Health Visitors provide a service to every child and family. They are Specialist Community Public Health Nurses who care for all under fives from the antenatal period to school age. Their value is long recognised in the protection of children, child development, growth, promotion of emotional health and wellbeing in parents and children. We support those suffering domestic abuse, in poverty and with complex health needs in any way that protects children and enables them to thrive. health Visitors make a difference to families. The effectiveness of Health Visiting is well documented. U.K. Government recently trained and recruited 4200 extra SCPHN (Health Visitors) and yet without the funds in Councils many of these Health Visitors may be facing redundancy. Along with cuts to libraries, Children's Centres and Social Services budgets, the risks to our children are mounting. In Scotland the devolved Govt has increased the mandated contacts by Health Visitors to 11 in the first 5 years, recognising that the outcomes for children will be better. In England these contacts are only 5 with a real possibility in some areas this will not involve a Health Visitor contact. Health Visitors support every child, with the emphasis and knowledge that visible children and community support for parenting is the best way of Safeguarding our under 5s. Health Visiting is 120 years old, babies and yet children require support more than ever right now in these austere times. Please ask our Government to protect our Children by funding our service.

Update (28 August, 2016): Since I started this petition the NHS Trust where I live has decided, due to the huge increase in cost imposed by Univar, the manufacturer, that it can no longer supply me with Trientine Dihydrochloride, the drug that I rely on to control an otherwise fatal rare liver condition called Wilson's Disease. The situation for me and other Wilson's Disease patients has taken a turn for the worse so please sign the petition and please share it and encourage as many people as possible to do the same. Thank you so much! Jude ___________________________________________________________ The amazing NHS, funded by us through our taxes, buys drugs and provides them to us, our family members, our friends, our colleagues, to help us beat, alleviate and control all kinds of physical and mental health conditions. My case is just one example of how pharmaceutical companies and manufacturers unfairly hike the prices of vital lifesaving drugs in order to inflate profits and company share prices. It's not the only example out there and I'm sure it's not the worst. We need to stand up and let them know that unethical price hikes are not acceptable. I have a rare genetic liver condition called Wilson's Disease. To control this, I take a drug called Trientine Dihydrochloride, which is a product that's been unchanged since it was developed for the treatment of this potentially fatal condition in the 1960s. Trientine is owned by multinational corporation, Univar, and it's been a registered product in the UK since 1985. Trientine is a great drug! It's kept me alive and healthy for the past 30 years when other drugs haven't worked. The fantastic NHS provides Trientine to me free of charge (I just pay the tiny prescription fee). The hospital pharmacist that supplies me with Trientine told me that until recently it cost the NHS about ￡400 for 100 Trientine capsules (that's a lot, right!) and that was about 16 days' worth for me. Univar has, over several incremental rises, increased the cost by about 750% so it now costs the NHS nearly ￡3,400 for the same amount. That's ￡205 each day to keep me alive and healthy; ￡1,431 each week; ￡6,219 each month; ￡74,624 each year... I now face periods without this vital drug because the NHS pharmacy cannot provide enough due to their spending limits and the increased cost. I don't know what this means for my health exactly but it's not good - I know that much. I'm not the only person. Others with Wilson's Disease are facing the same uncertainty over their health and prospects for controlling this condition. This is the ugly, greedy, unethical face of the pharmaceutical industry. Companies often have a monopoly on the rights to a certain vitally important drug and abuse this status to make profit hand over fist and inflate their share prices with no care for good organisations like the NHS that they're ripping off, and no regard for the patients that ultimately suffer, fall ill and die by being priced out of the treatment that they need. It can cost a pharmaceutical company a lot of money to develop new drugs but we're talking here about products that are long established and unchanged. There's no justification for astronomical price hikes. We need to show that we care and demand better ethical standards and enforce fair pricing regulations with us the people and our NHS at the heart. Thanks.

Animals cannot speak for themselves and while we can't change people's hearts we at least need to restrain the heartless!!

