I would like to ask you do something about the horrendous waste of resources regarding supermarkets and food packaging companies. Supermarkets own brand products are generally cheaper, but my observation is that this comes at the expense of using non recyclable packaging. All large companies even Aldi which gives a large well informed pledge to their commitment to the environment and yet at the same time most of their products packaging is non-recyclable? other large chains sell their own brand products too, again a lot of these seem to come also in non recyclable packages. In this day and age when we are being encouraged, and some do their utmost, to recycle as much as we can our bins are stuffed with this stuff which ends up in landfill- What is going on? why if some companies can do it then why not all. All our food should come this way - Also less of it too, as its totally unnecessary!

According to the Huffington Post Boris Johnson accuses the Ukip voting as 'a peasants revolt'! Therefore, he clearly sees us all as peasants. because of this he should resign as the mayor of London.

Thousands of victims of domestic violence are forced/pressured into unsupervised contact orders every year, between their children and the perpetrators who abused them. This is because the UK law states that it is in the 'child's best interest to have two parents', regardless of whether there is a history of violence. The government has limited funding for contact centres, so unless violence has been proven to have happened 'towards children' (many parents shield their children from this happening) in the majority of cases contact is ordered, and moves out of contact centres as quickly as possible. This frequently happens after risk assessments are ordered. Perpetrators are offered an opportunity to offer excuses for the abuse, to discredit victims. Abuse can then be cited as the result of a bad relationship – thus eliminating the risk as the relationship has ended - so contact can be moved out of contact centres. Saving the government substantial costs in the long term. Anger management and domestic violence courses may be ordered, but these offer no guarantees. What isn't acknowledged is the effect the violence and emotional abuse has on the abused parents. The abuse may not be aimed directly at children - often because the abused parents shield them and take the abuse themselves - but any parent who has been punched, choked, kicked, verbally abused, bullied, and demeaned, will feel extremely anxious about unsupervised access. It's common for perpetrators to seek contact, knowing that it will cause victims further distress. Many victims of abuse are so distressed at the idea of unsupervised contact orders, they are diagnosed with anxiety and depression, and medicated. Medication has side-effects. In a recent study of 1,829 people who have taken antidepressants in the past five years, led by Professor John Read, University of Liverpool, 60% of participants reported 'feeling emotionally numb', 52% 'feeling not like myself', 42% reduction in positive feelings, and 39% reported caring less about others. These side effects aren't in children's best interests. Yet parents are forced/pressured into a position, in that if they struggle with anxiety or depression, as a result of unsupervised contact orders, they risk being labelled 'fragile' and losing their children. Either into care, or to the abusive parent (who can then state he or she is reformed) because the primary carer is then considered an 'emotional risk'. The UK is one of the only countries to remove children for such a reason. I believe this is wrong. In cases in that parents have been found guilty of significant abuse towards their partners, risk assessments should be carried out by specialist domestic violence workers, to help find a way forward for contact to progress that is safe for chidren, and that doesn't subject victims to further distress. This does not necessarily mean no contact, or long-term contact in contact centres (as understandably funding is short.) In many cases contact could be supervised into the long term by a party the primary carer feels assured by, without over night contact. This would significantly reduce emotional distress, which would be positive for both children and victims of domestic violence into the long term. Fear leads to poor mental health, dysfunction and addictions (all a strain on public funding.) It can also lead to desperate-measures; Parents have fled the UK to escape such contact orders. Only to be brought back under the Hague Convention, to lose their children forever for seeking to protect them. Children's best interests should be paramount. But the fundamental flaw in the current law, is that it neglects to take into account parental emotional wellbeing. If primary carers are subjected to significant stress, this inevitably effects children. Although this is recognised in court proceedings, and is intended to be taken into account, there is a SERIOUS CONFLICT; The current UK law states that children can be removed from parents who 'pose emotional risk', Because of this there is reluctance from parents to admit to struggling with court orders. Any parent who has been violently attacked over many years, by his or her partner, will inevitably feel afraid of unsupervised/unsupported contact. This is not because he or she is mentally ill, or of a fragile disposition, it is because parents instinctively look to protect their children. Take the ability to protect your children away from you and it leads to distress. I believe it is important for children to have a relationship with both parents. But I believe it is equally important for parents who have been abused not to be subjected to further distress. This isn't in children's best interests. Nor for children to be put at further risk of abuse. I ask for re-assurance for victims of domestic violence, that children be kept safe. Please sign this petition and share it! Thank you! Zoe.

