The recent report, Movement for Movement, published by Dr. Aric Sigman, strongly supports the premise that recreational screen-time is increasingly displacing outdoor play among children as young as two years old, and this is having a detrimental effect on their physical and mental heath. Currently, by the age of eight, the average child will have spent one full year sitting in front of a screen and this is beginning to take a toll on our children. Based on the research outlined by Dr. Sigman in the report, we strongly support the introduction of a two-hour a day maximum recreational screen-time allowance for children and young people, and we want the government to formally introduce this as the guideline for parents. Parents and carers need a clearer guideline from the government on what constitutes acceptable levels of discretionary screen-time, and how children should balance use of screen-based devices with other activity as part of a healthy lifestyle. This is becoming more important in recent times, especially as children's recreational screen-time has increased by 50% in less than a decade. We are also losing our outdoor space, with playgrounds closing at an alarming rate, 347 closures since 2014, and many more planned. You can explore more facts and figures around how screen-time is displacing play, and what the health implications are for children on our website: https://www.api-play.org/movementformovement

When Andy Burnham was elected Mayor of Manchester, he promised to end homelessness in the city by 2020. But, there is still no concrete commitment or plan in place that says exactly how this is going to happen, nor that this commitment will continue following his first term. Hundreds of people across Greater Manchester are living on the streets in temperatures that are unbearable. The Greater Manchester Combined Authority have released an article stating official figure has fallen, due to the A Bed Every Night scheme, however this alone isn’t enough. Without a proactive and preventative Winter Plan, this crisis will not end by 2020. As the GMCA continue to develop the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework, the 10 boroughs should set a long term sustainable strategy that addresses the cause of homelessness, as well as offers solutions to those who are at risk and in need of housing.

By 2050 there will be more plastic than fish in our seas. But Scottish Premiership football clubs still give out thousands of single use plastic items every single matchday. Plastic cups, straws, stirrers, bags, they all end up clogging up our oceans and filling landfills. Football supporters shouldn't be forced to contribute to plastic pollution, just because they want a drink or some food at a match.

By 2050 there will be more plastic than fish in our seas. But Premier League football clubs still give our hundreds of thousands of single use plastic items every single matchday. Plastic cups, straws, stirrers, bags, they all end up clogging up our oceans and filling landfills. Football supporters shouldn't be forced to contribute to plastic pollution, just because they want a drink or some food at a match.

By 2050 there will be more plastic than fish in our seas. But Premier League football clubs still give our hundreds of thousands of single use plastic items every single matchday. Plastic cups, straws, stirrers, bags, they all end up clogging up our oceans and filling landfills. Football supporters shouldn't be forced to contribute to plastic pollution, just because they want a drink or some food at a match.

By 2050 there will be more plastic than fish in our seas. But Scottish Premiership football clubs still give out thousands of single use plastic items every single matchday. Plastic cups, straws, stirrers, bags, they all end up clogging up our oceans and filling landfills. Football supporters shouldn't be forced to contribute to plastic pollution, just because they want a drink or some food at a match.

By 2050 there will be more plastic than fish in our seas. But Premier League football clubs still give our hundreds of thousands of single use plastic items every single matchday. Plastic cups, straws, stirrers, bags, they all end up clogging up our oceans and filling landfills. Football supporters shouldn't be forced to contribute to plastic pollution, just because they want a drink or some food at a match.

By 2050 there will be more plastic than fish in our seas. But Premier League football clubs still give our hundreds of thousands of single use plastic items every single matchday. Plastic cups, straws, stirrers, bags, they all end up clogging up our oceans and filling landfills. we,palace supports want to set an example. Football supporters shouldn't be forced to contribute to plastic pollution, just because they want a drink or some food at a match.

There is a Climate Emergency and Newcastle City Council’s Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan is dangerously outdated, having been last published in 2010. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report this autumn warned that humanity has just 11 years left to take emergency action in order to prevent catastrophic climate breakdown due to global warming greater than 1.5°C. Above this, the risks to humanity from floods, droughts, extreme heat and growing poverty become much greater, with far worse impacts in the UK and on hundreds of millions more people across the globe. At present, the world is on course for 3°C of warming – this will be catastrophic for humanity, risking the collapse of civilisation. The Climate Change Act committed the UK to 80% cuts in greenhouse gases by 2050, but to meet this target and the UK’s obligations under the Paris Agreement requires far stronger action from local as well as national government. Newcastle Council have not updated nor publicly reported on progress with their 2010 Climate Change Action Plan nor Declaration on Climate Change. In 2014, Newcastle Council became a signatory of Mayors Adapt, the European Commission’s initiative on preparing for climate change, under which they are obligated to report on progress every two years but have not done so. Since then, the urgency of the situation has redoubled. Our council must do more to protect the population of Newcastle from catastrophic climate breakdown and to report on progress to this end. As a leader in the North and one of the UK’s Core Cities, Newcastle City Council must follow the examples of Bristol, London, Manchester and other local authorities and lead the way to a fossil-free Northern Powerhouse and UK.

