The town will lose 70 parking spaces. The present Bus Station location is perfect and links well with the railway station. We would very much like it to be part of the new development. If this cannot be the case we would like a similar location with links to the railway station. Most importantly the people of Sudbury are not being listened to.

In the interest of safety and security we request that the switching out of lights in residential streets between midnight and 6 am be withdrawn and that LCC follow the example of Doncaster Borough Council by replacing lamps with energy efficient LED lights that will reduce electricity costs by 70% and reduce maintenance costs due to their long life (25 years compared with 6 years). Residents are very concerned that the creation of dark spaces in the town at night will encourage burglaries, anti-social behaviour and accidents. Do let us know of your concerns and any experiences you have related to the lights being out.

Our kitchen is non funded completely volunteer run and serves over 40 homeless, isolated and vhuranable people a week for free. We have build relationships with business who donate food. We have created relationships with people who are on the outskirts of our society. We have continued & will continue to offer communtiy on the street but we fear we will lose our homeless members of we can't provided a warm dry place to eat together.

Having endured nine months of road closure due to land slip it now transpires that the 37 service during this time picked up more traffic flow on its redirected route (Newton St Loe & Saltford) who frankly have services to both cities of Bath and Bristol. A decision has been made by the company that the service 'doesn't cut the mustard' and is not commercially viable. BNES & SGC need to take URGENT action at Council ward level to step in and provide a solution for rural home owners both young and elderly.

The consultant led services, for mums giving birth in the conurbation around Dewsbury, are due to be moved to Pinderfields Hospital Wakefield, in September 2016, to be replaced by a midwife led unit with 6 beds. Often mums in labour do not call an ambulance, but travel to hospital independently, via car or public transport. I would not want to travel from Cleckheaton or Birkenshaw to Pinderfields on the bus. Other women with no car may feel the same which will mean more calls for ambulances. The midwife led unit is for low risk births only, so first time mums should be directed to Pinderfields which will be dealing with higher risk births from the North Kirklees AND Wakefield areas. Will this not put a strain on the resources in Wakefield? Just after the Government Body rejected the Kirklees and Wakefield Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee (JHOSC) Report that the changes to Mid Yorkshire Hospital Trust's Dewsbury District Hospital site were not in the best interests of the local population, the Daily Mail published a study showing that the death rate amongst inpatients at nearby hospitals, went up, when Newark A&E was closed. A large study in America also came to this conclusion. Shockingly, news has broken that Huddersfield Royal Infirmary is also earmarked for closure and replacement by an Urgent Care Centre. Pontefract Hospital has also just been redesignated an Urgent Care Centre. The resulting scenario of driving seriously ill patients in ambulances across the region and subsequent overcrowding in hospitals which have a fully functioning A&E will have a knock on effect for patients around the whole region of West Yorkshire and beyond, Barnsley for example and Oldham. We know Mid Yorkshire Hospital Trust is facing 'winter pressures' and it is mid summer! Why do the CCGs and Trusts not get together and tell this 'democratically elected' government to stop the NHS vanity projects and fully fund front line services? This is what happened in a neighbouring hospital in London, when Chase Farm hospital was closed. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jun/19/north-middlesex-ae-staff-describe-unit-as-unsafe-and-unsupported http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2323141/Shocking-proof-Accident-Emergency-closures-cost-lives-Death-rate-jumps-THIRD-department-closes.html Strategic Projects team http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36847643

It is vital to make sure children from all backgrounds are inspired by to do science and that scientific education remains reflective of the scientific consensus and not what is in the interests of the sponsors. As big fans of science education, we are deeply saddened to hear that the popular Launch Pad gallery is to be relaunched not just with sponsorship from an oil company, but an entrance charge too. As research at King’s College and the Wellcome Trust emphasise, the British public are keen consumers of our amazing scientific culture, but also there are worrying divides in terms of which economic groups are most likely to engage. Price tags on science museum galleries will only exacerbate such social division. In addition to the entrance charge, it is totally inappropriate for this new gallery to be sponsored by an oil and gas company. It is a corruption of science to see our energies captured by fossil fuel companies and especially galling to see such sponsorship of a gallery aimed at children - it is their futures and qualties of life we risk ruining after all. We have particular concerns when it comes to the London Science Museum. As freedom of information requests by Art Not Oil have shown, previous sponsorship deals have shown the museum seriously pressurised by oil companies, compromising their scientific and cultural credibility.

