{"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?parliament=2&state=with_response","first":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?parliament=2&state=with_response","last":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?page=9&parliament=2&state=with_response","next":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?page=2&parliament=2&state=with_response","prev":null},"data":[{"type":"archived-petition","id":62385,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/62385.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"SOPHIES CHOICE ,smear test lowered to 16","background":null,"additional_details":"A friend and amazing young girl our Sophie has had her life cut short after experiencing symptoms for over a year and being in horrendous pain and even asking for a smear but because of her age 19 was refused time an time again and now she has terminal cervical cancer out of loads of doctors it took that one to say on we will check you properly but then it was too late our Sophie has been failed in the worst way and I need 500.000 signatures to be heard one million to get this changed hopefully ","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":327877,"created_at":"2014-03-14T05:59:46.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:01.402Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2014-03-14T11:02:32.000Z","closed_at":"2015-03-14T11:02:32.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2014-03-14T05:59:46.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2014-03-20T00:37:44.049Z","government_response_at":"2014-04-19T23:37:44.049Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2014-05-09T02:54:32.493Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2014-04-20","summary":"","details":"As this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response:\n\nThe Department of Health is aware of the tragic case of Sophie Jones who died from cervical cancer at the age of 19.  Although the Department is not able to comment on individual clinical cases, it believes this to be a case of misdiagnosis rather than a screening issue.\n\nThe best independent evidence still shows that routine screening of women under 25 does more harm than good.  The UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) reviewed the age range of cervical screening in 2012, and confirmed a policy of not screening under 25s as it has no impact on the rates of cervical cancer in young women, and gives rise to a high number of false positives, causing anxiety and leading to unnecessary investigations.  The UK NSC developed a Q&A for the public and professionals on this issue, which can be found on its website at:\n\nwww.screening.nhs.uk/cervicalcancer-qa\n\nThe UK NSC Review followed a review of the age at which cervical screening starts by the Advisory Committee on Cervical Screening (ACCS) in May 2009, following the raising of the screening age from 20 to 25 in 2004.  This review looked at all the latest available evidence on the risks and benefits of cervical screening in women aged 20 to 24.  The Committee was unanimous in deciding there was no reason to lower the age from 25, which is in line with the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation.  The reasons for the decision were:\n\n·        research presented to the review showed that cervical screening in women aged 20 to 24 has little or no impact on rates of invasive cervical cancer up to age 30;\n\n·        there was no clear evidence of an increase in the incidence of cervical cancer following the change to the screening age limit in England in 2004;\n\n·        no new scientific evidence was available to support the reintroduction of screening in women aged under 25;\n\n·        there is evidence that treatment following screening in this age group can lead to an increased risk of subsequent premature births, increasing the risk of babies dying or having disabilities;\n\n·        one in three young women screened aged under 25 would have an abnormal result, as opposed to one in 14 for all women screened.  This meant there are very large numbers of false positives in young women, causing anxiety and leading to unnecessary investigations; and\n\n·        cervical cancer is very rare in women aged under 25.  There were 47 cases in women aged under 25 in England in 2011, which is less than 2 per cent of all cases.\n\nHowever, the ACCS was concerned that young women presenting to primary care with symptoms of cervical cancer were not always being given the best advice.  New guidance for primary care on the management of young women who have gynaecological symptoms was therefore developed and sent to all GPs in England in March 2010.  The guidance, Clinical Practice Guidance for the Assessment of Young Women aged 20-24 with Abnormal Vaginal Bleeding, was produced by a multi-disciplinary group, including professionals, patients and the voluntary sector.  It was reviewed by a number of GPs, and has been endorsed by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the Royal College of General Practitioners and the Royal College of Physicians.  The guidance can be found at: www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/publications/doh-guidelines-young-women.pdf.\n\nSince early 2011 the Department of Health and Public Health England (from 1 April 2013) have been running Be Clear on Cancer campaigns.  These are designed to raise the public’s awareness of specific cancer symptoms and encourage people with those symptoms to go to their GPs.  The focus of Be Clear on Cancer campaigns so far has been on cancers with the largest number of avoidable deaths, compared with countries with the best survival rates.  A regional campaign on ovarian cancer was run from early February to early March.  The findings of this pilot will be evaluated before a decision is taken on whether to roll out the campaign nationally throughout England.  The Department will continue to keep campaigns under review and work with relevant experts to see what might be done to tackle other gynaecological cancers.\n\nIf a woman aged under 25 is concerned about her risk of developing cervical cancer, she should contact her GP, who will be able to examine her and refer her to a gynaecologist if clinically appropriate.  A cervical screening test is a population screening test, not a diagnostic test, and is therefore not appropriate for women with symptoms.\n\nThe Department of Health recognises that cervical cancer is almost always caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV), and that is why the HPV vaccination programme was introduced for girls aged 12 to 13.  The aim of the programme is to prevent cervical cancer related to HPV infection.  The programme has been very successful.  More than 6 million doses have been given so far in the UK since 2008, with 87 per cent of girls completing the three-dose course in the 2011/12 academic year.  It is expected that the programme will eventually save up to 400 lives a year from cervical cancer.\n\nSteve Rotheram MP and Alison McGovern MP have noted the petition and that they wish to discuss cervical screening and the case of Sophie Jones in a backbench debate on Thursday 1 May.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:01.396Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:01.396Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":38257,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/38257.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Stop the badger cull","background":null,"additional_details":"\r\nWe, the undersigned, call on the government to stop the planned cull of badgers on the following grounds:\r\n\r\n·         Over 70% of the badger population in large areas of the country will be killed, many of them healthy.\r\n\r\n·         The method of free-shooting badgers could cause severe to many thousands of badgers.\r\n\r\n·         Independent scientific studies have shown that culling would be of little help in reducing bovine TB, and even suggest that it could make things worse in some areas.\r\n\r\nWe urge the government to stop the cull and implement the more sustainable and humane solution of both a vaccination programme for badgers and cattle, along with improved testing and biosecurity.\r\n ","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":304255,"created_at":"2012-09-06T12:41:16.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:11:22.404Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2012-09-07T06:38:00.000Z","closed_at":"2013-09-07T06:38:00.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2012-09-06T12:41:16.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2012-09-13T06:35:29.494Z","government_response_at":"2012-10-13T06:35:29.494Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2012-11-06T06:12:54.946Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2012-10-13","summary":"","details":"This e-petition has now passed the threshold of 100 000 signatures.\n\nThe Leader of the House of Commons has written to the Backbench Business Committee, who are responsible for the scheduling of debates on e-petitions, informing them that the petition has reached 100 000 signatures.\n\nThe Backbench Business Committee meets weekly to hear representations from MPs for debates in backbench time. The Committee can consider any subject for debate, including those raised in e-petitions, but an MP must make the case for their consideration. More information about the Committee is available on its website http://www.parliament.uk/bbcom\n\nA futher response from the Government on this e-petition will be published in due course.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:11:22.396Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:11:22.396Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":7337,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/7337.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Convicted London rioters should loose all benefits.","background":null,"additional_details":"Any persons convicted of criminal acts during the current London riots should have all financial benefits removed.\r\n\r\nNo tax payer should have to contribute to those who have destroyed property, stolen from their community and shown a disregard for the country that provides for them.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":258276,"created_at":"2011-08-08T22:05:29.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:06:51.207Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2011-08-09T08:25:17.000Z","closed_at":"2012-02-09T09:25:17.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2011-08-08T22:05:29.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2011-08-12T21:55:50.480Z","government_response_at":"2011-09-12T21:55:50.480Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2011-09-13T23:30:51.804Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2011-09-12","summary":"","details":"This e-petition has reached 100,000 signatures. The Government has notified the Backbench Business Committee in the House of Commons who will consider its suitability for debate when Parliament returns in September. This e-petition will remain live, and people will be able to continue adding their signatures.\n\nAs you may be aware, the House of Commons debated the recent public disorder when Parliament was recalled on 11 August 2011 and there was an opportunity for MPs to address the substance of this e-petition. This does not preclude a decision by the Backbench Business Committee to schedule a further debate on this issue when the House of Commons returns from the summer recess.\n\nIn the meantime, we would like to update you on the Government’s current position on the substance of this e-petition.