Bristol Council currently uses four glyphosate herbicides including Monsanto's Roundup on our streets and parks. This is despite the fact that the World Health Organisation (WHO) has identified glyphosate as likely to cause cancer in humans. The WHO finding sits alongside a wealth of existing evidence that raises alarming questions marks over the long term safety of exposure to glyphosate both on its own and in combination with other chemicals found in formulas such as Roundup. The use of glyphosates has already been banned or restricted in 8 countries. It is not acceptable that ourselves, our children and the animals we share this city with are being routinely exposed to these chemicals whether we like it or not. If Bristol is to have any credentials as the current European Green Capital, it must exercise the precautionary principle and follow the example of cities such as Chicago, Paris and Rotterdam by banning this spraying in public places. This is a matter of great importance for those of us who care about each other's health and the health of our children, our cats, our dogs and all the flora and fauna of this city, of course including our beloved bees. For more information see this article from The Bristol Cable: https://thebristolcable.org/2015/10/bristol-monsanto-and-chemicals/ There are viable safe alternatives to glyphosates. The Netherlands have outright banned glyphosates in public spaces and are using a hot water treatment instead. A hot water and foam method is also available in the UK and Bristol Council is already aware that this can be a more effective alternative than hot water on its own. Glyphosates are the cheapest option but we must send the message loud and clear that value is not just about price and that the health and safety issues around glyphosate render its 'cheap and easy' status irrelevant. Other effective methods may cost more in cash terms but represent far better value to local residents. Using a formula such as Roundup in our public spaces is simply unacceptable no matter how cheap and quick it makes the task of urban weed management.

His request is simple; he wants to speak to you Mr Cameron, to present you with scientific evidence and to show you the social opposition to fracking, particularly from Lancashire where he lives, but he also acts as a passionate green voice for many people in the UK who feel the same way. He isn't a scientist, or a powerful politician or a celebrity; he is a regular everyday bloke who believes fracking is a very bad idea - today (4/12/2015) is his 12th day without food. He wants to talk to you about the exponential growth of support from regular everyday folks who don't have a voice on the telly, the radio or in the papers, but who want you and our government to deliver renewable, sustainable, safe options to power our country. He just wants to talk to you Mr Cameron - go and see him! * * * Gayzer has no PR or media team, no YouTube channel or popular blog page to help raise his profile. Please show your support for his plight; he is your next-door neighbour, he is the voice in the supermarket queue, he is the one who is putting everything on the line to try to protect the future of all of our children.

The area of concern has played host to a FunFair that has a long and glowing reputation for providing not only recreation for children but also has in the past raised money for the war effort and even managed to purchase a Spitfire Fighter for the War effort. Alongside the Fair can be found the Cricket pitch and Pavilion which is in use during the Cricket season and is very much a part of Village life. Had the Council had the necessary foresight they would have proposed to build the Centre on land especially purchased for this venture i.e. Naishes field across the road from the NNR site and out of harms way. There are several options available on this site for developing the Centre including one option that would utilise an underpass to keep visitors away from crossing Swincoate road. Bear in mind the Council in it's infinite wisdom failed to get the last centre built without causing serious problems even to the extent of building over the roots of several Veteran Oak Trees, at least one has since died. They also failed to take account of disabled persons and access to the forest and that even today have failed to rectify matters. Please give your support to this petition and help the forest and NNR to stay intact for future generations to come. Thank You from all concerned.

