Sure Start Children's Centre services in Newcastle are facing a two thirds cut in funding over the next three years. This will mean closure of services, buildings, parents groups, activity for young children across the city. It will mean at least 100 jobs will be lost across the council and the voluntary sector. It will mean the opportunities for children and parents will continue to be worsened, following significant cuts already 2010, and the axing of the councils play and youth services last year. SSCCs in Newcastle are all rated Good and Outstanding by Ofsted, reach the vast majority of children under 5 and their families offering universal as well as targeted services. The council proposals:  For the three year budget cycle (2013 – 2016) - the cuts proposed equate to over £5 milllion (or approx. 65% of the total budget) The first £1 million savings have already been agreed, with a proposal for a further £1 million this year and then £3 million for the year 2015-16.   Overall the cuts since 2011 will equate to over 70% with the budget being reduced to less than £3 million from approximately £10 million in 2010-11.   The review of Sure Start and Early Years Services has now been incorporated with the Family Services Review which is being asked to cut £670,000 over the next two years out of budget of £2.3 million which is a 34% cut in services to the most vulnerable families, children and young people.   50% of these services are delivered by the council and 50% by the Community and Voluntary Sector. The city council have estimated that for the work they directly deliver this would equate to the lost of 63 full time equivalent posts (i.e. this will actually be more than 63 people losing their jobs as many jobs are part-time or may be job share) we can only estimate that the equivalent level of job cuts would be made by the Community and Voluntary sector meaning the job cuts proposed would be at least 126 full time posts (probably between 130 and 180 people losing their jobs)   The review has not identified which Sure Start Children’s Centres, Services, Buildings or staff will face cuts.   The councils review timetable includes: ·         April 2014 onwards: Options appraisal (looking with partners at what the cuts could like and coming up with proposals) ·         July 2014: Consultation on the proposed cuts and closures ·         August 2014: Partners agree which options are to be implemented ·         September 2014: Implementation of the cuts for both 2014-15 and 2015-16. ·         March 2015: All cuts implemented.   The councils proposals for 2014 – 2016: http://www.newcastle.gov.uk/sites/drupalncc.newcastle.gov.uk/files/wwwfileroot/your-council-and-democracy/budget_2014-15_-_pc_-_2_-_family_services_review_0-25_incorporating_early_years.pdf   Previous year budgets: http://www.newcastle.gov.uk/your-council-and-democracy/budget-annual-report-and-spending/budget   Unison’s campaign page: http://unison-newcastle.org.uk/sure-start.html   Motion passed at Unison Newcastle City AGM: http://www.unison-newcastle.org.uk/assets/files/AGM2014/140210_18%20Motion%20-%20Save%20Sure%20Start.pdf

The permission was granted by the Forest of Dean District Council for their ownership, but the Monmouthshire Council have been making excuses for the last few years since the original proposal. All over the UK county after county's citizens have been benefiting from these valuable resources for leisure and transport purposes. Why are we waiting and consistently fobbed off with trivial excuses all the time? There are no cycle paths through Chepstow while everywhere else benefits. Despite all the Bills, Papers, and Consultations you pass and now 'The Wales we Want' campaign, we are ignored. This path would enable less able bodied people to access the beauty of the Wye Valley, it would provide business and opportunities locally, and hold these opportunities within Chepstow and surrounding villages where presently people go further afield for leisure facilities. Also it would encourage forms of sustainable transport such as cycling and walking, enabling many people to leave their cars at home. The already established paths in the UK are used by thousands everyday for multiple purpose. Why are we denied this resource, is it because our Council is blind to the future?

Brighton and Hove is the first and only green council and yet it doesn't have any real green initiatives! There are many councils that do various schemes (vouchers, cash back etc. full list here http://www.fill-your-pants.com/councilnappyincentives.html) but Brighton does nothing. Around 8 million disposable nappies are used every day in the UK (50 million were dumped in 2007 in Leicestershire alone- the equivalent of 70,000 double- decker buses)! Most of these end up in landfill sites. It is estimated that more than 300 pounds of wood, 50 pounds of petroleum feedstocks and 20 pounds of chlorine are used to produce disposable nappies for one baby each year. For every £1 spent on disposable nappies, there is a cost to the taxpayer of 10p to dispose of them! Leicestershire taxpayers pay £250,000 every year to dump disposable nappies in landfill sites. By ‘going cloth’ your family can incur a direct saving of up to £500.

