Communities around Heathrow airport are already suffering with drought and excess temperatures. The development covertly happening in Hillingdon is unsustainable and damaging to our communities. Anti-datacentre sentiment is growing from across the political spectrum in the US. More than a dozen states have considered moratoria on datacentres. New York became the first US state to enact a temporary ban last month. If they can say no, so can we. Hillingdon is one of Londons greenest boroughs. However we are already classified by the Environment Agency as "seriously water stressed". Data centres heavily exacerbate this pressure.  The data centres will raise local temperatures making already raised climate crises temperatures even hotter and more unbearable, also putting us at further risk of wild fires in our parks, gardens and green spaces.  I’m a keen gardener and in the ten years I’ve lived in the area I’ve seen my garden go from wet clay most the year round to now parched and thirsty most of the year.  The water and electricity consumption of these centres will no doubt lead to raised utility bills at a time when people are already struggling to meets rising costs of living.

This ten minute crossing is famous around the world - and is believed to be the last turntable style ferry anywhere. It's an iconic part of Skye's history, but it's under threat thanks to a wealthy landowner - Edinburgh-based retired corporate financier Richard Oliphant of that Ilk - forcing the community to follow archaic land laws. These laws mean that the Glenelg to Skye ferry and tearoom - who employ 22% of the local population - have to give millionaire land owner 5% of it's annual income. But it gets worse; these outdated laws also say that the payment for each new year can't be less than the previous year. It means that even though bad weather lowered earnings this year, Oliphant of that Ilk will still receive £10,000 because a great tourist season last year meant they had to pay him that much. It's an absolutely ridiculous situation, that is putting this amazing community asset at risk. As a Skye resident that first used this ferry back in 1958 I'm apalled that these historic laws are putting it at risk. I'm calling for Scottish politicians to step in and change the rules to support this incredible ferry. Image credit: Mike McBey, used under licence Attribution 2.0 Generic

“If music be the food of love, play on.” — William Shakespeare Music at Blackminster isn’t a recent initiative. The school has a remarkable musical tradition stretching back at least to the 1970s and beyond. Former pupils remember Mr Page and the Blackminster brass band, which competed in the National Brass Band Championships. Albums and LPs still exist featuring Blackminster children singing at schools’ festivals, including recordings associated with Songs of Praise. For more than half a century, children have walked through Blackminster’s doors and found music waiting for them. Different children. Different teachers. Different decades. That tradition continued into more recent generations. At its height, more than half of Blackminster’s pupils received peripatetic instrumental tuition. Children played in a brass band, three choirs, a ukulele group and a drumming group. They took part in musical theatre, Arts Award, community performances and Local Authority pyramid concerts alongside other Worcestershire schools. Visiting musicians and bands brought the wider musical world into Blackminster. Pupils travelled to experience live music, including the National Brass Band Championships, and performed at venues including Worcester Cathedral, Birmingham’s NIA and Wembley Arena. Imagine being ten or eleven years old and standing on a stage like that. And the impact lasted. Children progressed from Blackminster to GCSE Music; an entire generation of the school brass band did so. Former pupils continued performing into adulthood, and some became music teachers themselves. That doesn’t happen by accident. It happens because children are given access. Over decades, teachers, pupils, parents and the community built the infrastructure that made it possible. Grants were secured, money raised and instruments donated. The PTA supported concerts and productions. Peripatetic teachers taught successive generations. Instruments, music technology, stands and sheet music were accumulated and cared for. We now understand that Blackminster’s discrete music provision is coming to an end, with music instead forming part of a wider Performing Arts rotation. Instruments from the music department are also being offered to others in exchange for donations. Once those instruments are dispersed, they are gone. Once ensembles disappear and resources are broken up, a musical culture that took generations to build cannot simply be recreated later. We are asking Blackminster Middle School and its Governing Body to: • reconsider the closure of discrete music provision and explore sustainable alternatives; • pause the disposal of instruments and resources while their provenance, funding and future use are reviewed; • commit to meaningful, progressive music education, including opportunities to learn instruments, sing, play together, compose, perform and experience live music; • protect instrumental tuition, ensembles and extracurricular music wherever possible; and • consult pupils, parents, alumni, peripatetic teachers, receiving schools and the wider community before making irreversible changes. Blackminster still proudly celebrates former pupils who have achieved remarkable things in music. They are evidence of what happens when children are given an opportunity. Somewhere in Blackminster today may be another future musician, teacher, brass player or singer — or simply a child who has never held an instrument and has no idea yet how important music might become in their life. For more than fifty years, Blackminster children have been given that chance. Today’s children deserve it too. Please sign and ask Blackminster Middle School and its Governing Body to protect meaningful music education and a musical tradition generations have spent decades building. Because you cannot celebrate yesterday’s musicians while taking the instruments out of the hands of tomorrow’s

