 2. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/21/bp-tops-the-list-of-firms-obstructing-climate-action-in-europe 3. http://platformlondon.org/p-publications/artoilinfographic/ 4. http://fossilfundsfree.org/who/ 5. http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/jun/24/no-oil-painting-bp-sponsorship-npg-portrait-award 6. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/02/bp-will-pay-largest-environmental-fine-in-us-history-for-gulf-oil-spill 7. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/22/gilberto-torres-survived-colombias-death-squads-now-he-wants-justice 8. http://environmentaldefence.ca/reports/canadas-toxic-tar-sands-most-destructive-project-earth 9. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719 10. http://platformlondon.org/p-publications/picturethis/ 11. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-risks-as-conclusive-as-link-between-smoking-and-lung-cancer/

1. Mae’r celfyddydau'n dod â phobl o bob oed at ei gilydd gan gyrraedd pawb 2. Mae gweithgareddau celfyddydol hygyrch ar lawr gwlad yn cael effaith uniongyrchol ar ansawdd bywydau pobl 3. Mae'r celfyddydau'n gwneud gwahaniaeth gwirioneddol i'n cymunedau 4. Mae'r celfyddydau'n cyfrannu'n helaeth at economi'r sir drwy gynnig cyflogaeth a chynhyrchu incwm 1. The arts bring people of all ages together from all walks of life 2. Accessible arts activities have a direct impact on the quality of people's lives 3. The arts make a significant difference to our communities 4. The arts make a significant contribution to the county's economy by offering employment and generating income

The GP Walk In Centre located at Asda Hereford was originally opened in December 2009 and is used by many people. This walk in centre is a vital service to the community. It has been threatened with closure previously. In 2010 it was looking at being moved to the A&E department at the County hospital Glenda Vaughan-Powell (then Councillor) successfully campaigned to keep it open with a 700 signature petition handed to the Hereford Mayor, calling for the new centre to stay south of the river. We are again faced with possible closure. Please sign this petition thus adding your support to keeping this centre open in south Hereford.

Lewes Crown Post Office is under threat. On January 19th Post Office Ltd announced plans to franchise 39 of its branches, and close three. Lewes Post Office is on the list of those to be franchised once a suitable retailer is found. This franchising is not for our benefit. Lewes is a busy Post Office. Customers will be all too clearly aware of the queues frequently experienced at peak times. Basically, the Post Office wants to sell the valuable Victorian building that our branch is housed in. Putting it into a local shop, will lead to longer queues, less services offered, and an all round inferior service, which will affect businesses and individual customers. Anyone who has visited Ringmer Post Office will be aware of this kind of service. Our Post Office has been on the same site for over 100 years. We have to stop this move. Thank you

14th-18th Dec 2015: over 350 individuals came to Loaves and Fishes Charity in East Kilbride for food for their family. They were desperate - mothers crying because they had nothing for their children to eat. Some were walking 3-4 miles with children in the rain. If it's happening in E.K. then it's happening in other areas. We get constant cries for help from social work & welfare depts because they can't help them. Their only crime is being poor. At least during World War 2 our mothers payed for their food. 2016 they come to food banks because they have no money

Lincolnshire is a very rural county, and not everyone has a car. A lot of people rely on their bus services to get in groceries, to go to work, or hospital. Transport is a vital link for travelling to work, to community services, such as health servicea and shops. They are also vital for enabling social contact with friends and families, especially for those who are disabled or elderly.

It is important that all disabled veterans are supported by the government as it is the same government that placed them in areas of conflict that has resulted in them requiring financial supports as a result of the injuries they received while serving their country this including loss of mobility, loss of their ability to maintain their basic personal care, ie such as washing dressing, nutrition. Please support this petition to ensure that those U.K veterans who have been left permanently disabled do not also find themselves financially disadvantaged due to the these changes. Ian Duncan Smith needs to remove this process, provide a fair system and be forced to support disabled veterans and not just on Poppy Day. It will only take a few minutes of your time, but a life time of difference to improve the quality of life for disabled veterans.

