Independent midwives are fully registered and regulated by the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) and choose to practice outside the NHS in order to provide continuity of care during pregnancy, birth and post-natally. They are valued by women who seek their support and better maternity outcomes that continuity of care provides. Independent midwives often care for women who have had traumatic experiences in previous pregnancies. For many women, this is an absolute priority. Women must be able to choose where, how and with whom they give birth. Some women have said that if they cannot choose an independent midwife, they would rather give birth alone. We know this is not safe. We are concerned that midwives may be go underground or that women may seek the services of untrained birth attendants. Our midwives also provide vital support to the NHS. Trusts call on the support of their local Independent Midwives when they do not have the skills available. We also relieve pressure on the system when women opt out of NHS care, saving an estimated £10-13 million per year with just 170 midwives. With 2000 expressions of interest from midwives to become independent we could potentially save the NHS in the region of £100 million pounds per annum. From October 2013 thousands of women could be denied this ‘gold standard’ midwifery care as independent midwives have not been able to obtain the insurance cover required by EU law. The Government has promised to support us in finding a solution and has said that independent Midwives should continue to book women who are due to give birth after October but no action has yet been taken. You can find out more about the current situation regarding independent midwifery in the U.K in this recent R4 ‘Woman’s Hour’ programme: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s8qxc You can read more about the history and background to this situation here: http://www.birthrights.org.uk/2013/02/the-end-of-independent-midwifery-consultation-launched-into-mandatory-insurance-for-midwives/ Independent midwives Facebook campaign page here: https://www.facebook.com/ChooseYourMidwife

The land is a protected piece of open land which allows exceptional vistas of Hythe and Shorncliffe and should not be developed. The current proposals of 150 residential flats and houses on the site will change the character of Hythe forever and will lead to the almost inevitable development of the adjacent golf course to a similar residential density. The land at Princes Parade has been dredged, its been quarried, it’s been land filled, it successfully defended us against Napoleon, the Kaiser and Hitler, it protects us and our Ancient Scheduled Monument from the ravages of the sea and provides a unique habitat for wildlife. The land creates fantastic vistas of the surrounding hills, it is a protected open space, It has a recorded planning history which should make it undevelopable for residential purposes. Definitely worth fighting for! http://saveprincesparade.org/

What the Friends of John Beddoes stand for: Supporting and promoting John Beddoes School – including the excellent work of the Newtown High School team Growing a new leadership at John Beddoes – under the advice and direction of the Newtown High School (NHS) team for the next 18 months Allowing the school to retain its governing body Provided the necessary progress is being made, appointing a new head as soon as practicable, who will work under the advice and direction of NHS Supporting and promoting John Beddoes School – including the excellent work of the Newtown High School team: We are delighted with the rapid improvement in John Beddoes and profoundly grateful to the Newtown leadership team who have brought it about. We would like them to continue their work for the 18 month period of the Lead and Emerging Practitioner Scheme. We want to do everything we can to promote the school and encourage prospective parents to send their children there and are happy to offer our time and differing strengths and local knowledge to the NHS team to help bring that about. Growing a new leadership at John Beddoes – under the advice and direction of the NHS team for the next 18 months: We know that there are many very good teachers at John Beddoes. From this pool, it would be possible to develop a fine new middle and senior management structure under the advice and guidance of NHS and using the systems that they are putting in place, to help the school to develop and grow. While recognising the legitimate rights of all current staff to protection, the present management structure does not reflect the size of the school and rectifying this will put the school on a sounder financial footing. As the school grows, so more staff can be appointed into middle management roles. Allowing the school to retain its governing body for the next 18 months: If the school loses its governing body, it will have lost control of the school budget as well as the responsibility for the buildings and grounds. Even if we manage to get representatives on the NHS governors, they will always be in a small minority. The school will be run from Montgomeryshire. Therefore it is vital for East Radnorshire that we retain control of the school, unless of course at the end of the 18 months, the necessary progress had not been made. Provided the necessary progress is being made, appointing a new head as soon as practicable, who will work under the advice and direction of Newtown High School: As soon as it becomes clear that the green shoots, which we are seeing now, have the potential to grow into healthy plants, a new head should be appointed – either from the NHS leadership team or elsewhere. All schools need a headteacher who will provide consistent leadership and will be the leading representative of the school in the community. The new head should continue to work under the advice and guidance of the NHS management team as he or she develops into the role. Keeping NHS as a critical friend will be extremely important for the school once the 18 month period has passed.

