We, the undersigned, care deeply about the arts, and equally the natural environment and the rights of humans around the world. We believe arts and cultural institutions should break their ties with oil companies such as BP, a company which has caused repeated environmental catastrophes, including the Deepwater Horizon spill, and been implicated in numerous human rights violations. Furthermore, BP is turning a profit on the continued extraction of dirty fossil fuels, pushing us towards runaway climate change, whilst lobbying against environmental laws and clean energy alternatives [1, 2]. By accepting sponsorship from BP, cultural institutions give the oil giant much-needed positive publicity, and help it to obscure the destructive reality of its activities with a veneer of respectability. At the same time, oil sponsorship taints the reputation of the institutions that accept it. We recognise the vital importance of arts funding, particularly after public funding cuts. However BP sponsorship provides less than 1% of the annual income of the British Museum, Tate, and Royal Opera House, and just 3% of the income of the National Portrait Gallery [3], yet BP are allowed to place their name and logo alongside the names of these institutions, on their website and in exhibitions (despite many artists and arts workers having strong views against such branding) [4, 5]. BP needs these institutions far more than they need BP. This is the 26th year that BP has sponsored the Portrait Awards, through an agreement with the National Portait Gallery (NPG) in London. Fortunately this agreement is due to end this year. The NPG could choose not to renew the agreement, and to find a more appropriate sponsor for the Portrait Awards. However, negotiations about renewal are already underway. The NPG will not drop BP as a sponsor without strong pressure from the public and the arts sector. We need to act now. Over its 26 years of sponsorship, BP has repeatedly caused great harms to the environment and people; it has been responsible for multiple deadly explosions and oil spillages, including that of Deepwater Horizon, which killed 11 people, decimated ecosystems and livelihoods in the Gulf of Mexico, and resulted in the largest corporate fine in history [6]. It has traded with oppressive regimes from Azerbaijan to Libya, and has even been implicated in torture in Colombia [7]. It has recently expanded into tar sands, an extreme form of energy production which contaminates water and tramples on indigenous rights [8]. Worldwide, fossil fuel companies have currently laid claim to five times the volume of oil, gas and coal that humanity can burn without causing dangerous and destructive levels of global warming [9] - despite this, BP has stated that it will continue to explore and exploit new reserves of oil and gas into the future. In 1989, the National Portrait Gallery ended its eight-year Portrait Award sponsorship agreement with tobacco company John Player [10]. It is time for this national cultural institution to show such moral leadership and forward-thinking once again, by cutting ties with BP. As a partner of the National Portrait Gallery, the Scottish National Portrait Gallery can influence this decision. We call on this respected national cultural institution to put pressure on the NPG to find a more appropriate sponsor, and to refuse to host the BP Portrait Awards until a new sponsor has been found. For more information, please see: http://bp-or-not-bp.org/ http://bp-or-not-bp.org/scotland http://platformlondon.org/p-publications/picturethis/ References 1. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/may/02/bp-deepwater-horizon-oil-spills 2. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/21/bp-tops-the-list-of-firms-obstructing-climate-action-in-europe 3. http://platformlondon.org/p-publications/artoilinfographic/ 4. http://fossilfundsfree.org/who/ 5. http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/jun/24/no-oil-painting-bp-sponsorship-npg-portrait-award 6. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/02/bp-will-pay-largest-environmental-fine-in-us-history-for-gulf-oil-spill 7. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/22/gilberto-torres-survived-colombias-death-squads-now-he-wants-justice 8. http://environmentaldefence.ca/reports/canadas-toxic-tar-sands-most-destructive-project-earth 9. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719 10. http://platformlondon.org/p-publications/picturethis/ 11. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-risks-as-conclusive-as-link-between-smoking-and-lung-cancer/

We are being asked to vote on something which will possibly change the future of Britain and haven't been given the facts from which to make a choice.

