Britain first are a far right hate group that promotes racial and religious hatred via their website and Facebook page. The number of their likes, even though fake, gives them a veneer of respectability and increases their global reach. The comments on their posts are of the vilest hate speech imaginable. Facebook needs to investigate Britain Firsts page and remove their fake likes.

Fracking carries significant risks. Strong evidence suggests risks of significant health and environmental damage, damage to the quality of home and family life—and damage to property. Fracking releases pollutants into the air and risks polluting water supplies. Stories come in from all over the world. The evidence is well supported and researched. Families can't drink water. Cattle die. Children suffer. There are also risks from fumes, vibration, heavy traffic, from light pollution, and much, much more. The UK government is ignoring important democratic and human rights considerations in its 'dash for gas'. Human rights to health, to a healthy environment, to enjoy wellbeing don't even figure in the debates. On top of this, ordinary people, many of whom have never, ever protested before, are being subjected to underhand tactics designed to intimidate them and which violate their civil and political rights. Enough is enough. The UK government has important responsibilities under human rights law. It is time to ban fracking until a full human rights impact assessment has been made, based on the best evidence, and independent of the companies with an interest in fracking the UK.

1. Rural areas are liable to decline if their infrastructure and services – public transport, education, GP practices, cottage hospitals, street lighting, etc – are not effectively funded and supported. Unless these are of a good standard and accessibility, businesses will not be established in rural areas, those already there will be unable to attract workers, and this will run counter to the government’s own policy (see Truss, E., 2014, “Stimulating Economic Growth in Rural Areas”, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs). 2. Those who live in rural areas are entitled to a reasonable standard of services and national infrastructure. The cuts in grant to local authorities have made it impossible for rural counties to maintain services and infrastructure at a level anywhere near comparable to that provided in metropolitan areas. 3. Some government policies have been implemented without consideration for the impact on rural areas – e.g. the raising of the school/training leaving age to 18, requiring all young people to reach centres of population on a daily basis, while councils are forced to remove subsidy for buses that could get them there and no government provision has been made for this. Thanks to LM and AB

so people can walk home safely and be seen

1) It is not sustainable to develop new sources of fossil fuels. If climate change is to be limited to 2°C, which is necessary to avoid catastrophic impacts, 80% of proven fossil fuels reserves cannot be burnt. We note that, with one quarter of the county less than 5m above sea level, Kent is very vulnerable to the rise in sea level that will result from our changing climate. 2) All water supplies in Kent are severely stressed. Fracking requires very large quantities of clean water (almost 19 million litres per frack). There is not an adequate water supply in Kent to sustain fracking. 3) Fracking produces very large quantities of polluted water which contain radioactive elements from deep underground. Water treatment plants cannot safely dispose of this waste. 4) Water supplies can be polluted by fracking due to pollutants leaking from the shale rock, or from wells drilled through an aquifer. There are many cases of water pollution from fracking documented in the USA. 5) Kent’s roads are already busy with many heavy goods vehicles. Development of onshore oil or gas extraction would require many truck movements, increasing the heavy vehicle goods traffic on Kent’s major and rural roads. 6) We value the peace and amenity of Kent’s countryside, and oppose onshore oil and gas development that would industrialise rural Kent. Production from onshore wells is short-lived, requiring many wells to be drilled. 7) Financial analysts, the Chancellor and the onshore oil and gas industry all accept that development of shale oil and gas in the UK will not reduce the price of gas.

Our West Hendon are a group of concerned residents on the West Hendon Estate that believe that the developments taking place benefit private developers at the expense of our community. We fear the development is going to force many people from our community out of the estate and possibly out of London. We are therefore making the following demands of Barnet Council, Barnet Homes, Barratt and Metropolitan Housing Association.

"The Rough" is an adjacent greenfield site which has been the target of developers for decades. The plan includes re-building Ascot Heath School between the "The Rough" and Ascot Stud Farm, leaving the eastern half of this greenfield site susceptible to creeping status change. It is important because this is green belt designated as a Special Protected Area and because there are other East Berkshire sites with infrastructure (sewers, arterial roads, hospitals) much more suited to new housing developments.

The Bill would rewrite the rules that force market tendering of services and that are seeing millions of pounds wasted on competition lawyers that should instead be spent on patients.

People in the affected areas are suffering from increased crime and fear of crime, such as damage to cars and property. Taxis, the fire brigade and police can't see house numbers in the dark, delaying responses, which could threaten people's safety - the police apparently oppose KCC's action. People are worried if they have to go out in the dark streets because they could trip on uneven pavements and tree roots. This affects many people who return from work late at night or have to leave very early to get to work. I live in Thanet, and there have been many complaints about KCC's policy of turning off lights on social media such as Streetlife, and this affects most people except those who live on main roads.

