Parents should continue to have the freedom to choose from a variety of local childcare providers: council, schools and private. Closing all the council-run nurseries will deny parents this choice. Some nurseries which are run by local schools do not open during the school holidays so this might not be a viable option for many parents, who would then be forced to move their children to privately-run nurseries. Furthermore, the council's current proposals will cause a significant amount of disruption, confusion and anxiety for a lot of pre-school children. UPDATE (18.12.15): (1) If you have already signed our paper petition, please don't sign this online petition as well! (2) North Tyneside Council will only accept petition signatures from people who live, work or study in the borough. If you don't have a North Tyneside postcode for one of these activities, please don't sign this petition. (3) Thank you for your support! There is more information about this campaign on the Facebook page "Save North Tyneside Children's Centre Nursery".

As a parent I want what is best for my children. My son was given an OPPORTUNITY when he was offered a Grammar School place. If free school transport is withdrawn, a grammar school education would become a PRIVILEGE which many parents across Lincolnshire would be unable to afford.

Whilst it’s great to live in such a beautiful part of the region, rural areas get a rough deal when it comes to services. I want to see the Post Office in Luddenden maintained to ensure those who depend on these services can continue to live in our area.

ALL SUBSIDISED bus routes in the county are set to lose their funding from Oxfordshire County Council under proposals approved in November 2015 by the Council. The subsidies are paid to bus companies and community groups so they can run 118 bus routes, mainly in rural areas, that would otherwise not be commercially viable. The bus network is vital to the health of local communities and especially important to vulnerable members of the community who use the network to access support and care and avoid social isolation. These cuts are totally unacceptable and a false economy as they will have hidden costs in terms of additional social care and health spending to support those who currently use the bus service to access support and life opportunities. The cuts also make a mockery of the County Council’s integrated transport plan and environmental targets. We are calling on the Leader of the County Council Council and the Prime Minister, who is MP for Winey and who has in correspondence questioned whether the cuts to front line council services are necessary in Oxfordshire, to resolve their disagreement about council funding and withdraw these cuts proposals before the new County Council budget is agreed in February. Deadline for completion January 12th (to be presented to the Council’s Transport Advisory Panel on the 14th January).

By the Government's own definition (31st May 1995, Committee on Standards in Public Life) the 7 Principles of Public Office are "the basis of the ethical standards expected of public office holders". By this we take to mean that all politicians in Her Majesty's Government are expected to abide by the ethical standards set out in this document; and are therefore accountable both to the public and to the members of parliament if they can be seen to have failed in doing so. In the light of large bodies of evidence which can be presented to highlight the fact that the Prime Minister has failed to uphold the 7 Principles of Public Office, I would like the the Leader of the Opposition to personally raise the issue with him, in parliament, in order to hear his response.

The government have announced they are removing the NHS bursaries for student nurses, midwives, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists, podiatrists, radiographers, dietetics, ODP's. This means we will be left with THOUSANDS of pounds worth of debt, which could take years to pay back from a salary which has been repeatedly frozen and capped. Healthcare degrees are like no other, we work 50% of the time on placement and 50% in university. Our hours are long and demanding both academically and professionally. To have our bursaries removed is insulting and upsetting. Furthermore, these loans will act as a deterent for people going to university who do not want to be saddled with extortinate debt. Healthcare courses appeal to a wide range of students from all back grounds and these high costs are very daunting. Already people are saying they are fearful of these costs meaning people are losing their dreams. This is NOT fair.

