1.cars do 50mph down here 2.A49 has speed cameras

Fracking causes devastating effects, affecting every sector of public life, from health to agriculture, to tourism and the environment. Places such as the USA, or Australia where Fracking has already happened have seen a complete degradation of normal life; taking a shower brings your whole body out in a painful red rash, you can light your water on fire, you can't sleep for the noise of the machines and worse, the division of communities due to the manipulation of the Fracking companies. The effects of Fracking are truly endless, with long term effects still being uncovered. We want a ban on Fracking because we love our families, our friends and where we live. Many people have become seriously ill when Fracking companies have started drilling near them. There are many stories of heartache, from someone's wife who has cancer to a mother's young son with severe asthma. Under no circumstances is it acceptable to put communities through the ordeal of Fracking for the sole reason of extracting fossil fuel from the ground. With the effects of the Climate Change becoming worse, this is not the time to invest in Fossil Fuels. If we do not change our habits the repercussions of Climate Change will affect every single person on this earth. We should therefore be investing in renewable energy, not in polluting practises such as Fracking. By signing this petition we make it the duty of our politicians to ensure that Climate change is curbed and Fracking never happens in Northern Ireland.

The financial success of such an endeavour depends on delivering a quality design that can attract users and provide real, long-term benefits to the city. To eat away at the key features in order to preserve a budget is a false economy which will result in a cheap-looking, lacklustre development that will absolutely NOT befit a much-loved and historically significant structure, and would offer little to attract tenants or visitors. The proposals include a creative quarter for artists, and refreshment and leisure facilities for visitors, with the intention of generating income to support the continual preservation of the Grade I listed monument. This generated much local interest and debate between both supporters and detractors, and following public consultations, the Planning Committee approved the scheme. The features noted above were APPROVED, not only by the Council Planning Department and Conservation Officer, but also by English Heritage and the vast majority of Portsmouth residents who responded to the consultation. As a Grade I listed monument, Point Battery shares the same designated status as Porchester Castle, York Minster and the Palace of Westminster as a building of exceptional interest. It is therefore sensible to assume that Planning Permission granted on such a building would require an intense level of scrutiny to ensure that the submitted design is appropriate and sympathetic to the structure, and that only work essential to the realisation of the proposal is carried out. Deviating from the approved documents would be considered a breach of planning control under section 171A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/8/section/171A, which can result in enforcement action being taken against the property owners. This is ESPECIALLY critical when those unauthorised changes are carried out on a nationally important historic structure such as Point Battery. As an example, the opening of the gun ports are clearly an integral part of the design, allowing essential light and warmth into the interior of the spaces and providing a more authentic historic appearance from the outside. Failure to implement this and other design elements would be hugely detrimental to the overall scheme, and could very possibly harm its economic prospects in the future. This would be an insult, not only to the many people who supported this project and the aims expressed through its design, but also to the objectors, who may now be faced with the failed development they always feared. Both these groups are taxpayers who put their faith in the democratic principles that underpin the planning process. Enforcement action would be an appropriate measure when dealing with breaches of planning control concerning a Grade I listed monument, as expressed in paragraph 207 of the National Planning Policy Framework: "Effective enforcement is important as a means of maintaining public confidence in the planning system. Enforcement action is discretionary, and local planning authorities should act proportionately in responding to suspected breaches of planning control." If the Council wish to "maintain public confidence in the planning system", then we suggest they implement the scheme they agreed to in the first place, the approved documents can be found here: http://publicaccess.portsmouth.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=MTA36TMO5G000 Portsmouth City Council: please don't let this unique opportunity end up a victim of penny-pinching bureaucracy.