In early August, a wildfire destroyed the ancient Dunwich Heath in Suffolk. This precious landscape, home to rare wildlife including nightjars, Dartford warblers and adders, and visited by 100,000 people each year, was devastated in a matter of hours. This is not an isolated incident. As climate change progresses, so does the risk of extreme weather. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more severe across the UK, threatening communities, nature, and our future. In the hours that followed the fire at Dunwich, we saw the best of people. Farmers and neighbours supported fire crews on the frontline, local communities provided shelter and food for evacuees, charity groups rallied. And the same is true for fires that have raged across the UK this summer - from the Isle of Wight to the Mourne Mountains. People have done their bit. Now they need a Government response to match. Now, we are calling on the Government to make three commitments: 1. Make climate resilience a national mission led by a Cabinet-level minister with responsibility for preparedness across Government and long-term investment. 2. Invest in nature as essential infrastructure, including peatlands, wetlands, rivers, woodlands and heathlands that help communities adapt to climate change, reduce environmental risks and support wildlife. 3. Support Fire and Rescue Services with the funding, specialist skills, equipment and public awareness campaigns they need to prevent, prepare for and respond to wildfires and other climate hazards.

Growing up in Worcester, specifically on the west side of the River Severn, has always been a cherished experience. However, with the vibrant community's expansion, there is an urgent need for educational resources to keep pace. Christopher Whitehead Language College, currently accommodating a significant number of students from this region, is under substantial pressure. The potential population growth only heightens this issue, placing an increasing demand on existing school facilities. The absence of a second local high school west of the River Severn means that many families face the inconvenience of having their children bused to schools farther away, in areas such as Malvern and other parts of the county. This not only disrupts their routine but also disconnects these young learners from their immediate community. Establishing a new high school in this vicinity is not just a logistical necessity but a critical factor in fostering a cohesive, community-cantered educational environment. Implementing a plan for a new high school would relieve the current strain on Christopher Whitehead Language College and neighbouring institutions, providing a fresh start for incoming students. With proper planning and investment, we can ensure the new school opens within a reasonable timeframe to meet the educational needs of future students. Such an initiative would reduce travel times, increase local engagement, and ensure that the children of Worcester receive a quality education right in their community. Statistics underscore the urgency of this matter. According to data from the Worcestershire Education Partnership, student numbers west of the Severn River are set to increase by 10% over the next five years. This rise translates to hundreds more students who will need local school placements. Our children’s educational journey should be facilitated, not hindered, by overcrowded classes and needless travel to distant schools. We call upon Worcestershire County Council to identify a feasible location for this new high school, prioritizing the needs and convenience of Worcester's families. By investing in our educational infrastructure now, we can create a learning environment that nurtures our children's potential and supports their future. Your signature can help turn this vision into reality and ensure a brighter future for our community's youth. Please sign this petition to make your voice heard.

Tragically, Professor Jason Arday has died after a vicious and deeply personal campaign of press attacks over the last few weeks. The Government must urgently launch an inquiry into the culture and behaviour of the British press, and any role it had in the death of Professor Arday. Add your name now.

Forest Poultry Ltd is trying to build a battery farm near Ripon capable of holding 360 thousand chickens. We call upon North Yorkshire council to reject this application Alongside the objections to battery farms, this proposal would land a small village with problems of air quality, traffic, and  the impact on the landscape  We call upon North Yorkshire to consider the inconsistencies and missing information within the planning application; the environmental and animal welfare issues this proposal  They don’t want the stench of the ammonia of 2.7 million chickens on their doorstep, polluting their water, and neither do us.  They don’t want cheap chicken grown through cruelty in their neighbourhoods compromising our way of life; neither do we. Join us in saying no to battery farms near Ripon.  North Yorkshire is full of small villages at threat of having their green fields turned into factories for big companies.  We don't want their cruelty or them damaging our land and water.

