It has come to our attention that NHS England is threatening to close this surgery within months due to one of the partners dissolving the contract for GP services here against the wishes of his fellow partners, staff and most importantly the 6000 patients signed up here. This move will unnecessarily make many patients including vulnerable and elderly members of our community deeply anxious and could cause negative health, social and psychological effects. It is completely unfair that the actions of one GP should have a severely detrimental effect on the very existence of this surgery and its wider community – many of which have been members of this practice for over 20 years. The Clinical Commissioning Group and NHS England should seek to consult with the practice’s patients in order to see if an amicable solution can be found before making a decision of this magnitude. Earl’s Court Medical Centre (previously Om Sai Clinic) has been a vital part of our community for nearly 50 years and we cannot afford to lose this hugely important provision of local healthcare. This is a dispute between the doctors but the practice’s patients are very much dependent on this Centre and are happy with the high quality of service that they receive. The location is excellent being situated next to Earls Court Underground Station, easy parking, close to bus links, the A4 and Chelsea & Westminster Hospital. A decision like this should not be imposed on us when a huge majority of people associated with the practice including staff and patients strongly oppose any possible closure. There are no similar facilities near here and no comparable service. Patients feel safe, comfortable and reassured here even at times of great stress and worry for them. The closure of this surgery would result in the displacement of thousands of patients that would need to be relocated elsewhere, putting severe strain on neighbouring GP surgeries. This is not in the interests of NHS service provision in this part of London which is already facing huge pressures in dealing with demand. The NHS funded the purchase of the freehold of the building on Earl’s Court Road and they funded the formation of the practice, which is purpose built for healthcare services and represents millions of pounds worth of public investment over many years. The NHS pays a £200k/annum interest only mortgage for the premises. They pay for the running of this successful practice. To close it down would be a real travesty. This practice even has potential for growth. With additional doctors, the facility could cope with an extra 4,000 patients bringing the total to a possible 10,000. What needs to happen now? • Our aim is to do what is required in order to keep this surgery open • The people this affects are primarily the patients and staff. NHS England should consult the other GPs, staff and patients before arriving at a decision. • Do not proceed with any change until sufficient time should be given to a process of mediation between NHS England and the GPs concerned in order to explore all available options to keep this practice open instead of rushing through an ill conceived decision. What are the solutions? • NHS England to buy the partner out and find a replacement GP to replace him in order to sustain the practice contract • NHS England to buy the freehold of the property thereby safeguarding the longevity of the surgery • NHS England to halt any change to the existence of the surgery on the condition of seeking to find an alternative partner to replace the one that wishes to exit. • Give control to the remaining 2 GPs who are willing to buy the exiting partner out under a newly issued contract. We would be most grateful if you could do all that you can to save this practice from closure. It is against the will of the community at large and all seems to come from the actions of one doctor. This can so easily be avoided if some compassion, discretion and common sense could be applied at a senior level where such decisions can be taken. If necessarily, we would be grateful if you could raise this with the Secretary of State for Health as we feel these needs the attention at the highest levels in order to protect such a vital community asset concerning thousands of people.

The board of the Oxford university hospital NHS foundation trust maintain that their impending downgrading of the maternity unit at the Horton Hospital, Banbury is due to no suitable doctors being available, news has also been released that two trauma doctors have resigned their posts. An investigation of the advertised posts in the trust show no indication of these posts being available. Downgrading of services at this local district general hospital, without any upgrading of services in the area's ambulance trust or the 'main' hospital in Oxford will inevitably mean sick / injured people being transported in unsuitable conditions for 30+ miles through some of the most congested roads in southern England to a hospital that will be overstretched trying to deal with a workload it was never designed for. This situation was totally avoidable and is no indication of a civilised country in the 21st century, those responsible should be bought to account

Community Hospitals provide health and medical services such as minor injuries departments and hospital beds for those well enough to be released from General Hospitals but still too sick to return to their own homes. These hospitals act as intermediaries, providing care for some of the most vulnerable people in south devon in particular the old and infirm. In particular patients who would have used Ashburton & Buckfastleigh Community Hospital will be put into Totnes Community Hospital instead. This is farther from home, there is no public transport links, and therefore will only cost more money to non-emergency patient transport services. Beds in community hospitals mean General Hospitals are able to move recovering patients enabling them to treat more critical patients. Losing these beds will only serve to bed block General Hospitals, such as Torbay, leading to poorer service. When it comes to Medical treatment this can be the difference in providing outstanding care (saving lives), or being prevented from treating the sick or injured (resulting in preventable deaths and suffering).

There is mental health funding in Birmingham and Walsall that is meant to provide advocates to those that struggle and need assistance or prompting to be able to live independently with mental health day to day. This support helps people to get outside and live their lives by giving them confidence and support. I’ve tried to access this support and have been told there are no available advocates. Without this support many patients end up housebound. It’s like a mental health postcode lottery. I’m a mum and it really pains me to see my children missing out on making lovely memories during their summer holidays, because I can’t access the help I and many others suffering in silence need, to manage anxiety and depression, bipolar and many more mental illnesses. I'd say cuts to NHS mental health is wrong ... how are people meant to get better if theres no one there to reach out to in time of need... 😕 I feel strongly about this matter ... Call it personal experience ... Age , race , sex , rich or poor....... Mental illness can affect anyone ....

Help us protect our Crisis Line in Bristol! Earlier this month, Bristol Mental Health (BMH) announced the proposed closure of the crisis line from the end of November 2016. Some concerned users of the crisis line have expressed anxiety over the potential changes, sharing that they worry they would "lose a valuable service" that has helped them 'throughout the last eighteen months or so', approximately how long the line has been operational. With at least one in four people experiencing a mental health issue in their lifetime, now is the time for increased and clear mental health support that is easily accessible for all. We feel that there needs to be more improved signposting, with clear and easily accessible information available for people wanting to use mental health services and seek support. We want to ensure that any changes to the crisis line are in the best interests of those currently accessing services, and those that may access Bristol’s mental health services in the the future. We will be meeting with BMH and Bristol CCG on 9th September to discuss the crisis line further, and will also announce a date for an open meeting to get wider views in the near future. In the meantime, please join us in ensuring proper scrutiny of the future of our Crisis Line and spread the word of this vital campaign by signing and sharing this petition to show you are with us when we meet with them. If you want to get in touch about this campaign, or share your experience of using the Crisis Line, then please drop BIMHN Secretary, Tom, an email at: [email protected] References 1. BIMHN article breaking the story: http://bimhn.org.uk/news/bristol-crisis-line-closure/ 2. Bristol Cable article: https://thebristolcable.org/2016/08/mental-health-crisis-line-to-close-oh-wait/ 3. Second BMH Statement: http://bristolmentalhealth.org/news-and-events/bristol-mental-health-news/2016/august/statement-regarding-bmhs-crisis-line/ 4. Latest BIMHN statement and link to third statement from BMH: http://bimhn.org.uk/news/response-latest-crisis-line-statement/ 5. Updated BIMHN news article on the campaign, including latest statement from BMH: http://bimhn.org.uk/news/crisis-line-update/

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