\n\nPrisoners convicted of a criminal offence and detained in prison are not entitled to social security benefits. That means that anyone who is eligible for social security benefits and who is caught, convicted and imprisoned for any offence committed during the recent disorder that has disrupted London and other UK cities will be disqualified from receiving social security payments.  The Department for Work and Pensions is also looking at whether further sanctions can be imposed on the benefit entitlements of individuals who receive non custodial sentences. In addition the Department is considering increasing the level of fines which can be deducted from benefit entitlement.\n\nIn relation to social housing, it is already a ground for eviction if a tenant or a member of their family is involved in anti-social behaviour or criminal activity in their local neighbourhood. Ministers have encouraged social landlords to use these powers, and a number of local authorities have pledged to do so. The Department for Communities and Local Government is consulting on proposals to allow such evictions to take place where the criminal activity takes place outside the vicinity of the local neighbourhood; more information is available to view here: http://www.communities.gov.uk/statements/newsroom/publicdisorder.\n\nGavin Barwell MP was allocated a half-day in Westminster Hall in Backbench time for a wider debate on the response to the riots. This took place on 13 October 2011.  A transcript of the debate can be found at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm111013/halltext/111013h0001.htm#11101334000002","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:06:51.200Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:06:51.200Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":22670,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/22670.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"“Drop the Health Bill”","background":null,"additional_details":"“Calls on the Government to drop its Health and Social Care Bill.”\r\n\r\n","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":179466,"created_at":"2011-11-15T08:03:29.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:09:10.973Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2011-11-16T09:56:36.000Z","closed_at":"2012-05-16T08:56:36.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2011-11-15T08:03:29.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2011-11-21T11:36:35.398Z","government_response_at":"2011-12-21T11:36:35.398Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2012-01-06T02:36:29.982Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2011-12-21","summary":"","details":"The Bill has now received the Royal assent, after 50 days of detailed parliamentary scrutiny in both Houses of Parliament. It becomes the Health and Social Care Act (2012).\n\nThe Act will:\n\n* Give more power to front-line doctors and nurses: Health professionals will be able to make key decisions about improving care for their patients;\n\n* Drive up quality:  there will be a greater focus on improving standards of care;\n\n* Give patients more information and choice: Patients will get the information they need so they are able to choose the best hospital or doctor for them;\n\n* Reduce bureaucracy: two layers of management – Primary Care Trusts and Strategic Health Authorities – will be removed through the Act, saving £4.5 billion over the lifetime of this Parliament, with every penny being reinvested in patient care.\n\n* Improve co-ordination: There will be strong duties on the NHS to improve how it works with social care service and other local services;\n\n* Help promote good health: local authorities will be able to pull together the work done by the NHS, social care, housing, environmental health, leisure and transport services to promote health and wellbeing in the communities they serve;\n\n* Give more power to local people: Power will shift from Whitehall to town hall – there will be at least one locally elected councillor and a representative of Healthwatch on every Health and Wellbeing Board, to influence and challenge commissioning decisions and promote integrated health and care;\n\nThe government now looks forward to working with NHS staff, patients, the public, and other organisations to implement the reforms.\n\nThe e-petition was debated during an Opposition Day on 13 March 2012   The transcript of the debate can be found at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201212/cmhansrd/cm120313/debtext/120313-0001.htm#12031360000001","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:09:10.965Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:09:10.965Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":37180,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/37180.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Reconsider West Coast Mainline franchise decision","background":null,"additional_details":"We the undersigned urge the government to reconsider the decision to award the West Coast Mainline franchise to FirstGroup.\r\n\r\nThe West Coast Mainline's current value is thanks to millions of pounds of investment and commitment from Virgin Trains - they're not perfect,  none are - but they have delivered a reliable service for 15 years and turned the line around.\r\n\r\nFirstGroup consistently rate amongst the worst of the train operators in passenger satisfaction surveys - they should show improvements in their existing services before being able to bid on more.\r\n\r\nAny previous time Virgin have lost a bid in a rail tender the winner has failed to deliver promised plan and revenue - the East Coast is still under Government ownership.\r\n\r\nThe Government should look at more than the highest bidder - look what happened with G4S at London 2012.\r\n\r\nI urge the government to reconsider this decision or to seek public opinion in these franchise bids.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":174578,"created_at":"2012-08-15T08:04:00.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:11:12.865Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2012-08-17T09:57:46.000Z","closed_at":"2013-02-17T10:57:46.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2012-08-15T08:04:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2012-08-22T16:28:04.208Z","government_response_at":"2012-09-22T16:28:04.208Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2012-10-09T03:00:48.084Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2012-09-22","summary":"","details":"This e-petition has now passed the threshold of 100 000 signatures.\n\nThe Leader of the House of Commons has written to the Backbench Business Committee, who are responsible for the scheduling of debates on e-petitions, informing them that the petition has reached 100 000 signatures\n\nThe Backbench Business Committee meets weekly, when the House of Commons is sitting, to hear representations from MPs for debates in backbench time. The Committee can consider any subject for debate, including those raised in e-petitions, but an MP must make the case for their consideration. More information about the Committee is available on its website http://www.parliament.uk/bbcom\n\nRosie Cooper MP was allocated a 3hr debate in Westminster Hall on 17 September 2012, the Hansard transcript of which can be seen at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm120917/halltext/120917h0001.htm#1209179000002.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:11:12.859Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:11:12.859Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":46455,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/46455.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Stop Holiday companies charging extra in school holidays","background":null,"additional_details":"Family time is so much more essential in the current working world, but so many people cannot afford holidays in school holidays. A break at home is not the same as getting away from it all where there isn't any house work or DIY to get done, instead focus is on family.  Its time to stop the holiday companies cashing in on school holidays and let parents have some guilt free family time! Enforce action that caps the percentage increase on holiday prices in school holidays.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":170931,"created_at":"2013-02-26T21:51:58.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:12:33.125Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2013-03-07T14:40:36.000Z","closed_at":"2014-03-07T14:40:36.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2013-02-26T21:51:58.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2013-03-18T06:55:13.490Z","government_response_at":"2013-04-18T05:55:13.490Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2013-06-22T09:06:50.909Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2013-04-18","summary":"","details":"Responsibility for this policy area sits with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.\n\nIn a competitive market it is for business to decide the market worth of their products and to price accordingly.  In the holiday market there is fierce competition for custom.  Prices rises in peak periods are a reflection of the international competition holiday companies face for hotel accommodation and other services in destinations which are popular with consumers from many other countries and where there are limits to capacity.  These consumers also wish to holiday during these peak periods. We are advised also that holiday companies must seek to make a reasonable profit during the peak periods so that they are able to operate throughout the year when demand and therefore prices and profits are lower.\n\nThis e-petition has reached 100,000 signatures. The Government has notified the Backbench Business Committee in the House of Commons. This e-petition will remain live, and people will be able to continue adding their signatures.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:12:33.118Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:12:33.118Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":2199,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/2199.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Full disclosure of all government documents relating to 1989 Hillsborough disaster","background":null,"additional_details":"Full government disclosure and publication of all documents, discussions and reports relating to the 1989 Hillsborough disater.\r\n\r\n*As requested by information commissioner Christopher Graham*","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":156218,"created_at":"2011-08-04T14:35:52.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:06:05.842Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2011-08-09T09:30:51.000Z","closed_at":"2012-08-09T09:30:51.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2011-08-04T14:35:52.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2011-08-21T02:39:35.083Z","government_response_at":"2011-09-21T02:39:35.083Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2011-12-04T12:58:11.830Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2011-09-21","summary":"","details":"This e-petition has reached 100,000 signatures. The Government has notified the Backbench Business Committee in the House of Commons who will consider its suitability for debate when Parliament returns in September. This e-petition will remain live, and people will be able to continue adding their signatures.\n\nIn the meantime, we would like to update you on the Government’s current position on the substance of this e-petition:\n\nThe Government has confirmed its commitment to full transparency about the Hillsborough disaster through full public disclosure. All papers had previously been shared with the Hillsborough Independent Panel. The Government is happy for all the papers, including Cabinet papers, to be released as soon as the Panel so decides, in consultation with the families. We expect them to be shared with the Hillsborough families first and then to the wider public.