• Stop Turtle Bay tip deductions
    Fair business practice
    146 of 200 Signatures
    Created by Jon Taylor
  • Bring maternity clothes back to the high street
    To all British retailers, Just over 4 months ago I found out I was pregnant. Since that moment my life has been a roller coaster ride of emotions ranging from so-excited-I-could-burst to oh-my-god-what-are-we-doing?-this-is-absolutely-terrifying. Indeed, as a FTM or first time mum there are lots of things to get my head round. Knowing what FTM means for example, or becoming highly acquainted with the toilet bowl. There seems to be an endless list of adjustments to be made, whether it be my sleeping position or how to sneeze without causing myself pain. All of these things I hadn’t expected. I actually said to a friend that I’m convinced the reason why it’s been deemed bad luck to share your pregnancy news before you’ve completed the first trimester is because the first trimester is so bloody horrible that if non-parents were to know they’d never consider starting a family. All in all it’s been emotional. One of the biggest factors to contend with is the effect of pregnancy on your body. People talk about the pregnancy glow but I must admit I can’t say I feel bouncing when every part of my body hurts, I’m out of breath, covered in spots like a pubescent teenager and watching my body expand by the day. Like any woman I take pride in my appearance, like to keep up to date with fashion and know that when I’m not feeling my best I want to be dressed in my favourite clothes. This has been a problem. On a recent visit to the UK I was looking forward to hitting the streets of London and Manchester and getting my hands on some maternity clothes. I’ve reached the point of no return with my ‘normal’ clothes and I was looking forward to shopping in the both fashionable and affordable high street stores. Sadly I shouldn’t have bothered. After dragging my podgy ankles up and down Oxford Street I realised that it was time to make another realisation: I was now an outcast of society. All the stores I entered (bar three) told me that they no longer stocked maternity clothes in-store, instead opting to sell them online. Now I’m a big online shopper, I love it, especially living abroad but I only love it because after 30 odd years I know my size. Being pregnant I don’t. Never has there been a more important time to try clothes on because I’m still coming to terms with my ever-changing shape. Trying to explain this to various shop assistants and managers I got some sympathetic glances and suggestions to try plus size clothing but i left feeling hugely disappointed. It’s not as if I’m the only pregnant woman in the world so what has changed the attitudes of the retailers? Why is being pregnant now out of fashion? Most fashion stores now stock a variety of ranges for different body types, tall, petite, plus-size. So why has pregnancy clothing suddenly been deemed uncommercial? In the few stores I visited which did stock maternity clothes there was a very limited range (usually just a rail or two) and bizarrely these sections were located in the most inaccessible parts of the store, requiring me to climb several flights of stairs, manoeuvre through enthusiastic bargain-hunters and rifle through childrenswear before finding my one pair of over-the-bump jeans. The store whose praises i would like to sing however is H&M. In virtually all the stores I entered I found a maternity range, clearly signposted and easy to find and with a decent range of fashionable clothes at reasonable prices. Were it not for them I would probably have burst into tears a few times during my shopping trip (I’ll blame the hormones). So to all the other retailers who have, for some unbeknown reason, decided to purge their stores of maternity clothes and move them all online; I urge you to reconsider. Having children is a wonderful thing and mothers are truly awesome at dealing with pregnancy and childbirth (trust me on this one) so please, please don’t alienate young mothers and make their self esteem take yet another beating. At a time when everything is changing lets allow mothers to at least indulge in a good bit of retail therapy. Yours sincerely (and pregnant) Olivia
    34 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Olivia Price Bates
  • Update the information requirements on marriage certificates!
    As it stands, only the father's name and 'rank or profession' is needed on a marriage certificate. We believe this is archaic; a father's name and profession was important when marriage was seen as the passing of a possession (the woman) from one man (the father) to another (the husband). This is no longer the case. If the information is necessary for public record, then the mother's name and profession should be included too. Mothers play as vital a part in their children's upbringing as men do (and sometimes more...) and this should be reflected in modern marriage certificates. Ideally a person would be able to include information for only one parent if they so wish. Having to include a parent with whom one does not have a good relationship on something as significant as a marriage certificate can be unnecessarily upsetting.
    11,241 of 15,000 Signatures
    Created by Abigail de Leon
  • Stop Pension Freezing
    It is important because the existing practice is unfair, dishonest and discriminatory all of which are un-British. It often results in pensioners who have gone to live with their families in countries like Canada or Australia having to sponge on their children or return to a lonely life in the UK where, of course, they become a burden on the NHS. The exclusion of British pensioners in most countries from receiving their rightful pension is irrational. Pension freezing means that after twenty years a pensioner is getting less than half of his or her entitlement. Our Government claims to be fair and honest but it seems to be unfair and dishonest. If we all pay the same compulsory contributions we should all get the same pension.