We all campaigned for a new doctors surgery in the south of King's Lynn, after the town centre surgery, St James, said it would move out of town. After the town centre surgery moved out, it was more difficult and more expensive to get to from South Lynn and the town centre,  if you do not have a car. Funding was found, from the NHS,  for a new Primary Care Surgery in South Lynn.  The South Lynn Health Hub was built at a cost of £11.5 million and opened a year ago. But  still has no doctors in it. Out Patients from the local hospital, first time physios, Mental Health, but no doctors.  Now Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Integrated Care Board says it won't fund doctors in South Lynn Health Hub. This is about access to doctors and to NHS Dentists and Diabetic Nurses, in a community that's among the 20% most deprived in England. For better health outcomes.

Petition: Stop Turning Ownership Into a Subscription Protect consumers' right to own what they buy To the UK Government, Parliament, Competition and Markets Authority, and consumer-protection authorities: At one point, my monthly subscriptions had reached 50% of my income, and something had to change. I simply couldn't afford it anymore. Once I cancelled them, I realised how much of my income had been going towards subscriptions, and I was left with almost nothing. My experience reflects a wider problem: the growing practice of turning ownership into permanent rental. We, the undersigned, call for stronger laws to protect consumers from being forced to pay recurring subscriptions for functionality they have already purchased. We believe that buying something should mean owning it. Consumers are increasingly paying thousands of pounds for cars, appliances, technology and other products, only to discover that some functions are controlled by software and can only be accessed through an ongoing subscription. Hardware may already be physically installed in a product, yet consumers can be required to keep paying to use it. This represents a fundamental shift from ownership to permanent rental. We recognise that genuine ongoing services can legitimately require subscriptions. Streaming, cloud storage, continuously updated navigation and similar services involve continuing costs. However, consumers should not be forced to pay indefinitely for functionality that is already physically present in a product they have purchased and does not genuinely require an ongoing service. We therefore call on the Government to introduce stronger consumer protections: 1. Consumers should own the functionality they purchase Where hardware or functionality is included in the purchase price, manufacturers should not be permitted to disable it solely because a consumer refuses to pay a recurring subscription. Where a feature can operate without an ongoing service, consumers should have the option of purchasing permanent access. 2. No "subscription lock" on paid-for hardware Manufacturers should not use software or digital restrictions to turn already-installed, paid-for hardware into a subscription-only feature without making this exceptionally clear before purchase. Consumers must know exactly what they are buying. 3. Permanent purchase options should be available where technically possible If a subscription unlocks functionality that does not genuinely require an ongoing service, consumers should also be offered a reasonable one-off purchase option. 4. Ownership should survive the end of a subscription Products should remain reasonably functional when a subscription expires. Manufacturers should not be able to make an expensive physical product unnecessarily useless simply because a consumer stops paying a recurring fee. 5. Second-hand ownership must be protected When a product is sold, the new owner should receive the functionality included in the original purchase, except where genuinely ongoing services are required. Digital restrictions should not undermine the traditional ability to buy, sell and use second-hand goods. 6. Subscriptions must require genuine, informed consent Consumers should not unknowingly move from a free trial, introductory offer or fixed-term purchase into an expensive recurring contract. The price, renewal date, minimum commitment and cancellation conditions must be clearly displayed before purchase. 7. Cancellation must be as easy as subscribing If a subscription can be started online in a few clicks, consumers should be able to cancel it online in a similarly simple way. Companies should not use complicated procedures, lengthy telephone queues, hidden processes or unnecessary obstacles to discourage cancellation. 8. Automatic renewal must not become an indefinite licence to take money Consumers should receive clear and timely reminders before significant renewals and price increases. Where appropriate, active confirmation should be required rather than assuming continued consent because a consumer forgot a renewal date. 9. Consumers must be protected from "dark patterns" Companies should not deliberately design websites or applications so that subscribing is easy while cancellation is confusing, hidden or unnecessarily difficult. 10. Regulators should investigate subscription-based ownership We call on the Competition and Markets Authority and other relevant regulators to investigate whether subscription-based access to already-purchased functionality creates unfair consumer practices, particularly in automotive, technology, software, appliances and digital information services. Why this matters The UK Government has estimated that approximately 9.7 million subscription contracts are unwanted, costing consumers around £1.6 billion every year. The Government has recognised subscription traps as a consumer-protection problem and introduced measures intended to improve information, reminders and cancellation. But the problem goes beyond unwanted subscriptions. It is about the meaning of ownership itself. We are moving towards a world where consumers can pay the full purchase price for a product while the manufacturer retains control over whether important functions can actually be used. This raises a fundamental question: If I have paid for the product, but must keep paying to use its functions, do I really own it? We believe consumers deserve a clear answer. BUY IT — OWN IT. A subscription should pay for a genuine ongoing service. It should not become a permanent toll booth between consumers and products they have already purchased. We call on the UK Government and Parliament to strengthen consumer law so that: If you buy it, you own it. If you subscribe to a service, you pay for the service. Companies should not be allowed to turn ownership into permanent rent simply because modern technology makes it possible. We urge the Government to act now to protect the fundamental consumer right to own and use the products we buy. Petitioner's principal demand Introduce legislation preventing businesses from using subscriptions to restrict functionality that consumers have already purchased as part of a physical product, while strengthening transparency, informed consent, automatic-renewal, price-increase and cancellation protections for genuine subscription services.