\n\nSteve Rotheram MP was allocated a half-day in the Chamber in Backbench time and the debate took place on 17 October 2011.   A transcript of the debate can be found at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm111017/debtext/111017-0002.htm#11101715000001","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:06:05.836Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:06:05.836Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":29349,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/29349.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Return VAT on Air Ambulance fuel payments.","background":null,"additional_details":"The Air Ambulance Service is forced to meet rising fuel prices year on year including VAT.\r\nThe Air Ambulance Service have saved successive governments millions and millions of pounds funded by charitable donations given by the general public to run what has proven to be an essential service.\r\n\r\nWhilst the Lifeboat Service has been exempt from VAT on fuel costs since 1977, a similar privilege has not been afforded to the Air Ambulance Service;\r\n\r\nWe call on the government to have an urgent review of this situation and in doing so\r\nWe call on the government to return in the form of grants to Air Ambulance Service providers all the future VAT which the Treasury collects from them so that the Air Ambulance Service is in practice exempt from paying VAT in the same way as the Lifeboat Service.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":154662,"created_at":"2012-02-09T17:43:16.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:10:06.231Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2012-02-10T08:53:29.000Z","closed_at":"2013-02-10T08:53:29.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2012-02-09T17:43:16.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2012-02-22T04:51:55.707Z","government_response_at":"2012-03-22T04:51:55.707Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2012-06-07T16:37:56.075Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2012-03-22","summary":"","details":"The Leader of the House of Commons has written to the Backbench Business Committee, who are responsible for the scheduling of debates on e-petitions, informing them that the petition has reached 100 000 signatures\n\nThe Backbench Business Committee meets weekly to hear representations from MPs for debates in backbench time. The Committee can consider any subject for debate, including those raised in e-petitions, but an MP must make the case for their consideration. More information about the Committee is available on its website http://www.parliament.uk/bbcom\n\nThe Government has provided the following response to the petition:\n\n“Charities are at the heart of the Government’s ambition to build the Big Society. To help support this, the Government provides charities with over £3 billion a year in tax reliefs, which includes around £200 million in reliefs from VAT.  Furthermore, as part of the wide range of VAT and other tax reliefs available to charities, voluntary search and rescue charities can purchase medicines, medical equipment and certain other specialised equipment VAT free. All of these reliefs are derogations from the normal EU VAT rules and are not enjoyed by charities in other Member States.\n\nAir ambulance charities currently operate in many different ways, which will determine whether they pay VAT on supplies received, and the extent to which this can be recovered.  There are a number of specific VAT reliefs which apply to air ambulance charities. Full VAT relief applies to the purchase of air ambulance helicopters, saving £600,000 on the cost of a £3 million helicopter, and on leasing costs, saving £86,000 a year based on a standing charge of £36,000 a month. If the lease contact includes fuel, then this will also be zero rated.  Furthermore, aviation fuel can be purchased exempt from excise duties, and at a reduced VAT rate of 5 per cent.\n\nHowever, there are some charities that do pay the standard rate of VAT on fuel and it is right to look further at whether the impact of VAT can be mitigated. The Government fully appreciates the valuable work carried out by all rescue teams, and is committed to reviewing tax and operational issues around the Air Ambulance Service. It is important that we fully understand the operating models and funding arrangements of air ambulance services before narrowing our focus onto the specific issue of VAT.\n\nThe Department of Health is committed to undertaking a ‘fair playing field review’ which will examine whether there are inequalities in the treatment providers of NHS funded services, and if so what can be done to address these.   In addition they are considering the capability and funding of emergency medical care of the type provided by the London Air Ambulance. HM Treasury officials will be working with colleagues in the Department of Health to discuss both reviews.  If neither addresses the issue of the VAT regime applicable to the air ambulance service, the Treasury will undertake its own separate review.”\n\nGuy Opperman MP and Hugh Bayley MP were allocated a half-day in the Chamber in Backbench time and the debate took place on 11 July 2012.  A transcript of the debate can be found at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm120711/debtext/120711-0003.htm#12071139000002","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:10:06.225Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:10:06.225Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":41492,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/41492.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Stop mass immigration from Bulgarian and Romanians in 2014, when EU restrictions on immigration are relaxed.","background":null,"additional_details":"In 2014 EU restrictions are set be removed, allowing nationals of Bulgaria and Romania ‘free movement’ to the UK. The move is similar to the one that granted access to around 600,000 Polish immigrants to enter Britain over recent years.\r\n\r\nDespite Bulgaria and Romania joining the EU in 2005, restrictions were put on the number who could move to Britain. However, those restrictions will be abolished in 2014.\r\n\r\nOnce the restrictions are lifted all new comers will entitled to claim benefits, housing, child, job seekers etc. There is currently an estimated 1.5 million people seeking work within the two countries\r\n\r\nThe impact will also put pressure on housing, infrastructure, schools, and heath care. All at a time the government are cutting pensions, jobs, public services and the armed forces.\r\n\r\nI request the government suspends the easing on these restrictions for another 5 years.\r\n\r\nThe government requests to renegotiate the immigration laws within the EU.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":153828,"created_at":"2012-11-10T18:05:38.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:11:51.501Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2012-11-12T12:04:28.000Z","closed_at":"2013-11-12T12:04:28.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2012-11-10T18:05:38.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2012-11-24T08:48:28.954Z","government_response_at":"2012-12-24T08:48:28.954Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2013-03-11T03:24:37.548Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2012-12-24","summary":"","details":"This e-petition has passed 100 000 signatures and has been passed to the Backbench Business Committee to consider for debate.\n\nThe Committee have allocated a debate in Westminster Hall on 22 April 2013 from 16:30 to 19:30.  Further information about the debate, and the work of the Backbench Business Committee can be found at www.parliament.uk/bbcom\n\nThe Home Office have provided the following Government response to the petition:\n\nWhen the coalition government was formed we made a clear promise to the British public that, after thirteen years of uncontrolled mass immigration, this government would reduce and control immigration.\n\nLatest statistics show that the tough policy changes we have made are working. Net migration has fallen by almost a third since June 2010 and our visa statistics indicate that this trend is set to continue.\n\nJust under a third of the people coming to the United Kingdom are from the EU, while 55% are from outside the EU.  About 14% are British citizens returning home. The bulk of our net migration, therefore, is from outside the EU. The right to free movement offers substantial benefits to EU citizens, and these advantages are also enjoyed by a great number of British nationals.  Around 1.4 million UK nationals have exercised their free movement rights to live in another EU country.\n\nIn terms of European immigration, we have made clear that we will always apply transitional controls on new EU member states.  In 2011 we extended controls on Bulgarian and Romanian migration until the end of 2013, the latest date allowed by the Accession Treaties, under which these two countries joined the EU. Continuing the controls beyond the end of this year is not possible because of the terms of the Accession Treaties agreed under the previous Government. Eight other EU Member States imposed similar transitional controls which will expire at the same time: Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, and Spain.\n\nFree movement rights are not unlimited.  Any stay beyond the initial three months is limited to those exercising Treaty rights as a worker, student, self-employed or self-sufficient person.  Those who are not working or seeking work in the UK are required to have sufficient resources to support themselves and their families to avoid becoming a burden on the social assistance scheme, and are required to have comprehensive medical insurance.\n\nThe Government is clear that EU citizens who benefit from the right to free movement must adhere to the responsibilities this brings with it and abide by our laws.  If an EU national does not meet one of the requirements set out in the Directive then they will not have a right to reside in the UK and may be liable for removal.\n\nA cross-government ministerial group is currently reviewing the arrangements for controlling all foreign nationals’ access to benefits and public services.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:11:51.495Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:11:51.495Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":885,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/885.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Put Babar Ahmad on trial in the UK","background":null,"additional_details":"Babar Ahmad is a British Citizen who has been detained in the UK for 7 years without trial fighting extradition to the USA under the controversial no-evidence-required Extradition Act 2003.\r\n\r\nIn June 2011, the Houses of Parliament, Joint Committee on Human Rights urged the UK government to change the law so that Babar Ahmad’s perpetual threat of extradition is ended without further delay. Since all of the allegations against Babar Ahmad are said to have taken place in the UK, we call upon the British Government to put him on trial in the UK and support British Justice for British Citizens.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":149470,"created_at":"2011-08-01T22:18:27.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:05:54.376Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2011-08-10T12:38:47.000Z","closed_at":"2011-11-10T13:38:47.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2011-08-01T22:18:27.