The use of glyphosates has already been banned or restricted in 8 countries. It is not acceptable that ourselves, our children and the animals we share our community with are being routinely exposed to these chemicals whether we like it or not. This is a matter of great importance for those of us who care about each other's health and the health of our children, our cats, our dogs and all the flora and fauna of this county, of course including our beloved bees. If you don't live in this area, click here to start a campaign for your city: https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/start-a-pesticide-campaign

The use of glyphosates has already been banned or restricted in 8 countries. It is not acceptable that ourselves, our children and the animals we share our community with are being routinely exposed to these chemicals whether we like it or not. This is a matter of great importance for those of us who care about each other's health and the health of our children, our cats, our dogs and all the flora and fauna of this city, of course including our beloved bees. If you don't live in this area, click here to start a campaign for your city: https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/start-a-pesticide-campaign

The use of glyphosates has already been banned or restricted in 8 countries. It is not acceptable that ourselves, our children and the animals we share our community with are being routinely exposed to these chemicals whether we like it or not. This is a matter of great importance for those of us who care about each other's health and the health of our children, our cats, our dogs and all the flora and fauna of this city, of course including our beloved bees. If you don't live in this area, click here to start a campaign for your city: https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/start-a-pesticide-campaign

The use of glyphosates has already been banned or restricted in 8 countries. It is not acceptable that ourselves, our children and the animals we share our community with are being routinely exposed to these chemicals whether we like it or not. This is a matter of great importance for those of us who care about each other's health and the health of our children, our cats, our dogs and all the flora and fauna of this city, of course including our beloved bees. If you don't live in this area, click here to start a campaign for your city: https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/start-a-pesticide-campaign

In the tragic event when someone dies the family are left to organise their funeral arrangements whilst grieving their loss. If a British person dies overseas the extra stress and worry of having to repatriate their body can have serious consequences to the family, both in a heavy financial burden and emotional strain. Recently a British lorry driver from Wakefield died in Italy of natural causes whilst waiting for a ferry to Greece. His employer stated that because he was not in an accident they were not covered under their employers liability insurance to recover the costs of repatriating his body back to the UK, even though he was still physically employed by them. They did however immediately send another driver to collect their lorry, and offered £5000 towards the cost of repatriation - as long as the family did not tell the national press their story. With the unexpected worry of having to find the extra cost of thousands of pounds to repatriate his body, the dead driver's family were left with no other option than to reach out to the transport community via a crowdfunding campaign. The campaign was extremely successful and over £20'000 was raised within 3 days, because lorry drivers and other transport personnel all over the country were disgusted that the driver's employer would not cover the cost of repatriating his body after 12 years of employment, even though they have a multi million pound turnover. They chose money over empathy, reputation over compassion, inconvenience over pure decency and honor, and they chose to leave one of their own staff member's dead body in a foreign country over doing the right thing. This time the drivers community came through for him and his family, but someone else might not be so lucky. The devastating and heart breaking thought of not being able to bring your loved one's body home to rest is unthinkable. The transport community would like the Government to put legislation into place so this can never happen to another British person again. A very tiny rise in national insurance contributions will raise enough money to cover the cost of repatriation for normal British civilians. Hundreds of British citizens die overseas every year, caused by terrorists or natural death whilst on holiday, natural disasters and work related deaths. Army, Navy and RAF personnel are all repatriated back home, so why can't normal citizens have that right too? MOD personnel serve their country by protecting it and those at risk of harm in other countries. Normal British citizens serve our country by working and keeping the economy strong. This petition to the Government is dedicated to all British citizens who die overseas. Please choose compassion over money and doing the right thing over inconvenience. Please support this campaign and sign this petition. It could be you or one of your loved ones who needs repatriating next. Thank you.

It is important because it has become apparent that a small minority want to spoil things for the vast majority by objecting to Barry selling ice-cream from his beautiful cart in Lelant. It is vital these people who objected see that Barry has the support of people whose common sense and community hasn't been lost and who support him in all the advantages he brings to the village. Let's not let small minded bigots spoil our community, let's join together and sign up here to support Barrys application.

Im all for dogs being on certain parts of the beach just not Prime Spots which are in force along our Lincolnshire Coast. I understand there is a petition to try and lift a certain peice of lands ban but in my opinion it would have a effect on the safety of 1000`s of children that play in the area ( between Ba Rumba and Bibbys Beach Bar )

Ryanair threatened to leave two disabled octogenarians and myself aged 76 at Malaga airport because we were unable to download inbound boarding cards, which they do not allow to be downloaded before the outbound flight. We could not download them in Spain because we do not own smartphones. We were humiliated at the airport and forced to scrabble around for the cash. The stress has had an effect on all three of us and spoiled what had been a recuperative holiday. Michael O'Leary, the Chief Exec. of Ryanair told me personally that I should have bought on at an internet café or an hotel." Why not just allow them to be downloaded before flying?" I asked him. I have not yet had a reply to this simple question. Many people have been fined in this way and I would like them to sign this petition. I have two letters from O'Leary refusing to return our money.

