The beaver is the most important, formerly native, animal to Britain that could create landscapes that protect our native plants and animals. They also save taxpayers money in water treatment and flood management costs. The beaver was hunted to extinction and we have a duty to bring them back to our rivers. The effects of beavers will improve water quality, reduce flooding and help turn our river banks back into wildlife havens. This is resisted by some groups who want to exploit our river banks for private gain or fear change in the countryside. 1. The beaver family in the Beauly is not causing any problems and is popular with locals 2. They did not come from illegal releases so there is no need for SNH to make an example of them. 3. They have been there for 5 years or more and are breeding. Kits have been seen this year. 4. Trees for Life are fundraising to run a licensed beaver project in that area and would like to study and add to the existing beaver population. 5. Without this it could take decades for beavers to disperse naturally to the north of the Cairngorms. 6. Trapping these beavers is a waste of public money and a pointless animal welfare risk.

Jake Berry MP (Tory minister for the so-called Northern "Powerhouse") has advised cash strapped Wirral Council to use its own resources and reserves to help victims of the huge explosion that tore through the centre of New Ferry, Wirral earlier this year. 33 people were injured 2 seriously, many businesses were destroyed, a further dozen shops and services put out of action and 30 families displaced from their homes. With so much of the town centre destroyed, shoppers have stopped going to New Ferry and the surviving businesses are suffering from loss of trade and facing financial ruin. Insurance companies have been very slow to act and indeed reluctant to pay out (with nobody having yet been found guilty of causing the explosion), leaving residents and businesses without sufficient financial support with which to rebuild their lives. Many people are not only suffering financially, but also emotionally with depression and the equivalent of post-traumatic stress disorder. The government has shockingly refused to call the explosion a NATIONAL INCIDENT, what on earth does constitute a "national incident" then ? Despite pleas for funding assistance from local MPs, businesses and residents, the government has turned its back on this devastated community, citing rules and regulations for not offering any disaster relief funding to help those affected. New Ferry, Wirral - a deprived community in a Labour controlled authority - is being treated entirely differently to other communities in the UK that have faced similar, and seemingly less significant, disasters. Jake Berry's refusal of assistance is an absolute disgrace and makes a mockery of the title Northern Powerhouse. New Ferry should be treated the same as other communities that have recently suffered (as should every community in the country should a similar disaster befall them), and the rebuilding of its centre should be funded by the British government A.S.A.P If you agree that New Ferry (and every other community in the country affected by such an economically damaging disaster) should be treated fairly and given government support, please, please sign this petition, thank you

My name is Eddie Gilbertson and I was diagnosed with pleural plaques in 1999. I know what it's like to have an asbestos-related condition and how important it is to receive piece of mind when you are told you have a toxic material in your body. I co-ordinate and run the South Wales Asbestos Support Group (SWASG - http://www.swasg.wales/about), and with their backing and support I am bringing you the information and background surrounding this petition. The purpose of this petition is to bring attention to a House of Lords decision that residents of both England and Wales should not be entitled to compensation when diagnosed with pleural plaques, while their counterparts in Scotland and Northern Ireland are allowed to do so. Since the 1980s, the presence of pleural plaques was treated by the courts as giving rise to a potential provisional damages claim. An individual would be able to instruct solicitors to investigate liability in the knowledge they would achieve peace of mind - they could also be entitled to compensation should they develop a more serious asbestos-related condition in the future. In 2007, the House of Lords ruled that people with the condition would no longer qualify for compensation after insurance companies challenged workers’ rights to claim. Compensation for pleural plaques was reinstated in Scotland in 2009 and again in Northern Ireland in 2011 through legislation passed by their devolved parliaments with the knowledge that the combination of the physical change to the lung tissue when combined with the inevitable anxiety as to the individual’s future and the risk of development of more serious conditions, ought to be actionable. This leaves those who were exposed to asbestos dust and fibres throughout England and Wales unable to claim compensation if they are diagnosed with pleural plaques. Caused by exposure to asbestos dust and fibres, pleural plaques are a condition affecting the membrane surrounding your lungs and lining the inside of your ribcage. After being exposed to asbestos, it is very common for areas of the membrane to become thickened and fibrous, and to accumulate a chalky material. Despite there being no symptoms associated with pleural plaques, the fact that they are there signals the presence of asbestos fibres in the lungs which may independently cause life-threatening or fatal diseases, such as asbestosis or mesothelioma. To put it shortly, pleural plaques are an indicator of potentially serious health problems in the future. Diagnosis means that people with previous asbestos exposure can feel great anxiety about what their future holds, and can even alter someones state of mind. I know several individuals who have since been diagnosed with pleural plaques, as well as the families and friends of others and it can be very harrowing to see such fine gentlemen and ladies know that one day they could develop a life threatening condition and get no support, all while their mental well-being deteriorates. When you are told you have asbestos fibres in your lungs - no matter how serious the related condition - it's frightening and isolating. What does is mean for your health and future, and the future of your family? It is for these reasons that I wanted to set up the SWASG, and I am now bringing forward this petition.