I like many others began my love of literature reading "Of Mice and Men" and "To Kill a Mockingbird" I have re-read them both several times in adulthood. In addition to being entertaining, the book's have powerful messages of fairness, equality and compassion. Our Children deserve to be taught in a balanced way and monumental decisions like this should be made by the experts. The National curriculum should be in the best interest of the pupils and not the whim of someone who "doesn't like them"

We feel the BBC News coverage of the European and Local Elections has, to date, been unfairly biased against the Green Party. This bias is not only evident in the almost complete absence of coverage of the Green Party during the European and Local Election results, but also prior to this during the campaign for the elections on Thursday 22nd May and in the months since. Whilst we understand that UKIP made gains in the Local Elections, it has gone largely unreported that the Green Party currently have a total of 162 Councillors and are now the official opposition in Liverpool, Solihull, Islington, Lewisham, and Norwich (15 councillors to Labour's 21). They gained two seats in Bristol, one with over 47% of the vote and retained a third seat, bringing the total to 6. In addition to their many councillors, the Green Party also have one MP, one member of the House of Lords, three MEPs, three MSPs (Scottish Greens), two London Assembly members, as well as a Green-led Council in Brighton & Hove. UKIP don't have any MSPs, London Assembly members, or run a Council. In the European Election coverage the Green Party were only very sporadically and reluctantly mentioned by the BBC. A representative of the Green Party (Leader Natalie Bennett) was not interviewed until 2:30am (26/5/14) on BBC One's Vote 2014, members of the other four parties were interviewed multiple times prior to this. The Today programme (R4) news summary at 8:30am (26/5/14) mentioned the Lib Dems in 5th place, but there was no mention of the Greens, let alone their being in 4th. These are just a couple of examples of the blatant refusal by the BBC to acknowledge the Green Party's successes. Seeing as the results of the European Elections placed the Greens ahead of the Lib Dems they should surely be treated as a Major Party, especially as UKIP are treated as such whilst not having had an MP until four months after these elections took place. The Green's membership has increased by 45% since January. They should receive coverage reflective of their successes and a chance to share the political floor with Farage et al not only during and in the lead-up to elections, but also in the interim period on programmes such as Newsnight and Question Time and in any Leaders' Debates. Incidentally, from the beginning of January 2014 until 22nd May 2014 Question Time has featured five UKIP representatives and only one Green representative (Caroline Lucas). Most despicable of all was how, in much of the BBC's coverage of the election results, the Green Party were consistently lumped in with the 'Others' category and often removed altogether from statistical evidence. This is an insult to the 8% who voted for them - 1.2million members of the British public. The BBC prides itself on painting a fair and unbiased picture of events, however in this case we feel they have not done so. All parties should receive fair, impartial coverage, whether they be Left, Right, or Centre. This apparent news blackout of the Green Party by a much respected taxpayer-funded corporation is incredibly disturbing and must not be allowed to continue. *This petition has been edited to keep its content up to date with the changing political climate*

The so called 'National roll-out of fibre broadband' is being funded by public money and we - the public - need to be given full access to the matter. The BT Telephone service side of the business (which does the talking to customers ...) should be given access to the data, owned by BT Openreach, to ensure that any telephone user ... interested in using fast fibre access to the broadband network ... can obtain an honest and complete answer as to when, and by what method - and at what price - they will be provided with the connection capability to the fibre broadband network.

Sefton Park Meadows are a unique green space heritage belonging to the City and people of Liverpool. They are of great ecological and environmental value and have existed since 1872 when Sefton Park was opened. Sefton Park Meadows are a grand sweeping tree-lined entrance to Sefton Park in a conservation area and within the significant setting of the English Heritage Grade 1 designated Sefton Park. The people of Liverpool have vociferously told the Mayor and Council of Liverpool over the last year to Save Sefton Park Meadows. A preferred developer is to be announced in the near future, followed by a planning application. It is not too late to decide to leave the site as it is, as a significant part of Sefton Park for the benefit of generations to come, as it has been since 1872.

