A recent High Court Queens Bench decision to dismiss libel case HQ12X04053 on Summary Judgement has essentially eviscerated Whistleblower rights, rendering the Public Interest Disclosure Act, (PIDA 1998), worthless. The High Court's decision allowed an NHS Trust to manipulate "qualified privilege" to target a conscientious Whistleblower by directly sighting her "protected disclosure," made in good faith to the Health Professions Council, as a valid reason for retaliatory defamation and taking devastating punitive measures against her. This is why employees within the NHS do not blow the whistle on dangerous practice. Not only do Whistleblowers have their training, retraining and/or their career totally destroyed, their efforts are futile, often ignored and they frequently accomplish absolutely nothing. This Petition was drafted by Kim Sanders-Fisher, a student in retraining whose protected disclosure was violated; she has had a final Appeal to overturn the dismissal of her case denied. Case HQ12X04053 is in the public domain and can be reviewed at the High Court Queens Bench in London.

Given the recent revelations about GCHQ's 'Tempora' programme UK citizens are facing the greatest threat to their civil liberties in this country's history. Indiscriminate surveillance is being collected on the populace on a massive scale with no public mandate or accountabilty. This is being allowed through a legal loophole which would have been legitimised with the Snooper's Charter. If this kind of system is allowed to exist at all at the very least it should have a mandate from both the public and parliament - with external accountability and auditing. No publicly accountable body currently exists to audit this programme.

By acting like a bank, you forget your unique role in the financial sector at the time when you should be most mindful of it. As your website points out, “Nationwide has mutual status, which means that we are owned by and run for the benefit of our members”, rather than for profit. Mutuals and co-ops should be keeping the banks honest, showing them that social justice and financial stability go hand in hand. If the ethical alternative to big banks is paying its CEO 190 times the minimum wage, then what hope is there for reform of the rest? [See the campaign website link on the left for a fuller explanation]

This is our last chance to save Croydon's libraries. When library closures were originally proposed just six libraries were under threat. The people of Croydon rallied together against the plans and more than twenty thousand people spoke out in support of our libraries through a public consultation. Residents’ views were ignored and the Council forged ahead with plans to privatise, slashing the library service via back door cuts to prepare for this process. The original divisive consultation made no mention of privatisation or outsourcing the library service. It only consulted on the closure of six rather than the whole network of 13 libraries. The public have never been consulted on the outsourcing of our library service, which is due to go through imminently. Serious concerns have been raised about the tendering process and the company which is due to run the libraries. Repeated requests for information have been refused. We have to let Croydon Council know that they cannot and must not ignore the wishes of the residents that they serve. If enough of us sign the petition we can force them to hold a debate on this issue so we can expose the truth and foster proper engagement and accountability: something sorely lacking in Croydon. The Council claims no buildings have or will be closed BUT a library is so much more than just a building. If we want our voice heard we must act NOW! http://soslibrary.blogspot.co.uk/

For the people of Weston-super-Mare and North Somerset it is vtal to protect our local hospital, its essential sevices and to resist the gradual spread of privatisation undermining the structure of the NHS. The Weston Area Health Trust is deemed too small to exist as a stand-alone trust, and the recent orgaisational changes changes have led to a £5 million shortfall in funding. WAHT has to find a new way of operating either by merging with another trust that has already achieved NHS foundation staus or finding a partner to run it as an operating franchise. We fear a solution where a private company could become the franchise operator as has happened at Hinchingbrooke Hospital. This is unacceptable for all of us that care about keeping our NHS public! So please,please show your support for the NHS andsign our petition against the privatisation of Weston Hospital.

The service times of the Glasgow Subway are not satisfactory. People often need to get around the city before 6.30 am, and particularly after 11 pm. The situation is even worse on Sundays, when there is only limited service available between 10 am and 6.30 pm - it is not even possible to get into town for e.g. a cultural event on a Sunday evening. Extending the service times would make public transport in Glasgow far more attractive. SPT is a public body, which means it is owned by the people, and hence it should meet their need for efficient public transport. (SPT often say "regular heavy maintenance" is needed to be carried out at night and on Sunday evenings - but other and often larger subway systems all over the world seem to be able to offer far better service times.) On top of that, and scarcely announced, the popular 10 and 20 journey tickets (for 12/22 £) were scrapped on 29 June without public consultation. They are meant to be replaced by 7 day and new 28 day season tickets: http://www.spt.co.uk/subway/smart/ However, season tickets are far more expensive - 45 £ for 28 days - and less flexible compared to 10/20 journey tickets because they expire. This lets down frequent but not daily travellers. This petition is not directed against new "smart" tickets per se, but against punishing regular but not daily travellers through a massive price hike. We really would like to know what SPT mean in detail when they say "SPT would like to reassure customers who have made use of our multi-journey tickets in the past that there will be a similar ‘smart’ ticket product in future." If, as SPT claim, the "smart" tickets cannot count to 20, then alternative solutions are possible, e.g. in the form of top up offers (pay 22 £, get a 28 £ top-up - this would be equal to the old 20 journey ticket). But making regular users pay for a single ticket every time (even from a top-up card) is not good enough - and increases the price for 20 flexible journeys from 22 £ to 28 £, a 27.3 % increase. Prices were already increased by 9 % last year ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-19300997 ). But still, there is no service improvement at all - we, the public, have to live with appalling opening times and bad access for the elderly, disabled and prams. A customer complains on Facebook: "The heart of Glasgow yet your happy t scrap 10&20 journey tickets that so many people rely on. I currently spend £22 a month using your subway. Your price changes mean you want me to spend £44. If your introducing "Smart" cards is the reason for this, then why are they not "smart" enough to deal with 10&20 journey? Disappointing and you have lost a loyal customer of 5 years from July!" Another customer says on SPT's Facebook page "I think your new 7/28 day tickets are just an excuse to make extra money, I work 4 days a week and only use the subway one way so a 10 journey can last me over 2 weeks, on your new system I would be more than double the money for the same period." As a publicly owned and run body, SPT is not serving our interests. Therefore we would like to ask Gordon Maclennan, SPT's Chief Executive, to listen to us as SPT's owners by improving service times and proving that the new "smart card" ticketing system lives up to its name and can handle 10 and 20 journey tickets.