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2011-08-13T14:32:26.937Z","government_response_at":"2011-09-13T14:32:26.937Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2011-09-10T07:35:26.371Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2011-09-13","summary":"","details":"Dominic Raab MP was allocated a half-day in Westminster Hall in Backbench time for a debate on extradition. This took place on 24 November 2011.  A transcript of the debate can be found at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm111124/halltext/111124h0001.htm#11112452000002","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:05:54.370Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:05:54.370Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":347,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/347.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"CHEAPER PETROL AND DIESEL, BY ROBERT HALFON MP AND FAIRFUEL UK","background":null,"additional_details":"High petrol and diesel prices are crippling our economy.\r\n\r\nMany motorists now pay a tenth of their income just to fill up the family car, and millions of families are suffering.\r\n\r\nBusinesses are under immense pressure, especially the road freight industry. But petrol and diesel are now so astronomically expensive, it is COSTING the Government money. This is because fewer people can afford to drive, leading to lower tax revenues.\r\n\r\nTherefore, this petition calls on the Government to:\r\n\r\n1) Scrap the planned 4p fuel duty increases, which are scheduled for January and August 2012.\r\n\r\n2) Create a price stabilisation mechanism that smooths out fluctuations in the pump price.\r\n\r\n3) Pressure big oil companies to pass on cheaper oil to motorists.\r\n\r\n4) Set up a Commission to look at market competitiveness, and radical ways of cutting fuel taxes in the longer term.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":148373,"created_at":"2011-07-29T16:16:17.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:05:49.270Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2011-08-05T13:13:15.000Z","closed_at":"2012-08-05T13:13:15.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2011-07-29T16:16:17.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2011-08-17T21:13:53.626Z","government_response_at":"2011-09-17T21:13:53.626Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2011-12-06T21:19:41.269Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2011-09-17","summary":"","details":"This e-petition has reached 100,000 signatures. The Government has notified the Backbench Business Committee in the House of Commons, who have scheduled a debate on the matter on 15 November.\n\nThis e-petition will remain live, and people will be able to continue adding their signatures. In the meantime, we would like to update you on the Government’s current position on the substance of this e-petition.\n\n“The Government recognises that the price of petrol has become an increasingly significant part of day-to-day spending. We know this is causing real difficulties in ensuring that motoring remains affordable and people are feeling the pinch. This is why we announced a £2bn package, in the Budget, to support motorists.\n\nWe cut fuel duty by 1 penny per litre from Budget Day. We cancelled the previous government’s fuel duty escalator which would have increased pump prices by 1 penny above inflation – with further above inflation increases in each of the next three years. The Government also introduced a fair fuel stabiliser so that when oil prices are high, and oil profits are higher, fuel duty will increase by inflation only. We also made sure that there will be no fuel duty rise this year by deferring April’s inflation-only increase to January 2012.\n\nOur actions resulted in average pump prices being about 6 pence per litre lower than if we had continued with the previous government’s fuel duty plans. Following the January increase, average pump prices in 2011-12 could still be 2.5 pence per litre less than if we had implemented the escalator. Therefore, a typical Ford Focus driver will be £56 better off this year. And an average haulier will benefit by approximately £1700. This package of support was paid for by increasing tax on North Sea oil companies that benefit from high oil prices.\n\nOil prices peaked in late April. The Governments wants falls in oil prices to be passed onto consumers at petrol stations. Average pump prices have fallen since their peak in May. However, the investigation into suspected infringements of competition law is, in the first instance, a matter for the Office of Fair Trading.\n\nLike other taxes, fuel duty plays an important part in supporting public finances. This is a time of real international uncertainty and instability, from which no country can be immune. The crisis in the eurozone and the downgrading of the US credit rating shows why action was necessary. Due to the record Budget deficit that we inherited, the Government has had to set out plans to get public finances back on track. This includes deficit reduction, but also includes measures to support families and businesses such as increasing the personal allowance. Together with the increase this year, the changes to the personal allowance will benefit 25 million taxpayers and take 1.1 million individuals out of tax altogether.\n\nConversely, abandoning the Government’s plan could lead to rising interest rates and falling international confidence, which would undermine the recovery.\n\nThe cut in fuel duty and scrapping of the fuel duty escalator, together with increases in the personal allowance and cuts in corporation tax will continue to support households, businesses and the economy – while we also deal with the debits we inherited.”\n\nRobert Halfon MP was allocated a half-day in the Chamber in Backbench time and a  debate took place on 15 November 2011.  A transcript of the debate can be found at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm111115/debtext/111115-0002.htm#11111559000004","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:05:49.262Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:05:49.262Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":19658,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/19658.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"No to 70 million","background":null,"additional_details":"Over the past ten years the government has permitted mass immigration despite very strong public opposition reflected in numerous opinion polls.  We express our deep concern that, according to official figures, the population of the UK is expected to reach 70 million within 20 years with two thirds of the increase due to immigration.  While we recognise the benefits that properly controlled immigration could bring to our economy and society, this population increase, which is the equivalent of building seven cities the size of Birmingham, will have a huge impact both on our quality of life and on our public services yet the public has never been consulted.  So we call on the government to take all necessary steps to get immigration down to a level that will stabilise our population as close to the present level as possible and, certainly, well below 70 million.\"","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":145544,"created_at":"2011-10-19T17:36:44.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:08:43.313Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2011-10-20T13:55:11.000Z","closed_at":"2012-10-20T13:55:11.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2011-10-19T17:36:44.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2011-11-02T03:41:02.893Z","government_response_at":"2011-12-02T03:41:02.893Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2012-02-23T07:33:49.935Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2011-12-02","summary":"","details":"This e-petition has reached 100,000 signatures. The Government has notified the Backbench Business Committee in the House of Commons. This e-petition will remain live, and people will be able to continue adding their signatures.\n\nThe Government has provided the following response:\n\n“The response to this petition shows that the public feel strongly that immigration is too high and that this government should continue its work to bring numbers under control.\n\nWe have made sweeping changes to the immigration system to reduce net migration from the hundreds of thousands to tens of thousands.\n\nWe have already introduced a limit on non-EU workers coming to the UK, radically overhauled the student visa system to cut abuse and will shortly be announcing reforms to the family and settlement routes.”\n\nNicholas Soames MP and Frank Field MP were allocated a half-day in the Chamber of the House of Commons in Backbench time and the debate took place on 6 September 2012.   A transcript of the debate is available at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm120906/debtext/120906-0002.htm#12090626000001","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:08:43.307Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:08:43.307Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":74830,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/74830.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Protect religious slaughter in the UK and EU","background":null,"additional_details":"The Government should continue to protect the right to non-stun religious slaughter in the UK.\r\n\r\nJudaism and Islam require adherents to treat animals with kindness and to minimise pain when slaughtering. Scientific evidence shows minimisation of suffering when religious slaughter is practiced properly: www.grandin.com/ritual/rec.ritual.slaughter.html.\r\n\r\nStunning in abattoirs frequently fails to effectively stun the animal, thereby causing suffering. The British Veterinary Association and others opposing religious slaughter should focus on improving the competence of slaughterers who stun, instead of attacking methods that have been shown to minimise suffering.\r\n\r\n","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":135408,"created_at":"2015-02-12T22:24:24.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:16:49.899Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2015-02-13T08:00:26.000Z","closed_at":"2015-03-30T22:59:59.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2015-02-12T22:24:24.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2015-02-15T00:26:25.088Z","government_response_at":"2015-03-15T00:26:25.088Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2015-03-02T04:20:16.880Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2015-03-15","summary":"","details":"As this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response:\n\nThe Government encourages the highest standards of welfare at slaughter and would prefer to see all animals stunned before they are slaughtered for food. However, we also respect the rights of the Jewish and Muslim communities to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. The Prime Minister has confirmed that that there would be no ban on religious slaughter in the UK.\n\nCouncil Regulation 1099/2009, on the protection of animals at time of killing, and the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995  permit slaughter without stunning to be carried out in accordance with religious rites. Within both regulations there are strict requirements on where, how and who can slaughter animals in accordance with religious rites. These requirements are monitored and enforced by Official Veterinarians (OV) of the Food Standards Agency (FSA) to ensure that animals are spared unnecessary suffering, distress or pain during the slaughter process.\n\nThis e-petition remains open to signatures and will be considered for debate by the Backbench Business Committee should it pass the 100 000 signature threshold.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:16:49.894Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:16:49.894Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":45969,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/45969.