While big energy companies make record profits, the fuel bills of ordinary Londoners are out of control. And while other major cities make the transition to clean energy -- tackling air pollution and climate change -- London is lagging behind. We don’t have to accept profiteering, poverty and pollution. Switched On London is calling for a people-powered alternative. A publicly owned company with social justice, clean energy and democracy at its core... SOCIAL JUSTICE --> We want an energy company that offers fair, affordable prices, based on a progressive pricing system. --> We want an energy company that does not cut-off access to those who can’t pay and that does not install unwanted prepayment meters. --> We want an energy company that re-invests all revenues in measures to address fuel poverty and the cost of living crisis, particularly prioritising ambitious investment in household energy efficiency measures. --> We want an energy company that treats its workers fairly, meaning paying at least a London Living Wage, good terms and conditions, secure, unionised and non-precarious work. CLEAN ENERGY --> We want ambitious public investment in new renewable energy generating capacity (we are initiating research into an appropriate specific investment target). A significant portion should be invested in renewable capacity in London. --> The GLA and London local authorities must divest their pension funds from fossil fuels, and re-invest this money to fund the new renewable capacity we need. Other public funding sources for new renewable investment to be explored include municipal bonds and borrowing. --> We want an energy company that aims to sell 100% renewable energy as soon as feasibly possible. DEMOCRACY --> We want a company fully owned by London public bodies (without any private partners) but controlled by people directly. --> To do this, we want to integrate a range of democratic mechanisms, including: 1. A board of directors made up of: 1/3rd London public officials; 1/3rd energy company employees elected democratically by the whole energy company workforce; 1/3rd ordinary London residents, elected democratically with all London residents and all non-London customers given a vote. Board membership must guarantee at least 50% representation of women. 2. Annual open assemblies in every London borough, where representatives of the company have to answer questions and take input and advice. 3. The creation of an online democratic forum where people can discuss and influence the company’s operations, including through public petitions. 4. An obligation for the board to discuss public petitions, if backed by 1% or more of London’s population. 5. An obligation for an online referendum on a proposal, if backed by 5% of London’s population. 6. 100% transparency in all operations. 7. These democratic measures apply to all London residents, regardless of citizenship/nationality status.

This is important because it will help save the environment.

The Swansea Bay lagoon project heralds a new 'world first' in energy supply. It was hailed as 'a game changer for British energy, a catalyst for the birth and expansion of an industry with the potential to create energy by harnessing a predictable and renewable resource.' It would harness the power of the tides to create energy- it's doing it every day. All we need to do is make it work in our favour. Anyone who has reservations about any other means of energy creation should have their attention focused on this project. This project is under threat, and along with it the unprecedented opportunities for a disadvantaged area to create worthwhile, real jobs in business, education, tourism and environmental communities. We urge you to stick to your pledge to support this project and consider how wonderful it would be to be at the forefront of world innovation in tidal energy production. It's all very well turning to China to fulfill our growing energy needs, but we have this natural resource around our island. We could be out there changing the way the world creates renewable energy. What a missed opportunity it would be for the UK if you abandon it.

Given the choice between purchasing eggs from caged or free range hens, the British public have proven that they care enough about animal welfare to have this inform their purchasing decisions. Independent research has found that 79% of UK consumers take animal welfare into account when shopping, yet most of the method of production labelling in this country is still voluntary and insufficiently regulated and enforced. http://www.rspca.org.uk/getinvolved/campaign/foodlabelling/works Requiring those manufacturers who source meat from intensive "factory" farms to declare this on their packaging by law would help consumers make an informed choice at the point of purchase, while encouraging people to think about where their food comes from and the quality of life the animals involved receive before they become our dinner. The research indicates that 8 out of 10 British shoppers would support this, and the "Labelling Matters" campaign offers a tool for lobbying DEFRA and the EU as individuals with regard to chicken meat: http://www.rspca.org.uk/getinvolved/campaign/foodlabelling/takeaction http://www.onekind.org/campaigns/food_labelling/ It is our opinion that this does not go far enough; and we think that pigs, sheep, cows, and fish deserve the same consideration as chickens. In addition, the meat industry is a major contributor to climate change, and intensive farming methods exacerbate this. While it is unrealistic to expect people to stop eating meat all together, this move would give consumers an indication as to how much their purchasing choices contribute to this global crisis. http://www.cowspiracy.com/ http://www.fawf.org.uk/documents/FAWF_Labelling_Food_FINAL.pdf

The development and use of renewable energy sources is required to protect the future of all who live and work in Gloucestershire from Climate Change. The current strategy of the Pension Fund administered by Gloucestershire County Council Pension Comittee to invest many many £millions in large fossil fuel companies is compromising the future of those of us who live in Gloucestershire and those who contribute to or are receiving GCC pensions.