A&Es all over the country are under threat - from Hartlepool in the North to Margate in the South. But the full extent of the impact of closing A&E departments is still unknown. Evidence from Newark showed that when their A&E closed, death rates jumped by more than a third. * When NHS chiefs decided to close Newark A&E they promised that more lives would be saved. However, the opposite to this has happened - more lives have been put at risk and death rates have increased. We can’t let these closures happen across the country. We need a proper investigation into the impact of A&E closures before any more are closed or downgraded. Dr Clare Gerada, Chairman of the Royal College of General Practitioners agrees. The Newark data revealed by The Mail on Sunday points to a close association between A&E closures and mortality. It is clear the provision of emergency care is in crisis across the whole of the NHS. Before any further closures are contemplated, there must be a full, independent assessment of their impact on patients and on the system as a whole.’ * If the recent ‘backdoor’ privatisation of the NHS wasn’t enough, the unjustified closure of our A&E departments * Shocking proof A&E closures cost lives, Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2323141/Shocking-proof-Accident-Emergency-closures-cost-lives-Death-rate-jumps-THIRD-department-closes.html

UK coroner Sir Robert Owen, under pressure from Foreign Secretary William Hague, has said a legal inquest will exclude material implicating either Russia's state agencies or the UK security services. Seven years after the death of her husband, Marina Litvinenko is no closer to knowing the truth about his death. This is a travesty of justice at the heart of Westminster and a disgrace to the people of Britain. Many other lives were also put at risk - in London, Moscow and Hamburg and on planes and vehicles in which the Polonium was transported. The public deserves an answer too. see: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22579463 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/17/alexander-litvinenko-widow-slams-william-hague?INTCMP=SRCH

Refuge supports a number of families who have lost loved ones to domestic violence. Rachael Slack and her two-year-old son Auden were killed by Rachael’s ex partner Andrew Cairns in June 2010, after Rachael had reported Cairns to the police for stalking and threatening to kill her. Derbyshire Police failed to tell Rachael that she and Auden were at high risk of serious harm or homicide from Cairns. An inquest found that police failures contributed to Rachael and Auden's deaths. Maria Stubbings was murdered by her former partner, Marc Chivers – a man already known to the police for killing a previous girlfriend – in December 2008. In the days leading up to her death, Maria called the police to ask for help, but none came. When the police attended the house, they took Chivers at his word when he told them she had gone on holiday. By the time they carried out a thorough search of the house on 19th December, Maria was already dead. The IPCC found that Essex Police made a catalogue of failures in their response to her. Rachael Slack and her two-year-old son Auden were killed by Rachael’s ex partner Andrew Cairns in June 2010, after Rachael had reported Cairns to the police for stalking and threatening to kill her. Derbyshire Police failed to tell Rachael that she and Auden were at high risk of serious harm or homicide from Cairns. An inquest found that police failures contributed to Rachael and Auden's deaths. Sabina Akhtar was stabbed to death by her husband in September 2008, two months after she told the police he had assaulted her and threatened to kill her. Malik Mannan had been arrested less than a month before her death for assault, but the CPS released him without charging him. Social services had received three separate referrals relating to Sabina and her two-year-old son – but closed the case without even doing an initial risk assessment. An inquest found that serious failings had been made by Greater Manchester Police, Manchester Social Services and the Crown Prosecution Service which may possibly have contributed to Sabina’s death. Cassie Hasanovic was killed by her estranged husband in front of her two young children as she attempted to flee to a refuge. An inquest into her death found that Kent Police had failed to arrest Hajrudin Hasanovic for breaching his bail conditions, and that the CPS did not take a number of steps to safeguard Cassie’s life, including failing to apply for Hajrudin’s bail to be withdrawn and failing to inform Cassie of the special measures that might have been available to assist her in giving evidence against him. The inquest also found that Sussex Police officers were inadequately trained in domestic violence. Numerous investigations into the handling of domestic violence have shown recurring failings across the country. Many women using our services also tell us that they feel completely let down by the police, and other state agencies. We urgently need a public inquiry to investigate why these failures keep happening. Individual reports put the spotlight on individual police forces and local agencies – but no-one is looking at the national picture. A public inquiry will make links between different cases and help improve the state response to domestic violence across the country. Refuge, along with families who have lost loved ones to domestic violence, are determined to create real change - for Maria, Rachael, Sabina, Cassie, and countless other women. Please add your voice to this campaign. Find out more about domestic violence and our campaign for a public inquiry at http://refuge.org.uk/publicinquiry

