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.

Patient choice is important; homeopathy works, it's widely used by doctors in Europe, and patients who are treated by homeopathy are really convinced of its benefits, as am I.

The 1987 Act legally prevents thousands of UK Veterans from proper compensation............This must change and soon! You are urged to comply with the Prime Minister's vow to review this unfair payment rule (PM Question Time: 04 Nov 2015). For example: Fred Minall aged 74 joined up at age 15 and served 8 years in the Royal Navy as a mechanical engineer. He was heavily exposed to asbestos whilst working from the age of 16 years in engine and boiler rooms and machinery spaces or compartments on 4 of Her Majesty's Warships at home and abroad. Prior to his diagnosis he was a fit 74 year old man who enjoyed travel, caravanning and sport. At this date he is extremely fatigued, has no interest and is unable to partake in any exercise, e.g. 4 months ago he could swim 40 lengths of a swimming pool, now cannot swim at all because of exhaustion. He has been reduced 'overnight' to a feeble unwell man and has just started 18 weeks of chemotherapy which may or may not be effective. Fred is just one of an estimated 2,500 people who have or are likely to be effected by this fatal disease following exposure to this lethal asbestos. You will agree that all service personnel deserve to be recognised for their commitment to the country and should receive the same level of compensation as all civilians and all other Armed Forces service personnel after 1987. You may agree, that the MOD was negligent having the knowledge that this mineral substance was highly dangerous by allowing their personnel to work in a dangerous environment without warning of its dangers, without protective clothing or protection to their airways. Now they must suffer the consequences for their innocence.

To plead to the Council to open its empty buildings to the homeless in winter. I cannot imagine sleeping rough in driving, biting winds, snow, ice and winter rain. It's inhumane. It's also inexcusable when we have so many empty buildings.

This is immoral as such companies should not promote and profit from the impulse buying of sugary snacks, which increase the risk of obesity and diabetes. Furthermore, they should not impose such sales targets on their staff.

Pet owners. The elderly. Parents. Shift workers. We know the cost of a bit of fun. It's not just one evening. It starts at the beginning of October, and goes on and on, to Christmas, new year, and so on. Animals cannot tell that this is fun. It sounds like war. It sounds bad. It sounds scary.

To plead to the Council to open its empty buildings to the homeless in winter. I cannot imagine sleeping rough in driving, biting winds, snow, ice and winter rain. It's inhumane. It's also inexcusable when we have so many empty buildings.

More and more people are becoming homeless everyday, particularly in the climate of austerity and we are all susceptible to the adverse effects of harsh winter weather. With babies and children dying in cars when sleeping rough with their parents and number of people, even with houses, dying due to the bitter cold it is of vital importance that people are protected this winter. Furthermore, preventative action to reduce health problems as a result of cold weather could save the NHS money as they would not have to treat illnesses due to harsh weather. It is therefore simply logical to open up empty buildings this winter to provide shelter for those who are in need. References : http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/baby-who-was-forced-to-sleep-in-car-with-homeless-parents-dies-a6669301.html http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/feb/04/uk-death-rate-above-average-winter-cold-flu

Lives can be saved / extended with improved quality. No hospitalisation required and patients are able to walk away from treatment and resume normal life. There are little or no side effects, it is painless and there is little or no damage to surrounding healthy tissue. No long drawn out treatment, it is carried out in between one and five treatments, (more often than hot, three.) There is no risk of infection and no lengthy recovery periods either.