Healthcare students are at university for a longer period per year than an average student, our terms and academic year are substantially longer for all three years of training. Students completely understand that the government cannot fund them via the student loan once they finish university and therefore will not fund them over the summer after they have taken final exams. However the current standard reduction in the amount available under the student loan of £513 is based on 3 months less funding for students which is not representative for the healthcare student population. For healthcare students this should be a pro-rata reduction, determined by their academic year end date and not the national average. I am a student nurse and my pro rata reduction should be £134 which equates to 3 weeks. My friend is studying physio and her pro rata reduction should be £268.14 which equates to 6 weeks. The reduction in our loan should be directly comparable to how long we spend at University as the current system is inequitable. During my final year I will be placed under increased financial pressure. Rather than increasing the stress of the next generation of healthcare students, why not ensure our transition from student to newly qualified healthcare workers is not plagued by how am I going to pay my rent for the final few months? This rate has been calculated by looking at the full amount a healthcare student (i.e. Nurse, Midwife, OT, SLT, Physio etc.) is entitled to receive per annum in their first and second year from the Student Loan Company (SLC) which is £2324 as a Maintenance Loan. I have then calculated that to be a weekly rate of £44.69. In the final year SLC are offering £1811 which is a reduction of £513 on the previous year. The reduction of £513 equates to a removal of funding for 83 days, about 11 ½ weeks.

SMMC- formerly known as Saturday Morning Music School- provides affordable tuition to students as they progress from their first steps on an instrument to become confident, capable musicians. It is the umbrella group through which Liverpool Youth Orchestra is run, as well as Choral, Wind, Jazz, Brass, String and Woodwind ensembles that accept and nurture students throughout their musical development. It is a Liverpool institution, having played a pivotal role in the musical education of generations of the city's children. It has been the birthplace of the careers of many of the city's musicians, and instilled in many thousands of others a lifelong love of making music. It also provides a wonderful social function, as its students become lifelong friends and travel the globe in ensemble tours. They acquire confidence as they perform in public; self-esteem as they improve their instrumental technique, and rise to meet challenges; and through a busy musical calendar develop personal responsibility and time management skills by being part of a team of people who depend upon each other. As well as the children who attend it, it has long made outstanding contributions to the wider cultural life of the city. Its ensembles have been called upon to mark occasions such as the passage of the Olympic torch through the city, or the city's commemoration of the Battle of the Atlantic. They featured prominently in the city's celebration of its status as the European capital of culture in 2008, and regularly perform at fundraising events for local charities. Resonate claim that they are designing a new provision taking into account feedback from both parents of SMMC pupils and staff. However, it appears that this consultation is merely window-dressing. Questionnaires were sent out in the first week of the summer holidays; parents received them on the Tuesday and the responses were expected by Friday, which is not a great deal of time in a week when many people will be on holiday. Furthermore, a briefing received by a Liverpool councillor -before the consultation had been sent out to parents- outlines the proposed structure of the new provision. This document also makes it clear that SMMC indeed closed at the end of the last term, which has never been explicitly stated to parents. As for consultation with staff, SMMC staff were simply told on the final day of term, with no prior warning, that SMMC cannot afford to continue in its present form, and have not yet even been told if they will have jobs in the new provision. This structure involves simultaneously expanding the service, with the creation of a second centre, whilst simultaneously amalgamating youth ensembles into "Big Bands". It is stated that there will be a large PR campaign in order to recruit new students, and that to facilitate changing to a weeknight, Liverpool schools will be asked to transport children to the new services after school. One of the major factors that has led to the axing of SMMC is that the numbers of pupils attending it has dropped sharply, from 299 in 2009 to 199 today. It seems strange, in our view, to totally restructure a service of 40 years' standing in a way which leaves it dependant upon recruiting large numbers of students to a less focussed provision, when such a drive could instead be used to restore numbers to their levels of merely 5 years ago. This approach seems particularly strange given that no concerted effort has been made to advertise SMMC prior to its closure. It also seems optimistic to design such a system with scant regard to the response from present students and their parents about whether they would be able to access the service, even on the assumption that schools might provide a taxi service with no discernible benefit to themselves. As well as the transport problems associated with travelling to the centres on a weekday evening (when bus routes may stop running, and parents may not yet be home from work to provide lifts) moving to a weekday evening also creates problems with schoolwork that has to be completed for the next day, and for those students who already play in school or other ensembles not affiliated to Resonate- or indeed for those who participate in other extra-curricular activities such as sport after school.

Lord Krebs, Chair of the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee, said: “When we really need to send the message that international STEM students will get a warm welcome in the UK, they’re getting the cold shoulder and heading elsewhere. The overwhelming evidence that we received led us to conclude that changes to the immigration rules in this country have played a direct part in putting overseas students off from choosing the UK.” Only this week a 17 year old Indian friend of ours, who was on her way to take a two week course here for High School students, and who has UK permanent residency, was turned away and put on a plane back to India because she had not been to the UK for two years. I think you will agree that this is outrageous and will want to help to restore reasonable immigration regulations for foreign students.

