MP's: If 100,000+ sign a petition all MP's must attend the debate.

This petition is a direct response to the perception that we cannot change the system which already exists. Even if it isn't fit for purpose, up to date with the modern world, or representative of most of the electorate. We can!

The promise of parliamentary debate on any petition which reached 100.000 signatures was a brave manifesto promise by the conservatives, but without some significant changes in the way the commons work, these petitions will fall on deaf (or absent) ears.

We live in an age of technology and information, many embrace it, many fear it. It is an age where almost everything you do is done on line.
Whatever your personal feelings about it, the internet is here to stay, and has the so far untapped potential to allow YOU unprecedented control over YOUR life, and the direction of politics in real time. We have social media which is acting as a lightning rod, by allowing us to display our righteous indignation at policy's which we don't agree with, but with no effect whatsoever. How many would bother to sign a petition which WOULD be heard by those that create all of our futures?

Internet petitions are branded "slacktivism" by the press, and yet many of us who walk in the middle of the road, or the "silent majority" fear taking part in any more pro active activism, because of the disproportionate response by the state to peaceful protest.
Also in these austere times many simply cannot afford to take the time to participate in politics, except by signing these e- petitions, and going out to vote once every 4 or 5 years.

At these times you are faced with a choice; to support one of 3 main parties, because it supports something which you are passionate about, even though you do not support all of the manifesto, give your vote to a fringe party, or like 45% of the electorate, not bother at all. If these changes were implemented then that would no longer need to be the way.

At present there is no record (accessible to the public) of attendance in the commons except for voting figures. This is not acceptable, as the public must be able to see whether their MP has attended any debate which they have petitioned for, and for general transparency, as promised by every incoming government.

All MPs are public servants, paid by the public purse, and, as we're reminded when we call HMRC, DWP, or any other government body, we are all customers of the state, and as customers we are entitled be listened to, and served well.

We demand a certain level of service for our taxes,and as customers, as voters and most importantly as Humans, we demand the right to determine how we live, and have our voice heard!

Its time to accept your "invitation to join the government of Britain" (This was the title of the Conservative manifesto 2010)

"People have been shut out of Westminster politics for too long.
Having a single vote every four or five years is not good enough – we need to give people real control over how they are governed. So, with a Conservative government, any petition that secures 100,000 signatures will be eligible for formal debate in Parliament".

"The Big Society runs consistently through our policy programme.
Our plans to reform public services, mend our broken society,and rebuild trust in politics are all part of our Big Society agenda. These plans involve redistributing power from the state to society; from the centre to local communities, giving people the opportunity to take more control over their lives".

"Big Society; our reform plans require a social response in order to be successful. So building the Big Society is not just a question of the state stepping back and hoping for the best: it will require an active role for the state. The state must take action to agitate for, catalyse and galvanise social renewal. We must use the state to help remake society".

The above are all excerpts from the Conservative party manifesto, printed before winning the 2010 general election. They all seem to say very much the same as this petition, and yet more and more of the people I speak to, feel the same as me, that they have less and less freedom, power and control over the way they are governed.

Apathy is a dangerous thing because it shows a lack of hope. A lack of hope is acceptance of that which makes you unhappy. Acceptance of unhappiness is surrender. Once surrender has been accepted, it is irrevocable.