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.

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

We think there are 10.2 million hypothyroid patients in the UK so this is a significant number. The NHS won't prescribe (see research links on Prezi below) anything other than Levothyroxine because Levo costs £26 a year and T3 costs £1300 per patient per year. This is a case of mindset myopia because our research indicates that the long term cost to the NHS and taxpayer is much higher through prescribing extra medication and hospitals referrals required due to associated conditions such as high blood pressure, heart problems and mental illness etc. The lack of interests from GPs has pushed many hypothyroid patients to self-medication because they are fed up of feeling ill. This means patients are taking strong hormones with no supervision. My Prezi contains the full list of links for the research to put my presentation together - http://prezi.com/0ljwmhl87lnv/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy&rc=ex0share

There's already a shortage of UK trained nurses and the withdrawal of bursaries and introduction of loans will be detrimental in recruiting people for training. It will lead to even greater crisis in health care provision.

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.

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.

Being a type 1 diabetic I need to know what carbohydrates I am consuming to allow me the chance to keep blood sugars in target range to prevent complications.

They have made this decision, without consultation with patients, or other interested parties, such as Coeliac UK in order to save £70 000per annum. Whilst I am fortunate enough to be able to make the additional food purchases that will be required, many people will not be in the same position as me and will eat gluten containing food to save money. The CCG further state that gluten free foods are now of a similar price to gluten containing food, which is simply not the case. Furthermore, those who do not live with access to a supermarket that sells such food (and most local, or convenience stores do not) will suffer... There is an additional issue regarding those who are newly diagnosed, who trust the food on prescription, which they know will not give them symptoms.

This consultation has had no publicity at all and therefore few know of it. If there is to be such a document then all should know of it and what it means. This is the web page for it. It currently closes on the 23rd November https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/setting-the-mandate-to-nhs-england-for-2016-to-2017 This is about deciding on the future of the NHS. This is where I found out about it and until that day I didn't know it was taking place. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/19/nhs-mandate-england-consulation-deadline?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H&utm_term=138466&subid=13000417&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2

On 22nd December 2016 Birmingham City Council’s Planning Committee approved Lidl’s application to build a new supermarket on the Pershore Road site currently occupied by Fitness First Stirchley and PSL Bowling. Having previously rejected the application, the decision left the whole community, including its local councillors (across several political parties), shocked and disappointed. The community came together and petitioned against this decision, mounting a legal challenge with the Environmental Law Foundation. We were successful, and Birmingham City Council agreed to quash the application, admitting their errors. The latest news is that Lidl allegedly want to buy the land regardless. We are disgusted by this behaviour and petition Birmingham City Council to support us in saving our leisure facilities. We also petition Lidl to reconsider other vacant sites in Stirchley, of which there are plenty. We feel that this site is the wrong location for the Lidl store for the following reasons: Loss of PSL Bowling - a family run, independent business that supports local economy. Nearest alternative approximately 4 miles away Loss of Fitness First Stirchley – a popular fitness gym with over 3800 members amidst reports of a growing obesity crisis costing Birmingham over £2 billion every year Loss of jobs – 62+ people are set to lose their jobs across the 2 sites with Lidl only committing to 20 full time staff Further traffic disruption – concerns over increased volume of traffic on an already highly congested route and impact on residents parking Alternative Stirchley sites available – derelict site owned by Tesco and proposed new Aldi store on Magnet site Already enough supermarkets – 19 supermarkets in a 3 mile radius

The 567% increase in fees payable to the Care Quality Commission for Primary Care registration will financially cripple many Primary Care Providers and will negatively impact upon service provision. Practices could find themselves in a position where they are closing branch surgeries in order to move down a bracket in the fee structure, i.e. pay less fees for one site rather than two. This will adversely affect the quality of care we provide, as practices will have no option but to cut services and personnel in order to meet the extortionate fee currently being suggested. Such an action would be damaging to the patient/doctor relationship and would discriminate against patients with disabilities/those unable to travel to other branch sites. This would conflict with the CQC commitment to ensure “that people receive safe, effective, compassionate and high quality care”. We respectfully request a review of the Primary Care Registration Fees structure, as we do not feel that a rise in fees of 567% is justified in any way.

As pointed out recently by the 2015 Lancet Commission on Health and Climate Change, the global health improvements witnessed in recent decades risk being undone by climate change.. We also know that most of the existing coal, oil and gas reserves must stay in the ground if this is to be avoided. However, the energy sector’s continued exploration for new fossil fuel reserves makes clear that they will only respond to market forces. The ethical and financial case for fossil fuel divestment is thus well founded, and widely supported by, amongst others, the President of the World Bank and Director-General of the World Health Organisation (WHO)- both public health physicians. Whilst we commend the Gates Foundation Asset Trust’s recent decision to divest $765.9 million worth of shares from ExxonMobil, we feel that this does not go far enough. By failing to divest from the major fossil fuel companies, the Gates Foundation is implicitly providing moral support to companies that continue to obstruct meaningful action to reduce GHG emissions. Just as important, it sends the wrong signal to many governments who continue to frame their energy policies under the influence of the fossil fuel industry. It also misses the opportunity to support a transition to a safer and healthier world through transfer of investment to the renewable energy sector. Constructive engagement with the fossil fuel industry is important, but the Gates Foundation is better placed to support the transformation of the energy sector if it does not simultaneously signal that it is morally acceptable to profit from industries that cause global warming and threaten the health, biodiversity and security of the planet. Yours sincerely, Dr David McCoy, Medact, UK Prof. Hugh Montgomery, University College London Prof Sue Atkinson and Dr Robin Stott, on behalf of the Climate and Health Council, UK Dr David Pencheon, Director, Sustainable Development Unit for the Health and Social Care System, UK ----------- If you are from outside the UK then please email [email protected] with the following details, and we will add you to the petition manually: Full name, Email, Job title, Country and whether you work in the health sector.