    15 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Michael Nightingale
  • Stop Asda from penalising the Disabled
    Disabled customers should not have to justify their disability to bored customer care staff in a supermarket. Having to produce proof of a disability (as the blue badge will have been left on display in their vehicle) is undignified and demeaning. Having to divulge sensitive and personal information in a public area of a supermarket is unfair and unjust. Forcing customers to struggle back through a shop to the customer care desk in order to avoid being fined when they are wheelchair bound, struggle to walk or are in pain is a disgraceful way to treat a customer. Refusing to accept the validity of a blue badge becuase they are not on a supermarkets database is highly unfair and quite possibly illegal.
    100 of 200 Signatures
    Created by stuart nixon
  • Fund postgraduate study in the UK
    If equality and social mobility are regarded as important in a society, that society will provide all with equal access to the whole education system. Either education will be free, or it will be subsidised in such a way that people are not disadvantaged based on their background. Generations in the past have been screwed over by the government, but nothing like the current youth. If you’re tired of being told you are lucky to be able to afford a £200 iPhone by people who bought a house in central London for £21,000, then this campaign is for you. For most of us, if you want to be one of the people who can change the situation we’re in, you’re probably going to need a certain kind of job. And to get those kinds of jobs nowadays, you’re going to need some form of postgraduate qualification. If education isn’t affordable for all, we can never expect to live in a fair society. A lack of funding for higher-education means that the only people who are able to change our country will be the very people who want it to remain the same. To protect our democracy, this must be opposed. On 6th January 2013, the Observer printed a letter from nine UK university vice-chancellors calling for action on the 'policy vacuum' on postgraduate study. Since then, the number of students opting for postgraduate study has fallen by around 16,000 a year. This is despite the importance of postgraduate qualifications skyrocketing in that time. A Confederation of British Industry (CBI) report states that ‘anticipated changes to occupational structure mean that by 2020 nearly half of all employment will be for highly skilled roles.’ Worldwide, the number of high-level jobs that require postgraduate qualifications is growing by roughly 75% per year, according to the Graduate Management Admission Council (GMAC). At home, all this means less influence in our society for ordinary British people. As Gary Bell, a man from a working class background who is now a QC specialising in criminal defence, put it in the Guardian yesterday: 'The chances I had just aren't there for deprived young people today.' When Labour introduced university fees and the student loan (as opposed to the grant), Ken Livingston famously accused the Blairites of 'whipping away the ladder that they themselves had climbed.' Of the Tories' current policy, Bell added that: 'The ladder has now been not just whipped away but burned.' The Government is currently considering providing a postgraduate loan for the 2016/17 academic year. However, this loan has already been rejected by six Russell-Group Universities for the following reasons: 1. The loan will be a maximum of £10,000. This figure is lower than the costs of many postgraduate courses and will not provide living costs, even if it covers the course fees. It therefore greatly discourages lower income students - the very problem such loans should be set up to avoid. 2. The rate of repayment is set at 9% on earnings over £21,000. This is the same repayment rate as the undergraduate loans, but they will be paid CONCURRENTLY. Therefore the real figure for almost all students will be 18%. When you add income tax and national security to this, a person with a postgraduate qualification earning £24,000 will end up taking home around £12,000. This figure is only fractionally above minimum wage and, like the minimum, is not sustainable for the vast majority of people. 3. The loan is only available to people under the age of 30. Not only does this rule out the option for any professionals who desire a change of career, but it makes it even more unlikely that people will have time to apply by the time they have paid off their undergraduate loan. We’re looking for the 100,000 signatures required to force the MPs to debate this issue in The House of Commons. Our goal is to make campaigns such as this one unnecessary in future. In the meantime it's up to us to build a fairer society together. THANK YOU in advance. Please SIGN AND SHARE!
    16 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Thomas Pollitt
  • Cut House of Lords Attendance Allowance
    The recent scandal involving Lord Sewel has highlighted the fact that peers can claim a £300 allowance for sitting in the Upper Chamber. Surely this level of subsidy is the real scandal here!