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 - Impact Assessment","background":null,"additional_details":"Drug related harms and the costs to society remain high in Britain, with a growing consensus that the current enforcement led approach is not working. In recent months the independent UK Drugs Policy Commission has highlighted the fact that  Government is spending around £3 billion a year on a policy that is often self-defeating; and the Home Affairs Select Committee has concluded Government action is needed \"now, more than ever\" to consider all the alternatives to our failing drug laws and learn from countries that have adopted a more evidence based approach. We are concerned that, in this age of austerity, nobody is checking whether Britain's current approach is value for money - or money wasted.  We therefore call on the Government to commission an authoritative and independent cost-benefit analysis and impact assessment of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 within the next 12 months, in order to provide the evidence for Parliament to pursue a more effective drugs policy in the future.\r\n","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":134835,"created_at":"2013-02-14T16:12:32.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:12:28.862Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2013-02-15T09:26:44.000Z","closed_at":"2014-02-15T09:26:44.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2013-02-14T16:12:32.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2013-02-28T22:17:13.302Z","government_response_at":"2013-03-28T22:17:13.302Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2013-06-30T17:51:37.024Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2013-03-28","summary":"","details":"As this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response:\n\nThe Government has reviewed a range of reports including that produced by the Home Affairs Select Committee (HASC), which the Government considered in detail. We welcomed the valuable contribution the HASC report makes to policy development and noted the positive responses in a number of areas.\n\nThe level of acquisitive drug related crime and the need for a radical change in the way we tackle drug use and misuse is why the Government is implementing the most ambitious drug strategy to date with the ‘building recovery: supporting people to live a drug-free life'  strand at its heart. As the Government noted in its response (http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm85/8567/8567.asp) to the HASC report, there are positive signs that our approach is working.\n\nWe are however not complacent. We will continue to listen and learn from emerging trends, new evidence and international comparators to inform policy development.\n\nThis e-petition remains open to signatures and will be considered for debate by the Backbench Business Committee should it pass the 100 000 signature threshold.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:12:28.855Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:12:28.855Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":67165,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/67165.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"END THE CONFLICT IN PALESTINE","background":null,"additional_details":"Responsible department: Foreign and Commonwealth Office\r\n\r\nThis petition aims to end the horrific ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine. We want the government to take notice of this issue and move towards helping to solve the problem. As the UK government is part of the G8 it is vital that they work towards a peace treaty in the Middle East in order to help save lives and build a sustainable community.\r\n\r\nAs a human being it is your responsibility to take part in looking after world relations and this petition aims to ensure that the government is doing all it can to help address the problems between Israel and Palestine.\r\n\r\nThe conflict has now taken another life of a child who was burnt alive how can this be allowed to continue? How many more children have to die before something is done?\r\n\r\nForget culture, nationality of religion & please act in the name of humanity ","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":124511,"created_at":"2014-07-05T11:38:10.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:45.722Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2014-07-07T09:10:22.000Z","closed_at":"2014-10-07T09:10:22.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2014-07-05T11:38:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2014-07-11T01:50:22.713Z","government_response_at":"2014-08-11T01:50:22.713Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2014-08-13T07:50:29.131Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2014-08-11","summary":"","details":"As this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response:\n\nThe British Government has made clear that it was appalled by the recent kidnapping and murder of three Israeli and one Palestinian teenager and that those responsible should be held to account.\n\nWith regards to the current situation in Gaza, the Prime Minister made clear in his statement to the House of Commons on 21 July that the UK shares the grave concern of many in the international community about the heavy toll of civilian casualties.  We have condemned Hamas’ refusal to end their rocket attacks, despite all international efforts to broker a ceasefire.  The UK support Israel’s right to take proportionate action to defend itself from them.  But the Prime Minister has urged restraint, asked Israel to do everything it can to avoid civilian casualties, and to help find ways to bring this situation to an end.\n\nThe UK has three objectives - to secure a ceasefire, to alleviate humanitarian suffering, and to keep alive the prospects for peace negotiations which are the only hope of breaking this cycle of violence and devastation once and for all.  In all of these areas, the UK will play its role, working closely with the US and International partners.  As the Prime Minister has said, the loss of life is absolutely heartbreaking and appalling.  The Prime Minister has called for an immediate, unconditional humanitarian ceasefire.  We need urgently to stop the bloodshed, re-impose a cease-fire and work to find a longer term solution.\n\nWe are also extremely concerned about the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza.  That is why we have decided to provide more than £15m in emergency assistance to help tens of thousands of Palestinians affected.  On 4 August the Secretary of State for International Development announced £2 million in new funding for the UN Relief and Works Agency’s Flash Appeal.  This will help the UN provide a package of essential goods to the thousands of families sheltering in schools.  In total, we have now pledged 6 million to UNRWA’s appeal.  On 1 August DFID activated the Rapid Response Facility for Gaza.  This means pre-approved partners with a proven ability to operate in Gaza will now have access to a total of £3 million in new funding to provide rapid and direct emergency humanitarian assistance.  We are also providing £3 million to the World Food Programme to provide food vouchers.  This boost will provide emergency food vouchers for more than 300,000 people for one month.  Finally we have brought forward £3m in funding to the International Committee of the Red Cross to help them repair water infrastructure, deliver emergency medical services and protect the civilian population. But we are clear that a political solution is required to the current crisis in Gaza if we are to avoid this suffering happening again.  I can assure you all UK effort is focused to that end.\n\n(Published as of 5th August – A further updated response may be provided by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office as necessary)\n\nThis e-petition has now passed the threshold of 100 000 signatures.  The Leader of the House of Commons has written to the Backbench Business Committee, who are responsible for the scheduling of debates on e-petitions informing them that the petition has reached 100 000 signatures.\n\nThe Backbench Business Committee meets weekly, when the House of Commons is sitting, to hear representations from MPs for debates in backbench time. The Committee can consider any subject for debate, including those raised in e-petitions, but an MP must make the case for their consideration. More information about the Committee is available on its website http://www.parliament.uk/bbcom","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:45.716Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:45.716Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":53523,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/53523.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Make Eid & Diwali Public Holidays","background":null,"additional_details":"I believe that given the number of Muslims and Hindu's in this country it is only fair that we allow them to have the most important days in their faiths recognised in law.\r\n\r\nBy giving them public/bank holidays for these days we would be going some way to help to recognise the importance of these faiths to many within the country.\r\n","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":123881,"created_at":"2013-08-06T07:45:08.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:13:39.568Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2013-08-12T15:43:57.000Z","closed_at":"2014-08-12T15:43:57.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2013-08-06T07:45:08.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2013-08-27T09:17:51.413Z","government_response_at":"2013-09-27T09:17:51.413Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2014-01-06T23:23:01.136Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2013-09-27","summary":"","details":"The Leader of the House of Commons has written to the Backbench\nBusiness Committee, who are responsible for the scheduling of debates on e-petitions, informing them that the petition has reached 100 000 signatures.\n\nThe Backbench Business Committee meets weekly to hear representations from MPs for debates in backbench time. The Committee can consider any subject for debate, including those raised in e-petitions, but an MP must make the case for their consideration. More information about the Committee is available on its website http://www.parliament.uk/bbcom.\n\nThe relevant Government department have provided the following response to the petition:\n\nThe Government is grateful for this e-petition.  We are very aware of the importance of these festivals which are widely celebrated in the UK.  The Government is committed to bringing people together in strong, united communities. We encourage and support people to have shared aspirations, values and experiences. Festivals such as Eid and Diwali contribute to this objective.\n\nWe regret however that we cannot agree to create new bank or public holidays to mark these festivals. The Government regularly receives requests for additional bank and public holidays to celebrate a variety of occasions including religious festivals. However the current pattern is well established and accepted.  Whilst we appreciate a new national holiday may benefit some communities and sectors, the cost to the economy remains considerable and any changes to the current arrangements would not take place without a full consultation.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:13:39.561Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:13:39.561Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":62490,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/62490.