In May the government will block charities, who receive a government grant, from being able to lobby and campaign against government policies. A clause inserted into new and renewed grant agreements  will state that Charities can't take part in "activity intended to influence - or attempt to influence - Parliament, government or political parties". Sir Stuart Etherington, chief executive of the National Council for Voluntary Organisations, said the new rules were "draconian". "This is tantamount to making charities take a vow of silence and goes against the spirit of open policy-making that this Government has hitherto championed." Meanwhile big business, who receive government grants can carry on spending over £2.5bn a year on lobbying Westminster.

This is important due to the gambling addiction that has gripped this country. Gambling is an addiction that cannot be controlled and asking people to ban themselves from these establishments is not the answer to this problem especially with all the available online casinos and apps that can be downloaded. These companies and the television companies are still encouraging this horrible disease, people no longer have a choice when their addiction is being advertised as a fun , cool and exciting way to go about your spare time.

Users of the park visit the Ham Common (An SSSI area " of great beauty and interest.") and engage in sport & leisure activities that are based at Lake Pier. Perhaps most significantly they are residents of the local area including the youth of the borough, adults previously encouraged under ‘well being’ schemes, mature residents who visit to enjoy the environment and many others; fishermen, children and families - ‘crabbing’ and enjoying the shoreline. Most unfortunately the Poole Harbour Canoe club that has recently been encouraged to invest in a new boathouse at the site and who support the engagement of all ages in enjoying canoeing and kayaking may also suffer. Juniors, families and adults will all now sadly be discouraged by the introduction of these charges negating the good work of many in the borough who have previously encouraged active participation of these diverse groups of the community. The club has "Top Club" status from the National Governing body - the British Canoe Union through the diverse nature of its work and activities. http://www.pooleharbourcanoeclub.uk

This is a major crossing point for children and families using both John Hampden School and Lord Williams's School. At the moment there is no direct line of sight from where cars approach the turning into the East Street and cars frequently do not stop at the junction and often do not even indicate They come round the corner at speed and there have been a number of near misses where cars have had to slam on breaks or children get pulled back by their parents. A block of flats was built on the corner which directly impacted on the sightline of drivers into East Street. We are urging Thame Town Council to help save lives by providing adequate warning signage at the very least.

Unfortunately this is not an isolated incident in the St Albans Conservation Area. Recently, for example, an other locally listed building (Hawthornden, 23 Hatfield Road ) was demolished nearby. Let's step back from this path or we will lose the special character and architecture of the city. In 2012 the Victorian Society wrote: "The Pemberton block was built as an extension to the 1883 Hatfield Road Boys School and is now the only part of the school which still survives", and further: "The Victorian Society is backing local campaigners opposed to the demolition of the Pemberton block, the last remaining evidence of the town’s historic St Albans school for boys." Finally they conclude: "'Victorian and Edwardian schools were built to last and lend themselves well to adaptation. The demolition of the Pemberton block would be an appalling waste of a structurally sound historic building, and the site calls for a much less destructive solution". How could demolition have been approved against all expert opinion coming from Historic England, the Victorian Society or the Secretary of State (2012 decision), and against the wishes of the vast majority of the local St Albans Community including leading organizations like the St Albans Civic Society or the St Albans and Hertfordshire Architectural and Archaeological Society? To conclude here is a link to a 2012 letter by Mr. Donald Munro, former president of the St Albans and Hertfordshire Architectural and Archaeological Society, about the importance of this building and why it should be protected: http://www.stalbanshistory.org/page_id__443.aspx

We need to pay a fair and living wage to those who produce our food etc for us, we need to know where it comes from and if it is sustainable. We need local farmers who are inspired to get up at 4.00am to go and milk their cows, and carry on until 19.00, when the children have already gone to bed, and who turns out on Christmas Eve when a cow is calfing and doesn't get in until 22.00. The farmer who loves his land, and cares for it with a passion, cutting hedges, leaving borders for wildlife, going out to listen to the sounds of nature, kieeping the countryside alive for us. I care about this issue, not only because farming affects our family, but because we need to know where our food comes from and how the animals and vegtables are gown, and treated. This is a global problem, but it starts at home, we have to be self sufficient, and teach the world to be self sufficient, and to do that the large supermarkets have to respect and reward farmers, as they would their management staff.

