This petition is a direct response to the perception that we cannot change the system which already exists. Even if it isn't fit for purpose, up to date with the modern world, or representative of most of the electorate. We can! The promise of parliamentary debate on any petition which reached 100.000 signatures was a brave manifesto promise by the conservatives, but without some significant changes in the way the commons work, these petitions will fall on deaf (or absent) ears. We live in an age of technology and information, many embrace it, many fear it. It is an age where almost everything you do is done on line. Whatever your personal feelings about it, the internet is here to stay, and has the so far untapped potential to allow YOU unprecedented control over YOUR life, and the direction of politics in real time. We have social media which is acting as a lightning rod, by allowing us to display our righteous indignation at policy's which we don't agree with, but with no effect whatsoever. How many would bother to sign a petition which WOULD be heard by those that create all of our futures? Internet petitions are branded "slacktivism" by the press, and yet many of us who walk in the middle of the road, or the "silent majority" fear taking part in any more pro active activism, because of the disproportionate response by the state to peaceful protest. Also in these austere times many simply cannot afford to take the time to participate in politics, except by signing these e- petitions, and going out to vote once every 4 or 5 years. At these times you are faced with a choice; to support one of 3 main parties, because it supports something which you are passionate about, even though you do not support all of the manifesto, give your vote to a fringe party, or like 45% of the electorate, not bother at all. If these changes were implemented then that would no longer need to be the way. At present there is no record (accessible to the public) of attendance in the commons except for voting figures. This is not acceptable, as the public must be able to see whether their MP has attended any debate which they have petitioned for, and for general transparency, as promised by every incoming government. All MPs are public servants, paid by the public purse, and, as we're reminded when we call HMRC, DWP, or any other government body, we are all customers of the state, and as customers we are entitled be listened to, and served well. We demand a certain level of service for our taxes,and as customers, as voters and most importantly as Humans, we demand the right to determine how we live, and have our voice heard! Its time to accept your "invitation to join the government of Britain" (This was the title of the Conservative manifesto 2010) "People have been shut out of Westminster politics for too long. Having a single vote every four or five years is not good enough – we need to give people real control over how they are governed. So, with a Conservative government, any petition that secures 100,000 signatures will be eligible for formal debate in Parliament". "The Big Society runs consistently through our policy programme. Our plans to reform public services, mend our broken society,and rebuild trust in politics are all part of our Big Society agenda. These plans involve redistributing power from the state to society; from the centre to local communities, giving people the opportunity to take more control over their lives". "Big Society; our reform plans require a social response in order to be successful. So building the Big Society is not just a question of the state stepping back and hoping for the best: it will require an active role for the state. The state must take action to agitate for, catalyse and galvanise social renewal. We must use the state to help remake society". The above are all excerpts from the Conservative party manifesto, printed before winning the 2010 general election. They all seem to say very much the same as this petition, and yet more and more of the people I speak to, feel the same as me, that they have less and less freedom, power and control over the way they are governed. Apathy is a dangerous thing because it shows a lack of hope. A lack of hope is acceptance of that which makes you unhappy. Acceptance of unhappiness is surrender. Once surrender has been accepted, it is irrevocable.

There is a clear need for the Department of Energy and Climate Change to embark on a Public Information Campaign that actively seeks to: Improve public understanding of Climate Science Illustrate the implications of Climate Change Effectively communicate the findings and recommendations of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change --- The realities of climate change are clear and present. Experts in the field of climate science have published their findings time and time again, and there are very few dissenting voices against the consensus view. “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, human influence on the climate system is clear, and limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. These are the key conclusions from an assessment by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)” - http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/press/press_release_wg1_full_report.pdf These opening words from the IPCC press release announcing the online publication of its full report ‘Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis’, are utterly unambiguous. An international endeavour comprising the work of hundreds of climate scientists, prepared with the assistance of more than a thousand expert reviewers, and citing over 9000 publications, the report leaves no doubt as to the reality of climate change. The scientific consensus is not fully reflected in the wider population, however. A recent report from the UK Energy Research Centre suggests that public scepticism towards climate change has actually risen in recent years and that people are now less concerned about its potential impact than previously (http://www.ukerc.ac.uk/support/tiki-download_file.php?fileId=3514 - pdf download - survey conducted March 2013). The flooding crisis of the last few weeks has re-ignited a national debate on climate change, centred around the question of whether the spate of storms that contributed heavily to rising floodwaters could be attributed to climate change. But it has been clear that there is a large degree of misunderstanding on the topic, as well as a certain amount of misrepresentation. Some of the views on display in the national media are not just a rejection that the extensive flooding may have been caused by climate change, but are rejections of the very idea of climate change as a whole. Such sentiments are rare, but come from highly prominent political individuals. Of most concern is that they are people who are not experts in the field, but have still been given equal weight to their arguments. The issue of climate change is not one of political opinion, but of scientific fact. The Department of Energy and Climate Change should begin a program of public information releases that relay the message that climate scientists and many non-governmental organisations have been imparting for a number of years. We have seen instances of public information campaigns regarding health, safety, and security concerns in a wide range of areas. It is high-time that climate change was given the attention it requires.

