More than five million British workers are currently subjected to working hours longer than they are paid for (source ITV, http://www.itv.com/news/2017-02-24/unpaid-overtime-in-uk-worth-33-6bn-last-year-to-employees/) Employers should not be allowed to continue expecting staff to work for free. Longer working hours are known to cause/exacerbate a range of physical and mental health problems.

Shine offer professional coaching in a variety of sports that children may not be able to access ordinarily. The coaches provide positive role models that children are very comfortable with and they offer an alternative to parents and teachers in this respect in children's lives. They make engaging in physical exercise fun and achievable for all. The school believe that an internal coach facilitating sport through class teachers offers an effective, cost cutting solution in times of educational economic austerity. However we believe that the move will be to the detriment of our children's enthusiasm for sport, that they will be less active overall as they will not be as encouraged to join in physical activities outside of school, the range of different sporting activities available to them will decrease and the level of sporting prowess that many of the children currently possess (as demonstrated by St Ursula's achievements in inter-school matches and tournaments) will decline. In a world that promotes physical exercise as healthy this move suggests that E-Act do not hold physical educational as important as other aspects of the curriculum. Whilst the parents understand the need for the school to future-proof against the closure of the community hall and therefore the loss of Shine from the neighbouring building, the parents have long understood (as promoted by the school themselves in previous academic years) that Shine would operate from within the new school. The possible community hall closure has not yet been decided upon and even if that were to happen Shine would be on-site to continue their activities if what parents were previously led to believe is correct. Many parents selected St Ursula's as their child's primary school because of the close association between the school and Shine. E-Act are correct when they say that E-Act and Shine are two separate business organisations. However E-Act have, as recently as the autumn of 2016, used the association that exist between the two to promote their school. Many parents, on hearing that Shine will not be teaching PE to at least one key stage, feel that they have been mis-sold the school.

All the surrounding communities are against this development. There are lots of health risks involved for the people living within a 10km radius of this plant. The plant will be storing waste at the property which is dangerous as it heats up. If this were to catch fire at ground level many people would be forced to ingest the harmful toxins produced. Transport of the Waste to the plant causes another issue, with huge lorries coming and going from the property throughout the day. The company will be self regulated which means they would be responsible for reporting their own breaches to the authorities. In other plants owned by the same company there has been over 1000 breaches recorded. There are lots of reasons why we feel this is not the area for this type of plant and would urge people to support us by Signing the petition. Save our future generations by saying no to incineration.

I was issued with a Fixed Penalty Notice of £75 by two people, dressed in para-military black, armed with body-cams and walk i-talkies and told that I had dropped litter in a doorway. They approached me from behind and even though I am 71 years old they threatened me and followed me, telling me all the time that I would be arrested by the police and that I had committed a criminal offence. Totally confused and frightened I gave them my details only to find out later that they had both lied to me and to the Council because they had not observed me dropping litter but had harassed me in the hope of gaining a conviction for monetary reward from their company.

Current Government policy on pensions provision is based on the assumption that one third of one's life post starting work will be spent in retirement. The ability of retirees' ability 'to retain our intellectual, cultural and social capital' (Hartman, 2009) is compromised by the reluctance of university libraries to allow retired staff access away from university sites to e journals (see Paul Armstrong, Univ leeds, conference paper, undated but after 2011). This issue of the the defenestration of retired academics was given prominence by an influential survey of Retirees' views by Barbara Tizard widely reported in 2000-04. Access to journal articles by a substantial proportion of the UK population is severely limited, especially by those who cannot afford the exhorbitant rate of downloading one-off articles. The problem is writ large in terms of equity worldwide. Whilst most UK research councils (for example MRC, Welcome) now require publishing in open access journals and open access is on the increase, many journals still do not have an open access policy. The cost of such a policy should be born by a charge to institutions for publication in turn funded by research grant funding enhancements. The contribution of substantial expertise and dedication amongst academic and other retirees in particular is being compromised by this short sighted policy. (note: all these references can easily be obtained in a Google search by entering Barbara Tizard retirees)

Not very healthy to have those rubbishes on our streets. Not very respectful from council. No consideration for the public. Save the binmen jobs and no cut.

Change hospital waiting times. More therapy available maybe to avoid surgery. Allow a changes in the law to recognise a third sex as non binary.

The modern day national anthem has much less importance and relevance as it did a long time ago. A lot of people do not associate with the monarchy and the song is therefore not inclusive to those who wish to show their love for the country, without having to praise an age old system that has no power and is all for show. Evidence of this can be seen all over the country, from places such as sporting events, funerals and in times of remorse or love. Therefore the national anthem needs to be something that can summarise what it's like to be British and get every one to be proud of this great nation. The song to replace it would be 'Don't look back in anger' by 'Oasis' and it is the perfect replacement. The song is extremely well known by all ages and when it is sung by large groups of people it is truly spine tingling and heart pounding. The true meaning and influence of this song can simply be seen through its choice as the song to show the nations reaction to the atrocities in Manchester and London. The song has more meaning then the current day "God save the queen" which praises and glorifies the Monarchy, as the songs title itself represents what it is to be British as it reflects the attitude of the wonderful people of Britain when it comes to unforgivable acts of horror. Also itwould not only include everyone into the celebration of their country but also be much more relevant in the modern time. Thank you

Currently A&E at Weston General is closed between 10pm and 8am. Seriously ill and injured people are being taken over 20 miles to Bristol or Taunton.This puts patients health under grave risk and fatalities are inevitable due to the time it will take to get people to a functioning A&E.....if an ambulance can be found.

The Wolf killed as it escaped was part of an important breeding program and this loss has a crucial effect on that program.

When I was growing up it was instilled in me to NOT make a promise I couldn't keep. So far you have ignored my emails and tweets on this matter. I thought you were different I believed in you.

This is important because a child's well being needs to come first. A child doesn't choose to be put here or choose to have an absent parent just toss them to the side. We need to teach the next generation that we stand up to our responsibilitys. It takes 2 people to create a child so therefore 2 people are responsible. It's important that the parent that has full time care is taken seriously, which at present we are not.