The WRAG is a group of people with lived experience of mental health conditions. They have experience, past and present, of using mental health services, receiving benefits and working. This manifesto is supported by North East together (NEt), the North East regional network for people with lived experience of mental health conditions. Work capability assessments are part of a rigid system which relies on the assumption that just because a person can force themselves to carry out tasks, be around people and cope with unexpected events then it means they can and should do that in the workplace. It does not take into account the way that mental health is a fluid, uncertain concept and that a timeline of recovery cannot be predicted in the way that one recovers from a broken leg. We as human beings progress best when we feel able to go at our own pace and make choices about how we increase activity in a way that is meaningful to us. This is where work capability assessments get it wrong and are counter-productive. The tough regime and low benefits available on Job Seekers Allowance increase pressure on people with mental health conditions. JSA robs a person of their security as life becomes a constant battle to make appointments, attend meetings and apply for jobs in the fear that if they don't they will be sanctioned and their basic access to food and shelter will be compromised. This system creates a vicious cycle for us all; we feel disempowered, helpless and disrespected. It breeds anger, anxiety and meaninglessness. It disincentives progress and recovery. The DWP takes the view that the country needs to get back to work, and yet it has rolled out a vicious and unsupportive programme which delays people's recovery and made it harder for people to get back into the workplace. The DWP clearly has not responded to the evidence of increased mental health difficulties, reliance on food banks and suicide linked to the changes in the welfare system. They would probably claim that the system is working as unemployment has decreased, though how long can an employment boom based on zero hours contracts and self-employment last and it is at the expense of harming a huge number of people who are struggling with their health; who want to help themselves and yet are left feeling distressed and helpless in an unsupportive system that doesn't want to hear the shades of grey in "work capability". Our Manifesto What we, people with lived experience of mental health conditions, users of mental health services, carers, families and friends need: No More Work Capability Assessment • Create a fairer system: one that treats people with mental health and physical conditions equally. • Recognise that people cannot recover while living on or below the poverty line. • Stop sanctioning those affected by mental illness. Fund Services that Meet Our Need • Commission services that support wellbeing as well as respond at times of crisis. • Provide recovery focused services that provide continuity of care across all parts of our lives. • Encourage, stimulate and invest in services that are user led or co-produced. • Resource independent support for service users to be involved in the commissioning, design and improvement of the services they use. • Commit to parity of esteem between physical health and mental health care and make sure people with serious mental illnesses have the same life expectancy as those without. Support us in Meaningful Activity • Support us in activities that enable recovery. This could be via therapy, peer support volunteering, education or paid employment or something else. • Value our contributions to communities in the roles we choose. • Support to help us into employment should be available for as long as the individual needs it. Make Mental Health Everybody’s Business • Everybody has mental health. Promote wellbeing of mind and body. • Educate children about mental wellbeing in schools from starting school. • Promote programmes that encourage employers and employees to treat people with mental health conditions with more respect whether they are customers or members of staff. • Support people with lived experience to lead, deliver and be involved in these initiatives. • Make Workplaces More Mental Health Friendly by raising awareness of mental health conditions with managers and employees. Everyone has a place in society

We undesigned Angelus Sumesar-Rai, Prosper Rich, John Xuereb at 62 Bruce Rd E3 3HL and John Hayes at 34 Mount Terrace E1 2BB ask Tower Hamlets Mayor and cabinet members for TUSH Housing Co-operative house sharing to continue as we are family like community. As TUSH housing co-operative for 35 years with our own hands we have made empty derelict houses into our homes. 3 long-standing community members together with our pets are threatened with eviction by Tower-Hamlets council wanting to destroy our family like way of living. We who at present share 62 Bruce Rd E3 3HL are: 82 years old Trinidad Indian gentleman Mr Angelus Sumesar-Rai for 30 years a part of Bruce Rd co-operative family and one of the founding fathers and to this day performer at Notting Hill Carnival. Mr Sumesar-Rai shares house with 2 approaching 60 years of British citizens Mr Xuereb and Mr Rich. Together Mr Xuereb and Mr Rich spent 1000's of hours voluntary labour on co-op houses restoration, gardens cultivation, and as pets lovers fostering local wildlife. Mr John Xuereb as his parents is himself born and bred in East London, working class, driver, carpenter. Mr Prosper Rich home at 66 Bruce Rd had a fire 5 years ago. Tower Hamlets council delayed fire repairs for 4 years and kept the property empty for 5 years just to prevent Mr Rich and other residents to return to their home. We current TUSH housing co-op members request the Mayor and the cabinet of Tower Hamlets council that we are allowed to continue our family like communal living by staying where we are as TUSH housing co-operative. It makes sense for us to stay together without any cost to the council rather than to break our community down into separate flats with bathrooms, toilets and living rooms. We realise that 82 year old Mr Sumesar-Rai greatly values his independence and if he needs support he trusts us to help him as we know him for so long. Please agree for TUSH co-operative house sharing to continue as we are family like community. Signed: Angelus Sumesar-Rai, Prosper Rich, John Xuereb, John Hayes. 17-03-2015

Cancer patients in Staffordshire should know that the people caring for them are in the business of saving lives, not making money. There’s no justification for privatisation on this scale, ordinary people in Staffordshire haven’t been properly asked what they think, and if this deal goes through, we’ll be stuck with it for 10 years - and it could open the door for sweeping privatisation of our NHS across the country. As someone who lives in Staffordshire, I don’t want our healthcare in the hands of profit-hungry private companies. This contract is an untried, untested 10-year-long experiment and we can’t let this happen. If our CCGs don’t pull out of this deal, our money will be profiting shareholders rather than improving care. Let’s stop this in Staffordshire, and put the brakes on privatisation across the country.