‘First I am want to add my apologies to the event and the huge admiration for Barnet UNISON.I want to send a message of support to John Burgess & the Save Barnet Libraries campaign for their tireless & inspirational community campaign to protect their local Library service. I would encourage everyone to join their Kids4Libraries this Saturday 12 September. Barnet Council are determined to outsource all of their services I salute Barnet UNISON & the community campaign for their ongoing fight to defend public services.’ (Jeremy Corbyn September 2015, http://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/page/2/?s=Libraries ) Barnet Council has begun statutory consultation with all of the Library workers. The proposals seek to: 1. Sack 50% of the workforce. 2. Restrict the number of hours the Libraries are open with staff. 3. Limit access to Libraries for children under 16 and the disabled. 4. Replace paid workers with volunteers. 5. Prepare the remaining service for outsourcing. 6. Shrink the size of many of the Libraries. This is an attempt to disguise the destruction of a Library Service which recently achieved a 93% customer satisfaction rating. This proposal is yet another example of how Austerity policies are decimating public services. Libraries are a valuable community asset and need defending. Library services across the country are facing extinction, now is the time to join the fight for Libraries. Incredibly, 11 July 2016 Barnet Council announced they would be increasing the size of their Press Team at a cost of £0.5 million a year, whilst cutting Library frontline services. Every signature you secure for this petition does help the service and the morale of our members facing redundancy. For further details: https://youtu.be/_3XfibjbJuA http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/14541517.___We_need_to_take_action______Barnet_library_workers_to_strike_over_cuts_to_service/ http://www.european-services-strategy.org.uk/publications/public-bodies/transformation-and-public-service-reform/options-appraisals/direct-and-collateral-damage-to-barnet-librari/barnet-libraries-unison-march-2016.pdf

The future of Hinchingbrooke Hospital is under threat and the proposed merger with Peterborough and Stamford Foundation NHS Trust may see the closure of Accident & Emergency, Maternity and Haematology and also the downgrading of the hospital. We will fight for the retainment of Hinchingbrooke Hospital. Hinchingbrooke Hospital currently provides medical and emergency care for 160,000 residents in Huntingdon and the surrounding rural area. Further housing stock has been planned and approved for development in the near future, which will increase the need to have a District Hospital in Huntingdon. Peterborough and Addenbrookes, the two nearest alternative hospitals are 40 minutes journey time at best, along very busy roads assuming you have your own transport. Not ideal if you are very unwell. We will fight to save Hinchingbrooke. https://s.bsd.net/38degrees/main/page/-/CBY/Hands_Off_Hinchingbrooke_Logo_large.jpg

The actions of the NEC are so undemocratic they do not belong in this country. All across society they have excluded members and supports with bitter choices. This cannot be allowed to go on in The Labour Party.