Many of us have lived in this area for a many years and others have just moved here but the one thing we have in common, no matter what age or background, is the love we have for  the open aspect, the  closeness to nature it provides and the existing simple pathway around the green; this 'closeness' brings the community closer to one another too. Residents and visitors come here for informal recreational sports, picnics, or to simply sit on the bench or grass to relax and breathe in the calm serene surroundings after a hard working day or simply to enjoy a gentle leisurely walk or jog across it or around it with or without a dog in tow or one towing you. Lots of past and present residents have told me of the fond memories they have for this precious green haven, of weddings and childhood games of football, cricket and hide and seek. Many people have come to love the character of this green space and are vehemently opposed to it being partly changed into multiple playgrounds just because there  Section 106 funding from a developer to mitigate the impact of their developed estate outside this parish on our area so exacerbating the impact by altering our green when there are plenty of play areas already in existence in this area which need reimagining and refurbishment. Why Local Green Space designation matters  Aldwyck’s Field is:  • Close and accessible to the community  • Strongly valued by residents  • Important for beauty, tranquillity, and openness  • Used for recreation, exercise, and wellbeing  • Rich in biodiversity and wildlife  • A key green refuge in a built-up area  • Part of local identity and character  We therefore ask both councils to designate Aldwyck’s Field as Local Green Space In addition, the proposal is being rushed through this August (school holiday month) when we have not had much information and FOIs I submitted have not been responded to still plus, the results from the council's QR survey from the first consultation will not be out until well after the last consultation. So hardly any information given to us, and on 23 July council minutes, Aldwyck's Field has been allocated around £372000 of Section 106 funding from Dandara for what seems to be a very large intrusive project!  We need to stop this now. The online council survey is the same as the QR survey given out at the first consultation (a complete waste of time) on the field- go to the MKCC website: https://scepc.sharepoint.com/:w:/s/Website/IQAZrGpk_7EkQJ-qQrFgOlJUAc7yZoAOFGxgJrWdq6whxJc?rtime=fZuDwTz63kg On the above council survey put at the end that you want the designated as Local Green Space or that you have completed under protest as you have had no real pertinent information especially concerning scale and actual accurate layout. Please pass this petition around as we urgently need more signatures!!!!