Surrey County Council have decided to withdraw all funds supporting our valuable Home Support Teams. Many residents feel cheated and betrayed - why? Because they only moved into "Sheltered Accommodation" when they were assured that Home Support was available. Many having turned down "Granny Flats" in order to preserve their independence, now they are stuck! Vulnerable and elderly residents in Sheltered Accommodation rely on this support. Viv Y. who is now ninety says " we have been so lucky to have our lovely Home Support Angels - without them I would be in hospital. With their support and dedication I have not blocked a bed in hospital and can be in the familiar surroundings of my own home and lovely neighbours" Nora S. -" If this service is withdrawn I shall have to move somewhere more secure. I owe so much to Home Support for helping me stay in my own home. It would be a wonderful Christmas present for us all if this threat could be lifted" The Home Support teams have largely taken upon themselves myriad problems that arise on a day-to-day basis in residential establishments for elderly and vulnerable people. In fact they take on problems way beyond their remit because they care. Arguably, without Home Support many residents would either be hospitalised or relying on other emergency services such as Doctors,Fire Services and police incurring further costs that outweigh the proposed savings. .

On a regular basis I encounter drivers causing unnecessary danger simply by moving off from the wrong side of the road. A car that is moving in this situation always has a driver it doesn't always have a passenger who has a clearer view of the road. With a law in place this common dangerous practice would reduce.

Launceston is situated on the border with Devon far from any other hospital and 25 miles from Derriford Hospital in Plymouth. We need our Community Hospital and an Urgent Care Centre to serve our rural community's health care needs. With a rapidly expanding population in the new housing estates on the periphery of Launceston and an ageing population in the rural hinterland, we desperately need adequate health provision in the Launceston area. My husband has numerous chronic health problems and we spend a great deal of time in both Launceston Hospital and Derriford Hospital. I drive him to all his appointments and the trips to Derriford can be long and tiring for us both. We are not alone. There are many families like ours. Without emergency care in Launceston, our quality of life would be severely diminished. We need our Urgent Care Centre in Launceston. We need a fully functioning Community Hospital. We need our NHS.

As someone who has lived with chronic pain for over 15 years, I have considerable experience of the current pain management options and have tried over 30 medications and treatment regimes specifically aimed at reducing my chronic pain. I have used cannabis in the past in order to help control my pain but the current legal situation means it is illegal and is classed as having no medical benefit which deters those in considerable chronic pain who may gain some benefit from cannabis. Scottish Government figures estimate that over 223,000 adults in Scotland experience chronic pain. The Scottish Government have provided funding which set up the National Scottish Chronic Pain Management Service in Glasgow and which led to an overhaul of chronic pain services. While these investments are welcome, I believe that the Scottish Government needs to commit to exploring the medical benefits of cannabis based products in order to develop better treatments for those in chronic pain. I am aware of the reserved nature of drugs policy in the UK and confirm that this isn't a call for the legalisation of cannabis but for the First Minister to allocate money and resources for the exploration of the benefit of medicines based on cannabis. I've had a supporting quote from Crossbench peer Baroness Meacher: “It is shocking that cannabis remains illegal for medical use in this Country. The majority of US States and at least 11 Countries in Europe now recognise the medicinal value of cannabis to patients suffering chronic pain and other conditions. The World Health Organisation is now reviewing the legal status of cannabis under the United Nations Conventions. We are urging the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs - the drugs advisory body to the UK Government - to review the evidence on cannabis. It has become urgent for the UK to legalise cannabis for medical use, and I am now hopeful that this will happen within two years. This is of course far too long a delay but we will get there if public pressure continues”. And a supporting quote from Liberal Democrat peer and Lib Dem Home Affairs Spokesperson Baroness Hamwee: “The UK's drugs policy is good for the criminal gangs who profit from it, but heartless towards people who would benefit from medical treatment using cannabis. A health-based approach, and regulation, is simple common sense.”