Global warming is the biggest threat this country faces

British Airways is the only safest and direct flights to Sierra Leone and leaving us means we are doomed

Mr Cameron chose to hold a referendum on the UK's membership of the European Union solely to consolidate his political position vis a vis the Tory right and UKIP. It was not a decision that was based on the country's interests or popular demand and the result has caused massive disruption and far reaching problems. He gambled with our futures for his own interests and his behaviour in this respect was not honourable and it would be a travesty to honour him officially.

We are a Stroud-based community action group and we have received a number of complaints regarding the new parking system at Beeches Green. We have sent the following to PropCo and Parking Eye. We would like to register our disapproval – we believe the new system is unnecessary and is resulting in unfair and unjustifiable impacts. Neither patients nor people who work in NHS/Social Care at the site should be forced to pay to park. Staff in the various facilities at Beeches Green report many patients – daily - complaining of confusion regarding the use of the registration machines, many unsure if they are meant to be paying or registering for free parking. The signs are complicated and the two sections of car park (free/paid) are not clearly defined as separate - those with literacy problems may have difficulty with the signs (1% of the population are illiterate and 4% severely dyslexic). Many patients have paid unnecessarily due to fear of charges from Parking Eye and many more have simply not realised that they had to register, resulting in fines. For a several weeks, the pay machines were broken – with several people being fined as a result due to their not having access to the mobile phone app which was presented as the only alternative way to pay. We have spoken to members of staff who tell us that they had never received reports of patients being unable to park under the previous system, though parking was sometimes difficult. When parking became difficult in the past, the caretaker was very successful in preventing non-NHS users from leaving their cars at the site. The new system does not only prevent non-NHS users, but also excludes users and staff of services relating to the new Redwood building and the mammography unit. Previously, many of the people working in this new building were able to park within other parts of the estate. As a part of the NHS, users and staff of the breast screening unit were also able to park for free. Now we have a system where staff and users of some – but not all – NHS and social care services have to pay to park. This has led, amongst other things, to the breast-screening unit moving to a site further from the town centre, creating inconvenience and confusion for those accessing the services.

It is important to remove the fee so that most families can be able to make application especially as more children could be further trapped in destitution and limbo if they could not afford such payment in other to regularies their stay, and will therefore continue to be supported by their respective local authority with continuous burden on the tax payer.