The financial success of such an endeavour depends on delivering a quality design that can attract users and provide real, long-term benefits to the city. To eat away at the key features in order to preserve a budget is a false economy which will result in a cheap-looking, lacklustre development that will absolutely NOT befit a much-loved and historically significant structure, and would offer little to attract tenants or visitors. The proposals include a creative quarter for artists, and refreshment and leisure facilities for visitors, with the intention of generating income to support the continual preservation of the Grade I listed monument. This generated much local interest and debate between both supporters and detractors, and following public consultations, the Planning Committee approved the scheme. The features noted above were APPROVED, not only by the Council Planning Department and Conservation Officer, but also by English Heritage and the vast majority of Portsmouth residents who responded to the consultation. As a Grade I listed monument, Point Battery shares the same designated status as Porchester Castle, York Minster and the Palace of Westminster as a building of exceptional interest. It is therefore sensible to assume that Planning Permission granted on such a building would require an intense level of scrutiny to ensure that the submitted design is appropriate and sympathetic to the structure, and that only work essential to the realisation of the proposal is carried out. Deviating from the approved documents would be considered a breach of planning control under section 171A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/8/section/171A, which can result in enforcement action being taken against the property owners. This is ESPECIALLY critical when those unauthorised changes are carried out on a nationally important historic structure such as Point Battery. As an example, the opening of the gun ports are clearly an integral part of the design, allowing essential light and warmth into the interior of the spaces and providing a more authentic historic appearance from the outside. Failure to implement this and other design elements would be hugely detrimental to the overall scheme, and could very possibly harm its economic prospects in the future. This would be an insult, not only to the many people who supported this project and the aims expressed through its design, but also to the objectors, who may now be faced with the failed development they always feared. Both these groups are taxpayers who put their faith in the democratic principles that underpin the planning process. Enforcement action would be an appropriate measure when dealing with breaches of planning control concerning a Grade I listed monument, as expressed in paragraph 207 of the National Planning Policy Framework: "Effective enforcement is important as a means of maintaining public confidence in the planning system. Enforcement action is discretionary, and local planning authorities should act proportionately in responding to suspected breaches of planning control." If the Council wish to "maintain public confidence in the planning system", then we suggest they implement the scheme they agreed to in the first place, the approved documents can be found here: http://publicaccess.portsmouth.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=MTA36TMO5G000 Portsmouth City Council: please don't let this unique opportunity end up a victim of penny-pinching bureaucracy.

We have a charity that helps vulnerable people in the day throughout the week. This project is self-funded, and since it started 3 years ago one of the heartbreaking facts we have encountered is that vulnerable people are lost every year from the cold and heat. They die from extremes in weather while sleeping outside, often alone, with nowhere to go. When housing is available, many can't cope with the day to day management of a home, and they barely survive - often failing self care . Young and Old need somewhere to be. The most important reason for this petition is to help people live. The things that defeats the vulnerable the most - which is to them like a living death - is loneliness: having no where to rest to feel safe and cared for. This leads to greater mental distress and physical deterioration. Charities pick up the slack were they can were the vulnerable of our town are concerned, but this is not enough. We who have signed this petition call for the town to have a permanent night shelter that is both a secure and safe resource for all in our community.

To give disabled people the right to travel where and whenever they wish. My husband and I were asked to leave the bus because the driver said there was no room even though there was a seat by the stairs, he said I couldn't sit there with my rollator unless I could collapse it first and put it somewhere.