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Harvey's Law","background":null,"additional_details":"On November 23rd Harvey ran away at 10pm. Twenty one minutes later he was killed on the M62.\r\n\r\nDue to the inadequate procedures of the Highways Agency his fate was not discovered for 13 weeks.\r\n\r\nBy chance the events of November 23rd were communicated. Imagine the heartache, frustration and distress caused because of inadequate and unenforced procedures.\r\n\r\nThere are numerous documented occasions where people's pets have been shamelessly discarded without consideration, respect or compassion for the owners rights.\r\n\r\nWe request Legislation to enforce a formulated process ensuring that HA Departments abide by the following:\r\n\r\nCompulsory scanning of all domestic animals retrieved from the highways.\r\n\r\nLog report filed and circulated to both Police and Dog Warden.\r\n\r\nPhotographs of the deceased to be held with the log report to be used for identification purposes.\r\n\r\nPlease join us!","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":123307,"created_at":"2014-03-16T18:19:22.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:02.455Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2014-03-17T13:23:41.000Z","closed_at":"2015-03-17T13:23:41.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2014-03-16T18:19:22.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2014-04-01T08:36:20.518Z","government_response_at":"2014-05-01T08:36:20.518Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2014-08-12T13:30:16.189Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2014-05-01","summary":"","details":"As this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response:\n\nThe government does understand how important pets are and regrets that, sadly, a number of them are killed or injured on our roads each year.\n\nThe High­ways Agency is an Exec­u­tive Agency of the Depart­ment for Trans­port (DfT), and is respon­si­ble for oper­at­ing, main­tain­ing and improv­ing the strate­gic road net­work in Eng­land on behalf of the Sec­re­tary of State for Transport. The Agency’s role in main­tain­ing and improv­ing the net­work is deliv­ered through a large and com­plex sup­ply chain through a num­ber and vari­ety of con­tracts. The Agency also sets and main­tains tech­ni­cal stan­dards for roads and struc­tures which con­trac­tors are required to adhere to and which are referred to by many local and other national author­i­ties for the roads that they manage.\n\nThese standards are set down in the Net­work Man­age­ment Man­ual (NMM). The NMM gen­er­ally describes the processes for the man­age­ment of the main­te­nance ser­vice includ­ing the inter­face between the High­ways Agency, its ser­vice providers and other stakeholders. A link to the NMM is here:\n\nhttp://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/nmm_rwsc/docs/nmm_part_7a.pdf\n\nSection 7.17 of the NMM describes processes that must be followed when canine remains are found on the network, although it does recognise that it is impossible to guarantee that remains can be fully identified due to the high speed nature of the Agency’s roads.\n\nDue to the nature of the processes already in place, the Government has no plans to enforce adherence to the NMM through legislation.\n\nThis e-petition remains open to signatures and will be considered for debate by the Backbench Business Committee should it pass the 100 000 signature threshold.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:02.448Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:02.448Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":64331,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/64331.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"End non-stun slaughter to promote animal welfare","background":null,"additional_details":"We call for an end to slaughter without pre-stunning for all animals. EU and UK law requires all animals to be pre-stunned before slaughter to render them insensible to pain until death supervenes. But non-stun slaughter is permitted for certain communities.\r\n\r\nWe support BVA, RSPCA, HSA, FAWC and FVE who conclude that scientific evidence shows that non-stun slaughter allows animals to perceive pain and compromises welfare.\r\n\r\nWe must differentiate between religious and non-stun slaughter. Our concern does not relate to religious belief but to the animal welfare compromise of non-stun slaughter.\r\n\r\nWe note\r\n-\tover 80% of UK Halal slaughter is pre-stunned\r\n-\thindquarters of animals killed by (non-stun) Shechita can enter the market unlabelled\r\n\r\nWhile non-stun slaughter is permitted we call for clearer slaughter-method labelling and post-cut stunning to improve welfare.\r\n\r\nNon-stun slaughter affects millions of animals. We support a good life and a humane death for all animals.\r\n","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":118956,"created_at":"2014-04-25T15:08:27.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:19.737Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2014-04-28T09:59:48.000Z","closed_at":"2015-03-30T22:59:59.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2014-04-25T15:08:27.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2014-05-12T13:29:31.454Z","government_response_at":"2014-06-12T13:29:31.454Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2014-09-16T20:57:02.543Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2014-06-12","summary":"","details":"As this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response:\n\nThe Government encourages the highest standards of welfare at slaughter and would prefer to see all animals stunned before they are slaughtered for food.  However, we also respect the rights of the Jewish and Muslim communities to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. Recently, the Prime Minister has confirmed that that there would be no ban on religious slaughter in the UK.\n\nBoth EU Regulation 1099/2009, on the protection of animals at time of killing, and the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995 (WASK), as amended, permit slaughter without stunning to be carried out in accordance with religious rites.  Within both regulations there are strict requirements on where, how and who can slaughter animals in accordance with religious rites.  These requirements are monitored and enforced by Official Veterinarians of the Food Standards Agency to ensure that animals are spared unnecessary suffering, distress or pain during the slaughter process.\n\nThe Government is aware that there is public concern about meat from animals slaughtered in accordance with religious beliefs being sold to consumers who do not require their meat to be prepared in this way. Currently, there are no specific EU or national legal requirements governing the sale and labelling of halal or kosher meat.  However, where any information of this nature is provided it must be accurate and must not be misleading to the consumer.\n\nThe Government believes that consumers should have the necessary information available to them to make an informed choice about their food.    We are awaiting the results of a European Commission study on method-of-slaughter labelling which is due this summer.  We will look at possible options in light of that report.\n\nThis e-petition remains open to signatures and will be considered for debate by the Backbench Business Committee should it pass the 100 000 signature threshold.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:19.731Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:15:19.731Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":8903,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/8903.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Make financial education a compulsory part of the school curriculum","background":null,"additional_details":"It's a national disgrace that in the 20 years since introducing student loans, we’ve educated our youth into debt when they go to university, but never about debt. We're a financially illiterate nation, with millions caught by misselling, overborrowing and being ripped off. Is it any surprise we’ve just had a debt imbued financial crisis. This must change. Companies spend billions on marketing and teaching their staff to sell – it's time we got buyers' training. The most cost effective way to start is to ensure every child in the country gets a basic understanding of personal finance & consumer rights before leaving school. This isn’t a large resource requirement. Some schools already do it, but the majority don’t and that needs to end. Unless it's compulsory, head teachers can’t prioritise for it. 97% of people support this, yet no one will take up the baton. We have one of the world’s most complex consumer economies; it's time our children were taught how to thrive and survive in it.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":118875,"created_at":"2011-08-10T15:41:50.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:07:07.170Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2011-08-11T23:14:03.000Z","closed_at":"2012-02-12T00:14:03.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2011-08-10T15:41:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2011-08-19T17:01:03.189Z","government_response_at":"2011-09-19T17:01:03.189Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2011-10-28T09:04:04.892Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2011-09-19","summary":"","details":"This e-petition has reached 100,000 signatures. The Government has notified the Backbench Business Committee in the House of Commons. This e-petition will remain live, and people will be able to continue adding their signatures.\n\nThe Government has provided the following response:\n\n“The Government agrees that young people should have access to good quality personal finance education, so that they leave school with the knowledge and confidence to manage their money effectively.  Parents can also play a crucial role in helping young people to become financially aware in their day-to-day lives.\n\nSchools already use Personal, Social, Health and Economic (PSHE) education as a framework within which to teach young people about personal financial management.  The existing PSHE programmes of study include elements aimed at ensuring that by the time they leave school, pupils should be able to manage their money, understand and explain financial risk and reward, and identify how finance will play an important part in their lives and in achieving their aspirations.  We are currently carrying out a review to determine how best to support schools to improve the quality of all PSHE teaching.”\n\nJustin Tomlinson MP was allocated a half-day in the Chamber in Backbench time and the debate took place on 15 December 2011.   A transcript of the debate is available at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm111215/debtext/111215-0002.htm#11121580000003","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:07:07.164Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:07:07.164Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":19149,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/19149.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Give Kevin Williams his inquest under section 13 of the coroners Act, we have all the evidence under this section but keep getting refused.","background":null,"additional_details":"Kevin Williams died in the Hillsborough disaster in1989, Kevin's Inquests were riddled with coruption, suppressing of vital evidence and perverting the course of JUSTICE, Kevin did not die from Traumatic Asphixia or in an accident I will not pick up his death certificate until we get the course of death put right and the accidental death verdict struck down. Kevin does not relate to the 3.15pm cut off point.I want a new inquest were all the witnesses will be called to give evidence so the jury will know exactly what happened to Kevin at Hillsborough. I have all the evidence under section 13 of the coroners act and have been refused 3 times by the attorney generals office, I want the Attorney General to look at the evidence again and send Kevin's case back to the divisional court recomending a new inquest into the death of my son.