Scientific evidence links our routine exposure to BPA to a range of diseases, including breast cancer. Scientific studies have found that an important route of exposure to BPA is via our food and drink. BPA leaches from the packaging and into the products, especially when they are scratched or heated during cooking and in the dishwasher. As diet continues to be our main route of exposure to BPA, lets call for it to be removed from all food and drinks packaging and replaced with safer alternatives.

People who are desperate to start a family are being given the choice of either going without or having to spend their life savings (or going into serious debt) to make their dreams come true. When unfit parents are allowed to produce child after child supported by the government, people who would make great parents aren't even given a chance.

Because this is a life skill which would enable them to live full lives post hearing loss. It could help to prevent social isolation and the onset of dementia.

There is Way to much traffic constantly polluting Brighton with fumes and the noise level is deafening all day and night.

GM crops are a monopoly. They are heavily contaminated with pesticides either as part of the genetic make up or as a result of pesticide sprays which cannot be washed off. They have an effect on pollinating bees, on the livestock that eat them eg soy for pigs and ultimately on human health either for the people that live in proximity to where the crops are sprayed and for the people that consume the animals fed on the crops or the produce itself. There is some evidence to suggest that the rise of gluten intolerance is due to pesticide residues and genetic alterations in wheat.

'I, Daniel Blake' is the most important British film of this millennium, highlighting many pressing issues such as - the absurd inhumanity of benefits bureaucracy - how revenge evictions can have disastrous knock-on effects - how the housing crisis impacts many children's educations and upbringings by forcing them to change schools - the shameful prevalence of food bank dependency, and - how some single mothers are forced into sex work through sheer desperation the film should be mandatory viewing for anyone who cares at all about the plight of their neighbour. 'Cathy Come Home' made a huge impact 50 years ago by igniting public consciousness of homelessness, ultimately leading to the creation of Crisis. it was able to have such a profound effect because it was broadcast to the nation on BBC1; it is imperative that Loach's final film be given the same platform today with over 3,500 people sleeping rough, over 73,000 homeless households living in temporary accommodation (of which more than 20,000 were forced to relocate), and more than 1.1 million three-day food supplies given out last year by Trussell Trust food banks alone, our country is truly in crisis as TV licensees, we demand that the BBC plays its part in highlighting the severity of the situation, by acquiring the rights to broadcast 'I, Daniel Blake' at the earliest possible oppportunity

Data protection. Private companies or individuals should under no circumstances have the right to access any information held by a government organisation. The main purpose of this, to issue illegal fines and intimidating people by threatening to send in bailiffs if they don't pay. This practice is sailing close to the legal wind and these company's would not exist without the help of the DVLA.

Plastic cotton bud stems are the number one item of plastic, sewage-related debris on our beaches and rivers [1] - yet retailers could help prevent this by switching the stick from plastic to paper. In the marine environment, plastics can be eaten by marine life, often with fatal consequences. Plastic is found in the stomachs of Loggerhead Turtles, Seabirds and many species of UK-caught fish. And pieces that don't get eaten break down into microplastics, forming part of a dangerous plastic smog in our seas. Retailers are listening - earlier this year, Waitrose and Johnson & Johnson announced they'd make the change to paper, and the Coop and Marks and Spencers sell paper-stem buds. Now we need to make sure the others do the same. Tesco, Sainsburys, Boots, ASDA, Morrisons, Lidl, Aldi, Superdrug and Wilko are currently reviewing their policies on cotton buds ... which is why we need to show them how many of us support the switch to paper! Even paper stem cotton buds shouldn’t be flushed down the loo. But if they are, they're less likely to pass through sewage filters and will quickly biodegrade if they escape. So please sign and share our petition to ask the remaining retailers to Switch the Stick from plastic to paper. Your voice will be heard! Thanks, Natalie and the City to Sea Team [1] Beachwatch Report 2015, Marine Conservation Society

Bolton Environmental Health has said that these generators will cause a 'substantial adverse affect' on our air quality. The nearest houses are 10 metres away. We owe it to the many children who live here who deserve to breathe clean air. 40,000 people each year die from poor air quality.