If we are to stop global warming we need to move away from a Fossil Fuelled society to a world which exists on renewable energies. Renewable energies receive little or no subsidy, whereas Mega Rich MNCs receive millions of £'s in of taxpayers money in the form of subsidies from the British Government. Whereas in reality subsidies should be directed to help with the development of renewable energy services as well as helping people living in fuel poverty become recipients of renewable energies.

As an apolitical pensioner, I suffer from diabetes and a neighbour suffers friom acute anxiety. Our local small independent chemist is one of those that will have to close if this GovernMENTAL scheme is finalized

I understand from the Institute of Advanced Motorists that there is a government backed 'Older Drivers Task Force' consultation in progress, that should be reporting in the summer (2016). We hope something positive will come from this. The population is ageing, there are going to be more and more people driving into old age. We need a way of controlling those who may have got beyond safe driving, and becoming a danger to themselves and others on the roads around them. It is very difficult for family members to tell a relative that they should stop driving, our medics seem loath to broach the subject. Something needs to be done, and regular testing/assessment could be a way to solve the problem.

South Gloucestershire Council currently uses glyphosate chemical herbicides on our streets and parks despite there being viable safe alternatives and despite the fact that the World Health Organisation (WHO) has identified glyphosate as likely to cause cancer in humans. The WHO finding sits alongside a wealth of existing evidence that raises alarming questions marks over the long term safety of exposure to glyphosate both on its own and in combination with other chemicals found in formulas such as Roundup. The use of glyphosates has already been banned or restricted in 8 countries. It is not acceptable that our children, ourselves and the animals we share this county with are being routinely exposed to these chemicals whether we like it or not. The Council needs to exercise the precautionary principle and follow the example of cities such as Chicago, Paris and Rotterdam by banning this spraying in public places. This is a matter of great importance and urgency for those of us who care about each other's health and the health of our children, our dogs and cats and all the flora and fauna of this county, and of course including our beloved bees. There are viable safe alternatives to glyphosates. The Netherlands have outright banned glyphosates in public spaces and are using a hot water treatment instead. A hot water and foam method is also available in the UK and South Gloucestershire Council is already aware that this can be a more effective alternative than hot water on its own. Glyphosates are the cheapest option but we must send the message loud and clear that value is not just about price and that the health and safety issues around glyphosate render its 'cheap and easy' status irrelevant. Other effective methods may cost more in cash terms but represent far better value to local residents. Using a formula such as glyphosate or Roundup in our public spaces is simply unacceptable no matter how cheap and quick it makes the task of urban weed management. Other European cities have already banned them and now Glastonbury have paved the way here in the UK and have now banned glyphosates and are implementing the foam/hot water method instead. At their next meeting, Bristol City council will vote on whether to do the same following a petition that was handed in on 19th January. People-power stopped these pesticides elsewhere - can 38 Degrees members in South Glos stop them here too? If you think chemical pesticides, that have serious health concerns, no longer have a place on the streets of South Glos then please sign the petition and also email your local councillor and request that they stop spraying outside of your property and all areas! You can find your councillor details here: https://council.southglos.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx Further information can be found in the following links: The Guardian: Glyphosate is a 'probably carcinogenic' pesticide. Why do cities still use it? http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/apr/21/glyphosate-probably-carcinogenic-pesticide-why-cities-use-it The Independent: Glyphosate: Scientists urge caution over experts' claims pesticide is 'probably' carcinogenic: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/glyphosate-scientists-urge-caution-over-experts-claims-pesticide-is-probably-carcinogenic-10397787.html A safer non-toxic option is now used: http://www.centralsomersetgazette.co.uk/Glastonbury-takes-look-town-s-weed-problem/story-27651682-detail/story.html Bristol Council Website: A motion to ban the use of glyphosates will be voted on at the full council meeting after a petition was handed in on 19th January: https://www2.bristol.gov.uk/committeeMeetingFinder The Bristol Cable https://thebristolcable.org/2015/10/bristol-monsanto-and-chemicals/