1. Children play the sports they can watch on TV. They are inspired by their sporting heroes. But if they're unable to see the most famous competition in cricket - the pride of our national summer game - cricket will wither away. The vastly larger TV audiences of non-subscription channels will include a new generation of children inspired to play cricket - getting more kids into sport and improving the talent pool. 2. The last time the Ashes was on non-subscription TV - 2005 - saw the nation rally around to will England to an extraordinary victory. Showing the games only on paid TV makes it harder for everyone to enjoy our national culture. Cricket is central to English culture: we should all be able to celebrate it, not only those who can afford to pay. 3. In 2009, an independent review panel recommended that the government re-list the home Ashes series. The government didn't act then - and the longer it ignores it, the more the game loses support. It's time to act on the report - and make the #AshesForAll Photo: "Ashes Urn" by danielgreef/Dan - http://www.flickr.com/photos/danielgreef/ Licensed under CC BY 2.0

Whilst many of us do agree that high earners should probably pay more for living in social housing, an entire household on £30,000 (or £40,000 in London) a year just isn’t high or wealthy. That would consist of a couple earning just £15,000 each, and we know how hard it is to get by on that meagre amount. The current government are contradicting themselves when they say they’ll “make work pay” and they’re the party for the workers; yet if a social housing tenant works, they will now be penalised for it. If you live in social housing and you work, you will now face the prospect of losing your home. Many of these working families in social housing (just like most other people) have aspirations to get out of the poverty trap and use the opportunity of social housing to save for a deposit to one day buy their own home, thus freeing up the home for the next family who needs it. Now it is as though they are not allowed to have dreams or better themselves. All hope of saving for a decent mortgage have been ripped out from under their feet while they are pushed back down into the ground where they apparently “belong”. It is increasingly depressing that there is near to no hope for people’s futures. Mortgages aside, many families, especially those with children, will find it increasingly hard to manage day to day. These families could be forced to private rent, but not their own self contained flat as before, as the rents would again be too high, they will be forced into renting a room and sharing a house. Is this the way a family should live? We are regressing back to the days of overcrowded houses with notorious rip off landlords. The ONS says that a family of four will spend on average £517.30 per week. If both parents earned a total of £31,000, they would (after tax), have only around £465 to spend per week, this is well below the UK average. When their rents are raised to market level, where will they get the extra money from? This will result in more poverty, tenants giving up jobs or reducing their hours to earn under the threshold, or in worst case scenarios, couples splitting up or living apart to avoid being penalised for having a job or older working children being kicked out to reduce the household income. If these children are under 21, and on a low wage, how will they find housing without a Housing Benefit top up? Let’s cut out the “luxuries” of living, the ONS estimates that to live basically (rent/mortgage not included), a household will spend an average of £350 a week on bills, food, basic clothing, travel and health. This would leave a £30,000 earning home with about £100 a week to spend on their social housing rent. The average UK market rent is £960 per month, or £222 per week. How will these households meet the shortfall of market rent? Where will these families go? This petition is to ask for consideration that the threshold for Pay to Stay be increased to at least £60,000 per household (£70,000 for London). This would ensure that the average family is able to live without poverty, keep a roof over their head and still be able to save a little each month for a deposit to buy their own home, freeing up social housing without first making more people homeless. The current proposed threshold will only make one family homeless to rehome another, thus not bringing down homeless levels, and increasing the housing benefit spend. A consultation paper was produced which asked the opinions of experts in the field – Local Authority landlords, Private Registered Landlords, Tenant Representative Bodies, Private Landlords, and Individuals. A brief quote from the paper is below. Why was there a consultation when the majority of the views were not taken into account? “About a third of respondents thought that the threshold of £60,000 was appropriate. A smaller proportion thought that £80,000 should be the minimum, while the least favoured was £100,000. Social landlords largely preferred £60,000. There were also views that the threshold could be lower than £60,000, though not a consensus in favour of lowering the threshold. If the threshold was below £60,000 it could act as a disincentive to work, particularly for larger households and in high demand areas such as London. Those who favoured the threshold of £60,000 suggested it was reasonable and consistent with other Government policies involving income thresholds, such as access to affordable home ownership (although it was noted that the threshold may need to be adjusted to £74,000 for London, to align with London schemes) and the child benefit “cap”. There were also views that no more than 30% of a household’s income should go on housing costs; otherwise, it could start to impact detrimentally on the household’s budget.”