    30 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Laurence Gamlen Picture
  • Extend Discrimination/Hate Crime Laws - STOP THE MEDIA'S WELFARE SCAPEGOATING
    We already have laws in place intended to protect mainly ethnic minorities within society at large, while other often-disadvantaged groups of people can take comfort in there being rules by which prospective employers must abide. The question of gender equality and the LGBT movement also continue to be major talking points, as campaigns such as those seen on this very site and others enjoy increasing momentum. However, one thing that does appear not to have penetrated the public consciousness - quite the opposite - is the situation pertaining to, in particular, many unemployed and disabled people, beyond merely the legislation being passed. Compounding the present climate of savage spending cuts, workplace ambivalence to rights and key government departments' cruel dehumanisation of their core services' users, is the growing groundswell of opinion - perpetuated by small-scale local news sources [1] and internationally-renowned public service broadcasters [2] alike, alongside everything in-between [3] - whereby anyone out of work or known to be claiming any sort of social security is instantly not only marginalised, but in fact openly vilified [4], and blamed for all manner of perceived problems blighting the country. Some writers even set up websites for the sole purpose of baiting those on welfare. [5] Worse still, the overriding premise around which the whole hysteria was intended to revolve, thanks to the 'free' British media, is a purely sensationalist, propaganda-fuelled one that ultimately rings hollow when scrutinised on the grounds of accuracy. [6] From domestic charities [7] to medal-winning athletes [8], bloggers [9] to the research teams of esteemed Universities [10] the length and breadth of the country [11], online publications [12] and even some mainstream news outlets [13], the message is clear: this is irresponsible, vindictive journalism. Of course, even in light of the recent revelations in relation to the practices of the press and the resulting Leveson Inquiry, it seems that the nature of the stories' content itself is something largely being forgotten about, and so the attacks go ahead. Such is the public's apparent willingness to serve as a channel for the outrage emanating primarily from reports peddled by the likes of the Daily Mail, the Sun and the Daily Express, that we are now seeing innocent claimants abused [14], harassed [15] and even driven to death [16] by those who feel compelled to do their bidding. All this because a tiny minority (less than 1%!) of the DWP's bill are understood to be 'scrounging' off taxpayers' money. Taking vital funding away from those with little else to hold onto is one thing; sitting idly by while the institutions we depend on to inform us fairly and comprehensively instead choose to make these people's lives a complete misery - if not aiding them in doing so - is quite another. The media has no right and no mandate to wilfully turn citizens against each other (regardless of whether the victims can defend themselves any better than is the case here), especially on the basis of misinformation and spin. The buck for the crimes committed against these people (and no doubt many others hounded for a variety of reasons) falls squarely at the feet of those who are moulding ordinary people into vehicles of unfounded hate. This societal cancer needs to be removed at the source. By extending what we already have written in Acts of Parliament, to encompass anyone at risk of being the subject of incitement to ill intent, we can achieve this. [1] http://goo.gl/Sp3YQn [2] http://goo.gl/bMvbz [3] http://goo.gl/ar7Hgh (various links, including top of page 1) [4] http://goo.gl/SO8DPm [5] https://goo.gl/Ti1EK5 [6] http://goo.gl/hKFRrs [7] http://goo.gl/owGMal [8] http://goo.gl/4SwXGH [9] https://goo.gl/c9doFM [10] http://goo.gl/rNbdhv [11] http://goo.gl/9vpRQb [12] http://goo.gl/argS0d [13] http://goo.gl/FfpmZA [14] http://goo.gl/2XgLMn [15] http://goo.gl/EHOxz [16] http://goo.gl/ZHgNhP
    241 of 300 Signatures
    Created by Brian Cocozza Picture
  • PROTECT NHS CHILDREN'S SERVICES IN BRISTOL & SOUTH GLOS FROM PRIVATISATION
    NHS children's community health services and the inpatient adolescent mental health service in Bristol & South Gloucestershire are in the process of being recommissioned. The first stage of this campaign has already been successful with the recent announcement that the interim contract to deliver community children's health services for one year during 2016/17 has been won by a partnership made up of Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust (AWP) and two social enterprises, Sirona Care & Health CIC and Bristol Health CIC. The adolescent inpatient mental health unit, the Riverside Unit, will also be provided by AWP, with private company The Huntercombe Group, acting in a 'consultancy' role. However, AWP will be running the unit on a day-to-day basis and staff will be employed by AWP, so it will essentially remain within the NHS. The demand that services remain integrated has also been won, with the announcement that for the longer-term contract these services will be commissioned together by the Clinical Commissioning Groups and their partners. However, the campaign is not over yet. The next stage of the process during which the same services will be commissioned for the next 5 or 7 years from 2017 has begun. We must keep the pressure on to protect children's health services in Bristol for the long-term. And now we know it can be done! The next stage of this campaign will focus on bringing all of these services entirely back into the NHS for the long-term. We know private companies are planning to bid to run them. There should not be a role for companies who seek to make a profit or for social enterprises (many of whom operate in a similar way to private companies) in the delivery of our health services. There are two reasons why this campaign is vitally important: Firstly, children and young people in Bristol and South Gloucestershire need to get the best possible care and treatment. This means having services which are integrated and can work together, provided by people who are interested in delivering top quality care, not making maximum profit. Secondly, every time an NHS service in the UK is privatised we are a step closer to a US-style health system which would mean the end of free-at-point-of-need healthcare. The evidence is mounting that this government is not fully committed to a future publicly-owned health service. We are a group of concerned local people, including service users and NHS staff, who understand how damaging the consequences of moving these services to a private provider could be. We think the principle of 'people before profit' in the NHS is fundamental in Bristol, South Gloucestershire and the rest of the UK. Join our campaign at https://www.facebook.com/ProtectCCHP or search 'Protect CCHP' on Twitter for more information.