Wixams is entering a period of unprecedented change. The Town Centre is now progressing through the planning process, a new four-platform railway station is being delivered, thousands of additional homes are proposed around Wixams, and Universal’s UK theme park and resort is set to become one of the country’s most significant visitor destinations. These changes create both opportunities and challenges. The current Town Centre plans include a single dedicated Food & Beverage unit of approximately 2,000 sq ft, alongside a limited number of retail units that could potentially accommodate additional cafés, restaurants or takeaways. However, these plans were developed before the full implications of several major changes became clear: • The arrival of Universal UK and the millions of visitors it is expected to attract. • The delivery of a significantly expanded four-platform station. • The growth of surrounding communities that will increasingly rely on Wixams for services and facilities. • The evolving role of town centres as destinations for leisure, hospitality and social activity rather than simply places to shop. Specifically, we ask that the councils: 1. Undertake a Strategic Review Review whether the currently planned Food & Beverage provision remains appropriate in light of: • Universal UK and its anticipated visitor numbers. • The expanded four-platform Wixams Station. • Growth in Wixams itself. • Growth in surrounding developments that may look to Wixams for services and facilities. • Changing consumer behaviour and the role of town centres as social and leisure destinations. 2. Develop a Long-Term Food & Beverage Strategy Prepare a strategy that identifies: • The appropriate level of Food & Beverage provision for Wixams today. • The likely level of provision required over the next 10, 20 and 30 years. • The type of venues that would best serve residents and visitors. • Opportunities for independent businesses, local operators and Bedfordshire producers. • How Wixams can develop a distinctive identity that complements, rather than competes directly with, Universal. 3. Safeguard Land for Future Expansion Identify and safeguard land within or adjacent to the Town Centre that could accommodate future Food & Beverage development if demand grows. This land should not be allocated for housing until its future role has been properly assessed through an agreed review process. 4. Establish Formal Review Points Create a programme of regular reviews to assess whether additional Food & Beverage provision is required. These reviews should: • Be evidence-led. • Include meaningful resident engagement. • Consider visitor numbers, station usage, population growth and business demand. • Take place at agreed intervals, such as every five years. Following each review, safeguarded land should be: • Developed if demand is demonstrated. • Retained for future consideration if further growth is anticipated. • Released for alternative uses only if there is clear evidence that additional Food & Beverage provision will not be required. 5. Put Residents at the Heart of the Process Ensure that local residents are fully involved in future reviews and decisions regarding the future of Wixams Town Centre and its Food & Beverage offer. Our Request We support the delivery of the current Town Centre proposals. However, we believe they should be viewed as Phase One, not the final destination. We ask Bedford Borough Council and Central Bedfordshire Council to work together to establish a clear, evidence-based framework that: • Delivers the right level of Food & Beverage provision for Wixams today. • Plans for the Wixams of 2040 and beyond. • Responds to the opportunities created by Universal, the station and surrounding growth. • Safeguards future options before land is lost permanently to other uses. Good planning does not attempt to predict the future perfectly. Good planning ensures that communities retain the ability to respond when the future arrives. Deliver Phase One. Plan Phase Two. Safeguard the Future. The original vision for Wixams was that of a sustainable, self-sufficient community. Today, there is an opportunity to consider how Wixams can develop a distinctive Food & Beverage offer that serves residents, visitors and commuters alike. This does not mean building everything immediately. Instead, it means planning responsibly for future demand, safeguarding opportunities for future growth, and ensuring that decisions taken today do not prevent the Wixams of tomorrow from developing the facilities it may need. We therefore believe that Food & Beverage provision should be subject to a formal review process that reflects changing circumstances and allows future decisions to be based on evidence rather than assumptions.

I don't have an index linked final salary pension scheme which allowed me to retire at 55 like many public sector employees. As a well paid salaried employee of private companies, I took the decision to fund my private pension at the expense of nicer cars, a bigger home, more holidays abroad etc. I am still working at 70. I don't know whether my wife and I will live to 100, or drop dead tomorrow, but stupidly I have funded my pension to provide for us to whatever age. This reduces our potential burden on the state. All I ask is that anything unused from my pension can be transferred to my descendants free of inheritance tax as a pension, irrespective of the age that we die. If not, why bother saving at all? I should have just taken the income, paid a lower net rate of tax (40% at the time versus 72% for higher paid descendants now) and leave the state to pick up the costs of our care and support in retirement. My beneficiaries will have to pay their own tax on withdrawing contributions from their pension in exactly the same way as I do. They do not receive a further tax advantage. The Government does not lose tax, but more positively it does not incentivise people to not save for their retirement. More importantly this tax change is (commences April 2027) a fundamental breach of the implied contract between the state and its citizens. Having encouraged saving for retirement, the Government has simply spotted an opportunity to introduce a new death tax. If I had known that this was their intention I would not have saved for my retirement. This is fundamentally wrong, and is simply 'state theft' and deceit.