The use of animal experimentation is an outdated and barbaric method of testing. It became popular during Victorian times. But bizarrely these methods are still used today, even though there is undeniable evidence that these barbaric methods could easily be replaced. On the16th of July 2015 it was announced that The Rt Hon Greg Clark, Secretary of State for the department for communities and local government has agreed the planning appeal for B&K Universal Ltd in Hull UK, to construct what amounts to a puppy farm. A puppy farm that can hold 2000 beagles for use in Laboratories. Scientific research in recent years has shown that alternative methods are available and able to produce more accurate and reliable results, without the need to inflict suffering on living animals. In 2013 over 3440 Beagles were used in over 4523 procedures in the UK and thousands were bred specifically for this purpose.

It's immoral, a retrograde step, it's against the wishes of the people of East Riding, because their council had refused planning permission twice. And in my mind it smells of corporate lobbying.

All civil servants, public servants, nurse, firefighters etc have had to continue their work to serve the public at ever reducing standards of living. MPs should lead by example.

Mr Ellwood's recent claim that his MP's salary is insufficient shows a disregard for and disconnect from his many constituents who have accepted limited or no pay increases over recent years in order to boost the nation's economic recovery. Furthermore we feel that his enthusiasm for a pay increase of 10% at a time when public service employees are being restricted to rises of 1%, shows contempt for his electorate and a self-serving attitude which is not in the interest of his constituents.

Like many people I have found myself on the receiving end of ATOS deciding I am fit to work. Despite my GP sending me to the assessment with a supporting letter. My GP knows I am not fit enough to work. And there are thousands of people out there who are the same. Forcing people into situations that they can't cope with will cause more deaths, more illnesses and cost the NHS more in the long run. It's. It through choice I don't work. I am a qualified teacher. And shortly after qualifying was told by a school they didn't think I was capable of 'keeping up'. My health drastically deteriorated and now I can't work. Yet ATOS seem to think me and thousands of others out there are able to work..... and work any job. The whole system needs looking at and revising. How many people need to die before something is done about this.

The issue of local justice is enshrined in our constitution. The proposal to close up to 91 courts puts this in jeopardy. For instance, the court local to where I live is earmarked for closure, yet the nearest alternative will be about 60 miles away with no chance of being reachable by public transport. The nearest city court is in a different jurisdiction. Magistrates are a vital element of the justice system. They are chosen for their fairness., lack of discrimination and duty to uphold the laws and values of this country. Magistrates are constantly being downgraded by the government and their powers are eroded by the increasing emphasis on the police being allowed to be judge and jury. Please add your voice to stop these steps to take away our fundamental rights not only to justice, but justice at local level.

Our children need this service to get to school safely. It is a direct service which means our children don't have to change bus services in the frenchgate interchange. This will increase costs for parents and also have an impact on working parents whose children need to be taken to school in September because of no school bus. This will also have a detrimental effect on the environment as more parents will use cars to take children to school.

This is so important because many of those most in need of a National Health Service are the poor and long term chronically sick. These people cannot afford or get private health care. Without the NHS, we will be like America with 40% not having any health care cover. Once lost the NHS will NEVER be recovered, so act now to keep it. The NHS is the most cost effective & efficient health care system in the world, despite what the politicians keep saying about it. Love your NHS & fight to save it, it's the best thing Britain ever created and it's worth fighting for. The rest of the world knows it, we know it, the government knows it - so tell them to keep their grubby hands off!

In the House of Lords, a chamber of unelected representatives, the Government has proposed, through an unelected representative, that it is time to re-examine the NHS, and decide how best to make citizens pay at point of use, whether through compulsory insurance, or through additional taxes. https://opendemocracy.net/ournhs/richard-grimes/government-moves-to-consider-nhs-user-charges We already pay an additional tax to fund the NHS - it is called National Insurance. To propose we need additional taxation, or that we need to pay for services as we use them, not only disregards the fact that citizens already pay, but will be the beginning of a two-tier NHS, where only those who can afford to pay can be treated. As it is, the National Health Service is the envy of much of the world. We need to keep it that way.

Lord Prior, has just suggested to parliament that he plans to launch an inquiry to consider whether we should move away from a tax-funded NHS towards one funded by insurance and co-payments. This is an attack on the core principles of the NHS that have been in place since 1946.