On the 4th December, 2013, the government announced that children who were in foster care would be allowed and supported to remain with their foster carers until they were 21 years of age. There was much celebration amongst campaigners when the announcement was made. However, those celebrations did not extend to children and young people in children’s homes. Children in residential care are not included in this change even though arguably the residential sector cares for possibly the most vulnerable and disadvantaged young people who may be unable, or indeed choose not to be fostered. ECLCM is a campaign group, without funding or political affiliations with any other group, formed to stop Government discrimination against children in residential care who want support to 21, the same as those in foster care. One young 15 year old in residential care said: Just because foster children are settled in a family environment does not mean that young people in residential are not. I would love to live here until I am 21.' Children in children’s homes will still face being discharged from care at 18 (or even younger) and facing the savage disadvantages that life can bring. We know from the feedback we received that these young people were not celebrating last week. It is our view that increasing the care leaving age for fostered children and not those in other residential settings will have unintended consequences. It will: • create a ‘two tier’ care system, in which children in foster care receive longer aftercare support than those residential settings; • create an ‘underclass’ of children in care who have to leave care at 18; • reduce real choice for children as they will be compelled to accept family care in order to gain better aftercare; • create serious issues for social workers when family placements are breaking down. Instead of considering a residential care option, they may repeat family placements in an effort to protect aftercare; • have an impact on the self-image and confidence of children in residential settings other than foster care, who may feel undervalued and discriminated against by a change which excludes them through no fault of their own. We welcome the change in leaving age for fostered children to 21 years of age. We congratulate the campaigners who achieved this and acknowledge work that took place over several years. However, we feel that to accept this change whilst excluding other children in care is discriminatory and not sufficient. We ask that the government support all children and young people in care to 21 years of age. We ask all those who share our view to support our campaign for equality. It is the least we can do for our children. Petitioners: BEN ASHCROFT @AshcroftBen IAN DICKSON @IDickson258 ROSIE CANNING @RosieCanning1 ED NIXON @EdNixon2 LISA CHERRY @_LisaCherry PAOLO HEWITT @PaoloHewitt1 ALEX WHEATLE MBE @brixtonbard DR JOSIE PEARSE @angelstrand DR GORDON MILSON @gordonmilson HELEN WILLIAMS @coralhels MARY CAMPBELL-WHARAM @insight_mary RAYNE O'BRIEN @rayne_obrien DANIELLE McLAUGHLIN @Dmamclaughlin ROSE DEVEREUX @RoseDevereux1 PHILOMENA HARRISON IVOR FRANK, LLB, Barrister-at law

Its is so important that Seaham's new secondary school is replaced, like for like, and that it includes a swimming pool. Past generations of Seaham learnt to swim in a makeshift outdoor swimming pool, colloquially known as the pit pond, which was in fact water storage for Dawdon Colliery, however following the demise of the mining industry, and the closure of the three pits which were in the town, the pit pond was lost to the following generations. Swimming is such a vital life skill and even more so for the children of Seaham who live on the North Sea coast to have access to a decent sized learning pool. We believe the whole community would benefit from the replacement of the pool. This is not about profit, this is about saving lives. Surely one pool is worth more than several lives which have been lost in the past few years in our seas.

Our traditional customs are an important part of our National Heritage and in danger of being lost because organisers cannot afford the costs associated with compliance with Health and Safety legislation, insurance costs, security costs and similar placed on them by local authorities. These local authorities should be providing the means for the traditional customs to continue not placing obstacles in the way. E.g. The Bacup Coconut dance (which has been happening in Lancashire for over 150 years) is under threat because they cannot afford to pay for road closures. The Sussex Bonfire tradition is under threat because of increasing legislation and escalating insurance costs from 'ambulance chasers'. Other European nations have protected their customs by listing them with UNESCO, placing an international obligation on local authorities to assist rather than hinder their continuation for future generations. There is no question of compromising public safety but the means to make our customs possible without stretching the resources of the people who carry them out must be found. Nobody questions the resources used for the protection of World Heritage Sites and this is no different. It is good for tourism and for local economies to keep our customs alive.

I've heard that Hywel Dda health board are to downgrade Bronglais. They'll stabilize patients in Bronglais, then fly them down to Carmarthen

This is important because after so many years of governments and police trying to shut down our scene we are still here and we still feel we are doing no harm. If you feel the same then please sign this petition and get this issue addressed by the people who can make a change.

Access to Work isn't a benefit and doesn't incur a cost to government - in fact it brings money into the treasury, yet Deaf and disabled people are having their support allowance capped or cuts made (meaning they can no longer afford to use qualified interpreters or the support they need). This places jobs at risk and has already resulted in job losses and demotions. People currently in work are potentially being forced out of work and onto benefits, which goes against everything the government is telling us they are trying to achieve. Deaf and disabled people bring a vast amount of skill and talent to our workforce that we can't afford to lose. We want to ensure that full support is provided, and people are enabled to gain, maintain and progress in their chosen careers. Personal choice and control needs to be handed back to the experts on Deaf and disabled access needs in the workplace - the individual Deaf and disabled people who use the scheme We want to ensure Deaf and disabled people are not subjected to a glass ceiling due to lack of support.