    6,694 of 7,000 Signatures
    Created by Nathan Williams
  • Stop forcing disabled children to attend mainstream schools
    Please sign our petition to help us get this issue sorted as soon as possible, we need 250 signatures by July 31st to get this moving, please help us help these children. Hundreds of children are being forced into mainstream schools that have little to no resources to cater to their special needs. There are very few staff members with the correct training to help theses children & the members who do have the training are already overwhelmed with the amount of children with special needs attending the schools.There are specialist units/schools all over Glasgow which are decreasing their intake numbers until they are virtually empty & will be closed. This is unfair to not only the children but also to their families and the overwhelmed staff members at all the mainstream schools. P.A.C.T - Parents And Carers Together For Autism
    574 of 600 Signatures
    Created by Lindsay McCurley Picture
  • FREE PUBLIC TRANSPORT FOR UNDER 16's NATIONWIDE
    In some areas, children's annual bus passes for September on wards are rising by a staggering 25%, for instance in Kent, a child's annual pass last year was at £200, this is now going to £250. Kent County Council also says it has to save £209 million over the next three years and so will increase the cost of its bus pass for 11 to 16-year-olds from £200 to £250 in September, a year after the price doubled from £100. The chairman of the Local Government Association’s Children and Young People’s Board, David Simmonds, told Schools Week that financial pressures were forcing many councils to scale back to meet their legal obligations “rather than go far beyond that – which is what they did historically”. For children under 8, councils are obliged to provide transport for pupils living more than two miles from the nearest suitable school. For those aged between 8 and 16, the statutory duty is to provide transport for those living more than three miles away. In rural areas, councils had traditionally provided free transport, although it was not a legal duty. It's now being eroded because of yet more cuts. This is going to affect so many people all over the country with Kent County Council being hit with the steepest rises with the best explanation being due to cuts needed in a council letting down not only the most vulnerable but the many people that are working so hard just to pay the bills and put food on the table that will have to not only find money for uniform and school essentials but also £250. The only legal obligation being kept nationwide is that to provide free travel for the over 65's Free school travel for children will have huge positives. - Attendance will be higher - Congestion and traffic will be minimised - Less road related accidents to children who walk near schools due to less traffic. Examples of how this is promoted in councils that RECOGNISE that free school buss pass's are the way forward; LONDON Children under the age of 11 only need a 5-10 Zip Oyster photocard to travel free on Tube, DLR, London Overground, TfL Rail and some National Rail services if they: Travel without an adult Look older than 10 A 5-10 Zip Oyster photocard isn't needed for your child to travel free on buses and trams or to buy child-rate paper tickets. If you think your child doesn't need a 5-10 Zip Oyster photocard, find out more about travelling with children. Children aged over 10 years and 11 months and under 16 on 31 August can get an 11-15 Zip Oyster photocard to travel free on buses and trams, and child rate on Tube, DLR, London Overground, TfL Rail and most National Rail services in London. CITY OF BRADFORD "Where walking/cycling is not possible, please consider public transport before using the family car on the school run, public transport is miles better for the environment and cuts down on traffic and pollution. Many secondary school pupils travel to school by public transport and the journey to a new school is often the first step your child will take toward independent travel; Bus services provide a safe and reliable way to get to school. Instead of giving your child a lift all the way to school why not consider dropping off at a bus stop or train station so that your child can continue their journey by public transport with friends?" All pupils in full time education are entitled to purchase a weekly School Plus Metro Card or for those occasional bus users pay half fare on public transport; please contact Metro for more information. Bus services run to or close by many local secondary and primary schools. To find out which buses serve your school and get up to date information on school travel please visit the Generation M website. Bradford Council is committed to reducing car travel which is a major source of pollution and congestion around school gates and encourages schools to produce a School Travel Plan setting out their commitment to sustainable school travel. Please ask your headteacher for more information on your School's Travel Plan Your child needs you to show them the way to sustainability. Reduce your car use and improve their quality of life. PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE ~ Together We Can Make A Difference ~
    436 of 500 Signatures
    Created by Kerry Keating Picture
  • Award Honours to mens and womens sports teams equally
    Awarding honours in such a clearly gender specific way does nothing to encourage young women and girls to believe that participating in sport will be considered as worthy and respected as that of male participation. Women's sport receives less funding, coverage and sponsorship than men's, by adjudging the pinnacle of Women's Rugby to be so much less worthy of Honour reinforces the status quo. Any man who believes a girl has as much right as a boy to achieve success in sports and to be recognised for that success should feel the need to sign this petition.
    905 of 1,000 Signatures
    Created by Paul Phillips Picture