The initial consultation was manipulated to include responses from people who wouldn't be affected by the scheme. This 'fix' enabled the council to claim a 50%/50% split vote, but their own guidance (document HP 4/15) states "Experience has shown that Resident Parking Schemes will not be successful unless they have majority support of responses received". 50% is not a majority, but members of all parties (including the Greens!) decided to go ahead anyway. There is neither the wish nor the need to move from free parking to permits of £120 per year plus the cost of visitor permits. Council officers and members deny that the scheme is about the money. But a FOI (Freedom of Information) request showed that, in this zone alone, they could expect net profits (ie profits after costs) of £700,000 over 10 years: and that without any increase to permit or parking costs. The Council intends to continue rolling out its pay-for-parking schemes right across Brighton and Hove, in every area: these schemes are viral. Once an area has a scheme, displaced parkers create parking problems in neighbouring areas, who then also feel forced into having a scheme, and so it goes on. It is a completely deliberate attempt to create a 'cash cow'. The council was so keen to instigate its scheme (we had already refused it twice) that its contractors worked all over Bank Holiday weekend (starting at 8am with angle grinders, diggers etc). The lines are painted and some of the sign posts are already in. We are already being harassed by 'fake' parking tickets and bully-boy tactics by the council's contractors (and have plenty of evidence). The schemes spoil our environments, discourage visitors and threaten local businesses. In other areas, people have dug up front gardens to create off-road parking: flora and fauna lost, as well as the original parking space that was there. Some of us have organised ourselves, but the Ombudsman will not take our case, and we cannot afford a Judicial Review (complaints investigated' by the council themselves have got precisely nowhere, unsurprisingly). The council called the police twice to arrest our local lay priest - he was only exercising his right to peaceful protest, and - thankfully - the police saw this. We need your help, please, in getting the council to stop and pause, and re-run a fair consultation by which we will all stand.

The NHS was giving to the people of the UK it belongs to us and not the private proffiteers, We all pay for NHS in our taxes and local charity collettions for the local NHS Hospitals for things that they need like CAT scans. I like many others are not prepared to see it sold off bit by bit. The idea at the moment is to get people interested in saving the NHS nationally and the only way left now is a masive march in London on a mid week day.

This is a well-used and loved local amenity constantly utilized by children, pet owners, ramblers, cyclists and even just people walking to the village shop. I have lived here for 15 years and have seen these woods used daily by many locals and also by ramblers, dog walkers, cyclists and horse riders who come from miles around to enjoy the wonderful views of Kent. Children play on their bikes, off the public footpaths, they even have a name for an area where they ride which has an undulating landscape, they call it "The Bumps". In the summer they play late into the evening and we often join them with marshmallows and drinks. If you want to avoid the road and the risk of getting run over, Stubbs Woods is a pleasant walk from Goathurst Common to the Ide Hill Village Shop. Many of us wander these paths to collect our Sunday paper. Last summer the residents of Goathurst Common and Mackerels Plain fought a planning application by one of the major landowners to develop another part of our area of outstanding natural beauty into an industrial farm complex. A petition raised to oppose that garnered 700 signatures. This was enough to persuade the local council to oppose the plan and it was eventually withdrawn citing the public opposition as the reason. So petitions work, I hope we can get a similar response to save our spectacular, ancient and well used public space.

We as a local support group from South Tyneside have been campaigning since 2006, because a Diabetes pandemic has been predicted by professionals and we need to be prepared for this. As it stands Diabetes sufferers have to attend regular check ups e.g. Eye and Foot screening, Blood tests, podiatry and annual reviews at GP's surgery or hospital, at the moment these appointments are held at various locations and ideally would be much better to be done under one roof especially for the elderly or children who need public transport to attend each of these very important services.

If I had scammed £90,718 off the DWP, I would be in jail. Why is this not the case for Maria Miller who stole our taxes in yet another expenses scandal? Mr Cameron, the message you are putting out is 'one rule for one and a different rule for the other'. It's like you're telling your MP's 'it's okay as long as you don't get caught'. I thought no one was meant to be above the law? Also, she only has to pay £5000 back? We, the people, want justice.

This is a totally unnecessary decision and shows the Government does not value hard working nurses and health care support workers and are relying on their good nature and dedication to just accept it. A recent pay review body recommendation to increase MP’s salaries was accepted but then it was MP’s voting for their own pay increase! Please sign up to our petition so the Government knows how bitter a pill they are trying to make us swallow.

Our local village needs it's post office, it's a main part of the community, a post office is a place for the young and the old, a place where they can trust a postmaster to look after there needs , who else would know if an elderly person in the village had not been seen for a few days, or a vulnerable person had not received there benefit money , who else would know if someone was getting forgetful or if someone was taking advantage of some one , the post office is the hub of the community x

The public have no come-back, especially in rural areas, as it's not written down in law that they have to provide them. It is a public health issue as people will use other sites if necessary. This is a basic human right, which has more impact on women and disabled people, as well as workers in rural areas such as van drivers and bus drivers.

This petition is important for the simple reason that the Post Office is a vital part of the community in New Malden, and the only 'main' Post Office for a while around. Even a busy town like Kingston no longer has a main Post Office. The Post Office are trying to cut at least three, potentially four members of staff at the end of April, to be replaced by machines in Mid-May. The people of New Malden don't want machines to pay their bills - they prefer interacting with humans over the counter. DID YOU KNOW? Since 2012, if these plans are to go ahead, the Post Office will have lost 6 members of staff in 2 years - that's 50%! From 12 members of staff, to 6. Queues are already long enough now in New Malden Post Office, and it can't manage with 4 staff less. We need the Post Office to recruit new members of staff at New Malden Post Office to make up for this staff loss, and to, in effect, save New Malden Post Office. (See More at www.coombemonthly.co.uk)