Engagement with politics happens for the vast majority of people through radio and television, particularly on popular programs such as Question Time. The lack of diversity amongst MP's is a problem for the UK. The lack of diversity in our political programming is a linked problem. Politics should not be the sole domain of well educated, white men. Nor should political commentary, debate and discussion.

Michael Gove believes "...that from time to time you need to refresh the person who is in charge of an organisation." Time to refresh the Education Secretary. Michael Gove has repeatedly shown that his ideas are out of step with those of experienced education professionals. It is high time he is replaced by someone with competence in the field.

Peter Lilley has been accused of lying and making deliberately misleading statements regarding fracking and its safety on national television (Channel 4 news 26/1/14). He was unable to adequately defend his statements. It is vitally important that any minister involved in such a sensitive area be trustworthy. He also has a conflict of interest as he is employed by Cayman Islands-based oil and gas company Tethys Petroleum and so has a vested interest in promoting fossil fuels and not investing in their alternatives.

The bill is about to have its second reading on the 28/2/2014. The general public are not aware of this occurring and I as an individual of this so called democracy would be highly offended if they took to renaming the bank holiday after such a destructive and demoralising woman like Thatcher. Not everyone in this country lives by her values, far from it. Caring for others and being part of a large society is not a weakness. It's an insult to Miners, socialists, families of the Hillsborough Disaster and too many more to name.

Access to Work isn't a benefit and doesn't incur a cost to government - in fact it brings money into the treasury, yet Deaf and disabled people are having their support allowance capped or cuts made (meaning they can no longer afford to use qualified interpreters or the support they need). This places jobs at risk and has already resulted in job losses and demotions. People currently in work are potentially being forced out of work and onto benefits, which goes against everything the government is telling us they are trying to achieve. Deaf and disabled people bring a vast amount of skill and talent to our workforce that we can't afford to lose. We want to ensure that full support is provided, and people are enabled to gain, maintain and progress in their chosen careers. Personal choice and control needs to be handed back to the experts on Deaf and disabled access needs in the workplace - the individual Deaf and disabled people who use the scheme We want to ensure Deaf and disabled people are not subjected to a glass ceiling due to lack of support.

A levy on Wiltshire Supermarkets could reduce parking charges in our town centres which would be a lifeline to the many small traders.

The London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham council are proposing to close Sulivan Primary School in order to provide a site for a Free School.If the Council are successful in their closure the land Sulivan occupies would be given away by the council to a Church of England Free secondary school for 800 boys. Sulivan would then be merged with a primary school who are currently applying to become an academy. If the proposal goes ahead there will be a 20% decline in primary places on offer. This is a political decision not an educational one! Want to tell the Council how you feel about this? Please fill in the lbhf Consultation Form http://buff.ly/1ektOA0 it will only take 5 minutes and is vital to our campaign. The community are proud of Sulivan. It is an all inclusive school, Ofsted awarded good with outstanding features. The children's well being and happiness gained a top score in its last inspection. It is 89% full and its role is ever increasing (76% of parents chose Sulivan reception as their first choice). The nursery and reception are full with a waiting list. This year Sulivan celebrated its best SAT results ever. The one storey building is well maintained and is accessible for children with disabilities. There are nature gardens, a pond, meadow and playgrounds. The children grow food and cook in a special kitchen and outdoor science lessons are taught. Music lessons are provided by a full time music teacher and Spanish is taught in every Key Stage 2 class. There is so much (and more) Sulivan offer to the children who attend. If the council close this unique and wonderful school it will have a devastating effect on 300 children, their parents, carers, teachers and support staff. Please help us in saving Sulivan School. The Consultation deadline is 8th October 2013 and we need lots of support. Thank you! Again, if you feel strongly about what is happening to Sulivan then please complete the Councils Consultation form, http://buff.ly/1ektOA0 it's really important and will only take 5 minutes. Find out more at www.saveoursulivan.org Follow us on Twitter @saveoursulivan & Facebook savesulivanschool

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