• Unlimited attempts to take Literacy and Numeracy Skills Test for PGCE Teacher Training Courses
    If you cannot pass the tests in your third attempt, like me, then this holds you back from becoming an outstanding teacher. 2 years is a lot of time and it holds students back from wanting to teach because if you cannot pass after 2 years then you have to wait for another 2 years. I would like unlimited chances to pass Literacy and numeracy skills test to be put back to action because the government is loosing so many highly skilled student teachers as they are unable to pass their qts tests. I am sure most PGCE students would agree with this.
    12 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Emine Aladag
  • Don't ban or weaken WhatsApp!
    (To skip the history of this issue please scroll to **) In 2016 the government passed a bill called the "Investigatory Powers Bill" (now the Investigatory Powers Act). This bill replaced the UK's old RIPA (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) from 2000, which referred to the powers the UK police and security services had when it came to collecting, monitoring, intercepting, etc - electronic communications from any UK resident, or person currently in the country. The bill effectively makes it legal for the government to spy on everyone in the country, at their will, as well as conducting mass surveillance of the entire country (which they have renamed to "Bulk Collection", as this tends to make people less concerned.) This bill was hugely opposed by those who knew about it, however it wasn't widely known about due to the government precisely timing when they bought it to parliament to coincide with much bigger issues (such as BREXIT). When this bill officially became law it was referred to in headlines as "The UK now has a surveillance law that is more suited to a dictatorship than a democracy". Now the Conservative party are trying to sneak through an expansion of this bill. When the IPAct was bought into power the Conservatives said on numerous occasions said they would not ban or undermine encryption (by implementing backdoors etc) Theresa May personally said "We believe that encryption is important. It is important that data can be kept safe and secure. We are not proposing in the bill to make any changes in relation to the issue of encryption and the legal position around that. The current legal position in respect of encryption will be repeated in the legislation of the bill". ** However the following has document has made its way into the open (article link on page): https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/04/uk_bulk_surveillance_powers_draft/ Technology and apps like WhatsApp and Signal rely on strong encryption to keep our messages private. Weakening the encryption or inserting backdoors is an enormous risk for the entire UK, as the same encryption that keeps these messages safe, also secures things such as bank transactions, social media login, emails, etc. Theresa May usually refers to her famous "double lock" system. Meaning these kinds of things must be authorised by both the home secretary (for example) and a judge. The problem we have seen with this is that these people are not experts in these fields, so rather than question who, how, what, where, when and why they just rubber stamp it. The USA has a court that their surveillance has to go through. This court has rejected 0.03% of all requests ever made. Companies like Facebook (who own WhatsApp) have previously shown their dedication to keeping their users privacy. For them to disable encryption for the UK means anybody messaging that person is also vulnerable, which could cause WhatsApp the shut down in the UK. They may also refuse the request, which could then lead the Government to ban WhatsApp. Please join with me in getting the government to withdraw these plans, and work with an expert in the field to attempt to come up with an approach that keeps us all secure as well as sparing our privacy. Thank you.
    13 of 100 Signatures
    Created by John Cruickshank
  • Boarding passes at airport shops
    Because it's really annoying and an unnecessary invasion of privacy
    6 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Jem Rogers
  • Jes Staley Must Go
    The integrity of the whistle blowing system of the Financial Services Industry has been jeopardised by his actions. It is simply outrageous that someone in his position can even claim he did not know any better. I work as a customer service rep and even I know the identity of a whistleblower must not be compromised. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2017/apr/10/barclays-boss-jes-staley-may-lose-bonus-over-bid-to-expose-whistleblower
    3 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Kevin Murray
  • Refuse Royal Assent to the Investigatory Powers Bill
    The most important liberty of all is privacy, a right to operate in silence and in peace. Assuming no one is being harmed and everyone is innocent until proven guilty; I'd rank it above the freedom to speak. I wish to admit, but avoid, my republican nature in my argument and I think I can. I wish to remain polite and not be too crude. Unfortunately life is very much crude, and events are rarely polite. I cannot help but notice the masses around me suffering poverty under the guise of austerity. The sheer amount of charities that have sprung up, to cope with public services' duties. I feel this creates an air of "Us First", pitting poor against poor. Whilst those who are supposed to serve this kingdom do so well. This is aimed at our politicians and not a republican's slip. You have a chance to break with tradition and remind the world that "how we've always done it" is a terrible argument for a society that wishes to progress. As I'm sure you are well aware, Royal Assent has not been given in person since 1854 and has not been refused since 1707. I believe that breaking both of these records on the same day would send an important message through the ranks who support this bill, as well as to the people who oppose it. I fear that if you do not, Eric Arthur Blair may become the greatest prophet this country ever created. This comes from someone who hates clichéd tropes.
    24 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Allan Forbes
  • We do not consent to Smart Water Meters
    Haringey residents have six concerns about the Smart Meter installation programme: 1. Not being consulted prior to installation; 2. Not compulsory (?); 3. Penalise poor people who live in crowded homes; 4. Risk to the health of humans, animals, pollinators, trees and plants; "10. The World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) categorised RF EMFs as a Possible CARCINOGEN (Group 2B), the same as lead, DDT, chloroform & methylmercury (31 May 2011)". "11. Dr Andrew Goldsworthy’s research warned that electromagnetically-conditioned water flow could strip lead from pipes (after firstly removing limescale) leading to lead poisoning. (1998, 2007, 2012 and 2016)". 5. Surveillance of water, gas and electric usage; and 6. Security risk through (nuclear) electromagnetic pulse attacks, space weather and hacking (“cybercrime”). Our focus is on Smart Water Meters but not exclusively. Full details about the Stop Smart Meters Haringey campaign can be found on our website below. This petition will be initially delivered to Haringey Council. The target is 2,200+
    572 of 600 Signatures
    Created by Ron Hawkins
  • #optmeoutoflocation tracking by the mobile and Wi-Fi operators
    A location history of your movements for the last year or more is incredibly insightful. Location data can show your sex, your approx age, your home and work addresses, where your children go to school, whether you are ill or becoming ill, how affluent you are (or how much poorer you are becoming), who your friends and family are (or were), your sexual orientation, how fast you drive, your personal preferences and lifestyle and much more. Worse - you really don't know who this data is being sold to or what for. To learn more and how to opt out go to www.optmeoutoflocation.com and sign our petition asking the UK ICO (Information Commissioners Office) to make the mobile and Wi-Fi operators ask our consent before they take and use this data.