HS2 is merely a politicians' vanity project. With passenger numbers forecast to increase even further, the aim of current and future rail improvements should be to increase train, stations and line capacity; to make life more bearable for current and future passengers, not to shave half an hour off a single route from London to the north. There are already many environmental opponents to this vast waste of taxpayers money. Surely a majority of taxpayers would support using rail money in a far more efficient way.

Boaters who move every fourteen days are acting legally and should be left in peace. No one should have to endure the fear and trauma of being needlessly threatened with homelessness. No charity should be in the business of harassing and threatening members of the public, and boaters should have the same rights as all other travelling people. It is not an acceptable use of public money to spend it taking people to court to try and take their homes from them. Many boaters are retired and have limited funds. There are boaters who are key workers and cannot afford to live in regular accommodation. Some boaters are disabled, others have families. Those who move every 14 days are entitled to live and travel on the canal, and do so perfectly legally, yet The Canal & River Trust harasses such people regularly. They threaten to take away the boat license, then to take the boater to court and take their boat from them. If your boat is your home and your only major asset, this is a terrifying prospect. If they take your boat, they can sell it for a profit and you get nothing. The Canal & River Trust pressures liveaboard boaters to take permanent moorings. Most moorings do not have planning permission for residency, so if you live on your boat, a mooring is mostly something you cannot use. The Canal & River Trust owns many of the available moorings and benefits financially from pressuring boaters into taking moorings. In other circumstances, using threats to pressure someone into paying you for something they do not really need and cannot use, just to avoid some threatened outcome, is called a protection racket. This hardly seems like good, charitable activity.

The National Railway Museum in York is a cultural treasure-house of railway trains, railwayana and railway ephemera. In short, the greatest and largest collection of such in the world. A veritable three-dimensional encyclopaedia of travel and transport history. It has, over the years, proved its ability to show diverse and ever-changing exhibitions such that the public and tourists do not treat it as a 'once-and-once only' experience. It branched out to host an award-winning production of E. Nesbit's 'The Railway Children', teaming up with The York Theatre Royal Company to do so, to great acclaim. It is a hands-on museum that caters for those who want to be involved, every bit as much as those who merely wish to stand and admire the stunning collection of engines and rolling stock. The Railway Museum appeals to all ages, as a place of entertainment and serious education, and as such acts as a research and study centre for universal railway history. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~#~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This campaign will be running in co-operation with the '38 Degrees' campaigns to save the Manchester Museum Of Science and Industry and the Bradford Media Museum. http://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/save-mosi http://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/save-the-national-media-museum-bradford Three powerhouses of technology in the north of England; with campaigns that form a three-pronged trident which, it is hoped, will prick the conscience of central government regarding the folly of losing these museums, There is also a local York campaign to save the Railway Museum: http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/indepth/savethenrm/?ref=mmnsp which is being run by The York Press, and has the active support of Hugh Bayley MP. Please support all these campaigns to save the nation's heritage in the north.

On the basis of a rule from the 1500s, 'Bury Markets' management has the power to decide on whether to allow any trading which is made up of more than 4 stalls in the whole local area. Bury Markets' manager Andrew Hayes has refused to allow Manchester Vintage a license to hold a monthly fair in Ramsbottom despite the fact that this has the support of the public, local businesses and even local councillors. We're not the only ones, many other local events and traders have also been turned down for licenses. We have even been told we have no right of appeal. The argument seems to be that these are the rules and that it could affect Bury Market local traders but our event would be on a Sunday when the market is closed and we don't sell the same products. We'd also be paying 'Bury Markets' for a license so bringing them an income. A monthly vintage fair would be an event for local people to enjoy and would support the local economy. Over 800 people enjoyed our first event and we want to continue. Please sign and share the petition urge Bury Markets to change their decision. Watch our video to see the Vintage Fair in action. http://youtu.be/7_jKNSm0FrE

We believe that arming the rebels will not end the conflict in Syria or contribute to that end. Further we believe that sending weapons to the rebels could lead to the escalation of the violence in Syria and the wider Middle East region.

Staffordshire County Council is proposing to charge £380 a year per child for transport where children are not attending the nearest school. The figure does not take proper account of income and could be increased. For thousands of families their nearest school is not the local catchment school there is no way of avoiding this cost. An estimated 72 schools are affected and could face losing pupils. http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/Staffordshire-pupils-facing-pound-380-school-bus/story-19171776-detail/story.html In Perton where I live the nearest school is in Wolverhampton which is another Local Education Authority. We have no choice but to send children to Codsall if we want them to go to the local catchment school. The council is suggesting that pupils should walk to school if parents can't afford the transport costs or drive them, but with many of the those affected living in rural areas, walking along unlit 60 mile an hour roads is not a safe or viable option. It will also lead to a increased volume of cars on many roads causing disruption and congestion to other travellers. This policy is poorly thought through and unfair especially at a time when many families are already struggling to make ends meet.