Throughout the United Kingdom there is a forgotten group of people. A group of people, many thousands of them, with severe, life-shortening conditions who, because of medical advances are living well into adulthood when in the past they may not have been expected to, find themselves lost in limbo in a position when they are too old to use children's respite services and yet too young for the available adult respite services. Currently, all adult hospice services are set up largely to cater for much older adults suffering from cancer and other terminal illnesses, they are just as unsuitable a place for this age group of people to go to as children's respite services are. They find themselves stuck in the middle with nowhere to go. These respite breaks are vitally important to the young adults and their families, especially for the majority who still live at home with their parents, because it is the only time when the young adults get a break from their parents and for some they can be quite isolated at home so these breaks may be their only opportunity to socialise with others of a similar age. Equally as important if not more so is the break it gives families; the parents get a chance to relax and recharge their batteries, safe in the knowledge that their son/daughter is being well cared for and enjoying themselves. However, without any respite services the parents will have to provide constant care 24 hours a day 365 days a year without a break which will lead to high stress levels for the parents, carer burnout and many other health problems, because caring for a disabled adult with a life-shortening condition is a full-time job. Its not acceptable in any other job to be expected to work all year round without even a single day of rest, so why should it be acceptable in this case? The following articles were printed in The Glasgow Herald newspaper dated 10 May 2013, and they highlight the problems facing young disabled adults with life-shortening conditions. The links to these articles are as follows:- http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/young-adults-are-being-left-in-limbo-by-hospice-decision.21041635 http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/health/hospice-charity-sets-age-limit-on-services-for-young-people.21041823

Royal Mail is part of the fabric of the nation – we don’t want to see it ripped apart. The Government has announced that it plans to sell off the Royal Mail later this year either through issuing shares or potentially a private sale which could be to a private equity company. Royal Mail provides a hugely valued universal service. It charges the same to post a letter from Aberdeen to Penzance as it does from London to Manchester. This along with free postal services for our service men and women as well as vulnerable groups could disappear. Not only that, but it provides a lifeline to rural communities. Post Offices are often the cornerstones of remote villages, and provide the space for residents to meet and conduct their affairs, particularly for older people. And Royal Mail makes a profit. £403 million to be precise. It is an asset to the UK, worth an estimated £20 billion. But the government wants to sell it off, for just £3 billion. The government is giving away a public utility so that large corporations can turn a profit. The public has not been consulted about this, it was not in any party manifesto. The sell-off is a travesty that must be stopped. Sign our petition, share it amongst your friends, and let’s keep the Post Office public.

This is important because it reaches into the heart of the modern British nation. On the one hand there is a publicly funded institution that broadcasts and supports an idea of Britain that many people believe has had its day and on the other hand there is a voice of modern Britain that is being denied its place to be heard. The role of the BBC is to be impartial and to voice all opinions of the British people and not to project only the 'audience expectations' of the BBC Board of Governors. I feel the BBC is badly off target when it comes to understanding its role in modern society and I think that only a massive public response will wake it from it's slumber.

Because patients from all over the country who suffer with rare and complex rheumatological conditions rely on the unique reservoir of knowledge, skills and practice which only this hospital offers. The ambiance of the historic hospital buildings in the centre of the city of Bath creates a family atmosphere for both staff and patients from which both benefit. It is also part of Bath's special heritage and has an important place in medical history. This is all clearly affirmed by the latest CQC inspections showing that the country's smallest Foundation Trust operates an excellent service for patients. For more details: www.savethemin.org.uk