During the autumn of 2014 National Grid ran a consultation called "North West Coast Connections" asking members of the public how it should get power from the proposed new Moorside power station in west Cumbria into the high voltage transmission grid. On 17 June 2015 – despite widespread opposition - National Grid announced the decision to take forward its preferred option. This would see huge new pylons and overhead lines in the Lake District National Park and other sensitive protected areas, causing massive damage to the beautiful landscape and wildlife. At 50m tall, the new pylons would be twice the height of existing pylons and more than twice as wide. They would break the skyline from many viewpoints and create a permanent eyesore. National Grid provided an alternative offshore option for the public to comment on. The offshore route would take the powerline underground and then out to sea, where cables laid in the sea bed would link it into the national grid near Blackpool. National Grid has always accepted that this route is feasible, but it is not the route it wanted to take . In a previous public consultation in 2012, there was overwhelming support for the offshore route because it had the least impact on the Lake District. Although the majority of respondents to the 2014 consultation also supported the offshore option, National Grid has disregarded the wishes of the public. A number of stakeholder organisations that supported the onshore option did so with the proviso that National Grid takes satisfactory measures – such as routing cables underground - to mitigate the effects of pylons in sensitive areas. It now appears likely that adequate mitigation will NOT be offered. National Parks were created in order to protect beautiful areas for the people of Britain; we do not want to see 27 miles of 50m tall pylons (connected by multiple conductor wires) in and next to the Lake District National Park. We want your help to persuade National Grid that the offshore option IS the best route because it would both secure our future electricity supplies AND protect the Lake District’s wonderful landscapes. As well as signing the petition, please also consider joining Power Without Pylons (membership free) and Friends of the Lake District. You could also write to newspapers, newsletters and magazines; and if you live in an area likely to be affected, contact your MP and raise concerns with your parish council. As well as this petition, we are currently running a write-in campaign to encourage members of the public to contact National Grid, the MP and Liz Truss the Environment Secretary directly to express their concern and objections to taking the pylons onshore and not considering undergrounding in spite of the damage that pylons would do to the Lake District's landscape. You can access the campaign here: www.saynotopylonsinthelakedistrict.org.uk For more information: www.friendsofthelakedistrict.org.uk/News/response-to-national-grids www.powerwithoutpylons.org.uk www.northwestcoastconnections.com Note: this petition was initiated by Kate Willshaw of Friends of the Lake District ahead of the "North West Coast Connections" consultation, which has now ended. Kate has invited Power Without Pylons to continue to promote it.

We believe this ban is unnecessary and heavy handed. Laws regarding damage to public property already exist (this is the basis of the councils plan to ban skateboarding around the war memorial area) and we believe singling out skateboarders for special treatment is an extremely negative way to approach a diverse group of mostly respectful, active and creative individuals. We also believe that skateboarding is an activity that should be encouraged by the city council as a positive, healthy, sociable and green way for people, from a wide range of social backgrounds and age groups, to enjoy themselves and interact with the world around them. We are in agreement that the war memorial should NOT be used by skateboarders (or BMX, Inline, scooter etc) and should be left as a place of respect and contemplation for those it represents (the ban covers a much larger area than the memorial gardens and monument), however we believe that a simple sign or even CCTV camera would suffice to discourage anyone who tries to misuse this area. We believe the ban would also be difficult to enforce, waste police time and criminalise youths who are just trying to enjoy themselves.

My mother was recently taken into Kent and Canterbury Hospital, having suffered chest pains after receiving a flu jab. She had been advised to dial 999, should this be the case. I arrived at the hospital with my father at around 9.30pm, on the evening in question - my mother had been there, since around 8.00pm. We were told that she would need to be seen by a senior doctor, before a decision could be made, as to whether to discharge her, or keep her in over night. So we waited... And waited... And continued to wait, until 6.30am the following morning, before she was finally seen, by 'the senior doctor'. I use single quotes, as we were informed, during the night, that there was just ONE senior doctor to oversee the entire hospital. The reason it took so long for him to reach my mother, was due to an emergency case on one of the wards, along with the number of other people, needing to be seen first. I am sure you will agree, that this is completely unacceptable and that more frontline staff are needed, in order to avoid situations, such as this. As it happened, my mother wasn't in any danger, but supposing she had have been?