Legal Spark was formed as a result of the crisis in legal aid. People were going without representation because they could not afford a lawyer. This is particularly the case for disabled people. No one else would do this type of work, as it was deemed too expensive, not financially viable and also too complex. Daniel Donaldson, a disabled Solicitor, set up Legal Spark with the Support of the Scottish Institute for Enterprise under their Young Innovators Challenge 2015 programme. Daniel wanted to develop creative solutions to help people access justice and to fix the exclusion that disabled people face from the legal system. Daniel spent one year talking to the Law Society about this issue, highlighting that it was important that everyone could access a lawyer. Legal Spark consulted with the Chief Executive (Lorna Jack), the Head of Professional Practice, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar (James Ness) and the Secretary to the Civil Legal Aid Quality Assurance Committee (Hannah Sayers) amongst others. A document was prepared that explained what Legal Spark was planning to do. The Law Society accepted this document and did not object. The Law Society encouraged Legal Spark and found their approach "refreshing" and "innovative". Legal Spark was granted permission to do Legal Aid work in November 2015, and a compliance certificate was issued in December 2015. Legal Spark began helping the many disabled people that needed their help and began to have success. In April 2016, the Law Society decided that they had made an "error" and instructed Legal Spark to stop all Legal Aid work by Thursday 30 June 2016. By this stage, Legal Spark had a number of clients, with active and complex cases, some of which were about to go to Court. "A" is one such client. They had experienced awful disability discrimination from a University. They were not given adequate support to help them during a course, and had to leave. Additionally, Legal Spark uncovered evidence that the University's staff had used "unprofessional language" in their approach to "A". This case has now been lodged in Court. "B" is another client adversely affected by this decision. B is also disabled and is housebound. They had tried to find a lawyer for sometime but because of their rural location in the Highlands there were no Solicitors available to help. Legal Spark took on this case and was successful (in part) in achieving a resolution for B. However, because B had been adversely affected by a decision of Highland Council, and had lost out financially, the case may need to go to Court. B is unable to find anyone else to help them. These are only two examples of where Legal Spark is making a difference, there are others too. Since establishing Legal Spark, Daniel Donaldson has not drawn a salary and has used some of his own money to sustain the Legal Practice while it develops and is able to stand on its own feet. Legal Spark has also grown to enable it to employ staff and provide much need paid employment to some disabled people and unemployed law graduates. The Legal Aid certificate meant that Legal Spark could help people who could not access help elsewhere. Now "A", "B" and other will have to go without representation because of the Law Society of Scotland's failures. The Law Society's Chief Executive (Lorna Jack)says that they have to act in the public interest. The Director of Regulation (Philip Yelland) shares this view. 1. Where is the public interest in denying disabled people representation? 2. Also, where is the public interest is giving permission to do Legal Aid work only to revoke that permission 6 months later? The Law Society say that there are other Solicitors who can help, however this is not true. Legal Spark contacted 134 Civil Legal Aid lawyers with advertised specialism in discrimination law. Even the biggest Legal Aid firm in Scotland could not help. The Law Society has said that this will cause Legal Spark’s disabled client’s “inconvenience”. This is an offensive comment; they have never met any client, they have ignored client’s opinions, and also refused to acknowledge that they will suffer substantial prejudice in their cases because of the Law Society’s decision. This petition is addressed to the Law Society and the Scottish Legal Aid Board. It is important that you fulfil your roles correctly. Overturn your decision to stop Legal Spark doing legal aid work, remedy the mistake you have made and apologise. This is the only way you can restore public trust and continue to say you act in the public interest. Allow Legal Spark, and their clients the opportunity to continue to work together for the public interest and tackle the horrors faced by disabled people on a daily basis.

This is important to safeguard the future of the Post Office network into the future. Safeguard the futures of the workers and their pensions but also the Post Office being a vital part of both communities and the UK high street

Hartlepool is a city of 100,000 people. Our General Hospital, later called the University Hospital of Hartlepool, covered not just that population, but another 100,000 people in towns and villages to the North of Hartlepool. Since the closure of our Accident Emergency and the moving of many of our services from our state of the art modern hospital to another hospital to the South, some fifteen miles away of Hartlepool, there have been higher than expected annual death rates; to the extent that it has become a matter of concern. it takes a full extra 30 minutes to arrive at A&E from Hartlepool, and it takes more than an hour to arrive at that same overcrowded A&E from other local areas. http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/07/14/article-0-141053F5000005DC-371_634x729.jpg The ill and infirm, and anyone who wishes to visit them, have a very long journeys when sick, or to visit. This is intolerable hardship when a hospital still stands which could serve all the needs of the local population. This not only increases the financial hardship in terms of travelling costs, but it increases travelling times and the need to travel for all of the staff too. To add to this all of the data regarding privatisation has shown that patients are not the first priority. Fortunately we have been promised that a fully funded national service is now within our remit and a solid possibility, and this will better serve the population and less profit will go to large business based in other countries. We ask for direct funding to again have the NHS and the Hospital which our society deserves.