For a thorough and definitive analysis of why NOTA is the logical starting point for electoral reform, that could usher in an era of real democracy that maximises the common good, see our white paper here: https://notaukdotorg.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/nota-wp_16_js_rv.pdf Consent is central to the concept of democracy. But consent is only measurable if it is possible to withhold it. In the context of elections, this withholding of consent MUST be formal as consenting (voting) is formal. Yet it is currently impossible to do this. Abstaining is not formally withholding consent, it is simply not participating and can be dismissed as voter apathy with no further analysis. Spoiling the ballot in protest is not formally withholding consent either as they are lumped in with those spoiled in error. Any spoiled vote count is therefore meaningless as a measure of voter discontent. And neither abstaining or ballot spoiling affects the election result in any way. Having a formal 'None of the Above' (NOTA) option on ballot papers is the only way to formally withhold consent at an election. For this reason, NOTA can be shown to be a democratic pre-requisite. As such, inclusion of it would be achievable, with enough understanding and support for it among the general public, because to argue against NOTA is to argue against the concept of democracy itself, once both ideas are properly understood. The powers-that-be must be seen to be pro-democracy at all times, even if they aren't in practice. NOTA, essential in any true democracy, is therefore achievable. All other touted reforms, PR for example, are seen as desirable only, so can be paid lip service to and ignored by those in power. This is why NOTA should be the ground zero of electoral reform. In February 2015 we took a significant step closer to getting it. Thanks to NOTA UK's lobbying, the parliamentary Political & Constitutional Reform Committee (PCRC) felt compelled to recommend that the next government hold a public consultation before May 2016 solely on inclusion of NOTA on ballot papers. This was due to their conclusion that there is not only huge demand for it but that there would be a clear positive impact on voter engagement of having it. This was a huge development. Unfortunately, one of the very first acts of the incoming Conservative government that year was to shut down the PCRC, rendering all their good work on this and many others issue much harder to follow up on. However, on the upside, it is now an official policy of the Green Party of England & Wales to introduce a Re-Open Nominations (RON) option to UK ballot papers, effectively NOTA by another, less well known name. This is definitely a step in the right direction. Having a ‘None of the Above’ option on ballot papers for all future UK elections, as well as providing a way for people to cast a protest vote if they so choose, would be a game changer for our political system as a whole – but only if implemented properly i.e.: with formalised consequences for the result in the event of it ‘winning’. In other countries that have a NOTA option, India for example, in the event of a NOTA ‘win’, the candidate or party polling the next highest number of votes would be allowed to take office regardless. Clearly, this renders the option meaningless, as a NOTA 'win' would indicate that more voters actively rejected all the available candidates than endorsed any one of them. It therefore makes no sense for the next placed candidate or party to be elected. For NOTA to be effective in the event of it ‘winning’, a remedial process must be triggered. The election must be re-run with new candidates and/or policies in place. In the UK, this would most likely occur at constituency level, triggering by-elections only. But if it were to ever occur nationally, then a second general election would have to follow. This is democracy in action. In such circumstances, we propose an empty seat is returned for each constituency has rejected all candidates, but for no more than three to months while preparations for by-elections are put in place. This would avoid political instability and the possibility of voter fatigue from having instant re-run elections whilst ensuring that the will of the electorate is honoured in an acceptable time frame. This is no more or less disruptive than what happens when an MP dies or steps down suddenly. The knock on effect of having this real NOTA option with real ramifications could be huge. To avoid a NOTA defeat, or even to avoid finishing behind the NOTA option (just as embarrassing), parties would have to rethink their choices of candidates and policies and offer something that might be acceptable to more of the electorate, would-be NOTA voters included. Implemented this way, as well as engaging disillusioned non-voters, NOTA also has the potential to engage disillusioned voters and bring politics and our democracy into the 21st Century, ultimately making our democracy something meaningful and worth engaging with in the first place - something that genuinely maximises the common good over time. If you agree, please sign and share the petition and let the current crop of career politicians and vested interests know that enough is enough. Thank you.

For a Government that is committed to ‘digital by default’ their systems for claiming disability benefit are the equivalent of sending a carrier pigeon. If you want to claim Disability Living Allowance or Attendance Allowance online you will need to take a step back to the 1990s and hunt through second hand shops for an old PC that you can power up. Don’t even think about using a smartphone or a Mac. The most recent Microsoft browser the system supports is Internet Explorer 6 which is so out of date that technology geeks have held parties to celebrate it no longer being used http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16408850. One political blogger was so amazed at the situation he thought that this was an April fools joke. http://sampb.co.uk/politics/dla-online-outdated/ Whilst a new system is being phased in for those aged 16-64 between now and 2017, for everyone else they will have to find one of the 2% of computers nationwide that still run on this out of date technology. This situation is unacceptable and must be tackled immediately. Just t in case you are into retro IT here is the link to the online claim page http://www.dwp.gov.uk/eservice/ And these are the browsers you can use! Microsoft Windows 98, ME, 2000, or XP; Internet Explorer versions 5.0.1, 5.5 and 6.0; Netscape 7.2; Firefox 1.0.3; Mozilla 1.7.7'