Network Rail was formed in 2002 after the tragic failure of the privately-owned Railtrack plc, which was heavily criticised over several fatal train crashes in the late 1990s (particularly in Southall and Ladbroke Grove where 38 people lost their lives). It was acknowledged at the time that profit-making had proven incompatible with the need to put the public’s safety first. The Shaw Report, commissioned by the government and published in March 2016, recommended that passenger safety on tracks should not be handled by any private company. Re-privatising Network Rail would be a disaster. Not only is it the unnecessary sell-off of yet another important public asset, but it is also the wilful return to the failed experiment that was Railtrack plc. It would lead to yet more fragmentation and confusion on our railways and result in rising costs for taxpayers and falling safety standards for passengers. Petition Supported by: • All on Board (Compass) http://www.allonboard.org.uk • Bring Back British Rail http://www.bringbackbritishrail.org • Campaign against Climate Change http://www.campaigncc.org • Campaign for Better Transport http://www.bettertransport.org.uk • The People's Assembly http://www.thepeoplesassembly.org.uk • Together For Transport (TSSA) http://www.togetherfortransport.org • We Own It http://www.weownit.org.uk https://s.bsd.net/38degrees/main/page/-/CBY/STOP-Network-Rail-crop.jpg

Drummau Mountain is a peaceful, natural environment for quiet enjoyment, not an industrial zone. The area is an attraction for walkers and horse-riders. ‘Climbing Drummau’ to explore nature and its wildlife, free from traffic and noise, has been a favourite pastime of local children for generations. The installation of a 77-metre high, noisy turbine along with the construction of access tracks would result in the destruction of this activity and wildlife habitat. Drummau Mountain is a heritage asset. It is home to the standing stone Carreg Bica and to prehistoric cairns which are important to the archaeology of the area. Neath Port Talbot Council’s Alfred Russel Wallace Trail promotes visiting Drummau Mountain as a leisure pursuit, bringing tourism into the borough. In a press release in 2013, the Leader of Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, Cllr Ali Thomas said: "We are proud that our beautiful and diverse county played such a pivotal part in Wallace's life and a key role in the development of scientific theory. It is great that the natural environment Wallace fell in love with is still visible today.” The visual impact of this wind turbine will be detrimental and a significant part of Wallace’s Trail will be destroyed. This is not an objection to the Council’s green energy policies. There are other large wind farm developments in Neath Port Talbot. It is a question of balance and choice over a suitable environment...... PLEASE SIGN

The NHS is organised in such a way that people will only be considered as possible donors if they happen to die in Hospital, despite their declared wish during life to be a donor after their death. Every day In the UK, it is normal for 1,500 people to die, 400 of those are known to have signed up to the Organ Donor Register. Because each person has two kidneys, that is 800 potential life saving kidneys available every day, yet only 7 operations are carried out. If the NHS could manage 7 more operations a day then the waiting list could be eliminated within three years, but it does not happen and patients continue to languish on Dialysis, or die.

Hunting an animal with dogs for sport is a cruel and unnecessary activity that has no place in a modern society, and is an activity which the League Against Cruel Sports has campaigned against for 90 years. Ref: League against Cruel Sports http://www.league.org.uk

I know a man who is in very bad health he has had cancer all over his body and is still fighting. I was horrified to find out that all the other people from other countries all over the world have had compensation apart from the UK Please help me get justice for the people who are now getting to old to fight. read more about the story here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/defence/10611985/Forgotten-victims-of-Britains-nuclear-tests-on-Christmas-Island.html

In the runup to Christmas 2014 my local Tesco store - Ilkley, West Yorkshire - placed posters next to the checkouts listing the store's extended opening hours over Christmas. The posters also invited customers to take a photo of the poster if they wanted their own record of the opening hours. So I did. As Christmas passed I forgot about the photo and may even have deleted it. A week ago,almost 6 months later, I was suddenly surrounded by the Store Manager, Head of Security and 3 other senior managers, frogmarched into a private corridor and interrogated, military style, as to why I have been systematically been taking illicit photos of the store staff on numerous occasions during the past 6 months! I explained to the Store Manager that this was completely untrue and that I have never taken 'illicit photos' of the staff on numerous occasions, but simply a photo of a poster on 1 occasion as described above. He refused to believe me and has subsequently informed me that his staff regard me as a major threat to their health and safety, a potential security risk to the store and that, furthermore, I am now the subject of a police investigation into the incident. Further enquiries to Tesco Head Office have revealed that this is standard Tesco policy which will be applied to each and every Tesco store in the UK. Although the specific circumstances of this case may be seen as ridiculous and laughable, they mask a much more serious and sinister trend. I have been treated by this store as almost a potential terrorist for simply taking a photo within a Tesco store. There was no suggestion at the time that this photo would be published, distributed, downloaded onto the internet or posted in any way to a third party. It was taken for purely personal use and, incredibly, at Tesco's own invitation. There is nothing illegal, as far as I am aware, about my actions. Yet Tesco have responded by treating me as a potential serious criminal. What is deeply disturbing about this is that if you are a photography student, photographer, journalist, artist or simply a law abiding member of the public who wants to engage in the hobby of photography you will be treated almost like a terrorist presenting a major threat to public safety by this company. This case introduces a major challenge to civil liberties and human rights of every single member of the public in the UK who happens to have a camera (or camera phone) in their possession while on Tesco premises. This is why I think a campaign should be launched to pressure Tesco to change this draconian policy.