There is only roughly 2% of "Ancient Woodland" left in the UK, with over 400 of these under threat from development, and ours is one of those under threat!! So we are asking for your help by signing this petition. National Grid have proposed the new Richborough Connection to bring in electricity from Belgium to power homes in Canterbury and the surrounding areas. This will be in the form of pylons and cables running from Richborough power station to Canterbury. Due to this, National Grid want to cut a 40 meter wide avenue through the northern section of Kemberland "Ancient" Woodland. While we understand that people need electricity to power their homes etc, we do not feel it is necessary to cut through protected "Ancient woodland" affecting protected species when it is in such rapid decline and is under threat , so we are urging for a re-direction around Kemberland Woods. National Grid state that they "could re-direct" the route away from Kemberland Woods", but that it will cost more money, but we say whats money in comparison to something that is irreplaceable therefore priceless?? and at such a time when our environment is in such a fragile state?? We bought this woodland to preserve it!. The biodiversity within it is rich with an ecosystem that relies on every inch of this woodland. We have protected Bats, Newts, Bluebells, and many other species that need to stay protected. The woodland floor is what classes this woodland as "Ancient", so having machinery that will cut a 40 meter wide avenue straight through the northern section will not only destroy the trees that birds use to nest, but will also destroy the very ground that makes this woodland "Ancient". Once Ancient woodlands are gone, they are gone forever, the damage is irreversible and they cannot be replaced!!. "They are priceless and need to be protected, else everybody suffers from this loss, not just us!" A quote by The Woodland Trust - "The Woodland Trust are fully supportive of Your petition, and we will be submitting our own response to the proposals and hope to see plenty of others getting involved to voice their concerns too" Our aim now is to approach National Planning Inspectorate and Canterbury City`s MP the signatures collected this summer! So we ask that you help us by signing and sharing this petition far and wide. We, the woodland and all the wildlife that live in it would be very grateful. They dont have a voice, but we do!!!

Some of the anticipated problems include: - building works and roadway disruption (including potentially restricting emergency service routes) - 4 new extra large, 3-storey, houses (out of character with the street), each with 2 parking spaces PLUS a driveway - removal of parking spaces outside the church on Annandale Road to accommodate the above new houses - therefore leading to increased parking problems (not to mention nowhere for the numerous weekly church visitors to park) - abolishing the trees and hedges surrounding the venue In addition to signing this petition, please feel free to comment on planning application numbers 15/00237 (houses - deadline 19 March) and 15/00238 (church - deadline 31 March) via the Bexley Council Online system: http://www.bexley.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=2638 OR send your comments in writing (including the above planning application numbers): BY EMAIL TO: [email protected] You may wish to copy councillors: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] BY POST TO: Miss J K Bansil, Bexley Council Civic Offices, 2 Watling Street, Bexleyheath DA6 7AT. You may also wish to copy the above councillor names at the same address. Thank you to those who signed the petition/submitted feedback by 19th March (the deadline for the houses proposal). THERE IS STILL TIME! Please sign this petition/ object by email/post by TUESDAY 31ST MARCH which is the final deadline for the church proposal. Thank you for your time.

Scotland's economy has lost out since 1999 when Tony Blair and Donald Dewar moved the continental plate to take in 7 of Scotland's oil platforms. This was done the night before the Scottish parliament was resumed after 300 years. It did not get debated on, it was done underhandedly though we do not get the taxes directly to Scotland the revenues from these 7 oil fields should count towards Scotland's taxes. Instead Westminster is claiming them towards their tax revenue and undermines what Scotland is actually contributing.

It is important because such revolting developments are chipping away at our London and sucking it dry of its lifeblood and individuality. This is a marvelous piece of London where independent traders can sell their wares which allow W11 a truly authentic edge ; and now they are proposing a sanitized shopping experience akin to the Westfield that does not enhance or reflect our beloved Portobello . This just has to stop so please sign and pass on. This outlines their plans : http://www.westway.org/news/shaping-future http://metro.co.uk/2015/03/12/londons-portobello-road-faces-redevelopment-with-westfield-style-shops-5101200/ http://metro.co.uk/2015/03/12/londons-portobello-road-faces-redevelopment-with-westfield-style-shops-5101200/