    11 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Geoff Revill
  • Block Investigatory Powers Bill
    In short, privacy. As we have seen in the past, there is no such thing as privacy when hackers have become very skilled at accessing whatever they want or desire. End to end encryption adds a very large barrier to this snooping, and adding a backdoor for governments also adds a back door for hackers. The government should have no right in accessing anyone's encrypted communications. Not everyone is a terrorist and the people have the right to a level of privacy.
    33 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Simon Zielonka
  • What the Frack! Regular referendums. Let the UK public vote for their future.
    Members of the public find it difficult to support a political party 100%. Our system is out of date, our MPs out of touch, the public go unheard. We agree with points made by the Lib Dems, the Conservatives, Labour, the Green Party, the SNP etc and sometimes we disagree with them all. Either way we can't communicate with the government effectively. The system needs to work for us all but instead it's dusty, nobody really understands it or cares to sort it out with any long term vision. We need to start again. Simplify. Direct questions, direct answers. If regular referendums were to take place, the public are truly part of the process, allowing us to demonstrate what we care about, that we're united and want to invest in the future of this land and it's people. Less moaning and more doing, having a proactive and fair say, feeling satisfied that the decisions are being made and supported by the majority of the UK. Let the UK public vote for their future. This Kingdom can then begin to feel proud and respected, and most importantly, united.
    27 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Tezia Perret
    Many people feel that companies make enough money from us already purchasing products from them, using our income in banking to invest, or tying us into long term contracts with phone companies ensuring future income for said company etc.. therefore public and private companies or corporations should not be able to sell our data without individuals permission. This should be passed as a law under the data protection Act 1998. They should also ensure, that, allowing the use of our data is not a requirement for being provided services as this is entirely undemocratic and is in effect bribery and coercion. Companies should honour us when they say the will not use our data for any other purposes than managing our trading account with them. In addendum to this request, The "information commissioning" officer , Christopher Graham and his department needs to ensure a more thorough investigation is undertaken and enforce the policies below until decisions are made regarding the request above of a change to the Data protection act. Many of the below principles in the Data protection act 1998 are being broken regularly. and we are not informed if a company is making money form us. These principles need to be amended to ensure our data is not sold without our permission or personal benefit outside of the original agreement we have made with said company. Data Protection Act 1998 summary of rules below - Personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully and, in particular, shall not be processed unless: at least one of the conditions in Schedule 2 is met, and - in the case of sensitive personal data, at least one of the conditions in Schedule 3 is also met. - Personal data shall be obtained only for one or more specified and lawful purposes, and shall not be further processed in any manner incompatible with that purpose or those purposes. - Personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they are processed. - Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date. - Personal data processed for any purpose or purposes shall not be kept for longer than is necessary for that purpose or those purposes. - About the rights of individuals e.g.[10] personal data shall be processed in accordance with the rights of data subjects (individuals). - Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data. - Personal data shall not be transferred to a country or territory outside the European Economic Area unless that country or territory ensures an adequate level of protection for the rights and freedoms of data subjects in relation to the processing of personal data. These principles need to be amended to ensure our data is not sold without our permission or personal benefit outside of the original agreement we have made with said company.
    32 of 100 Signatures
    Created by laila cohen
  • Clamp Down On Telephone Marketing
    We are all familiar with the constant calls which invade our privacy from Tele-Marketing Companies - more often than not from Offshore Calling Centres, such as those based in India who are outside of the reach of our laws. Despite these calls being frustrating, inconvenient & more often than not, downright fraudulent they are still used by leading U.K. based companies as a loophole to get around the Telephone Preference laws which are intended to prevent this. Although we may not be able to stop the Offshore Call Centres entirely, we can, at least, clamp down on those companies that use them. Give the law some power to clamp down on such companies & remove the ever increasing Western market for these Call Centres.
    72 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Jerry Gamble
  • Facebook name change purge
    Our names are part of our personal identity and are used by each of us to distinguish ourselves. Here is what we would like to say to Facebook. Dear Facebook, We would like to draw your attention to the way Facebook members have been treated regarding their names and accounts recently. Whilst we understand that Facebook has rules regarding acceptable names the recent purge is ignoring your own rules. People called “Bob” are being made to become Robert for example…. And the names we are known by in real life may not actually be those we have on legal documents. This certainly applies in my case, and in others too. We are not using the names on our facebook accounts for fraudulent, underhand or deceitful purposes so see no need for you to lock us out of our accounts and prevent us communicating with friends near and far. Please reconsider your recent actions as demanding “proper” names is causing chaos and consternation for many, many people, it is antisocial as well as heavy handed and may eventually contribute to the demise of Facebook in the future if an acceptable alternative becomes available to us We sincerely hope you will see fit to reverse your recent actions and allow us to revert to out proper account status on Facebook Thankyou in advance :-)
    84 of 100 Signatures
    Created by wendywoo watson