Due to the ever increasing fraud within FIFA and the inability of knowing who to trust, added to the hundreds of slave labourers who have already died building the Qatari Stadiums (current estimates are that 4000 will have perished by the time the competition starts), it would be morally wrong to send your national team to this competition which is already rocked by corruption, bribery and death. Let UEFA hold an alternative competition during the European summer instead and publicly denounce the QATAR bid which is under extreme scrutiny for further bribery and corruption behind its successful bid to host the World Cup

The mental health crisis in this country is dire. There is a shortage of beds, people waiting too long to be seen by a therapist. My local mind may have to close because of funding. I need people to help me fight for the services we so badly need please can people sign and share xx

Oakham Fire Station is 1 of 20 Fire Stations in Leicestershire Fire and Rescue (LFRS). The geographical area it protects is the second largest in LFRS. The area includes many risks such as part of the A1 motorway, HMP Stocken and a number of industrial units. The station attends a number of Road Traffic Collisions (RTC’s) on the many treacherous roads surrounding the area. Oakham Fire Station is the only Station in LFRS where calls to incidents have not declined over the last 5 years. Because of the risks in the area, Oakham Fire Station contains 3 Fire Service appliances. 1 of which is a fire engine that is available 24/7 and crewed by a minimum of 5 full time firefighters. The other 2 appliances are crewed by part-time retained firefighters who live and work in the Oakham area. The part-time retained firefighters at Oakham crew a second fire engine with a minimum of 4 firefighters. They also crew the Heavy Rescue Unit (HRU) appliance that attends specialist rescues such as RTC’s involving Heavy Goods Vehicles. LFRS have proposed to remove all of Oakham’s part-time retained firefighters and the fire engine they crew by April 2016. There has been no mention of what will happen to the HRU, but without the retained firefighters who crew the vehicle. It is unlikely to remain at Oakham Fire Station. Therefore, Oakham will be left with only 1 fire engine usually riding 5 firefighters, rather than 3 fire appliances with 11 firefighters it currently has ready to respond to any emergency incidents when they are needed. We believe these changes would increase the risk of death and injury to the members of the public in Oakham and Rutland. The estimated cost for LFRS to keep Oakham’s second fire engine and all the retained firefighters who crew it is £97,000 a year. RCC has kindly offered the Combined Fire Authority (CFA) £150,000 in order to maintain Oakham’s second fire engine and its retained firefighters for the next 2 years. On the 8th April 2015 the CFA decided that Oakham’s second fire engine and all its retained firefighters would be removed by April 2016. At the same time the CFA stated they would continue discussions with RCC regarding accepting the offer of £150,000 and using it instead to fund a Rapid Response Vehicle (RRV) which is to be placed somewhere in Rutland. We believe the RRV will provide a significantly reduced service to the people of Oakham and Rutland compared to that given by the second fire engine at Oakham. The RRV will be crewed by 2 or 3 firefighters rather than a fire engine which can be crewed by a maximum of 6 firefighters. The RRV will contain significantly less firefighting and rescue equipment compared to a fire engine. Furthermore the RRV may not even be placed in Oakham. To highlight the reduced service the RRV will provide; at present when a fire engine attends a house fire, the crew can only go inside that house if it has a minimum of 4 firefighters. This is to ensure all the safety critical roles and procedures are being met. Since the RRV will only be crewed by 2 or 3 firefighters, in the same situation the crew of the RRV would not be allowed to enter the house to rescue the people inside or extinguish the fire and would instead have to wait outside until further resources arrived. This is unacceptable and could lead to members of the public risking their own lives to try and save their family, friends and neighbours. Whilst the firefighters riding the RRV have to stand outside awaiting further resources. Therefore, it is crucial we oppose the £150,000 offered by RCC to be used for anything other than helping to maintain Oakham’s second fire engine and the retained firefighters who crew it.

This excellent and very busy general hospital covers the whole of south west Wales - with patients and visitors having to travel round trips of up to 100 + miles. The health board has absolutely no consideration for its disabled and elderly patients nor, indeed, for any of its patients and visitors.

Sugar is a zero nutrition addictive drug / poison which is easily consumed in large quantities by children, decreasing the overall well-being of society. Medical experts are fighting for there to be taxes on unhealthy foods and sugar will be one of the easiest to tackle, will generate funds which go directly to the NHS as well as long term decreasing treatment demand. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-32882186

Only registered doctors can work in the UK and the GMC as a government monopoly charges a premium to be registered. Doctors have to pay many fees to allow them to work but the fee to be on the register now appears antiquated and unjust, especially when we have no way to question how much we are charged for the continued privilege to work and serve the public. As an additional point, would it be more sensible to have the GMC as a publicly funded body? Tax payer funding for tax payer protection.