It is now 5 years since the Inquiry into the Iraq war was announced, 3 years since the the hearings were completed, and and to date it has reportedly cost £10 million. It is a national scandal that Sir John Chilcot’s findings have still not been published and we call upon The Iraq Inquiry for the report’s immediate publication, including full disclosure of all communications between Tony Blair and George Bush, regardless of political expediency and personal interest. Surveys suggest that the Iraq war has claimed up to 250.000 lives, cost billions of pounds, and its aftermath continues a toll of death years after the foreign troops have left. The legacy of the war has critically undermined any moral authority that the United Kingdom seeks to exert in international affairs as well as intensifying both national and global insecurity. The vested interests of a few individuals in further prevarication must no longer override the moral right of British citizens and the world at large to know the sequence of events and culpabilities of individuals responsible for this disastrous episode. If you believe this report is long overdue, please sign my petition.

○ free food for who ever wants it ○ free part of the five a day for the vulnerable. ○ engaging and educating young people about the origins of fruit. ○ assisting bee colonies by increasing pollen in parks.

In 2004 the government changed the funding formula for GP surgeries and didn't take account of the fact that in deprived areas people have higher health needs. Many practices would have gone bankrupt, so they introduced something called the 'minimum practice income guarantee' (MPIG) to stop practices falling below their previous level of income. Now the government is taking away the MPIG and many practices are threatened with bankruptcy again. Good quality surgeries (who spend the most, employing more staff to provide the best possible service to patients) will be the first to go. This will open the door for more GP surgeries run by large private firms on the cheap. The government is targeting poor areas to push it's agenda of increasing privatisation of the health service.

Elections should require the individual candidates to make their case for being elected. There should be space for good local independent candidates to win on their merit. Local elections often become about national politics and nothing to do with local issues. Poor candidates often succeed in getting elected, not because they will be any good, but because they are the candidate for a given party. Candidates will still be able to stand as the candidate for a given party, but they will have to get their name known by going out out and campaigning, instead of relying on a party vote that can see candidates getting elected without having seen a single leaflet delivered, door knocked on, or telephone call made.

TWO DIRECTORS ARE LORDS AND THIS, I BELIEVE, IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THERE JUST ISN'T THE INFRASTRUCTURE, LET ALONE THE WATER SUPPLY TO DEAL WITH THIS MASSIVE INVASION OF OVER 30,000 PEOPLE. Vast areas of countryside where many Red Listed and Schedule 1 Protected birds live, as well as other rare species of wildlife including badgers will be concreted over, ruining the countryside forever. HS2 WILL BE BUILT TO FERRY PEOPLE FROM THE NORTH TO LONDON. THEY CAN BUILD THEIR SPRAWL NEAR ALREADY DEVELOPED TOWNS WHERE HOUSES ARE NEEDED AND BUSINESSES ARE NEEDED UP NORTH. - OR ON THEIR OWN DOORSTEPS. https://www.mayfieldtowns.co.uk/ I believe that Lord Borwick and Lord Mathew Taylor (housing ‘advisor’ to the current Conservative government) are potentially breaching a ‘conflict of interest’. Large donations were made to the Conservative party. Peter Freeman is a director of Mayfields - founder Argent Plc. Donations made to Conservative party from M FREEMAN (over £500,000) of Argent plc - Co founder of Argent - Peter Freeman who is now a director of Mayfields. Mr Freeman founded the property group Argent in 1981. He is Founder, Chairman, and Non-Executive Director of Argent Group Plc. Lord Borwick group of companies: http://companycheck.co.uk/director/900170909 http://companycheck.co.uk/director/900170909/GEOFFREY-ROBERT-JAMES-BORWICK/directors-shareholders ENSCO 946 LIMITED - Lord Borwick Director - Federated Investments LLP Lee Newlyn; Lord Matthew Taylor, Lord Jamie Borwick; Jacqueline Craymer - Mayfield, directors will be gaining, prospering and benefiting financially from this vast concrete sprawl.

In a location such as a Wetherby it is of paramount importance that a fire appliance is available at all possible times within the normal operating parameters of a Fire Brigade. This is due to the remoteness of the next nearest fire appliances, some 12-15 minutes away. It is also an abuse of the tax payers money and resources and falls short of the service standards paid for and expected by the public and businesses in the Wetherby area. Not so long ago, the then District Manager, Mick Smith, allowed a crew from Wetherby to be stood down from operational duties for over 4 hours and to travel over 22 miles out of station area. During this time the crew dismantled a boxing ring at Fire Service HQ and then traveled to the Batley frontier club to reassemble it. The reason for the absence input on official documentation was "training at FSHQ for approx. 1'5 hours" This meant that, due to this falsehood, no appliance was sent to standby at Wetherby by control staff and this left the area vulnerable in the case of a fire or road traffic collision. An investigation was carried out (by the peers and colleagues!) of those responsible and no-one was found to be accountable. It was proved that the entry made in the official log was a lie to cover up the actual whereabouts of the appliance and crew. The stated reply was "We can learn lessons from this" Imagine if this had been an ambulance and crew or a police van been allowed to be used in this same way. After the investigation and result, Councillor Wilkinson was approached and when asked to comment on the incident of the inappropriate use of the appliance and crew he said that he trusted the judgement of the officers concerned as "he has known them personally for some years" ACO Barnes has also refused to hold anyone accountable and has refused to have an investigation. It was also stated that Wetherby is a "low risk area" to justify the absence. Charity is, by definition, the giving of time or money freely to aid an organisation. It is not the unilateral commandeering of an essential on duty emergency service paid by the tax payers . If you think this incident was wrong and should not be allowed to happen again then please sign this petition. I am a retired fire officer and know the importance of an early attendance in order to save lives. If this incident goes unpunished or not demonstrated against then Wetherby might lose it's fire engine altogether! Please support. Thank you in anticipation.

