We know that even exploratory drilling will constitute a high risk to our water, our environment, our health, our wildlife as well as involving a heavy lorry traffic and noise pollution and the processing of toxic water pumped out of the coal seams. Drilling will also threaten our buildings with partial subsidence, if these applications are successful they will pave the way to the industrialisation of our countryside.

People's lives are at risk, staff, prisoners and the general public. The long-term implications of just warehousing criminals will ensure that the UK will become more volatile and dangerous. Everyone should support this campaign and visit the Know the Danger Facebook page before we pave the way for another generation of people living in fear of violence within society and breeding hardened criminals by just warehousing those sent to prison.

I believe that the time has come that our representatives should no longer be allowed to eat at subsidised private restaurants, and that the food they consume should be brought into line with food the general public can buy at the same price point. Our MPs, having just given themselves a 25% pay rise, are still able to eat subsidised food at these exclusive restaurants, often for less than the cost of a full english breakfast at a greasy spoon cafe, or a McDonalds "meal deal". Please refer to the cost they pay for meals as shown in the freedom of information request from 2012, as linked below for some indication of the (sarcasm alert !) outrageous costs they have to pay. http://www.parliament.uk/site-information/foi/foi-responses/foi-disclosures-2012/foi-disclosures-july---september-2012-/house-of-commons-restaurants-and-bars/ Example: Grilled rump steak with Diane sauce and parmentier potatoes £4

I believe this War is simply a ruse to escalate the problems in the Middle East and enable the West to take more resources from sovereign states. This is the stated plan of the Military Industrial Complex. We should not take part.

Victims of Caste based discrimination deserve immediate legal protection to avoid continued suffering. The Government is proposing an unacceptable delay in bringing what is already law, into force. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/caste-discrimination-legislation-timetable Here are just some of the many hundreds of cases showing that caste-based discrimination is a fact in the UK in 2013. - Mr G endured intimidating, hostile and degrading environment at the hands of so called Upper Castes at his work place. He was forced to resort to hunger strike action to draw attention of his employer to his plight. - An elderly lady is not given attention in a care home in accordance with her care plan due to discriminatory actions of Upper Caste care administrator. - Children in schools routinely face caste labelling and name-calling resulting in Bullying and harassment in Schools. A Pupil endured Caste bullying where he could not complete GCSE projects due to negativity and violence of those around him. - A professional couple at a law firm endured caste based bullying, intimidation and harassment as a consequence of inter-caste marriage. Superiors at work did everything to dissuade them from marrying resulting in harassment, snide remarks and denial of pay hike and promotion, eventually culminating in his dismissal after several years in service and her resignation. This discrimination is confirmed not only by the many victims but also by Government-commissioned independent research from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (2010) and other sources (see http : //niesr.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publications/caste-discrimination.pdf). We therefore demand the following: 1 The Government must act quickly to give effect to Parliament’s intention and to protect actual and potential victims of caste discrimination; 2 The Government must act immediately to set a new and prompt timetable for any further consultation; 3 Any consultation must start as soon as possible and must last no longer than 12 weeks; and 4 Any consultation must in any event end in sufficient time for the making of an Order under the terms of s.9(5) of the Equality Act 2010 by June 2014 at the latest.** ** petition still active due to government procrastination

I'm 27 and I live in Brighton, where rent on a one bed can be £650-£750 per month. On my wages this is not affordable. The same is happening all over the country. It is making it harder for young people to be independent. Also capping rents would leave more disposable income to inject into our failing economy.

Appealing the decision would waste still more taxpayer cash which should be spent on making the NHS better. It would cause continued damaging uncertainty and anxiety for NHS staff and local people. The decision to close vital Lewisham services was completely flawed and has now been found unlawful. The government has already spent hundreds of thousands, if not millions, in a misguided attempt to close Lewisham hospital services. It should stop now, not throw good money after bad. If the High Court judgement were to be overturned, no hospital anywhere in the country would be safe from closure. See www.savelewishamhospital.com/ and www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs for more information.

As you may be aware, there are already numerous methods of blocking access to pornography where parents wish to do so. A block at the ISP level takes what is and is not blocked out of the control of parents, with potentially dangerous results. Video chat sites aimed at teenagers and certain social media sites are (as identified by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, CEOP) some of the places paedophiles go to prey on children, but as these are not 'adult' in nature they will most likely not come under the block. Parents being told their internet connection is being filtered for adult content to protect their children will therefore believe their children are 'safe' when they are in fact being left exposed to serious risks. The emphasis should be on educating parents about dangers like these, helping them to set up their own restrictions so their children are protected, and highlighting the fact that no blocking software or filters are a substitute for parental supervision. Restricting access to information based on blacklists and filtering at the ISP level represents a severe curtailment of civil liberties. Such practices are typically employed by governments wishing to restrict access to information and ideas they find threatening or undesirable (the aforementioned People's Republic of China being a good example). Prime Minister Cameron took the opportunity to also state that certain 'extreme' fantasy material (involving no illegal acts) would now be made illegal in all of the UK, signalling his intent to restrict access to material that is currently legal. Sure enough, one week later it was revealed that the ISP filtering may cover far more than just pornography; categories of materials that may be blocked include violent material, extremist related content, anorexia and eating disorder websites, suicide related websites, alcohol, smoking, and even web forums and so-called "esoteric material" (see http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-07/27/pornwall). I would urge you to carefully consider these points when and if these issues are debated in the house. The CEOP previously identified other priorities for protecting children from abuse such as finding ways to monitor hidden and encrypted networks, and greater inter-country law enforcement cooperation. I believe these approaches should be selected in preference to the measures mentioned by the Prime Minister, measures that will ultimately fail to catch the most serious perpetrators and are themselves open to serious abuse.

Given the recent revelations about GCHQ's 'Tempora' programme UK citizens are facing the greatest threat to their civil liberties in this country's history. Indiscriminate surveillance is being collected on the populace on a massive scale with no public mandate or accountabilty. This is being allowed through a legal loophole which would have been legitimised with the Snooper's Charter. If this kind of system is allowed to exist at all at the very least it should have a mandate from both the public and parliament - with external accountability and auditing. No publicly accountable body currently exists to audit this programme.

We believe that arming the rebels will not end the conflict in Syria or contribute to that end. Further we believe that sending weapons to the rebels could lead to the escalation of the violence in Syria and the wider Middle East region.

In 1913 Emily Davison ran in front of the King's horse and was killed, in what was probably the most historically memorable event of the movement for Women's Suffrage. Emily Davison should be remembered, as should all women who campaigned for women's suffrage in the early 20th Century. The place where she made her stand should carry her name so that her sacrifice will always be remembered

UK coroner Sir Robert Owen, under pressure from Foreign Secretary William Hague, has said a legal inquest will exclude material implicating either Russia's state agencies or the UK security services. Seven years after the death of her husband, Marina Litvinenko is no closer to knowing the truth about his death. This is a travesty of justice at the heart of Westminster and a disgrace to the people of Britain. Many other lives were also put at risk - in London, Moscow and Hamburg and on planes and vehicles in which the Polonium was transported. The public deserves an answer too. see: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22579463 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/17/alexander-litvinenko-widow-slams-william-hague?INTCMP=SRCH