EPSRC is a branch of Research Council UK, the largest public funding agency in your country. It supplies hundreds of millions of pounds in funding every year. See www.epsrc.ac.uk. The pretense is that this money is given to Research Organizations with adequate procedures to tackle scientific fraud. This is not so. In fact, fraud in publicly funded research has promoted the careers of incompetent people at British Universities. I know most of you won't know much chemistry, but there is Wikipaedia to check up simple scientific facts: what would you think, after checking that aluminum sulphate is Al2(SO4)3 and phenol an acid, I told you that two academics at two of the top five Universities in the UK wrote a research paper where they gave phenol as an alkali and aluminum sulphate as AlSO4? (Pst! Now that you are at the Wikipaedia site you could make a donation... ;-) ) And remember, corruption only spreads...It is therefore in your interest that public funding is not abused. Also, by claiming that organisations funded by EPSRC have procedures to deal efficiently with fraud lends legitimacy to such institutions when dealing with people they have damaged. For example, I want to confront EPSRC with a range of allegations which includes those made in this link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2umhkGxHbasY241U3huLUZQTzA/edit?usp=sharing in an example case which still affects me.

As Yorkshire Wildlife Trust’s first ever nature reserve, Askham Bog has special significance. In fact in 1946 the Trust was created with the purpose of looking after the site which was bought to save it from development. A brief summary of the issues relating to the proposals is as follows: Askham Bog supports an exceptionally high biodiversity with healthy populations of numerous nationally rare species, and the only regional populations of many others. Particular rarities include gingerbread sedge carex elongata (largest population in England), numerous water beetles and the fen square-spot moth diarsia florida. Askham Bog has been recognised as an exceptional habitat for two centuries. It is highly valued both by the population of York and by a national and international community of naturalists and ecologists. Just two miles from the city centre it offers a peaceful place to walk and enjoy nature. The importance of the site is entirely dependent on the integrity of the local water table and it is exceptionally sensitive to any disturbance of that. We are concerned that these housing proposals will irreversibly damage the hydrology of Askham Bog and its special interest will be lost. There has been no information presented to indicate that this will not be the case. We are also concerned about the huge increase in recreational access on to the reserve. There is highly likely to be unmanaged access from a range of locations, particularly from dog walkers and young people. Whilst we welcome large numbers of people on to many of our sites, Askham Bog is too small and fragile to cope with this high volume of unregulated access. We therefore consider that the site should not be allocated for development and that doing so would result in significant loss of the important wildlife features of the site. This allocation is therefore contrary to the Council’s own policies regarding the protection of biodiversity and Sites of Special Scientific Interest. http://www.ywt.org.uk/news/2014/06/12/help-save-york%E2%80%99s-wildlife http://www.ywt.org.uk/York

David Ross is being lined up as the new Chair of OFSTED. This is wrong - he is a Tory donor and the founder of a chain of academies - the very schools that will be inspected by OFSTED - this is a huge conflict of interest. How is it possible to keep State Education out of politics when this kind of back door cronyism is happening? OFSTED should be about improving the education of our children and nothing else.

As a person entitled to the Higher rate care componant, I receive an 'allowance' towards my own additional costs, but not the additional costs I have to pay for the care of my children. This is yet another example of society forgetting that disabled people can be parents too.

The government is now consulting on reducing funding by 30% - consultation closes on 19 June 2014. The UK has produced some of the world's finest musicians and composers which are supported by millions of people in this country. All our children deserve the opportunity to learn an instrument and/or sing in a choir. Music education can improve numeracy, literacy and social interaction (as demonstrated brilliantly by the El Sistema programme in Venezuela).

JP Morgan identify teamwork, communication, project management, self-confidence and creativity as essential characteristics in graduates. Drama GCSE explicitly teaches and develops all these skills, which are desirable in any work environment. Our nation is famed for its culture. The theatre industry and related tourism brings great revenue to the country, not to mention our fantastic exports in film and television. Far deeper than this is the impact of Drama on a person's character. Shakespeare needs to be performed, spoken, enacted and felt to truly be understood. Reading is not enough. Where will the next Shakespeare come from if we remove Drama GCSE? It would easy to write Drama off as a sub-set of English. As a Head of Drama working for many years in the UK's most diverse postcode I am am keenly aware of the transformational, inspirational effect of practical Drama on young people's lives. Some of my former students are now professional actors. This would not have been possible without GCSE Drama. By removing Drama from the GCSE roster, it would become the preserve of those well-off enough to afford private tuition. We must maintain access for all.