64% of us don't want student loans to be privatised - the government needs to listen. This plan doesn't make financial sense and needs to be scrapped. Martin Wolf from the Financial Times explains ‘Why the UK should not sell its student loan book’: “The UK Treasury is, it is reported, considering the sale of parts of its student loan book. This provokes a big question: when should the UK government sell such an asset – given that it is both immortal and solvent? The best answer has two parts. First, it must be believed that the asset would be better managed by the private sector. And, second, it must be believed that this superior private management can only be introduced by selling the assets – rather than introducing some type of private management contract. Thus, if the government decided to privatise the Royal Bank of Scotland, it should be because the value of the business would be higher under private ownership than it would be under public ownership. What the government paid for RBS shares is irrelevant: those are sunk costs. Similarly, the case for selling the Royal Mail is that it would be more valuable as a private business than in government hands. What of the student loan book? Would a buyer be able to offer more to the government for this stream of income than it is worth in public hands? No, because no private party has a lower borrowing cost than the government, since the government is the most creditworthy entity in the country. So the value of the student loan book to the government, given its low discount rate, is higher than to any potential private buyer. That might not be the case if the Treasury suffered from a genuine – as opposed to a purely artificial – borrowing constraint. In that case, the marginal cost of borrowing might be much higher than the average cost. That could justify selling existing assets, to replace them with more valuable assets. But the government suffers from no such borrowing constraint. So why do it? It is yet another example of a bigger problem: the manic concentration on the government’s overall debts – the totemic public debt ratio – rather than the whole balance sheet. Selling the book flatters the net public debt level in the very short term. Yet who would be impressed with a company that reported only its debts, but not its assets? It is not a sensible way to manage one’s activities. The student loan book should be left exactly where it is."

The restriction on GP referrals was introduced in July 2015. We had heard nothing of this and it appears it was sneaked in under the carpet. The excuse given is an overuse of hospital services in particular outpatient appointments. Does anyone go to an outpatient appointment unless required?. If a GP has decided that your ailment requires further investigation or treatment that should be the case. This cap on appointments could undermines the GPs professional status. The decision to refer a patient for treatment should not be based on purely financial reasons. The Referral Management System (RMS) is a scheme with a committee that take the decision on whether a patient will be referred for further treatment or tests. (what does that committee cost?) My husband is waiting for a decision from the RMS committee. His GP is in support but states that it is outside of her control. In the meantime he has to wait. Will it be yes or no. Please sign the petition to try to stop this cut, Many thanks We had a result this morning (1st December) a referral letter arrived. It shows that a little bit of pressure goes a long way.

We put forward something this town has needed since 2003, a minor injuries unit for children alongside an extension to the wonderful Brookdale dementia services, already next to that site. Let’s give something back to the community that is more important to our hearts than more shops. Margaret Brown and I (Cath Regan) are the co-chairs of CARES (Coalition Against Removal of kids Emergency & other Services), the team who fought tirelessly years ago for the return of our A & E and maternity services for our children. It is about time the powers that be FINALLY did something right and good for our children and elderly. We don’t want more shops or houses; there are plenty of both lying empty in Southport, just somewhere closer than Ormskirk and Liverpool to take our sick children to. Junior doctors are currently striking and A & E units are pushed to their limits. A minor injuries unit would give us the immediate peace of mind for our children, without 4 hour waiting times at an already full A & E. It is also a ‘perfect’ location between Formby and Southport with room for parking. Let’s finally return something that should never have been taken away thirteen years ago. I ask all parents, grandparents and families to support this and make it happen.

Traffic turning onto V1 at school-run times is heavy and dangerous with cars travelling at 60mph. This is only set to get worse as Tattenhoe Park is developed. Share your views on our facebook page https://www.facebook.com/tattenhoecommunitynews/?ref=hl Fill in the survey on what restrictions we should fight for https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/6ZHRRZH

