It is imperative that the UK Government introduce respect for human rights and international law to UK Foreign Policy and safeguard national security by ending support for a regime which: i) exports a violent and intolerant ideology across the globe. ii) executes peaceful activists including those who were children at the time of their "crime". iii) is accused in a UN report of “widespread and systematic” attacks on civilian targets in violation of international humanitarian law in Yemen. By defending mass Saudi executions the Foreign Minister, Philip Hammond MP and the UK Government are damaging what little reputation remains of Britain as a country which values freedom of speech, democracy, human rights, the right of assembly and peaceful protest. UK Government policy does not represent British values but those of the brutal Saudi regime. As an apologist for Saudi Arabia's execution of peaceful protestors, Hammond is working in the interest, not of the British people but of the despotic Saudi monarchy. As David Mepham, the UK director of Human Rights Watch points out: "1. Phillip Hammond is an apologist for the death penalty. 2. Phillip Hammond believes that execution by beheading for political protests is an acceptable form of punishment. 3. It doesn’t matter how low Saudi Arabia sinks in order to stifle protests against their barbaric regime, Phillip Hammond will seemingly refuse to condemn their actions – even if their actions are relative to those of Daesh (ISIS)."* The UK Government has long prioritised arms sales and securing oil supplies above human rights and democracy, but the hypocrisy of condemning ISIS's horrific beheadings whilst defending Saudi Arabia's makes a mockery of the UK's claim to be a champion of "the free world". *http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-executions-philip-hammond-condemned-by-rights-campaigners-for-excusing-mass-killings-a6802641.html

Once a month, I take my blind amputee brother to Asda supermarket in Perth. During our last visit to the store, we were appalled at our treatment following the use of a disabled parking space. I discovered a fine which had been imposed on the grounds that my brother (who has lived in a care home for many years and cannot drive for obvious reasons) does not have a blue badge to display. Why should a genuinely disabled person be fined in an Asda car park for not displaying a blue badge? Blue Badge Scotland clearly state on their website: "The Blue Badge scheme is for drivers or passengers with severe mobility problems. The scheme provides a range of on-street parking concessions enabling Blue Badge holders to park closer to where they need to go. The scheme does not apply to off-street car parking, for example in privately operated car parks at supermarkets or airports." I immediately contested this fine with the store management and was shocked to discover that Asda have no power to waive these fines under any circumstances. This is because Asda allow a private company - Smart Parking - to run many of their car parks across the country. This company exploits the blue badge system under their "contract" agreement and employ their own staff to cowardly affix parking fines to windshields without care or consideration for who could be using this space. By allowing such a company to run their parking areas, Asda are complicit in this greedy money making exercise. Following my formal complaint, I had a call from an Asda corporate employee who claims to be among the highest echelons of customer service representatives. This individual showed no understanding or compassion whatsoever, responding to my issue with cold bureaucracy. This employee showed (as with any other member of Asda management that i have discussed this issue with) utter incompetence in understanding the difference between criminal law and contract law. I have been persistently shamed as having “broken the law”, which is absolutely not the case. Perhaps the most shocking revelation during this call is that Asda have confirmed they DO NOT provide their own spaces for disabled people who do not have (perhaps have forgotten or never had the need for) a blue badge. Their best suggestion was that I use the drop off point at the front door. This shows an incredible lack of understanding as they expect me to leave my blind, wheelchair bound brother unattended while I find a regular space. My brother is effectively barred from Asda as there are no suitable spaces to allow safe access to their stores. This amounts to discrimination against disabled customers, as confirmed in my correspondence with Citizens Advice Scotland. They have suggested that there is a strong argument here for the discrimination against the disabled and they have notified trading standards with regards to this issue. I am grateful to have guidance and support of local mps and msps on this matter in addition to a local newspaper that intends to run our story. PLEASE SIGN this petition to help prevent other people from suffering this discrimination, humiliation and indignity while visiting their local Asda store. N.B. Tesco have confirmed that they do not treat their disabled customers in this way and are equally shocked by the conduct of Asda.

The UK government's £130M tax deal with Google means that Google have effectively agreed to pay only a 3% corporation tax rate for the past 10 years. This is much lower than the 20% rate many other businesses have to pay in comparison. This is clearly unfair and demonstrates the UK government will treat rich powerful companies, who may benefit their political agenda, more favourably than those who have little or no influence. The secrecy of this deal is a cause of national concern and needs investigating by an independent body which has the power to veto it should due cause be found. Google is not alone in this. Other large multinational companies have found ways to avoid paying their fair share of taxes too. But if the Google tax deal can be stopped in its tracks, this could also prevent similar unfair arrangements being made with them. Margrethe Vestager, the European Union Competition Commissioner, is reported to have offered to launch an investigation into this Google tax deal if requested. By signing this, we are jointly asking her to do so on behalf of all the honest UK tax paying public.