The handing in of the contract at Whyburn surgery will leave our community woefully short of full-time doctors and extend waiting times beyond the, already unacceptable, level. Hucknall people deserve better.

UPDATE: The current Fire Station is now being demolished but our campaign to see the return of the Second Fire Engine is still very much alive. Please support TWO FIRE ENGINES FOR CHESTER. Listen to the experience and concerns of Chester Retired Firefighters, return Chester's second fire engine . TWO FIRE ENGINES FOR CHESTER *******MORE SIGNATURES NEEDED PETITION UPDATE BY CHESTER RETIRED FIREFIGHTERS.. Chester still only has ONE FIRE ENGINE but there is some good news...........the Petition is working !!!! The new Chief Fire Officer, after much analysis and debate, is now recommending we once again have TWO FIRE ENGINES at St Anne Street in Chester, there is even an extra space for the Second Fire Engine in the new Fire Station which is soon to be constructed on the same site.   Why is this important? The Fire Authority Councillors are voting on the return of the Second Fire Engine amongst othe proposals in April. If you live, work, study, worship, socialize in , visit or travel through Chester, this affects YOU !Please let them know that you support TWO FIRE ENGINES FOR CHESTER, please sign the PETITION if you have not already done so. ONE FIRE ENGINE, FOUR FIREFIGHTERS, THINK ABOUT IT ! The return of a second fire engine to Chester is vital and will serve to enhance the safety of not only around 100,000 residents but also our firefighters. Chester has over 45,000 homes with more at an advanced planning stage. Recently Chester was voted top for Hotel building and investment. Since 1938 (when the city was half it's current size and had half its current population) Chester has been protected by two fully crewed fire engines and an aerial appliance. These were supported by up to three on-call fire engines at one point. Since February 2017 we now have just ONE fire engine and an aerial appliance whilst other similar Heritage Cities have Two or Three. Cheshire West and Chester's economy is based on tourism to the tune of £2.6 Billion. Much of it is generated by our city. We have 206 listed buildings many of which are unique worldwide. The loss of any of these due to inadequate levels fire cover would have a lasting detrimental effect on tourism, the economy and also employment. The protection of our old buildings is therefore vital to sustain this economy. Being a University city we have the largest concentration of houses in multiple occupation (with their attendant risk) anywhere in Cheshire. Chester's one fire engine turns out to incidents; give or take; 1,000 times per year. An increasing number of these calls are to incidents in the Malpas and Tarporley areas. This being due to the sporadic availability of their on call crews. An immediate standby is not always mobilised to Chester until sometimes 30 mins has passed. That's potentially 500 hours each year that our city is without a Fire Engine. On average, just under 10 hrs per week or equivalent to shutting Chester Fire Station for around THREE weeks. Please sign our petition sharing widely with family, friends and collegues and complete the online consultation which has been launched by Cheshire Fire and Rescue Service. “Have your Say on our Draft IRMP 2020/2024. https://www.cheshirefire.gov.uk/ ****** Many thanks for your ongoing support. Take care and stay safe.

With the current system, which allows the defecting MP to be disingenuous to the election system (leaving dishonourable people the opportunity to take advantage of the popularity of a political party to ‘ride the wave’ into a MP seat for the sole intention of gaining officer for themselves rather than delivering that parties representation as promised in the election contract, and go AGAINST the will of those who elected the MP by breaking manifesto promises in any way they chose without repercussion ) and a betrayal to the voters. There are many people who vote not for their local candidate (as there is a good chance that the local electorate will not even know their candidate), but vote instead as support for a political party that shares their values (the party which is clearly labelled on the ballot paper when they put their cross in the box to vote), or even the party leader, and these people's vote should not be dismissed at the whim of the MP after election!