The proposals were developed in consultation with the local community, prioritising feedback from rough sleepers at the group's weekly Love Kitchen. Love Activists hope to gather 1250 signatures to force the council to debate the proposals at a full council meeting. Reasoning/Rationale: 1. In May, the Supreme Court ruled that when local authorities make vulnerability assessments, a 'homeless person' should be compared with an 'ordinary person who is at risk of becoming homeless'. There is no doubt that any homeless person is 'significantly more vulnerable' than an ordinary person, therefore everybody living on the street should be assessed as being in priority need. The judgement also made it clear that while councils are often under huge financial strain, this must not be used as an excuse for avoiding their legal duties. To guarantee duty of care and legal obligations are met, all local authorities must provide permanent housing for anybody living on the streets. 2. Housing first pilot project had a 70% success rate in Brighton & Hove - helping 7 out of 10 people with high support needs into accommodation. 3. Extended winter provision: additional services provided over a period of time e.g. every night from November to March. If the material resources exist to provide shelter from a severe weather emergency, economic arguments against keeping the shelters open are not as powerful as the humanitarian ones for opening them. (Copy & pasted from 'Homeless Link') Humanitarian Response: SWEP should be applied responsibly to prevent death at all times; 3 consecutive nights at zero or below is the minimum requirement. Local authorities should consider factors such as wet weather and wind chill, snow coverage and duration of extreme weather when looking at provision. Preventing deaths on the streets is the aim of the protocol, so if this demands more beds and a longer response the local authority should do everything it can to prevent harm to individuals. Economics cannot change the weather any more than economics can determine people's relative vulnerability to each other. 4. It doesn't have to be severely wet to have a severe impact if you're sleeping on the streets. Severely windy, wet weather is an emergency, as is extremely hot, dry weather. Homeless Link offers advice and guidance to BHT, St Mungo's and Brighton & Hove City Council. Currently their minimum definition of severe weather is when the temperature drops below zero for three consecutive nights. (Copy & pasted from 'Homeless Link') There is no strict definition of what counts as ‘severe weather’. Local authorities should proactively identify any weather that could increase the risk of serious harm to people sleeping rough and put measures in place to minimise this. This includes extreme cold, wind and rain. It is important not to presume when, or in what form, severe weather will occur. Sleeping rough is never comfortable, but the suffering is exacerbated by all elements It doesn't have to be severely wet to have a severe impact if you're sleeping on the streets. ('Homeless Link') http://www.homeless.org.uk/sites/default/files/site-attachments/Winter%20provision%20guidance%202015-16.pdf 5. If this doesn't happen there will be no truly affordable places to live and more people will inevitably become homeless. 6. This would make use of empty properties, keep people safe and avoid waste of tax payers money, private money and time spent on security, policing and court costs. (Copy & pasted from 'Homeless Link') In addition to the direct risk associated with severe weather, local authorities should work alongside other local statutory and voluntary services to identify and mitigate actions taken during severe weather that can increase risk for those sleeping rough. For example, people may choose to sleep in riskier places, such as in bins, where they can find cover. They may also enter buildings or property illegally, or increase their substance use as a coping mechanism. 7. No single authority can successfully move to implement all of these measures, because if they 'move first', their service capacity would risk being overwhelmed by people migrating to that local authority. Therefore, we must work towards implementing these measures nationally. [email protected] twitter.com/loveactivists_ facebook.com/loveactivistsbrighton

I have had my own daughter in mental health services from age 14 she is now 20 and still in the services but out of hospital a year ago. But to get help its a battle at every step she has been waiting 12 months for her PIP money she only gets one half of it but after they accepted her claim on both parts why wont they pay her. They owe her nearly 5000 pound in PIP. She gone through enough being in hospital being neglected verbally abused threatened had to get the CQC we had over 20 complaints that was in one of the hospitals she was in on a particular ward for only 3 months we had those over 20 complaints. It was awful time for us all but there is not enough support for parents, siblings, grandparents etc I've lost all my immediate family and friends just because my daughter was in hospital and has a mental health illness. So i felt and still feel totally alone. We live in Wrexham in North Wales i travelled to Abergele 5 days a week a good 120 miles round trip everytime spent upto 8 hours per day there with my daughter cause i didnt trust staff there. She was once said by staff she is like a piece of furniture, i was disgusted by their comment just because she was a quiet girl who was severely depressed self harming etc staff calling themselves her 2nd mother or 2nd granny hugging her while they did she would steal their pass to abscond etc its totally wrong staff leaving medicine keys in toilets and my daughter had them it could of gone so tragically wrong glad to say it didnt she handed them in after an hour. But no one ever told me i could get help or where to go to find help. Constant absconding cause staff there were not trained well enough. Young staff just there for money not to care. My daughter was locked up in between to double doors in a bedroom with nothing in it for 3 months it was disgusting staff falling asleep while on her observations of 1 to 1 arms lengh but they be sitting in a big comfy armchair in corridor reading a book over 2 metres away while my daughter would have pairs of socks there to ligature with which she did on several occasions. Better training for staff and i think people should be aged 25 before working with mental health patients in or out of hospital they at least have some life experiences not like a 18 year old not knowing much, how can they support grown men or women when they dont know themselves. Better pay for support workers who are the frontliners in care in hospitals, private companies and at home. They do all the dirty work take abuse and get attacked but their pay is pennies you pay them nurses also.