Camden's plans for houses on these sites are a really bad idea for several reasons. These will NOT be Social Housing and it is very unlikely that they'll be able to sell these plots at any profit. Camden's previous attempts at developments nearby have resulted in empty apartments. Local Residents' concerns about what will be built on the sites are being ignored so that Camden have a chance of selling them off to a private developer. Please sign our petition to object to development of these 3 sites. It is now time for Camden to listen to the local community. Your voice counts!

Resolving this issue is one which the government should prioritize as gender inequality is an issue which should not be prevalent in 21st century Britain.

Following the Homelessness Reduction Act, which came into force in April 2018, local authorities have a duty to provide interim accommodation for “all people found to be homeless and in priority need” and “In determining who is in priority need, housing authorities will need to be aware that ‘an applicant may be considered vulnerable because of a combination of factors which taken alone may not necessarily lead to a decision that they are vulnerable (e.g. drug and alcohol problems, common mental health problems, a history of sleeping rough, no previous experience of managing a tenancy)” We, the undersigned, call upon the Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk to follow on from the successful night shelter funded by Churches Together and fund a night shelter 7 nights a week as part of the interim accommodation

The citizens of Suffolk Coastal already pay significant amounts of council tax, in which waste disposal is included. There is no reasonable explanation to why we should be trying to find extra funds to support a service that is already included.

The preservation of the Sutton Estate is strongly supported by The Victorian Society due to its fine architecture, historic value and its contribution to the Chelsea Conservation Area. Furthermore, RBKC have given no explanation whatsoever for why the Estate was not originally included in the Conservation Area, since all other buildings of that period are, and as a result remain protected from demolition. The Sutton Estate is an Edwarian social housing estate completed in 1913, the largest ever built at that time, comprising 16 red-brick blocks, designed by renowned architect Edward Charles Philip Monson. It was founded in 1900 with the funds of entrepreneur and philanthropist William Sutton who left his fortune to provide housing for the poor. Clarion Group (who took over Affinity Sutton) propose to demolish the historic estate and replace it with an ugly modern block which The Chelsea Society calls “bland and lacking in character”, with a large part of the land to comprise luxury housing. James Hughes of The Victorian Society wrote in support of the estate's preservation, saying “Sutton Dwellings is an early example of social housing which makes a positive contribution to the local area and sits well with the 1915 Samuel Lewis Trust Dwellings opposite. With its handsome proportions it is unsurprising that many residents are unhappy at leaving...Affinity should spend its money on sensitive restoration rather than demolishing this early attempt to address inequality in London.” There has now been a date set, 9th May, for the appeal of their plan, which was rejected on the grounds that it did not provide enough replacement social housing. The new plan will still fall short in social housing by 70 apartments.

The borough of Camden has one of the highest homeless people in the country. Those living on the streets have difficulty accessing basic services. Those homeless with mental health issues are the most vulnerable and require more not less psychiatric care and follow up.

You are removing the annual visitor permit for residents in permit parking zones. The daily parking permits have increased in price by 100%, from £1 to £2. This directly affects the residents who live in areas without off road parking, usually smaller cheaper properties than those who live in non permit roads with off road parking. This means instead of paying £35 a year for a visitor permit, people could have to spend £730 a year to use a daily permit every day of the year. This is a 1986% increase, which is a huge financial increase to residents.

As mentioned in the ongoing consultation on the property-buying process (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/653789/Home_buying_and_selling.pdf), hundreds of millions of pounds are wasted every year due to failed transactions in relation to purchasing property. But this consultation does not seek to address the fundamental problem underlying much of this waste: that potential buyers are being forced to prove aspects of the quality and value of a property that could have been proven - once and for all - by the vendor, yet, in the case of properties with issues, are unearthing issues that had been unearthed in surveys by previous potential vendors. The buyer has to prove to him or herself that the property is of sufficient quality! This should be the vendor’s responsibility to prove. This system only benefits those who charge fees to supply the services related to these surveys, i.e. conveyancers and surveyors. It takes place at the expense of buyers. It has to change and be aligned with the Australian system.

Last week was one of the coldest weeks we’ve had in a long time . Whilst out on the street we saw people sleeping in door ways with nowhere to go. Local support workers and people who work for homeless shelters told us they were completely packed and didn't have enough space to let in more people. Recently, in Bristol and London, homeless people have been dying on the streets from hyperthermia. In Brighton alone 17 people died in 2017. And last week a homeless man in Lincolnshire died in his tent. This cannot go on.

At the moment we are seeing the coldest weather ever and terrible condition. There are so many homeless and their pets with no where to go and are been left to try and survive in this awful weather. There are so many church’s that could open their doors to give people shelter and the community could help run these between them with help from professionals. Please sign this petition to get the church’s in this country to help those in need.

Introducing anti-homeless benches is not going to solve homelessness in Southampton. The council have a responsibility to support people living on the streets by providing shelters. Instead they are making it harder for those without a roof over there head to get by. Benches can provide a place to sleep that is off the ground and dryer than the floor, and sleeping in the town centre is often safer for people sleeping rough, due to CCTV. Hiding societies problems does not solve them. We want Southampton council to act now!

I grew up on Edgeside, many residents of the valley will know about its difficult history. In 2002 Rossendale Borough Council was ranked as one of the worst in the country for local authority homes after previous administrations had left the properties to decay. Recently, there have been concerns raised about regeneration schemes, empty homes, homelessness, and planning decisions made in the area. However, these have been ongoing issues for the area for decades and have been challenging for parties of all colours. Previous empty homes initiatives haven't worked, including recent attempts and earlier ones, such as the Pathfinder initiative. Several changes of Council haven't lead to these issues being fully addressed either, but I believe that a change of how the council structures their work would make a real difference. A scrutiny committee is a missing constant and there are many issues around housing which need to be looked into in depth. Over the past year, 5 out of 10 of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meetings have considered housing issues. This takes away from the chance to discuss non-housing matters, without giving housing the focus that it warrants. I believe these challenges deserve a scrutiny committee of their own which brings together a range of services. The Government have cut funding to councils over the past few years. This leaves many councils under-funded and over-stretched. Ours is no different. While initiatives in Edgeside have seen the area transformed, this has only been possible by working in partnership with the local community (including community groups like the White Horse Project). Yet, several challenges continue in other areas of the valley and policy. A scrutiny committee, which is open to the public, would allow the council to work more closely with its residents. Together we could glean some insight into what might be the most effective changes, focus our efforts on bringing them into fruition, and solve some of the issues facing our friends and neighbors.