Please do not ignore how important this subject is, it may one day save our planet. Education is the most powerful tool in saving the planet and helping us sustain ourselves and further generations. Environmental Studies has not just empowered students, but also changed the way they think and act about their education, their lives, and where they live. For me it's been the biggest page turner in my life, and without it I wouldn't be where I am now. This subject hasn't just helped me, it has helped countless other young adults in the UK find their passion in life and set them on their path for life, who are we to deprive others of such an opportunity? Furthermore it has actually encouraged students to go into STEM subjects at university, something that the government actually would like more people to do. Whilst some think that Environmental Studies overlaps with the other sciences, i can assure you the approach to similar topics is far from the same and each take their own angles and focus on completely different areas. This is a subject that deserves our attention, our care, and our devotion. We only have one earth, we only have one chance at this life, and how are we supposed to understand how we are affecting our home if we are not educated. If you would like to help us please sign this petition and email ofqual to speak your mind on the matter, we also have a facebook page up and running where we will post updates, important information, and some Environmental Studies related news just to show how much of an impact and how important this subject is! Email: [email protected]

Our local precinct in Accrington often plays host to a man who carries his life's possessions in a large rucksack and two M&S bags. Standing there in his burst slippers he declaims himself a messenger from god sent to rescue us from the cesspool of our morals. He is an example of (Don't) care in the community. I see so many parallels but Gove is better dressed... * "Mice and Men", "Islamic Trojan Horses" and others * Micromanagement, Term Time Holidays * Fight people and shadows outside his department So many signs... Perhaps it is too late to send for Matron. He may need a time-out and perhaps counselling. It would be a win-win situation in that teachers, and the rest of the UK could take a breath, take stock and be worry free for a while. I ask the nation to chip in. Please show you care.

Pre application planning consultation shows Austerity design is worse than anticipated due to Lewisham council not putting funding in to this which they could from the redevelopments that are causing need for school places. Sir Francis Drake Primary school is in one of Lewisham boroughs most deprived areas Evelyn Ward, it a local one form entry community school with capacity for 210 children. 52% of school pupils are have English as a second language, 41% are on free school meals and the proportion of disabled pupils and special educational needs is above average. Despite the disadvantages -Currently it is in the top 8% of school in the country for the 2013 SATS and recognised by the DFE as in the top 250 schools in the country measured by the progress made by disadvantaged pupils. The RT Hon David Laws MP Secretary of State congratulated the school for "being exceptionally effective in educating disadvantaged children providing them with a good start in life and a strong springboard into secondary education". Ofsted: Pupils thoroughly enjoy school and this is reflected in their attendance, which is above average. The school provides a very positive and vibrant learning environment, and pupils therefore feel safe and secure. All pupils are equally valued, as the school motto indicates, ‘Everyone is valued and all succeed.’ This ensures that the school strongly promotes equality of opportunity, and does not tolerate any form of discrimination. Pupils have extremely positive attitudes towards learning, and engage thoughtfully in all activities. Their behaviour around the school is often exemplary. They get on well together, and show considerable respect and care for each other. Despite its success the school has become earmarked for demolition and on its tiny site the plan is to rebuild it as a 3 storey "Pilot" Austerity "baseline design" school with reduced classroom space to provide 30 reception places for 2016 and doubling the capacity of children to 420 on the same small site. Baseline Design schools (Aka Austerity schools) The Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) is seriously concerned about the unproven ‘Austerity School’ scheme.RIBA President Angela Brady said: 'Our students, teachers and local communities deserve great schools - environments that are beneficial to the best-quality teaching and learning. In these times of austerity of course we need to cut our cloth on all spending; however, the government's proposals for the design and construction of future schools are far too restrictive with too much focus on short-term savings. They say that the scheme’s overall space reduction is ‘ignoring the safeguarding of environmental comfort’ and it is ‘not ensuring discipline and student wellbeing’. They maintain that there is ‘a failure to create functional spaces for excellent teaching’, that ‘students and teachers will be deprived of quality environments that are proven to support teaching and learning’ and the scheme is ‘disregarding statutory requirements for accessibility and inclusion’. The RIBA believe that it does ‘not deliver long-term sustainability and value’. Only time will tell the success of this scheme but for now, the children of SFD will become the first ‘guinea pigs’ for the success or failure of this type of building development. Why is this happening? The council is allowing private developments to build new homes without adequate primary provision. Instead the council has over the last four years opted to enlarge 75% of their primary schools instead. Locally we have 1432 new homes being built but the council says it has no sites to build new schools. Demolishing Sir Francis Drake will not resolve the need for primary places for the developments the council has agreed but it will permanently disrupt and change it irreparably. The council says "The Mayor and Cabinet report (April 9th 2014) provides evidence that there is a need for a school in this locality looking forward to the end of this decade. The due diligence conducted by the government's Education Funding Agency, which would manage the new build, also confirms this." We are asking the council to build a new school that they truly need- a new school would bring an additional 60 reception places in to the locality. We say no to the demolition and rebuild of our successful well maintained, inclusive and diverse little community school so that's it "exceptional work" can go on.