`A swift and decisive decision is important because of the Dire Economic Consequences we were all warned about should the United Kingdom vote for Brexit. This decision is long overdue. The Airports Commission, set up to look into airport capacity in south-east England, published its findings in favour of Heathrow on 1 July 2015. Since then, the final decision has been delayed by David Cameron's government. David Cameron's Government has shown a lack of leadership by failing to make a decision on how to expand airport capacity — a failure which could hurt the economy, Britain’s biggest business lobby group, the CBI, has said. Dithering and delay must be avoided at all costs by ministers who are urged to ‘act swiftly’ and ‘grasp the nettle’ in building a new runway at whichever location the Government’s airports ‘tsar’ Sir Howard Davies recommends. But failure to act quickly could cost the UK economy between 0.2 and 1 per cent of the nation’s wealth or GDP by 2050 - or between £42billion and £214billion over the next 60 years, depending on which site is chosen for expansion, says the CBI, report. The economic consequences of the Government not acting upon the Airports Commission's recommendations include significant lost productivity and inward investment. Gatwick, the West Sussex airport, recently announced a £200m programme of investment until 2021. Projects include expansion of both the north and south terminal departure lounges and immigration halls, upgrading shopping facilities, and extra aircraft parking stands. The airport said it would bring total investment over the next five years to £1.2bn. Heathrow said there were significantly greater benefits to its proposal to build a third runway. "The Airports Commission disagree with Sadiq Khan and Gatwick," said a spokesman. "Brexit makes the Commission's conclusion that, with Heathrow expansion, 'the benefits are significantly greater, for business passengers, freight operators and the broader economy', even more persuasive (This is Money) Failure to act quickly could cost the UK economy between 0.2 and 1 per cent of the nation’s wealth or GDP by 2050 - or between £42billion and £214billion over the next 60 years, depending on which site is chosen for expansion a recent report states. The CBI's President, Paul Drechsler, who was previously chief executive of construction firm Wates Group, said: “More than ever before, it is absolutely critical that the government sends a signal, loud and clear, that the UK is open for trade with markets across the globe. “Building a new runway in the southeast is a key decision for the long-term future of our economy and country, and will demonstrate to, and reassure, Britain’s workers, makers, exporters and investors that the UK is open for business. Last year the CBI showed that delays to getting a decision on airport expansion by 2030 could see the UK lose out on over £30 billion in lost trade with the BRIC economies alone. “Our new analysis shows that our European rivals with spare capacity will be gaining at the UK’s expense, cashing in on their own thriving connectivity, if we fail to get on and build a new runway. By 2030, better capacity will see German trade with the BRIC economies alone grow by an additional £15 billion, and French trade grow by £7.5 billion – trade that could and should be coming here. “We could still avoid this scenario, if the new prime minister makes a decision with a clear timetable for action immediately after entering Downing Street, so that construction can begin by 2020.” . "Brexit makes the Commission's conclusion that, with Heathrow expansion, 'the benefits are significantly greater, for business passengers, freight operators and the broader economy', even more persuasive I THEREFORE PETITION, THE RIGHT HONOURABLE, THERESA MAY, THE PRIME MINISTER AND HER GOVERNMENT to make a SPEEDY decision on the construction of a Third Runway for the South East of England, Heathrow or Gatwick, before the end of this Parliamentary Session for the benefit of the Ordinary People of this United Kingdom and her Economy as recommended by the Expert Opinions cited above.

This service serves the public very well and is well used. I believe that this is a crucial service, particularly because of the difficulty accessing health care both in normal working hours and OOH services.

‘First I am want to add my apologies to the event and the huge admiration for Barnet UNISON.I want to send a message of support to John Burgess & the Save Barnet Libraries campaign for their tireless & inspirational community campaign to protect their local Library service. I would encourage everyone to join their Kids4Libraries this Saturday 12 September. Barnet Council are determined to outsource all of their services I salute Barnet UNISON & the community campaign for their ongoing fight to defend public services.’ (Jeremy Corbyn September 2015, http://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/page/2/?s=Libraries ) Barnet Council has begun statutory consultation with all of the Library workers. The proposals seek to: 1. Sack 50% of the workforce. 2. Restrict the number of hours the Libraries are open with staff. 3. Limit access to Libraries for children under 16 and the disabled. 4. Replace paid workers with volunteers. 5. Prepare the remaining service for outsourcing. 6. Shrink the size of many of the Libraries. This is an attempt to disguise the destruction of a Library Service which recently achieved a 93% customer satisfaction rating. This proposal is yet another example of how Austerity policies are decimating public services. Libraries are a valuable community asset and need defending. Library services across the country are facing extinction, now is the time to join the fight for Libraries. Incredibly, 11 July 2016 Barnet Council announced they would be increasing the size of their Press Team at a cost of £0.5 million a year, whilst cutting Library frontline services. Every signature you secure for this petition does help the service and the morale of our members facing redundancy. For further details: https://youtu.be/_3XfibjbJuA http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/14541517.___We_need_to_take_action______Barnet_library_workers_to_strike_over_cuts_to_service/ http://www.european-services-strategy.org.uk/publications/public-bodies/transformation-and-public-service-reform/options-appraisals/direct-and-collateral-damage-to-barnet-librari/barnet-libraries-unison-march-2016.pdf

Nuclear weapons are an anachronistic hangover from the cold war and serve no useful purpose in the modern world. With the greatest risk to our society likely to be terrorist attacks in out own country or those of our allies nuclear weapons no longer have a place in our arsenal.