Lewes Crown Post Office is under threat. On January 19th Post Office Ltd announced plans to franchise 39 of its branches, and close three. Lewes Post Office is on the list of those to be franchised once a suitable retailer is found. This franchising is not for our benefit. Lewes is a busy Post Office. Customers will be all too clearly aware of the queues frequently experienced at peak times. Basically, the Post Office wants to sell the valuable Victorian building that our branch is housed in. Putting it into a local shop, will lead to longer queues, less services offered, and an all round inferior service, which will affect businesses and individual customers. Anyone who has visited Ringmer Post Office will be aware of this kind of service. Our Post Office has been on the same site for over 100 years. We have to stop this move. Thank you

We have been made aware that there is a final opportunity for comments of support for this project to be made either via this petition, the Council website or to the Planning Officer at the following address: [email protected] +++++ Rydym yn ymwybodol bod cyfle olaf i gyflwyno sylwadau o gefnogaeth i'r prosiect hwn naill ai drwy arwyddo'r ddeiseb hon, drwy wefan y Cyngor neu drwy ddanfon neges at y Swyddog Cynllunio ar y cyfeiriad canlynol: [email protected]

For the leader of our country to make remarks so carelessly about such a terrible issue is in my eyes unforgivable and shameful. This is the man elected to represent us all in the UK on the world stage and I for one would like to see him make amends for this error by learning more about the issue he casually commented on.

The signatories of this petition regard peaceful, direct action as a political right & believe that poeple are entitled to non-violent political protest, as inferred by rights under Article 19 & Article 20 [1] of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Article 20 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

Tesco have been caught out and then admitted to delaying payments to suppliers to improve its own financial position. Despite bringing financial misery to the owners, the threat of bankruptcy and job losses to some of their smaller suppliers, Tesco's have not offered them any direct apologies, financial recompense and to top it all, they also have avoided any fines by the Grocery Code Adjudicator. Whilst recognising that Tesco claims to have changed these unfair practises towards suppliers they have done nothing in attempting to make good the damage they have done.

The NHS has always been free at the point of delivery - that's one of the principles on which it was created (see: fatpod.org). Millions of ordinary people rely on this principle. I was lucky enough to know my great-grandmother, who raised her family of 5 before the NHS existed. She told me of family meetings, when someone was ill, to decide which meals would be skipped in order to be able to pay for them to see a doctor. We cannot allow government to re-create a "pre-NHS" society by charging directly for NHS services or demanding private insurance policies for healthcare (which would only benefit insurance companies). We already have insurance for free-at-the-point-of-delivery healthcare - it's called National Insurance (NI), to which we all contribute when we can. Individuals should not be penalised financially for being ill and needing NHS services. The website fatpod.org is dedicated to keeping the National Health Service "FATPOD" - Free At The Point Of Delivery. You can find more information there.

As of January 2016 the V&A Museum will stop employing new museum staff directly. All new staff (from Gallery Assistants to Curators) will now be employed through the museum’s own trading company V&A Enterprises Ltd. This ‘in-house’ backdoor privatisation is presented by the museum as a cost saving exercise and a consequence of declining budgets. Their savings will in effect be made by removing access for new staff to the Civil Service Pensions and Compensation Schemes as well as employing new starters on reduced terms & conditions (maternity & sick pay are especially affected), and preventing new staff’s access to union recognition and collective bargaining. The trade unions currently recognised by the V&A are: PCS, Prospect, & FDA. PCS created this petition. Although the museum has committed to ‘review’ future union recognition in the Enterprises company; so far management have consistently refused to enter into negotiations with the unions over this matter, arguing that only new employees would be affected, not existing members of staff. However, this decision can only lead to a two-tier workforce, exacerbating inequalities between V&A staff and before long undermining the rights of the current workforce.

Our children are becoming increasingly unwell physically, mentally and emotionally and are in dire need of adequate education in this area. If we want to prosper as a nation, we have to make learning about personal, social and environmental well-being as important as learning to read and write. Only healthy people can create a healthy nation and our children are the leaders and positive change-makers of tomorrow.

Because dental health is important. People need to have the same basic rights as those who can pay