A few days ago, SSE reported annual profits of £1.55 BILLION. At a time when more than half a million struggling households face eviction, and almost a million people are forced to use food banks or starve, when inflation has risen yet again, when working families account for one in four households living in poverty, and 3 out of 4 claims for Housing Benefit are made by working people, SSE's profits, and the 3% increase in dividends paid to shareholders, are an obscenity. Last week, E-On was fined £12 MILLION, for mis-selling energy packages, making it the 5th of the Big Six to be fined for this appalling practice. In total, Ofgem has imposed fines of £100 MILLION on the energy companies, £39 MILLION of which relates to their failure to comply with the rules governing energy sales. But their unscrupulous practices don't end there: those who choose not to pay their energy bills by direct debit are subject to higher charges than those who do, and those with pre-payment meters pay the highest rates of all. Worse still, of the 420,000 pre-payments meters installed in the UK in the last year, almost 25% were installed without the householder's permission. Of the households with pre-payment meters that 'voluntarily disconnect', which is an energy company euphemism for 'have no money to pay for energy', 44% have at least one resident who is either disabled or has a long-term health problem. There can be no doubt that ordinary people in the UK are suffering on many fronts. It has been said many times in the past that people were having to choose between heating and eating, but the situation is now so dire that many can afford neither heat nor food. Austerity isn't just biting, it is eating us alive. And yet, we know that there are so-called celebrities involved in tax avoidance schemes that deprive the economy of MULTI MILLIONS OF POUNDS, and corporations that exploit tax loopholes to avoid paying BILLIONS OF POUNDS. But all around, people are fighting against injustice with petitions and direct action, targeting the DWP, corporations, AND the energy companies. We must keep fighting if we want to improve our quality of life and SAVE LIVES. We need affordable energy and the Big Six will NEVER, EVER provide it. Even the small, independent companies won't provide it, as they, too, have shareholders. The only way that energy will be affordable is to have a nationalised energy sector, devoid of shareholders. Please keep promoting my petition and encouraging people to sign it. Together we CAN make a difference

We believe that this is a necessary course of action in order to attract investment and economic benefit back to Hereford. The state of Herefordshire also discourages potential investors and tourism alike from visiting the County, this is potentially an economic disaster for Hereford.

My husband has an advanced prostate cancer. He wants to die at home, but he may not get what he wants, because there are inadequate services and support in the community; and if he runs into any medical problems there is little or no communication between the Hospital and those who work in the community. Whether you want to die in a hospital, a hospice or at home, you need the services to link together and support you. And you need seven days a week services. Research carried out ten years ago found that 2/3 of people want to die in their own homes, but only 1/3 do. Let's all work together to change this! It will be too late for my husband, but it will benefit everyone else. There needs to be an overall plan for each individual, as put forward in the End of Life Care Strategy. This is important for every one of us. Whilst there have been three pilot studies in Lincolnshire, Leeds and Somerset, the majority of Hospital Trusts and Clinical Commissioning Groups have failed to get their act together. Please sign my petition and show the NHS that people want action and they want it NOW!

North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust is the largest ambulance service in the country covering 5,400 square miles and serving a population of more than seven million people. It is already extremely challenging for an ambulance service to provide excellent response and clinical care in a timely manner. As part of a cost improvement plan the Trust Board and Management is proposing to reduce day and night time cover across the whole of the North West. This action without doubt will have a detrimental impact on patient care and safety as a reduction in resources will mean that patients may have to wait longer than they do now on some occasions. It will affect residents from Carlisle to Crewe. The proposed cuts in resources will mean that Ambulances that cover outlying rural towns and villages will be pulled into urban areas to respond to 999 calls. The public everywhere will have a lower level of service whether they live in large urban areas, towns or villages. The North West Ambulance Service is a unique service with its mixture of large urban cities and vast rural areas. The North West should not suffer any detriment in the provision of patient care provided by the Ambulance Service just because of its size. We are campaigning to keep the Ambulance resources that we currently provide for our patients within the North West. To make these cuts will have an impact on patients and could ultimately cost lives. Please support our campaign

The hay meadow is a beautiful and special place to be and well-used by children, walkers and dog-walkers, flower-lovers and others. It feels like an old friend, to me and many other people. Hay meadows are threatened in Britain and we need to preserve as many as possible. Once one is gone, it is gone forever. It is part of the green belt that forms a 'green lung' for Coventry and other nearby urban areas. Natural England should not make decisions about community resources like our field in secret. In law we have a democratic right to have environmental information, to participate in environmental decisions, and to have access to low- cost environmental justice. This is enshrined in an International UN treaty which is law in this country - the Aarhus Convention. This is a problem for all of us, near and far, if decisions about nature conservation are made in secret, without publicly available evidence. Tell Natural England that they need to give us the rules, and criteria; they need to give us their reasons and evidence and they need to offer us an independent appeal process where we disagree with their decisions.