There is only roughly 2% of "Ancient Woodland" left in the UK, with over 400 of these under threat from development, and ours is one of those under threat!! So we are asking for your help by signing this petition. National Grid have proposed the new Richborough Connection to bring in electricity from Belgium to power homes in Canterbury and the surrounding areas. This will be in the form of pylons and cables running from Richborough power station to Canterbury. Due to this, National Grid want to cut a 40 meter wide avenue through the northern section of Kemberland "Ancient" Woodland. While we understand that people need electricity to power their homes etc, we do not feel it is necessary to cut through protected "Ancient woodland" affecting protected species when it is in such rapid decline and is under threat , so we are urging for a re-direction around Kemberland Woods. National Grid state that they "could re-direct" the route away from Kemberland Woods", but that it will cost more money, but we say whats money in comparison to something that is irreplaceable therefore priceless?? and at such a time when our environment is in such a fragile state?? We bought this woodland to preserve it!. The biodiversity within it is rich with an ecosystem that relies on every inch of this woodland. We have protected Bats, Newts, Bluebells, and many other species that need to stay protected. The woodland floor is what classes this woodland as "Ancient", so having machinery that will cut a 40 meter wide avenue straight through the northern section will not only destroy the trees that birds use to nest, but will also destroy the very ground that makes this woodland "Ancient". Once Ancient woodlands are gone, they are gone forever, the damage is irreversible and they cannot be replaced!!. "They are priceless and need to be protected, else everybody suffers from this loss, not just us!" A quote by The Woodland Trust - "The Woodland Trust are fully supportive of Your petition, and we will be submitting our own response to the proposals and hope to see plenty of others getting involved to voice their concerns too" Our aim now is to approach National Planning Inspectorate and Canterbury City`s MP the signatures collected this summer! So we ask that you help us by signing and sharing this petition far and wide. We, the woodland and all the wildlife that live in it would be very grateful. They dont have a voice, but we do!!!

For a country that is so wealthy, there is no excuse for people to be sleeping in the streets.

The Independent Living Fund makes a massive difference to disabled peoples' lives and it's a far better alternative to the very limited help provided by council-funded care agencies, or living in an institution. The ILF is the only way a lot of us disabled people get the care and help we actually need, because we directly employ our own PA's (or carers), who can help us in the most appropriate way. Many disabled people are skilled and talented individuals who have a lot to offer society, but we can't offer our skills to the world if we are either shut away in an institution or having to rely on the massively restricted help that council agency 'carers' provide. Like non-disabled people, we all have individual needs, and it is only through being in charge of our own care that we can ensure our needs are properly met and we can reach our full potential as human beings and members of society. The Government has argued that the care provided by agencies contracted out by local authorities is sufficient for disabled people. This is completely wrong! These agencies are expensive for the councils to use yet they pay their own 'carers' a very low rate of pay. The way it works is, the more clients a council-funded agency 'carer' can take on, the more money she or he earns. This of course means less time is then available to provide help to each client. In addition, there have been well-documented cases where clients receiving help from council-funded agency carers, (either in an institution or via home visits) have been subjected to physical and mental abuse. If the disabled person can directly choose and employ their own PA, then this is far less likely to happen. The current plan to scrap the Independent Living Fund is not only inhumane but it doesn't even make economic sense! For example, it will cost a lot more to keep someone in an institution for a year or to pay the wages of an agency 'carer' than it would to provide that same person with an annual budget to pay for and control their own care. To the next UK Government: Please show some humanity and common sense and ditch the plans to scrap the ILF!

1)The Breast Cancer Unit at Ysbyty Gwynedd , Bangor has been created over many years by a team of highly motivated , highly skilled and passionate staff that go above and beyond to offer the best care available to the patients and families of Breast cancer sufferers. It cannot be destroyed by this callous move. 2) Time, Distance and expense of travel for patients and loved ones make this move unacceptable . It removes support contact from patients who are already experiencing unbelievable fear, upset and pain . A major part of the repair and healing process during this time is provided by this support. It cannot be removed from the patient's reach as it destroys any concept that the NHS is there to treat and care for all members of the community.

Some of the anticipated problems include: - building works and roadway disruption (including potentially restricting emergency service routes) - 4 new extra large, 3-storey, houses (out of character with the street), each with 2 parking spaces PLUS a driveway - removal of parking spaces outside the church on Annandale Road to accommodate the above new houses - therefore leading to increased parking problems (not to mention nowhere for the numerous weekly church visitors to park) - abolishing the trees and hedges surrounding the venue In addition to signing this petition, please feel free to comment on planning application numbers 15/00237 (houses - deadline 19 March) and 15/00238 (church - deadline 31 March) via the Bexley Council Online system: http://www.bexley.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=2638 OR send your comments in writing (including the above planning application numbers): BY EMAIL TO: [email protected] You may wish to copy councillors: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] BY POST TO: Miss J K Bansil, Bexley Council Civic Offices, 2 Watling Street, Bexleyheath DA6 7AT. You may also wish to copy the above councillor names at the same address. Thank you to those who signed the petition/submitted feedback by 19th March (the deadline for the houses proposal). THERE IS STILL TIME! Please sign this petition/ object by email/post by TUESDAY 31ST MARCH which is the final deadline for the church proposal. Thank you for your time.

As small hive beetle (SHB) is now present in Italy we should ban imports of queens and bees from this country until further notice. If SHB reaches our shores it will be almost impossible to eradicate it. Surely the advent of varroa has taught us that we should strive to keep out other exotic pests from our country. We are an island and we can protect our bees in ways beekeepers on the continent cannot. Our honeybees are already under stress from varroa. If beekeepers have to contend with another exotic pest many beekeepers will just give up keeping bees. It will be too much effort to deal with another problem. Our honey production will go down and, more importantly, the pollination of crops will be adversely affected. The beetle eats brood, honey and pollen and destroys combs thereby spoiling the honey. If left unchecked it can multiply to huge numbers in an affected colony.