It is estimated that supermarkets waste around 180,000 tonnes of food each year, with far higher waste in the supply chain caused by their unnecessary cosmetic standard policies, which contribute towards waste of around 3 million tonnes in the supply chain. In Norwich there are over 7,000 children living in poverty, with the effects of childhood malnutrition lasting a lifetime at a significant cost to the taxpayer, with increased spending on social services, criminal justice, healthcare and extra educational support arising from an upbringing below the breadline. The need to redistribute unsold food to those who can’t afford to feed themselves has become so urgent that a number of organisations have recently joined together to form Norwich Food Hub – which aims to collect food from supermarkets, bring it to a central city-centre location for sorting, and redistribute it to community groups helping those in food poverty. Since forming we’ve been in contact with over 15 organisations interested in receiving food, including 6 breakfast and after-school clubs for young children. By supplying to these groups alone we could be feeding over 250 people each day. Using food waste to feed the hungry is not a solution to food poverty. That should be addressed through fair and sustainable welfare policies. However whilst both food waste and food poverty co-exist we need to organise so that this food can be used to help people in need. Support from the Council would go a long way to achieving our aims and reducing food poverty in our city.

Tunnock's is a well known and loved Scottish brand, not only in its native Scotland, but around the world. Tunnock's should pave the way in the biscuit industry as being a leader in important environmental issues and show to be ecologically and environmentally responsible. Using uncertified palm oil in biscuits is contributing to the destruction of rainforests and the near extinction of orangutans and Sumatran tigers. For the unsustainable palm oil industry to flourish indigenous people´s homes are threatened, deforestation leaves animals homeless, carbon dioxide emits poison contributing to greenhouse gases and animals such as orangutans are either killed, badly hurt, starved, or left as orphans. Enjoying a Tunnock's Tea Cake should not reflect such monstrosities.

100% London teamed up with energy experts to come up with nine essential steps to a clean energy future for London. The mayor needs to stand with every Londoner, including businesses, schools, hospitals and local councils, to make sure we build a clean future for our city. Here’s what the new mayor should commit to do to make London 100% clean: - Fix up older homes, to make them warm and energy efficient - Invest in public transport - Create a network of renewable energy suppliers - Make cycling safe and accessible for everybody - A city-wide solar power strategy - Make freight carbon-free - Cleaner air through lower vehicle emissions - Use resources well, and recycle more effectively - Modernise our workplaces to make them energy efficient

As pointed out recently by the 2015 Lancet Commission on Health and Climate Change, the global health improvements witnessed in recent decades risk being undone by climate change.. We also know that most of the existing coal, oil and gas reserves must stay in the ground if this is to be avoided. However, the energy sector’s continued exploration for new fossil fuel reserves makes clear that they will only respond to market forces. The ethical and financial case for fossil fuel divestment is thus well founded, and widely supported by, amongst others, the President of the World Bank and Director-General of the World Health Organisation (WHO)- both public health physicians. Whilst we commend the Gates Foundation Asset Trust’s recent decision to divest $765.9 million worth of shares from ExxonMobil, we feel that this does not go far enough. By failing to divest from the major fossil fuel companies, the Gates Foundation is implicitly providing moral support to companies that continue to obstruct meaningful action to reduce GHG emissions. Just as important, it sends the wrong signal to many governments who continue to frame their energy policies under the influence of the fossil fuel industry. It also misses the opportunity to support a transition to a safer and healthier world through transfer of investment to the renewable energy sector. Constructive engagement with the fossil fuel industry is important, but the Gates Foundation is better placed to support the transformation of the energy sector if it does not simultaneously signal that it is morally acceptable to profit from industries that cause global warming and threaten the health, biodiversity and security of the planet. Yours sincerely, Dr David McCoy, Medact, UK Prof. Hugh Montgomery, University College London Prof Sue Atkinson and Dr Robin Stott, on behalf of the Climate and Health Council, UK Dr David Pencheon, Director, Sustainable Development Unit for the Health and Social Care System, UK ----------- If you are from outside the UK then please email alicemunro@medact.org with the following details, and we will add you to the petition manually: Full name, Email, Job title, Country and whether you work in the health sector.