We the undersigned demand that in the interests of fairness, equality and social justice that the loyal Conservative boroughs, who voted for austerity and cuts to services on 7th May 2015 should have the honour of bearing the brunt of the £12bn worth proposed for the next five years. In the 2010-15 parliamentary term the inner cities and Labour voting areas suffered much more severe cuts than wealthier Conservative and Liberal Democrat constituencies, especially those with ministerial MPs. We further demand that the disparities of the previous term (2010-15) be overturned in this process over the next five years. There is a proposal for devolution of fiscal powers to the regions of England, but if the cuts continue at the same level as the previous five years, inner city areas may fall into irreversible economic decline, with no help on offer from central government. These areas have also given their fair share to the Treasury over the past five years, and this needs levelling up. Whilst this all appears disgracefully partisan and could be construed as an effort to garner votes, it would nonetheless undoubtedly have had an effect on the outcome of the election. So those who voted with clear understanding of the overall economic plan for the next five years, should now proudly accept their responsibility to shoulder their fair share of austerity cuts for the good of the nation, as they have displayed clear and open support for the proposed cuts to public services through a democratic process. Cutting services to a greater extent in Labour voting areas overlooks another glaring fact. Many people in those areas voted Conservative in both 2010 and 15. If these decisions are partisan and punitive as they appear to be, the many voters who remained loyal to the now incumbent government throughout are suffering cuts to their local services regardless. Fairness, justice and democracy are supposedly British values, and whether or not the disparities in the allocation of austerity measures have been deliberately implemented as an attack on Labour voters in England, this approach is quite simply unfair and undemocratic. By 2020 the Conservative long term economic plan will be complete and the UK will have made a complete recovery and will have "put a bit aside for a rainy day". It would be a shame for all of their most loyal supporters if they hadn't been given the opportunity to fully be a part of that economic recovery. So it's time to roll up your sleeves and do your bit for a brighter future for Britain. Those of us in the inner cities have done our bit, but we're with you all the way. We're all in this big society together! Right? Graphic of local government budget cuts 11/12 (Looks uncannily like the election outcome in 2015) http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/dec/14/local-council-cuts-data http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/30/local-government-cuts-poorest-areas *(Footnote for potential signers: Signing the petition does not necessarily mean that you agree with, or believe in the proposed austerity measures. The campaign is more an attempt to undermine the basic austerity premise that the country is skint, and that we all need to do our bit to help. This is a challenge to the government and their supporters to justify themselves, and bring this question of fairness into the public domain, and hopefully go some way to unravelling the austerity myth for all to see clearly.)

The mental health crisis in this country is dire. There is a shortage of beds, people waiting too long to be seen by a therapist. My local mind may have to close because of funding. I need people to help me fight for the services we so badly need please can people sign and share xx

Oakham Fire Station is 1 of 20 Fire Stations in Leicestershire Fire and Rescue (LFRS). The geographical area it protects is the second largest in LFRS. The area includes many risks such as part of the A1 motorway, HMP Stocken and a number of industrial units. The station attends a number of Road Traffic Collisions (RTC’s) on the many treacherous roads surrounding the area. Oakham Fire Station is the only Station in LFRS where calls to incidents have not declined over the last 5 years. Because of the risks in the area, Oakham Fire Station contains 3 Fire Service appliances. 1 of which is a fire engine that is available 24/7 and crewed by a minimum of 5 full time firefighters. The other 2 appliances are crewed by part-time retained firefighters who live and work in the Oakham area. The part-time retained firefighters at Oakham crew a second fire engine with a minimum of 4 firefighters. They also crew the Heavy Rescue Unit (HRU) appliance that attends specialist rescues such as RTC’s involving Heavy Goods Vehicles. LFRS have proposed to remove all of Oakham’s part-time retained firefighters and the fire engine they crew by April 2016. There has been no mention of what will happen to the HRU, but without the retained firefighters who crew the vehicle. It is unlikely to remain at Oakham Fire Station. Therefore, Oakham will be left with only 1 fire engine usually riding 5 firefighters, rather than 3 fire appliances with 11 firefighters it currently has ready to respond to any emergency incidents when they are needed. We believe these changes would increase the risk of death and injury to the members of the public in Oakham and Rutland. The estimated cost for LFRS to keep Oakham’s second fire engine and all the retained firefighters who crew it is £97,000 a year. RCC has kindly offered the Combined Fire Authority (CFA) £150,000 in order to maintain Oakham’s second fire engine and its retained firefighters for the next 2 years. On the 8th April 2015 the CFA decided that Oakham’s second fire engine and all its retained firefighters would be removed by April 2016. At the same time the CFA stated they would continue discussions with RCC regarding accepting the offer of £150,000 and using it instead to fund a Rapid Response Vehicle (RRV) which is to be placed somewhere in Rutland. We believe the RRV will provide a significantly reduced service to the people of Oakham and Rutland compared to that given by the second fire engine at Oakham. The RRV will be crewed by 2 or 3 firefighters rather than a fire engine which can be crewed by a maximum of 6 firefighters. The RRV will contain significantly less firefighting and rescue equipment compared to a fire engine. Furthermore the RRV may not even be placed in Oakham. To highlight the reduced service the RRV will provide; at present when a fire engine attends a house fire, the crew can only go inside that house if it has a minimum of 4 firefighters. This is to ensure all the safety critical roles and procedures are being met. Since the RRV will only be crewed by 2 or 3 firefighters, in the same situation the crew of the RRV would not be allowed to enter the house to rescue the people inside or extinguish the fire and would instead have to wait outside until further resources arrived. This is unacceptable and could lead to members of the public risking their own lives to try and save their family, friends and neighbours. Whilst the firefighters riding the RRV have to stand outside awaiting further resources. Therefore, it is crucial we oppose the £150,000 offered by RCC to be used for anything other than helping to maintain Oakham’s second fire engine and the retained firefighters who crew it.