12,000 people used the pool last year in the four short months for which it was open. The council are representing the pool as a burden, but you cannot measure the value of a public asset in pounds and pence. What value can you put on the civic identity of Abingdon, living by the river, playing by the river? What value on the mental and physical wellbeing afforded by splashing about outdoors? What value on the happy memories of days out with the family enjoying the pool, the park, the relaxed atmosphere? Wallingford, Hinksey, even a small village like Woodstock manage to have outdoor pools, why not a large and growing town like Abingdon. Why do we have to lose our pool? We're set to have new houses built on every margin of the town to add to the 10 years of in-fill (brewery, penlon, etc). Will Abingdon residents have to get in their cars and travel to access leisure and recreational facilities? Is such a scenario good for Abingdon socially or economically? This is the last portion of Thames riverside with public recreational access, everything else has been sold off and built on. Can we afford to lose Abbey Meadows by letting the pool be turned into a 'riverside restaurant', only available to those that can afford it? If this happens, we will be paying to bulldoze over a public asset to set up a private commercial business. Another restaurant to add to all those in Abingdon and two new ones in the Old Gaol. The outdoor pool is part of what makes Abingdon unique. The pool is an asset not a burden and a confident town should invest in the pool and make it as good as Hinksey, Wallingford and even Woodstock. Does Abingdon deserve less? I don't think so. IMPORTANT: Please also go to www.saveourpool.org.uk and vote option A in the Vale of the White Horse public consultation. Options B & C will see the pool lost forever.

CAMRA fully supports the production and availability of real ciders and perries. In many cases the proposed action would make small scale cider production uneconomic. This is wholly disproportionate given that a small producer selling up to 33 pints a day has no capacity to affect EU trade to any meaningful degree. The case for rejecting the request by the EU to tax small cider producers: - Someone producing less than 70hl (12,000 pints) will generally be making less than £10,000 a year in sales. This means the tax exemption only applies to very small businesses, such as hobbyists or farm-gate producers. If a duty were to be levied on these producers it would make their operations uneconomic and lead to wide-spread closure. - 80% of Britain’s 500+ cider makers are currently small producers. A tax will severely impact on consumer choice and will cause irreparable damage to one of the nation’s most historic industries. - An exemption from this duty is essential to supporting the growth of a vibrant but still small cider and perry market. - A tax charge of up to £2,700 would drive many small cider producers out of business costing jobs, harming the countryside and dramatically reducing consumer choice.

This development involves the demolition of the former nurses home and the construction of 17 luxury flats, together with a 3-storey deep basement. This nurses home currently contains 70 units for housing. It is practically on the doorstep of 3 primary schools and 2 nurseries. The proposed development will have a serious impact on the health and safety, education and well-being of over 1000 primary school children in the three nearby neighbouring schools and two nurseries; it will cause harm to adjacent heritage assets, and there is a risk of structural problems from the proposed basement. We say that, for the above reasons, the grant of planning permission is therefore “grossly wrong”, and the permission should be revoked. A letter will be delivered to Mr Pickles’ office on Friday 13 March, 2015 and can be found on our website which provides more background on New End and the impact of the development: www.newendnw3.co.uk Please sign this petition to show your support for this call to action. Yours sincerely, Jessica Learmond-Criqui Resident of Hampstead and co-ordinator of the Campaign for Revocation of Planning Permission on 29 New End

We are street traders in Colchester there is a handful of us. Many street traders have worked in the town for decades. We trade seven days a week providing goods for our local community. Over the years street traders have built trust with the community and have been rewarded with the local communities loyal custom. The council has served notice to the traders we now have 20 days to save our businesses ,save our staff from being made unemployed. We have been model tenants contributing tens of thousands to the councils treasury. So why in these times of austerity with public services being cut is the council taking away funds from the public purse. By the council relocating traders from their current established positions and raising rents by 300-400% they are most definitely forcing the hard working street trader out of business. We urge the public to save us as we feel that over the years we have contributed to the local economy and provided a service for the public. This is your local public service that the council would like to take away so please show your support.

There is, on average, a significant incident every four days, with someone being fatally or seriously injured every month on Streatham High Road. The road is trying to serve too many purposes. It’s a commuter route, a haulier route, a bus route as well as a busy shopping street. These needs are incompatible. Drivers see the wide road, 3 lanes and lack of speed signs and treat it as a dual carriageway. Research shows half of them break the 30mph speed limit. On the other hand, residents see it as their High Street and dart between cars to make it to the middle section where they stand between six lanes of traffic before making the final dash to Sainsbury’s to pick up some milk. Streatham’s population is growing. There’s the redevelopment of the bowling alley and work’s started on Caesar’s. This is brilliant and such an exciting time for the area but it will only make the risks of the A23 greater. There seems to be a lot of chat on this issue but no action. Lambeth remains London’s deadliest borough with more people dying in Lambeth than anywhere else in London. **Please note this petition is not party political. We have cross-party support. Your contact details will NOT be shared with anyone.**