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":118475,"created_at":"2011-10-13T13:01:49.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:08:38.708Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2011-10-19T12:05:17.000Z","closed_at":"2012-01-19T17:00:00.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2011-10-13T13:01:49.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2011-10-23T09:28:46.453Z","government_response_at":"2011-11-23T10:28:46.453Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2011-11-27T10:00:11.534Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2011-11-23","summary":"","details":"This e-petition has now passed the threshold of 100 000 signatures.\n\nThe Leader of the House of Commons has written to the Backbench Business Committee, who are responsible for the scheduling of debates on e-petitions, informing them that the petition has reached 100 000 signatures\n\nThe Backbench Business Committee meets weekly to hear representations from MPs for debates in backbench time. The Committee can consider any subject for debate, including those raised in e-petitions, but an MP must make the case for their consideration. More information about the Committee is available on its website http://www.parliament.uk/bbcom\n\nSince the petition was brought to the attention of the Attorney General, he has agreed that he will look at the applications made to his predecessor, to determine whether in his view, the evidence available supports an application to the Court for a new inquest.\n\nStephen Mosley MP was allocated time in Westminster Hall through the Speaker’s ballot and the debate took place on 22 February 2012.  A transcript of the debate can be found at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201212/cmhansrd/cm120222/halltext/120222h0001.htm#12022246000003","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:08:38.702Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:08:38.702Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":71455,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/71455.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Refusal of Cervical Screenings","background":null,"additional_details":"My sister Sorcha Glenn was a beautiful and inspirational young lady, sadly taken from us aged just 23 following a 13 month battle with cervical cancer.\r\n\r\nSorcha had initially asked for a smear test in June 2013 but was refused based on age. After experiencing symptoms, Sorcha managed to get a smear test and was diagnosed in September 2013.\r\n\r\nWe do not want any more young ladies to be refused a vital smear test that could save their life, because of an age limit. We would like to petition that any female who requests a smear test should be provided with one, and it should not be refused based on age discrimination.  As cancer does not discriminate. ","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":118068,"created_at":"2014-10-29T13:10:06.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:16:24.235Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2014-10-31T09:12:51.000Z","closed_at":"2015-03-30T22:59:59.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2014-10-29T13:10:06.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2014-11-06T18:15:08.934Z","government_response_at":"2014-12-06T18:15:08.934Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2015-01-03T03:35:50.340Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2014-12-06","summary":"","details":"As this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response:\n\nThe Government is advised on screening programmes by the UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) using the best available evidence. The UK NSC reviewed the age range of cervical screening in 2009 and again in 2012.\n\nThe 2009 review looked at all the latest available evidence on the risks and benefits of cervical screening in women aged 20-24.  The Committee was unanimous in deciding there was no reason to lower the age from 25, which is in line with the World Health Organization recommendation.  The reasons for the decision were:\n\nresearch presented to the review showed that cervical screening in women aged 20 to 24 has little or no impact on detection rates of invasive cervical cancer up to age 30;\n\nno new scientific evidence was available to support the reintroduction of screening in women aged under 25;\n\nthere is evidence that treatment following screening in this age group can lead to an increased risk of subsequent premature births, increasing the risk of babies dying or having disabilities;\n\none in three young women screened aged under 25 would have an abnormal result, as opposed to one in 14 for all women screened.  This meant there are very large numbers of false positives in young women, causing anxiety and leading to unnecessary investigations; and\ncervical cancer is very rare in women aged under 25.  There were 45 cases in women aged under 25 in England in 2010 (two per cent of all cases).\n\nHowever, the Committee recognised the need to ensure that young women presenting to primary care with symptoms of cervical cancer were are being given the best advice.\n\nNew guidance for primary care on the management of young women who present with gynaecological symptoms, Clinical practice guidelines for the assessment of young women aged 20-24 with abnormal vaginal bleeding, was therefore developed and published on 3 March 2010. The guidance was produced by a multi-disciplinary group, including professionals, patients and the voluntary sector.  It was reviewed by a number of GPs, and was endorsed by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the Royal College of General Practitioners and the Royal College of Physicians.\n\nThe 2012 review confirmed a policy of not screening under 25s.  The UK NSC recommended that the age of first invitation for screening should be 25 on the basis that there is evidence that a large number of women are screened and treated with relatively little benefit below this age.  Screening women under the age of 25 has little impact on the detection rates of cervical cancer in young women, and gives rise to a high number of false positives, causing anxiety and leading to unnecessary investigations.\n\nOther work is also underway. For example, the NHS Cancer Screening Programmes are undertaking audits on all young women diagnosed with cervical cancer, to see how many had symptoms and what their symptoms were. This will help GPs have the best information available to identify symptoms of cervical cancer.\n\nThe human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme was introduced in 2008 for girls aged 12 to 13, with a catch-up for girls aged up to 18.  Its aim is to prevent the cervical cancers related to the HPV types covered by the vaccine, which are about 70 per cent of all cervical cancers.  The programme has been a big success.  More than 7.8 million doses have been given so far in the UK since 2008, and we have among the highest rates of HPV vaccine coverage in the world, with 86 per cent of girls eligible for routine vaccination in England in the 2012-13 academic year completing the three-dose course, and 90 per cent receiving at least two doses. Recent advice by the Joint Committee on Vaccines and Immunisation also suggests that a two dose treatment course offer comparable protection to a three dose course. This means that 90% of girls are protected from HPV.\n\nIt is expected that the programme will eventually save more than 400 lives a year from cervical cancer.  The first indication that the programme is successfully preventing infection with HPV types 16 and 18 in sexually active young women in England was published in the scientific journal Vaccine, and showed that the proportion of infected rates in 16 to 18-year-olds fell from 17.6 per cent in 2008 to 6.6 per cent between 2010 and 2012.\n\nThis e-petition remains open to signatures and will be considered for debate by the Backbench Business Committee should it pass the 100 000 signature threshold.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:16:24.228Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:16:24.228Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":33133,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/33133.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Return Shaker Aamer to the UK","background":null,"additional_details":"Shaker Aamer is a British resident with a British wife and children who has been imprisoned without trial by the US in Bagram Airforce Base and Guantanamo Bay for over ten years. The Foreign Secretary and the Foreign Office must undertake urgent new initiatives to achieve the immediate transfer of Shaker Aamer to the UK from continuing indefinite detention in Guantanamo Bay.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":117469,"created_at":"2012-04-20T16:53:17.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:10:38.502Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2012-04-20T17:21:12.000Z","closed_at":"2013-04-20T17:21:12.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2012-04-20T16:53:17.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2012-05-06T06:13:03.588Z","government_response_at":"2012-06-06T06:13:03.588Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2012-09-23T01:59:47.885Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2012-06-06","summary":"","details":"A debate will take place on this e-petition on Wednesday 24 April 2013 at 9:30am.  Further information about the business of the House of Commons can be found at www.parliament.uk\n\nAs this e-petition has received more than 100 000 signatures, on 15 April 2013 the Leader of the House of Commons passed this petition to the House of Commons Backbench Business Committee to consider for debate.  Further information about the Committee, including how they handle e-petitions, can be found at http://www.parliament.uk/bbcom\n\nAs this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response:\n\nUK Government Ministers and senior officials continue to raise Mr Aamer’s case with their US counterparts. On the 6 July 2010 the Prime Minister confirmed to Parliament that the Government would continue to make efforts to secure Mr Aamer’s release and return to the UK.\n\nAs the Foreign Secretary has publically stated following a meeting with Mr Aamer’s legal representatives:\n\n“The UK believes that indefinite detention in Guantanamo Bay is wrong and will continue to call for Guantanamo Bay to be closed and Mr Aamer to be returned to his family in the UK. I have personally raised his case with Secretary Clinton on a number of previous occasions, and we will continue to engage with the US on this issue until a solution is reached.”\n\nThe ultimate decision in respect of Mr Aamer’s release remains one for the US to make.\n\nLegislation passed by the US Congress, namely the 2011 National Defense Authorisation Act, all but precluded transfers out of Guantanamo Bay. This legislation has been renewed by the US Government for 2012, allowing for the US Secretary of Defense to exercise a waiver should stringent conditions be met. We are currently working with US counterparts to consider the implications of the new bill for Mr Aamer’s case.\n\nThis e-petition will remain open to signatures until the published closing date and will be considered for debate by the Backbench Business Committee should it pass the 100 000 signature threshold.