If you are not aware, the decision has been made to remove the second fire engine and retained Firefighters from Oakham Fire Station on the 31/03/16. Removing the second fire engine and retained Firefighters from Oakham Fire Station will mean slower response times to emergencies, which will have a significant impact, putting life and property at greater risk in Rutland and surrounding areas. There is also a very high likelihood of the Heavy Rescue Unit (HRU) also crewed by Oakham retained Firefighters and used for incidents involving larger vehicles also being removed. You may be aware that Uppingham are now recruiting retained Firefighters…..! This is because they are under crewed and struggle to keep their fire engine “on the run” (available for calls). If the second fire engine at Oakham is removed, the fire engine at Uppingham in most cases will be the fire engine to cover Oakham when the first fire engine (Oakham’s first fire engine) is on a call. When Uppingham are not available it could be a fire engine from Melton or Leicester covering. We all understand that money has to be saved, but removing front line services in not the way. We all pay our council tax with a proportion of it going to Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Combined Fire Authority (check your council tax demand notice for details). We do not mind paying this as we all feel that if we are unlucky enough to be involved in an accident or a fire, with rapid response from the fire service hopefully the outcome will not be too severe. If the removal of the second fire engine goes ahead leaving a greatly reduced service, putting life and property at greater risk in Rutland and surrounding areas, do you think we will then be getting a discount in our council tax to reflect the change…? I doubt this very much, so we would be paying the same for a greatly reduced service. We cannot let this happen, we need to keep all the people of Rutland and surrounding areas as safe as possible and respond to emergencies as quick as possible. This will be your last chance to make your opinion count; I fear that if the second fire engine is removed there will be no chance of it returning. Please sign the petition.

Increasing numbers of homeless people are being arrested for begging around the country. In 2013-14, 2771 cases were brought before the courts, a 70% increase on the previous year. Police use an archaic law which deems those found begging to be 'idle and disorderly'. Begging was made a recordable offence in 2003 against the strong criticisms of civil rights groups and homelessness organisations. Those prosecuted can be fined up to £1000 excluding court charges when found with just a few pennies. Those who have 'gathered alms' (that is, accepted money, food or other material goods offered to them) can be prosecuted under this same law with the same consequences. Some people are kept in cells for several nights. Although begging in and of itself is not an imprisonable offence, if the person is already on bail for another case a simple arrest for begging can lead to imprisonment. Those who are fined will inevitably have to beg more to pay off these fines, risking further arrests and fines, a punishment which stands out in its absurdity. Punishing the destitute for trying to survive is both costly and morally abhorrent. It is a waste of tax payers' money which is spent paying police who 'catch people out' in organised undercover operations, as well as on court cases to prosecute them. The minimum cost of bringing one case to the Magistrates' Court is £1000, meaning that in the year 2013-14, bringing begging cases before the courts cost the taxpayer at least £2.777 million. This is money that could be spent helping people rather than punishing them. Police also routinely move homeless people on under part 3 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014) which gives police the power to confiscate property and exclude individuals from a particular area for up to 48 hours, with the officer also able to impose by what manner and route the person must leave. Failure to comply is a criminal offence which can result in a £2500 fine or 3 months in prison. Refusing to surrender your property is punishable by a fine of up to £500. The two conditions needed by officers to issue a dispersal order are firstly, that the constable has 'reasonable grounds to suspect that the behaviour of the person in the locality has contributed or is likely to contribute to (a) members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b) the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder, and secondly, that the constable considers that giving a direction to the person is necessary for the purpose of removing or reducing the likelihood of (a) or (b)'. Given that begging is a crime considered 'idle and disorderly', the two laws in tandem essentially give police de facto power to exclude any homeless person from any area simply because they think it is likely that the person, being homeless, might beg there. The highly subjective definition of 'anti-social behaviour' as that which contributes or is likely to contribute to members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed reinforces this and even with the decriminalisation of begging, would still give police the power to move on any homeless person from any area simply because they believe doing so is necessary for the purpose of removing or reducing the likelihood of members of the public being distressed by seeing them. Seeing people forced to live on the streets is distressing to much of the public for good reason, but this compassionate distress means that under this definition a homeless person is considered to be exhibiting anti-social behaviour simply by existing visibly. The anti-social behaviour that causes the public distress is not caused by the homeless person however, but by the authorities' failure to provide people with shelter in a country that has 600,000 empty homes. As described by someone living on the street, being asked to move on when you have nowhere to go is like being asked to walk into a brick wall. These laws and their enforcement victimize vulnerable people who are already suffering the daily struggle of life on the streets or in insecure and unstable temporary accommodation. We believe that kicking someone for limping when it is you who cut off their leg is shameless and cruel. We believe that the government should be providing homes for the homeless, not handcuffs. We therefore call on parliament to repeal without replacement section 3 of the Vagrancy Act (1824), to amend part 3 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014) to safeguard homeless people from its discriminatory use, and for an ultimate end to the criminalisation of homelessness by any and all other laws that may be newly concocted or dug up for this purpose. If you have an MP who may be sympathetic, get in touch with them to push this issue to parliament. We launched this petition at our demo at Brighton Magistrate's court on the 20th January.

This family center brings together all different parents from many walks of life and helps support them through the good and the bad times. Provides a warm and friendly environment for parents and preschool children to attend 4 days a week. Without it, many parents would feel isolated.