Mental health deserves equality with physical health. Service user involvement in the form of tokenism is unacceptable but none at all is shameful in 2014. Health And Social Care Act 2001 ''Section 11: Public involvement and consultation. 66. Section 11 confers on each Health Authority, Primary Care Trust and NHS trust a new statutory duty to make arrangements with the aim of involving patients and the public in the planning and decision making processes of that body, in so far as they affect the operation of the health services for which the body is responsible. In relation to Health Authorities, this would cover both the hospital and community health services for which they are responsible and the family health services provided by practitioners in their area'' Mental health must have parity with physical health services and the same legal entitlement to user involvement .Cornwall's complete absence of a meaningful independent voice for service users and carers is putting lives at risk, causing a huge rise in self harm and needless loss of lives.

Some of these bird numbers are already in decline and we shouldn't be worsening their situation. This is another example of humans thinking they can do what they want to the natural world for their own interests. We can't just decide to upset nature for some people's narrow-minded opinions and this body that advises the government is not one that has nature's interests at heart. Read here for more details. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/may/18/bird-killing-call-robin-starling-mallard-splits-conservationists This gives you a clearer insight as to what it's really about. http://tompride.wordpress.com/2014/05/18/heres-the-real-reason-the-tories-are-allowing-the-destruction-of-robin-eggs-and-nests/

Micro-plastic particle abrasives are used as exfoliants in consumer products (e.g. toothpastes, body and face scrubs and gels). These particles, which persist in our environment for 100 years, are designed to be washed down the drain. They are too small for our country’s sewage systems to filter. The micro-plastic particles’ large surface area relative to their modest volume makes it easy for toxic substances, such as persistent organic pollutants (think PCBs and DDT for example), to stick to them, causing further toxic harm. Micro-plastic particles are now being found in fish, marine mammals and reptiles and their toxic overload is affecting plankton at the bottom of the food chain. • Consumers can CHECK products for plastics and REFUSE to purchase them (look for polythene and "PE", "PP" or "PMMA" in the list of ingredients). Please…get plastics off our bodies and out of our water!

Britain's children should not be protected for profit. Yet, under new legislation proposed by Michael Gove's Department for Education, private companies could have the chance to decide whether children stay in their family homes or are put into the care system. Six weeks is too short a time for "consultation", and experts in the field have voiced concern over the proposals, as well as the lack of in-depth research. It's time to stand beside the 37 social services experts who have publicly condemned the plans for subjecting much-needed services to the "fickleness and failings" of private companies like Serco, G4S, and ATOS. In the past two years, we have seen the catastrophic impact of privatising public services. The private firm, ATOS, should have taught us a lesson through their failed Work Capability Assessments, which found millions of sick people "fit for work". Many died without benefits, and the government lost millions of pounds from appeals made by wrongly assessed claimants. Protecting young people is too important a service to hand over to the highest bidder. Tell the Department of Education that we don't want to see the lives of vulnerable children in the hands of target-chasing private companies.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/may/16/child-protection-privatised

I am a parent that is continually under pressure to supply my children with state of the art technology in the form of these all singing all dancing smart phones. To be able to truly control my children's spending the only way I can do this is to overspend initially on a phone and go Pay As You Go. Then there is the problem of teenagers hassling for more credit. Pay as You go is expensive. The cost of these phones are extortionate and the tariffs are designed to maximise the income for the company and to encourage people to take out contracts. The contract price plans are attractive. You can get a decent phone and a decent price plan for a reasonable monthly outlay. It is an easy option. My daughters were signed up and on the whole it is fantastic. They choose the phone, they know they can't upgrade it for 2 years and they know how much they can use it. In theory. As parents it is perfect. We sign them up. We are responsible for the bill. That is the issue. We naively assume our children are responsible adults and will treat this service with respect. As parents we are giving our children, young children, this responsibility maybe a little too early. There are children out there running up huge bills for their parents through lack of understanding of the consequences. These children don't realise it can lead to family debt and they assume it only effect them. There is also the point where the whole account can be suspended for non payment. The whole family, where a job which relies on the phone, could be at risk. My daughter ran up a bill of £130. On contacting the provider we were offered no help. The phone company said what if in the case of emergency. With unlimited texts and 999 I don't see this as being a valid reason. They told me they don't offer a capping service and we were responsible for the amount. After all she used it. I believe this is purely profiteering on the part of the phone company. I believe it should be a shared responsibility between the phone company and the contract holder. I believe that if they offered a cap option then this would prevent children (and some adults too) from putting their families through financial hardship. It will teach our children limits. I, after all, do not want to be presented with another extortionate bill that I can't afford.