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:10:38.495Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:10:38.495Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":31778,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/31778.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Restoration of Age Related Tax Allowances","background":null,"additional_details":"In the 2012 Budget the Government froze Old Age Pensioners Age Related Tax Allowances and cancelled them for those turning 65 after 5 April 2013.\r\nWe consider that at a time when pensioners are struggling to make ends meet and yet are a group of people due to age, health etc who often have extremely limited opportunity to make good lost income, this reduction in allowances is grossly unfair. The Government should therefore take immediate action to reverse the decisions on these allowances which were announced in the 2012 Budget. ","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":114499,"created_at":"2012-03-21T22:36:07.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:10:27.678Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2012-03-22T09:08:51.000Z","closed_at":"2013-03-22T09:08:51.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2012-03-21T22:36:07.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2012-04-07T07:41:00.931Z","government_response_at":"2012-05-07T07:41:00.931Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2012-08-28T18:30:30.312Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2012-05-07","summary":"","details":"The Backbench Business Committee of the House of Commons have announced that a debate will take place on this e-petition on Monday 29 April 2013 in Westminster Hall.  Further information about the debate can be found at http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/backbench-business-committee/news/debate-on-age-related-tax-allowances-e-petition-announced/\n\nAs this e-petition has received more than 100 000 signatures, the Leader of the House of Commons passed this petition to the House of Commons Backbench Business Committee to consider for debate.  Further information about the Committee, including how they handle e-petitions, can be found at http://www.parliament.uk/bbcom\n\nAs this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response:\n\nAt Budget 2012 the Government announced a phased withdrawal of Age-Related Allowances with no new recipients from April 2013. For existing recipients, allowances will be frozen at their 2012-13 levels until the Personal Allowance aligns with them.\n\nThe Government accepts that many people will be disappointed by these decisions. However, no one will pay any more tax as a result of these changes. Indeed, those affected by the withdrawal of Age-Related Allowances also benefit from the largest ever cash increase in the Personal Allowance. The Government remains committed that personal allowances should be set high enough to ensure that those solely reliant on the Basic State Pension do not pay any tax.\n\nThe Government has also continued to support pensioners in other ways. In April 2012 the Basic State Pension increased by £5.30, the biggest cash increase ever, and we have introduced a triple guarantee ensuring it will increase each and every year by the highest of earnings, prices or 2.5 per cent. Pensioners will also continue to be exempt from National Insurance Contributions of 12% on employment income.\n\nFurthermore, we have protected the support that makes a real difference to the lives of millions of pensioners every day, including free prescriptions, free eye tests, free bus passes and Winter Fuel Payments, and, for older pensioners, free TV licences.\n\nThis e-petition remains open to signatures and will be considered for debate by the Backbench Business Committee should it pass the 100 000 signature threshold.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:10:27.671Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:10:27.671Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":60164,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/60164.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"No to proposed increase in fees for Nurses and Midwives","background":null,"additional_details":"We would like the Government to Review the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) with regard to the fees charged to registered nurses and midwives, and the processes through which those fees are decided.\r\n\r\nThe Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) recently discussed a further increase in registration fees for Nurses and Midwives from £100 to £120.\r\n\r\nThe fees were increased 2 years ago from 76 to 100 following a consultation that was overwhelmingly against the rise.\r\n\r\nThe NMC are, of course, obliged to consult before any further rise. However 96%+ of individuals voted against the rise last time.\r\n\r\nThe Health Committee in their report earlier that year said \"We would urge the NMC to avoid further fee rises and to consider fee reductions for new entrants to the register.\"\r\n\r\nApproximately 670,000+ Nurses and Midwives contribute £67+ Million annually to the NMC\r\n\r\nPlease sign the petition to encourage a review of the NMC and the charging of annual fees to Nurses and Midwives\r\n","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":113797,"created_at":"2014-02-03T11:59:59.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:14:40.987Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2014-02-05T15:20:43.000Z","closed_at":"2015-02-05T15:20:43.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2014-02-03T11:59:59.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2014-02-21T16:14:28.280Z","government_response_at":"2014-03-21T16:14:28.280Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2014-07-16T00:18:15.801Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2014-03-21","summary":"","details":"As this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response:\n\nThe Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) is the independent regulator for nurses and midwives in the United Kingdom (UK).  It is illegal to work as a nurse or a midwife in the UK without being on the NMC register.  To be on the NMC register, nurses and midwives must pay an annual registration fee. However, nurses and midwives are not alone in being required to pay an annual registration fee.  All regulated healthcare professionals in the UK are required to do this to maintain registration.\n\nAs an independent body, the NMC is responsible for determining the amount of its annual registration fee.  This amount needs to cover the cost of its regulatory activity including quality assurance of education, maintenance of the register, development of standards, statutory supervision of midwives and the processing of fitness-to-practise cases.\n\nThe Department notes that since the NMC was established under the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001 on 1 April 2002, there have been a number of increases in the level of its annual registration fee.  In 2004, the NMC annual registration fee was £43, which increased to £76 in August 2007.  In February 2013, the NMC received a £20million Government grant that allowed it to protect nurses and midwives from the full impact of a further fee rise.  As a result of this financial support, the NMC was able to reduce the amount of the fee increase from £76 to £100, instead of £120 as originally proposed.\n\nThe Department is aware that on 26 March, the NMC Council is scheduled to carry out its annual registration fee review.  On 29 January, in advance of this formal review, the NMC Council considered the level of this fee and took the view that an increase is potentially necessary for 2015-16 onwards to bridge a funding gap between income and expenditure.  As of February, the NMC reports that further work to develop proposals and a consultation document is currently underway.\n\nThe Department is aware that the level of the NMC annual registration is of key importance to its registrants, particularly within the current context of pay restraint and financial austerity.  However, as of February, the NMC advises that no decision has been made.  If, in due course, the NMC Council does propose a fee increase, this will be subject to consultation where the NMC’s case would be scrutinised.  The NMC has a statutory duty to consult with any parties likely to be affected by changes to annual registration fee.  Should such a consultation be launched in future, this will give interested parties the opportunity to contribute their views to this process.\n\nThis e-petition remains open to signatures and will be considered for debate by the Backbench Business Committee should it pass the 100 000 signature threshold.","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:14:40.981Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:14:40.981Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":1535,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/1535.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2010-2015","government":"Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition","dissolution_at":"2015-03-30T23:59:59.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Public & Private Pension Increases - change from RPI to CPI","background":null,"additional_details":"Many workers in the Public and Private Sector have contributed to their pensions on the understanding that on retirement these Pensions would be increased each April by the preceding September's Retail Price Index (RPI) rate. From April 2011 the Government has transferred these increases to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) measure which in the Treasury's own words \"...is designed to take account of the fact that consumers tend to shop around, switching to cheaper alternatives when prices of similar goods change.\" This change, which has been introduced in most cases without any prior consultation, will mean a steady reduction in spending power for pensioners as they progress into their retirement. Given the promises that have previously been made, the RPI measure should be reintroduced without delay to ensure that the spending power of these Public and Private pensioners is maintained.    ","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":113490,"created_at":"2011-08-04T10:52:13.000Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:06:00.568Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2011-08-08T10:47:42.000Z","closed_at":"2012-05-08T10:47:42.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2011-08-04T10:52:13.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2011-08-20T12:30:43.760Z","government_response_at":"2011-09-20T12:30:43.760Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2011-12-07T03:57:59.605Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2011-09-20","summary":"","details":"This e-petition has reached 100,000 signatures. The Government has notified the Backbench Business Committee in the House of Commons who will consider its suitability for debate when Parliament returns in September. This e-petition will remain live, and people will be able to continue adding their signatures.\n\nThe Backbench Business Committe have announced that a debate relating to this e-petition will take place on Thursday 1 March 2012 in the Chamber of the House of Commons.  Further information about the debate, and on the workings of the Backbench Business Committee, can be found on the Committee's website at http://www.parliament.uk/bbcom\n\nJohn McDonnell MP was allocated a half day debate on the issue on 1 March 2012.  A transcript of the debate can be found at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201212/cmhansrd/cm120301/debtext/120301-0002.htm#12030147000001","created_at":"2017-06-21T15:06:00.561Z","updated_at":"2017-06-21T15:06:00.561Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}}]}