Like the vast majority of this country we are dismayed in the extreme to witness the way certain newspapers have reported the arrival of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children from Calais. Far from portraying this as a compassionate and humanitarian response, (not to mention a legal obligation), children have been identified, vilified and impugned by some politicians and parts of the media, much more intent on continuing the increasingly hostile anti-migrant agenda at large during and after the referendum, than treating children with the care and respect for their privacy and their childhoods that they are fully entitled to. The publication of children’s images, no doubt without their informed consent, with disregard for the Independent Press Standards Office Editors’ Code and other media guidelines published by the likes of UNICEF is most harmful and creates a serious risk to these and all other asylum seeking and migrant children. By exposing their images across a global media it puts children and their families at risk of identification by those who would persecute them, it undermines their ability to integrate in the country that is providing them with sanctuary and accuses them of being liars and cheats by pretending to be adults. Age assessment policies and procedures are well established in the UK and have been the subject of much judicial scrutiny all the way to the Supreme Court concerning the practice, accuracy and utility of age assessment methods including those such as dental X-Ray. Sections of the media have chosen to ignore the many sources of detailed information about these controversial practices and instead reached a peremptory conclusion using a crude visual appearance test, long dismissed by the courts as inadequate and inappropriate to serve their own sensationalist ends. The climate of hostility and damaging, negative news stories about asylum seeking children must stop. When a football celebrity expresses his horror at the attitudes at large in certain sections of society and on social media and is in turn vilified for showing compassion for refugee children something has gone terribly wrong. Our media as a whole shares a very high degree of responsibility for creating this dangerous climate. As more children arrive in the UK in the weeks and months ahead, including those under the so called ‘Dubs Amendment’ scheme, we call upon The Children’s Commissioner for England, using the powers invested in her Office under Part 6 of The Children and Families Act 2014, to investigate the UK’s print, audio, visual and digital media’s conduct in relation to these children’s arrival, to examine how and to what extent children’s individual and collective rights have been violated and to report publicly on how the media regulators should strengthen and enforce measures to protect all children’s rights in their work and in their regulatory frameworks. At present the so called ‘independent’ press regulator lacks statutory powers and is constrained by a narrow code of conduct for its complaints framework. This does not meet the interests of children in a way that is consistent with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. This is both urgent and long term work. Urgent in sending out a clear message about what is and is not acceptable in how children are represented as a group and individually across our media and long term in establishing a culture of responsible journalism about children and the promotion of their rights. Freedom of expression of our media is a vital pillar of accountability. Protection of children, their rights and interests is not subordinate to that function but equal to it. That means for all children, all of the time.

These people have been found to have taken part in the cover-up of Hillsborough by the courts. Therefore they are no longer worthy to hold a fellowship. They have been found to be dishonest and untrustworthy. Characteristics that should not be seen to be rewarded with such honors. This is one more step for justice for the 96 and their families.

Indycamp is not just a pro-independence camp outside of Holyrood, despite how it is portrayed in the media. It is a camp which continually educates and engages in political discussion about some of the worst social injustices we face as a society. Whether that be unregulated banking, general corruption, austerity, benefits and the vilification of benefits claimants, the NHS or for the poorest and most vulnerable in our society - it has continually brought to light some of the more severe issues we face as a society. This case is about more than just the removal of a camp, whether most people realise it or not, it is about the way in which the camp is being removed. You see, Government have used the Scotland Act to transfer public assets, namely the ground around parliament, to a private body, known as the Parliamentary Corporate Body. This body, has at its disposal the full force of parliament and government without having to justify itself to parliament. This sets a dangerous precedent, because when the SPCB took the camp to court, they did so under private law of a corporation and not law applicable to a public organisation. In otherwords, the precedent this sets, is to allow public organisations to transfer land and assets to private entities in order to usurp the public's fundamental rights and freedoms, particularly the freedom to protest your own government in a manner of your choosing should you remain peaceful. In a nutshell, it sets the precedent, that all any publicly accountable organisation need do, is transfer its assets to a corporate body and suddenly it does not have to deal with being publicly accountable. I am asking you to support the camp today, not for them, but for yourselves. It is not acceptable for assets you own as a member of the public to be transferred to a private entity. I am asking you to support the camp, because the precedent this will set will erode, not only those at the camps fundamental rights, but also yours as an individual. One day you may wake up after suffering injustice and find that you have to seek permission (like indycamp) from the people you wish to protest, and if you fail to do so, you will find yourself in court, bankrupt and destitute because you refused to ask their permission to protest them. The precedent before the court, of course being the SPCB vs Indycamp. This is not about a camp and land, it is about your fundamental human rights, which you should never have to ask for, but instead should just automatically have.