we need a fair and correct assessment of venerable persons and we are finding many losing out when the law sates they should be helped ..many people have been left down at an early age and now it is happening again

This £93 million has to be found from other tax sources and where by robbing Peter to pay Paul, the government will make cuts elsewhere. That might be funding taken from the NHS or reduced social payments that affects everybody and the poor respectfully.

a) EXTEND CLAUSE 12 TO COVER GROUPS AS WELL AS INDIVIDUALS When Sun columnist Katie Hopkins referred to asylum seekers and migrants as ‘cockroaches’, ‘a swarm’, ‘a plague’ a ‘virus’ ; ‘vagrants’ ‘feral humans’ - who if they did reach our shores turned our towns into ‘festering sores’”, she did not in any way breach Press Organisation standards, according to the IPSO ruling, which was again defended by its chief executive Matt Tee a few days ago. “In terms of the Editors’ Code, there wasn’t anything that could lead to a successful complaint against that column.” he said in his statement. And that’s because the Code is inadequate. In its ruling, this Press self-regulatory body said it could not even CONSIDER the complaints under the element of its Editors' Code of Practice dealing with discrimination, (Clause 12) as, although this “specifically prohibits prejudicial or pejorative reference to individuals” its terms “do not restrict publications’ commentary on GROUPS OR CATEGORIES OF people”. (Emphasis mine) But on those terms therefore, the IPSO Code of Practice would allow publications to use similarly vile language, about the disabled, about any racial or religious group, about people of a particular sexual orientation or gender identity, just so long as the comment referred to the group as a whole, and not to any specific individual. At present, under the section headed Discrimination, the IPSO Code states : i) The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual's race, colour, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or disability. We suggest that the words “or group’s” simply be added, between the words “individual’s” and “race” --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Following publication of Hopkins' column, other newspaper columnists expressed their horror at her remarks, more than 300,000 people signed a petition calling for her to be fired, and the High Commissioner of the United Nations expressed his deep concern. GENEVA “. . . in the wake of a recent article in the Sun newspaper calling migrants “cockroaches,” the UN Human Rights Chief . . urged the U.K. authorities, media and regulatory bodies to take steps to curb incitement to hatred by British tabloid newspapers” UK LAWS dealing with hate crimes and hate speech, DO outlaw expressions of hatred against ‘groups’ of people (see below). And they state that a person is guilty of an offence if by his/her actions “(s)he intends to stir up . . . hatred, or . . hatred is likely to be stirred up. “ The Public Order Act 1986, the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 and the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 all say “ . . hatred means hatred against a group of persons . . . (defined by reference to race, religion, or sexual orientation.) Under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 a crime is considered to be ‘aggravated’ if the offence is motivated by [general] “hostility towards persons . . “ (plural) - who have a disability. Surely the wording of the IPSO Editors’ Code of Practice, with reference to discrimination, should at the very least then, reflect the current standard of UK law. _______________________________________________________ Concern about free speech Of course there could be and should be concern, and continuous debate, about free speech, but the Code already insists that it must not be interpreted in such a way as to “infringe the fundamental right to freedom of expression – such as to inform, to be partisan, to challenge, shock, be satirical and to entertain – or prevent publications in the public interest. “ Nevertheless, it also says that this should be balanced with respect for the rights of the individual. ______________________________________________________________________ b) Urging IPSO to better ENFORCE its “Editors’ Code of Practise” Even as it stands, in HAVING a clause about discrimination, IPSO presumably intends to promote an atmosphere of treating with respect and dignity, (even if not making them immune to criticism), individuals belonging to those groups which the law deems to be in need of particular protection in this area. And its Code of Practice states “it is essential that an agreed Code be honoured not only to the letter, but in the full spirit “ Even if migrants and asylum seekers do not constitute an identifiable racial or religious group, (part of Matt Tee’s defence about IPSO’s ruling ) it is difficult to see how they would not be included within the SPIRIT OF a Code which says “The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual's race, colour, religion . . “ , within the spirit of a Code which seeks to protect children and vulnerable adults, and which affords particular consideration for those experiencing personal grief or shock. It may be too late to get a better ruling on The Sun/Katie Hopkins case, but the Press must regulate itself against allowing a proliferation of such hateful language about human beings in its publications, by extending its Editors’ Code of Practice in the way suggested, and by better enforcing the Code. That is, if its claim that it “sets the framework for the highest professional standards that members of the press . . .have undertaken to maintain” – is to mean anything at all.

Imagine the nuclear bombs in our country went off, leaving our nation a wasteland and we had to flee to mainland Europe or Africa, should they turn us away because we're refugees? Because we're of another faith or skin colour? Would other nations letting us die be okay? Chances are you said, no, so how is it okay for us to let thousands of people die every day trying to escape war. War that we created. They're trying to escape the IS, they're trying to escape the bombs that France, America and We drop on them. We need to do more. These are human beings and we are letting them die.