To help the civilians caught up in this horror with the addition of famine and disease . This is utterly shameful to leave other human beings to suffer so much.

We need daily medication to keep well and when you are cash strapped cut corners by reducing it. I came unstuck and needed an ambulance three times and had an overnight hospital stay because of this. It cost the nhs well over £1000 for this. My prescription came to £16 and if I'd had my meds would have saved the government money. It's a no brainer

On the 6th April 2017 a petition with over 5000 signatures was presented to Brighton and Hove Council. Over 3000 signatures were signed on the streets of Brighton and 2200 online. The petition was against the implementation of PSPO’s. PSPO’s give Council workers and the Police the power to give Homeless people and Travellers an on the spot £100 fine for occupying a tent, vehicle or caravan in 12 locations across the city. Failure to pay the fine can lead to prosecution and a further £1000 fine. People breaching the order must provide a name address and date of birth. Failure to positively identify someone can lead to arrest. So effectively you can be fined, arrested and prosecuted for being homeless and having no money to pay for the ‘crime’ of being homeless. Brighton and Hove council voted for the petition to be noted but not to be forwarded to the Policy and Resources committee for further debate. Usually any petition with over 1250 signatures is debated at committee. Despite opposition to this legislation from Liberty, Equality and Human Rights Commission, local charities, specialist lawyers and the local community, Councillors blocked due democratic process by voting against the legislation being debated by the Committee that decided to implement it. It appears that Brighton and Hove Council want to sweep away homeless people and Travellers from our city through criminalisation and attempting to block any debate or opposition to the legislation. This will not work, it cannot work and we are standing against it. PSPO’s should only be used to target specific behaviours and not specific groups. This statement has been echoed by Sussex Police as well as human rights lawyers. This legislation is a direct assault on the homeless community and Gypsies and Travellers. PSPO’s have been misused in this context as living in a tent, caravan or vehicle are not anti-social activities in themselves. Article 8, of the Human rights act the right to a private and family life, is being infringed by this use of PSPO’s. Under the European convention on Human Rights, all public bodies owe a duty to facilitate the Gypsy way of life. This legislation is an attack on the Gypsy way of life and therefore in breach of Equality Duty and The European Framework Convention for the protection of Minorities. This policy is unlawful and need to be brought back to committee to be looked at again as it stands Brighton and Hove Council have blocked any further debate.

North Devon Hospital is vital, the time it would take to get to Exeter by car or Ambulance would be over an hour, Exeter Hospital already overloaded. Sign and share petition, write to MPs, write to newspapers, said save our Hospital point out how far Exeter is from Barnstaple, lack of public transport from surrounding villages to Barnstaple. Lives that could be saved lost.

We call upon the transport secretary to: 1) Pledge his immediate backing for the Northern Powerhouse Rail programme including a new state-of-the-art 30-minute rail link between Manchester and Leeds – a ‘Crossrail North’; 2) Make an immediate commitment to at least £59 billion ‘catch-up cash’ over the coming decade to support the transport priorities being developed by Transport for the North; 3) Give Transport for the North the same powers as those enjoyed by Transport for London so that it can also raise private finance towards its own transport priorities. The government has announced its backing for the £31bn Crossrail 2 rail scheme in London just days after it has cancelled plans to electrify key rail routes, and rowed back on its long-standing commitment to electrify the trans-pennine link between Manchester and Leeds. Crossrail 2 was NOT in the Conservative Party Manifesto - whereas Northern Powerhouse Rail was! New analysis by IPPR North shows that over the past decade public spending on transport in London has been more than double that in the North – the North would have received £59bn more in investment over the last decade if it had received the same per person for transport as London. This is set to get worse, with planned public and public/private expenditure set at nearly £2000 per head, compared with £400 per head in the North BEFORE Crossrail 2 is taken into account. This is not just a matter of fairness. This is not special pleading. Transport investment needn’t be either/or. But lack of government spending on Northern transport is holding the whole economy back. Northern prosperity is national prosperity.