NYCC has already made subsidy cuts to bus services of a whopping £2 million in 2013/2014 - the highest in the UK - and now it wants to cut an extra £500,000 in 2016. Buses are a lifeline for so many, for both practical and social reasons. If a person cannot drive, or doesn't have access to transport, why should they be disadvantaged further? If somebody relies on the bus to get to work, why should they worry - again - that they may not be able to get there? You never know when you may need a bus so please don't take them for granted. They are a necessity and not a luxury. Here's my story: I've been using the 31x between Easingwold and Helmsley on an almost daily basis for several years to get to work. It's clean, reliable and a safe way to get to a lovely rural part of the world that is very popular with tourists. NYCC is thinking of cutting my two regular journeys to term-time only, with unacceptable cuts to the rest of the service which will effectively reduce it to three days a week and two journeys a day - one from and one to Helmsley - and nothing at all at the weekend. You can find full proposal information here: www.northyorks.gov.uk/bussubsidy DON'T LET NYCC CUT OR FRAGMENT ANY MORE SERVICES.

The proposed changes to services across our town's children's centres will have a devastating impact on our communities and will leave thousands of children and families without adequate early years services.

The human cost of welfare cuts is huge, with levels of stress, depression, physical ill health and family breakdown likely to increase as the cuts hit. Welfare cuts are about so much more than simply reducing the deficit for so many people. It's not possible for our politicians to experience fully what it is to be on a low income long-term, but we call on them to make this effort to engage with the human cost of their policies.

'Education Other Than At Schools' (EOTAS) provides a service which is in very high demand. In addition, there are so many more children still on the waiting list, due to the limited amount of teachers that they have at the moment. The Council is intent on cutting the tuition team further (from 12.6 to 4 full time equivalent teachers ). That’s not enough! It’s going to mean a great deal of children like me are not going to get the education they need and deserve. Under the new proposals, children with mental health issues will no longer be eligible for home tuition and the Key Stage Four Pupil Referral Unit, a provision for pupils for whom school is not suitable, will be shut down. For two and a half years I received home tuition. I was so ill that I couldn't even get out of bed and there wasn't really a question about whether or not I could get into school. I had two wonderful home tutors who not only were my teachers but became great friends. They made my lessons not only manageable but also fun and made me eager to learn. They got me through my GCSE's, helping me achieve an A, two B's and two C's, where most people including myself thought I might not pass any of my exams. I know so many kids personally that are really very ill/disabled and are in receipt of home tuition or have received it in the past. Over and over I have heard of the invaluable support, teaching and guidance that these teachers have given. I'm now far better, my condition has stabilised and I have just had my 17th birthday. I am my studying my A-levels in college, looking at universities and considering a career in politics and art. None of this would be possible without my fantastic home tutors. Without Home Tuition, I would just have been another NEET statistic (Not in education or in employment training). Most of time the kinds of children that are in need of home tuition are the ones who will need to rely on their education most in future. The team are highly skilled, highly qualified and experienced teachers. This is not just about keeping their jobs. It’s about looking out for all the vulnerable children that need an education! Once this service is gone, it's gone. There’s no getting this service or these teachers back. What if your child in the future is unable to attend school? What if for some reason you or your child develop symptoms that make going to school difficult if not impossible? Save our services! You never know when you ‘re going to need help! Thanks

Our community libraries are under threat! The council want to stop funding the running of Bromley's community libraries, and have asked for volunteer groups to run and fund the libraries, threatening the loss of jobs for qualified library staff and the closure of the libraries. The council has millions of pounds in reserves, some of which should be used to maintain an efficient and comprehensive library service as required by law. It is a vital community hub used by the most vulnerable members of society- children and the elderly and it cannot be lost.

Iain duncan smith is being investigated by the EU Because poor and disabled people and people with mental illness have died or took there own life's because of the new reform's and in that case every death should be properly investigated ...2 million more jobs that shouldn't be the price of a life ...iain Duncan smith has made peoples lives so miserable that they felt they couldn't take it any longer ..all in the name of David Cameron and can say our long term economic plan is working ...(more like a long economic failure)....you cant put numbers or a price on someone's life

This is important as in modern day society socialism and plain human instinct is to help and support one another. With the proposed budget being shown next month, we are likely to see the poorest get hit with waves of austerity and the rich getting richer as usual. Please sign to prevent such happening!

Without the NHS people like the elderly, disabled, which we all know your poor late son Ivan was, sick children and poor will suffer as they will not be ableto afford private health care and subsequently, like poor Ivan, die. I, myself, have epilepsy and, at the age of six months, contracted menigitis. This left me partially disabled and, without our beloved NHS I, no doubt, would've probably died as my parents were unable to afford private health care. In recent times my 70 year old dad suffered a subdural haemotoma and, yet again, without the NHS, we would have no doubt lost him. Get rid of the NHS and our blood will be on your hands.

The 119 bus service is a bus service that runs between Lymington and New Milton. Other bus services also travel this route but the 119 is the only service that goes via Pennington village. It is the only bus that the elderly and infirm can access because the other services all stop at other ends of the village. It may not seem like an important issue but for people unable to access the X1/2 services then they are left isolated and abandoned. This is simply not acceptable in our society today.