Firefighters understand that times are difficult and money is tight, but we believe these cuts go too far and would risk the long term safety of the public. The cuts would lead to slower response times, with fire engines taking longer to reach you in times of need. They would lead to a significantly increased risk to both the public and firefighters alike. Please add your name to our petition and tell Gloucestershire County Council to rethink these dangerous cuts!

If we do not prevent this contamination even the rich will become impoverished! No Barry Ash Dump - Stop the Incinerator Ash 'Facility' in Barry Town! We’re challenging Council approval of a plan to bring Cardiff’s incinerator ash to Barry -75000 tonnes per year on unused dockland close to homes and businesses. They would not simply dump the ash but extract metals, then aerate the ash in open-air heaps and grade the matured ash into building aggregate. Not only are these operations very dusty, but the dust is toxic, with lead, cadmium etc. The strong winds across the open site will carry scarcely visible toxic dust particles to many residential areas around the Dock and into the town center. Other incinerator ash sites are in rural locations, far from housing. Our community is the first to have it imposed on us. The regulators are concerned about harm to bio-conservation, but not about humans! Our lawyers are up to challenging this precedent that would dismiss the special health hazards and toxic nature of incinerator dust. The Vale of Glamorgan Council had to check risks to health, but failed to do so. They had asked Public Health Wales for their view on incomplete materials. A non-reply was used as excuse for ignoring risks to health of inhaling and ingesting the incinerator. Infants are especially vulnerable, being more sensitive to toxic metals and ingesting via. finger-licking. This crassly ignorant, almost criminal decision by the planning committee on 3rd Sept. 2015 can only be quashed by Court Order. Leading environmental lawyers Richard Buxton have lodged a case on our behalf. As well as part funding under Legal Aid, the community has to raise funds several £1000s towards it. Please contribute through:- http://www.gofundme.com/a97hmjnu Please help save our community and town from this insidious threat !

David Cameron pledged before the election that tax credits were "not going to fall". However, George Osborne's welfare reforms have included tax credit cuts that effectively act as a work penalty; punishing hard-working lower-income families. Both the Treasury select committee and the Work and Pensions select committee have requested a full impact assessment from the Government, yet Cameron and Osborne have attempted to brush the effects of their cuts under the carpet by only setting out the impact on income for families already in receipt of tax credits. We need analysis of the impact on income that the tax credit cuts will have on the population as a whole, not just those already in receipt of tax credits, so that we can see the true, devastating effects of these welfare reforms.

For many women reaching sixty was within sight when the state pension age was raised. The nearer they got the further away it was moved. Some women have been robbed of six even seven years pension, thousands of pounds, without a murmur of protest but now the reality of continuing to work has hit hard and for many this is a step too far.

We need an improvement to this service and not for it to be downgraded any more, this is important because the population of the surrounding area takes in members of the public when they need the use of this service. We also demand the sexual health clinic be reinstated to New Addington as we have the biggest unplanned teenage pregnancy in London. So where is the logic in shutting the service then telling everyone to go to Croydon thus increasing the foot full to C U H.

Glasgow has lost so much of its architectural heritage and we cannot afford to loose anymore or we will simply not be an attractive tourist spot for those from other European countries where the architecture is preserved to a larger state. This development of student housing could be built anywhere in the city, could it not be moved into the former City of Glasgow College building a few yards away that is up for sale? This area of Glasgow close to Townhead and Cowcaddens has virtually no heritage remaining and this former church is one of the only beautiful buildings remaining in this area. Please keep this vital part of our heritage for the next generations of Glaswegians to enjoy!

The Banks are removing the fabric of rural communities by closing Branches many country miles from central Banks, many are 40 miles away = 80 mile round trip. The alternative of a Bank mobile Van twice a week is not working out for these more remote communities, and when it does come customers have to queue up outside whatever the weather, this can be a lengthy period. Rural areas rely heavily upon local services, this also affects tourism, which is the life blood of these communities.

Scientists working for ExxonMobil had suspicions about the existence of climate change in the 1970s, and by the early 1980s they had conducted research projects, validated their theories and concluded that man-made climate change was real and would raise global temperatures by between two to three degrees. Evidence suggests that ExxonMobil continued to fund the work of climate sceptics as late as 2009, and possibly beyond, which is after the date that the Rome Statute entered into force. Rather than alert the world to these facts, Exxon Mobil used this knowledge to increase their profits, whilst also setting up and funding various organisations to deny the existence of climate change. Exxon Mobil's policy of aggressive climate change denial has caused irreversible damage to the environment. As the mandate of the International Criminal Court is to try individuals rather than corporations, we ask the ICC to charge all individuals at ExxonMobil who conspired to cover up the existence of climate change with crimes against humanity. We believe that ExxonMobil's actions constitute an inhumane act which has intentionally caused great suffering. We want the ICC to take this action both in order to hold ExxonMobil to account for their actions, and to prevent other corporations from taking similar actions in the future. It needs to be established that large scale destruction or pollution of the environment, whether intentional or through negligence, will constitute a crime against humanity, and that individuals responsible for such crimes will be pursued by the ICC.

My mother shopped at Stockport Market and I along with thousands of others have done so all my life. SMBC's policies over the last few years have had a negative affect on the market, particularly since the renovation of the market hall which allowed fewer stalls to operate. It feels that this has been a deliberate policy to run the market down. The market provides a low cost, high quality environment for people to shop. There are three good quality grocers, the only independent butcher, apart from Titterton's, in the town, an excellent independent bakers and again, the only independent delicatessen in the town. There is the only independent haberdashers alongside an ironmongers, stalls selling books, clothes, curtains, bedding - all of them independent. Stockport town centre is a heartless shrine to big name consumerism. The Market is a refreshing alternative to this and deserves to be cherished and nurtured, not have the heart ripped out of it.

Free open space is important for everyone, for town dwellers and those living outside towns. The Green Belt provides that free open space between built up areas. Surrey has areas of outstanding natural beauty which will be destroyed by excessive development around towns that will happen if Green Belt land is released for housebuilding

In this time of austerity, cuts and financial difficulty for some of the poorest in society, we need a strong opposition to Tory policies. A minority of Labour MPs cannot be allowed to divide the party on such important votes which will affect millions of people.

This behaviour is not only disrespectful and disruptive of proceedings (setting the worst example to the country and giving a terrible impression abroad), but it is used to bully and intimidate legitimate questioning of the PM by our elected representatives and shows contempt for the citizens of the country. There can be no justification for it and it must be stopped - the House of Commons is NOT a school debating society.