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.

Did you know that 94% OF RADIO 1’S MOST-PLAYED SONGS IN 2014 WERE MAJOR LABEL RELEASES? This means that they were signed to one of 3 labels Sony, Warners or Universal. We call for the BBC Radio 1 & 2 to represent the incredible music talent the exists within the UK on it's playlists by committing 30% of its playlist to music released by independent artists or labels. Jon Gomm who has has over 14 MILLION hits on his online videos says : "despite touring worldwide (I write this from my hotel room in Mongolia) and having hundreds of thousands of fans, I've literally never, ever been played on BBC radio. Not once." There are currently thousands of labels and artists who's careers would be transformed if they were play-listed by Radio 1 & 2. However, their music isn't being heard and doesn't stand a chance of being heard, no matter how good as as the three major labels monopolise the playlists. On Radio 1 this is how it looked in 2014: Warners 25%, Sony 20% and Universal 45%. This is despite the fact the BBC is a public funded body who should represent their listeners, they simply support huge corporations and NOT artists. In fact 32% of Radio X (formerly XFM) output was from independent artists, and they are a commercial station. We call for the BBC Radio 1 & 2 to represent the incredible music talent the exists within the UK on it's playlists by committing 30% of its playlist to music released by independent artists or labels. "Come on BBC: Free your DJs and free our ears" - Jon Gomm Source: http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/94-of-radio-1s-most-played-songs-in-2014-were-major-label-releases/

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.

Torbay is being sold off by our Council, piece by piece, to the highest bidder. The Pavilion has been allowed to fall into disrepair by our self-serving Council, in an apparent bid to force the public into consenting to the sale of the site (including the community green space Cary Green) for the princely sum of £1, to be destroyed by developers. Oldway Mansion, has also been left closed to the public and rotting, after being sold to developers 3 years ago. Another public facility stolen from the hands of the public. The old Hollicombe gas works has been sold off for redevelopment, at great risk to the health of surrounding residents. The Council is refusing to answer Freedom of Information requests for residents to be adequately informed about the levels of toxic dust measured around the site (presumably because it knows that these are far higher than it assured us all they would be). The pursuit of profits and kowtowing to big business appears to be more important to this Council than the health and wellbeing of residents of the Bay. For 2 consecutive years, the Mayor has shown contempt for the people of Brixham, refusing to pass on a £67,000 central government grant meant for Brixham (against the recommendations of the former Minister for Local Government, Kris Hopkins). This year, council tax will be rising by 2% while the Bay faces sweeping budget cuts, including £920,000 from children's services, £331,000 from highways and maintenance, £292,000 from Community Services, and the complete removal of funding for the Crisis Fund. Up to 50 council jobs will be lost as a result of these cuts (no doubt affecting low-paid frontline staff, rather than directors and heads of departments). In short, we will all be paying more, but getting a lot less for our money. Money is no object to the Coucil when it comes to beach huts, however - it managed to overspend by £600,000 on the Meadfoot and Oddicombe beach huts scheme. In a few months, when we are dodging potholes on roads that resemble a lunar landscape, please remember that the council incompetently blew nearly twice the £330,000 in cuts to Highways on a few seaside sheds for the wealthy minority who can afford them. Torbay businesses are being told that services once seen as fundamental will no longer be included in the extortionate business rates they pay to the Council. On top of these, the Council wanted businesses to pay a compulsory further levy to a private company who failed spectacularly in their previous attempt to provide these once basic services. The Council wanted this so much that it wasted £100,000 of taxpayers' money in a failed attempt to advertise the BID campaign, and undemocratically attempted to swing the 'Yes' vote by giving its 46 public car parks and toilets a vote! Are these the actions of a Council acting in the interests of the people who elected it? It is time this Council is reminded that it works for us, the taxpayers, not vice versa. It has a duty to all of us - those who voted for it, and those who didn't - and it is time that it was held accountable for its failure to uphold that duty. Please sign if you agree and want action.

We are currently seeing an ever growing number of homeless sleeping on the streets of ALL of our local towns just before the weather makes a turn. We cannot hide from the fact we are in the middle of a national social housing crisis. Pressure is needed to do up derelict homes and building and fill them not to mention our social housing stock increased. Those that are eligible for social housing have to 'bid' for their new property and each will be issued a priority rating. This can be different in different councils, so some may be on a point system of like our council, Thanet - a banding between 'A' being highest priority, and 'D' lowest. What has caught my attention more than anything is how the priority for homelessness in many districts has gone from an A to an automatic 'C' for instance here in Thanet, leaving people on the streets or in bed and breakfast costing 4 - 5 times as much per week to the tax-payer as the rent for a bedsit or 1 bedroom flat. We deal with those that are homeless and those facing homelessness day in day out with more rough sleepers than ever in our towns, cities and seaside areas. We see young and old, able and disabled, those from many backgrounds or situations. We see families torn apart, we see children infested with bed bug markings from poor quality but expensive B & B temporary accommodation. People will be placed for months, often years, on that Band C waiting to be housed. This involves paying rent for that room at 4 - 5 times as much as the average rent for a property. The cheapest rate being £35 per night at a B&B facility works out at £1050 pcm Local Authority allowances would pay a maximum of £350 pcm rent for this person when in premises. A huge difference of over £600 pcm being spent awaiting a tenancy. We are asking our Prime minister and council leaders to consider this alternative option At around £20,000 per container that comfortably sleeps 10, this will not only provide temporary shelter while the country plays catch up on previous failures of keeping up with housing needs for a growing and ageing population. These will allow people facing homelessness to be able to register themselves with doctors, be able to set up and access a bank account, and claim the benefits they need to get them on their feet in many cases. These have already proven a huge success in Brighton. It will keep people rough sleeping facing enforcement notices for rough sleeping on council. It will improve the health, prospects and chances of people facing rough sleeping and give voluntary organisations like the one I volunteer with, a better chance of more effectively working with clients to support them in successful tenancies in the future. It will also save a great deal of public money as will be spent more effectively. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-28035388

It's important as twice myself and my fiancé have had to scrip and scrap to have enough money just to get to and from the ATOS assessment centre in Hartlepool when I claimed ESA and we have to do the same again for my PIP assessment this Thursday as I cannot walk to the assessment centre as it's too far away from where me n my fiancé live and also because I have mobility problems with my left leg.

A privatised Channel 4 wouldn't be the same. Its focus on innovation would disappear as shareholder profits become the only priority. It would cut its work with hundreds of independent producers. We don't need another Channel 5, ITV or Sky News. Some of us enjoy Channel 4 News with Jon Snow. Some of us enjoy Countdown. Some of us enjoy Made in Chelsea. All of us want Channel 4 to stay OURS. Channel 4 is like no other broadcaster. It's a national treasure with a duty to make innovative programmes and reflect the diversity of British society. Keep it that way. "The notion that a privatised Channel 4 would continue to invest significant sums in news and current affairs or make equity investments in British feature films, or try out more programme ideas each year than any other channel, is utterly illusory." David Puttnam, film producer “I can imagine getting a call in the middle of the night from a shareholder sharing their view about something we were going to air that was going to have a lot of impact...The nature of that coverage would subtly change over time. And the fierce independence of our journalism, I can’t help but think, would alter over time.” David Abrahams, Chief Executive of Channel 4 Read more about Channel 4 on the We Own It website http://weownit.org.uk/evidence/channel-4

Our area is expanding rapidly and we have a high proportion of young families who need better access to GP services. It is almost impossible to get an on-the-day appointment to see the doctor and some patients are waiting up to 4 weeks to see a doctor about non-urgent problems.