Winter Fuel Allowance is a non-means tested benefit. You only need to be a qualifying pensioner to be paid it. The allowance is paid whether you need it or not. There are a range of conditions that are made worse by cold weather. If you have a condition such as severe Raynauds's or Scleroderma the effects of cold weather can result in painful, swollen cold hands and feet. Being cold can quickly become life threatening due to possible complications such as poor circulation and breathing difficulties. Most people who suffer with autoimmune diseases including rheumatoid arthritis and those with limited mobility need to take extra care in cold weather.The recent price hikes in energy costs is impacting on vulnerable groups. It is essential that warmth is maintained for people whose health is made worse by the cold. Extending this allowance won’t add much to the welfare budget and will mean less cost to the N.H.S. in the long term. We call on the government therefore to do the right thing, and the pay the winter fuel allowance to those who need it.

Recently, Jeremy Hunt lost his appeal against closing Lewisham Accident and Emergency. The law that protected it would be removed if Clause 118 passes. The Clause will allow the government to close or downgrade any hospital in the country, with barely any consultation of local people, if there is a Trust in financial difficulties anywhere nearby. They will be able to appoint an administrator to one Trust who will be able to take decisions to fast-track the closure of hospitals in another area - no matter how successful or popular those hospitals are - using the 'unsustainable provider' legislation that was designed only for insolvent Trusts. If it becomes law, this Clause means that *no* hospital will be safe, no matter how successful. Check out this link http://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/stop-hospital-closure-clause for more information. We will update you on further campaign actions you can get involved in. Please share on Twitter and Facebook.

PLEASE SUPPORT THE ENHANCEMENT OF OLD PORTSMOUTH'S HISTORIC ARCHES - SIGN THE PETITION ON THE RIGHT OF THIS PAGE PORTSMOUTH ARTches Arts & Crafts Quarter proposals are under attack from a group of residents who want to protect their own interests. The proposed plans will enhance the area for the common benefit of the people who live in portsmouth with the additional objective of increasing tourism. It will also provide more jobs and other opportunities. SEE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RodM9qLqA_k Any objection is a prime example of local residents trying to stop anything happening on there own doorstep and treating the surrounding area as their own back garden. Can you not see what a waste of space these arches actually are, at the moment they stink of urine where they are used as unofficial public toilets. Bring them back to life and then regenerate the whole seafront. By all means object to anything tacky going there but don't obstruct the Council every time they try and improve something or you will end up with nothing ! 91% of people (out of 380) citywide who attended the citywide public consultation WANT the ARTches and like the proposals. ENGLISH HERITAGE are really enthusiastic with their support for ARTches quarter proposals. To get the £1.9million (bid to national Coastal Communities Fund) needed they need planning permission. The ARTches arts & crafts project is also already supported by Partnership for South Hampshire 'PUSH' (who have put £40,000 towards it) and the 'Portsmouth Society'. The ARTches is supported by the Uni of Portsmouth Arts Faculty senior lecturer too and will help lots of local artists and innovators.

A levy on Wiltshire Supermarkets could reduce parking charges in our town centres which would be a lifeline to the many small traders.

Currently funding is weighted on a per pupil basis where children identified as socially deprived receive considerably more funding and additional funding benefits (free school dinners & free uniforms). Under proposed changes the minister will reduce the per pupil funding at 81% of schools across Northern Ireland and reallocate the funds to socially deprived children. This will affect the budget schools have to operate with and put more pressures on PTA's and fundraising activities to close the already existing funding gap at schools. There is a lack of evidence to support the assertion that increases to funding of socially deprived children will improve their educational performance.

In 2012 Michael Gove scrapped homework guidelines that laid out how much homework schools should be setting. Let’s ask that we go a step further and scrap homework in primary schools altogether. Schools continue to operate under the false assumption that homework is necessary for children to gain a satisfactory level of academic achievement, and to pander to the pressure from parents who also operate under this misconception. The fact is that there is not a single piece of evidence that can show any correlation between homework and academic achievement, nor that shows any improvement in study habits. Yet many recent studies and reports have raised serious concerns about the well-being of children, their lack of physical activity, excessive time spent in front of screens, increasingly limited time for free play, and lack of time spent outdoors. Homework is an intrusion on family time, on children’s free time, and can be a regular source of conflict in the home. It creates unnecessary anxiety and pressure for children. Young children already spend enough time engaged in formal school work. To expect them to bring more of this home risks overloading them and turning them off learning altogether. They learn and develop in so many other ways. Time for free play, outdoor play, pursuing their own interests, and quality family time is essential for their development and well-being.