The R&A has introduced a "no-readmission" policy so that spectators with general admission and hospitality tickets will not be permitted to re-enter the venue after leaving the course unless they pay again. The hundreds of thousands of fans who pay to attend the Open were not asked their opinion. This petition gives Open fans everywhere the chance to be heard and hopefully persuade the R&A to reverse its decision. Generations of fans have attended previous Opens to witness one of the world's greatest sporting events and soak up the off-course atmosphere. But the R&A's "No-readmission" policy will effectively lock them on-course all day - every day unless they pay again. This goes against the 150-year-old tradition of the Open and is not in the interests of spectators who are - only now - beginning to realise the full effects of these restrictions. We think the R&A have made a mistake by saying this policy will guard against the "inferior" and "unofficial" off-course hospitality. This is a slur on the hundreds of excellent pubs, eateries and cafes in all the host venues on the Open Rota. It will also prevent fans from enjoying the legitimate activities of the host communities whose residents, golf clubs, restaurants and other local businesses have traditionally helped Open fans to celebrate off-course by providing festival style entertainment; essential services; and hospitality at prices they can afford. Unless this policy is reversed, fans of the Open will no longer have the freedom of going off-course to stroll around the host town, visit local shops and cafes or enjoy an affordable sit-down pub lunch or restaurant meal. In fact, the wonderful festival atmosphere - which has become synonymous with the golfing prowess of the Open - will be lost. Tens of thousands of fans spend 10 hours or more on-course each day; and many buy a weekly ticket or a weekend bundle. They don't want to be trapped on-course each day - all day long - so the new policy will certainly not improve their enjoyment. It's also clear that only a privileged few can afford the on-course hospitality packages costing between £420 and £900 per person. The new policy is also very unfair and will mean that some of the Open’s biggest supporters will be penalised. It will curtail attendance by the very people who have worked so hard - day after day and all year around - to make our Open venues what they are today. Shopkeepers, club stewards, residents with young children, employees of businesses and many others won’t be allowed to go on and off the course to take care of their family and work based responsibilities so will probably not be able to attend or will have to limit their attendance. So, this policy will most definitely result in lower attendances. The 2018 Open will be staged on Carnoustie Golf links which were uniquely purchased on behalf of the people of the burgh around 1890. A great many of the residents, business owners and employees as well as the clubs who technically "own" the links will face weeks of disruption, loss of business and inconvenience but, because of the new policy, will not get a chance to see this marvellous event being staged on their own doorstep. We feel that this wonderful world class event is being spoiled by a policy designed to monopolise spectator revenues on-course while ensuring that local businesses miss out. It certainly has little if anything to do with making the event more safe or enjoyable for the spectators. In short, the fans who pay for the Open would like the choice but no-one asked their opinion – until now. For these reasons we request the R&A to reverse their decision in time for the 2018 Open and allow spectators with general admission and hospitality tickets to leave the Open course and re-enter the same day without having to pay again.

The volume of traffic and the behaviour of drivers in the area is placing cyclists and pedestrians, particularly children, in danger. There are two schools in the area; St Thomas Abney School on Fairholt Road and Holmleigh School on Dunsmure/Holmleigh Road. The roads are used as rat runs by motorists trying to avoid main thoroughfares. Cars travel at speed and ignore crossings. This is compounded by double parking which clogs up the streets resulting in more erratic driving and difficulties for people crossing the roads. Holmleigh School has no crossing guards to help children cross the roads safely and the crossing guards at St Thomas Abney receive regular abuse from drivers. Two children have been injured in the last 18 months and several cyclists have been knocked from their bikes. We need the council to take action before someone is killed. Examples can be seen at this link in the Hackney Gazette. http://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/news/parents-and-kids-protest-outside-school-over-horrifying-driving-in-stamford-hill-1-5294149

UK construction firm Carillion is in huge financial trouble. It is being reported the UK's second-largest construction company is shouldering a whopping £1.5bn debt pile and could collapse into administration by Monday. Carillion runs prisons, schools and hospitals (some 12,000 beds) and employs about 20,000 people in the UK, with more staff abroad. Mainstream news coverage reports the government is in crisis talks with Carillion and lending banks HSBC, RBS, Barclays and Lloyds, who are demanding a taxpayer bailout. After bailing out RBS in 2008 without imposing Government control, it is unthinkable that Government would pour more public money into the coffers of Carillion's PFI shareholders. We believe that the government can help by simply nationalising Carillion and bringing the PFI contracts it manages back into public control. The only way to protect services and the staff is to nationalise, not line the pockets of shareholders, particularly any shareholders who have avoided paying tax on profits. Governments PFI experiment has failed, with 68% of the UK public agreeing PFI deals should be banned. it is now time to accept responsibility and do the right thing by nationalising Carillion. Furthermore, we ask that a forensic audit investigation is commenced into how a consortium which included Carillion - while in acute financial distress, was awarded a £1.4bn contract for the HS2 rail link. Important links The company that runs Britain is near to collapse. Watch and worry : Aditya Chakrabortty “To see what this means, take the HS2 rail link, where Carillion this summer was part of a consortium that won a £1.4bn contract to knock tunnels through the Chilterns. If Carillion goes under, what happens to the largest infrastructure project in Europe? What happens to its partners on the deal, British firm Kier, and France’s Eiffage? The project will need to be put back and the taxpayer will almost certainly have to step in.” https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/12/building-company-carillion-collapse-schools-roads-hospitals-hs2-taxpayers-bill Redefining Corruption - Public Polling on attitudes to PFI by Liverpool University https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/publications/redefining-corruption Blacklisting, workers rights, and privatisation: 'The day we challenged Carillion' http://peoplevspfi.org.uk/2015/06/18/the-day-we-challenged-carillion/ FT: Vince Cable warns taxpayers must not bear brunt of Carillion bailout https://www.ft.com/content/e9f0f06c-f7b4-11e7-88f7-5465a6ce1a00?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

What Opponents are Saying: "If this mine were to go ahead and the coal that is now safely underground in the custody of Cumbria County Council were to end up as CO2 in the atmosphere, there would be a serious risk of climate change impacts including some thousands of deaths extending long into the future. The mine could also result in global loss of livelihoods and homes numbering many times greater than the jobs created in Cumbria." Laurie Michaelis. ( He was a Lead Author or Convening Lead Author on several IPCC reports, including the Special Report on Emission Scenarios). "Disturbance of nesting seabirds during construction and operation... The development has the potential to have an adverse effect upon the St Bees Head SSSI through disturbance to both breeding and wintering birds during construction and operation." RSPB “ little supporting information appears to have been provided by the applicant regarding the excavation of the new drifts" National Trust “It is clear that this is a very large mine, with a very long life span…of 20-50 years and a peak of 2.8 million tonnes a year. Assuming a 40 year life (following construction), and an average of 2 million tonnes a year, that is a total production of 80 million tonnes, which will emit around 175 million tonnes of carbon dioxide. The level of emissions and proposed life-time of the mine is of major concern….We would also query whether or not there has been robust enough analysis of the potential for seismicity (and subsidence) relating to well-known nuclear facilities in the wider area, including Sellafield and proposed new facility at Moorside? What potential is there for seismicity to effect these and other facilities (including the low level waste repository at Drigg) and the possible high level waste radioactive waste facility which has been proposed in West Cumbria for some time.” Friends of the Earth "The mining company’s aspiration is that scarce investment funding will come from Cumbria’s Local Enterprise Partnership. I will be very interested to understand the business justification for any such investment.” Graham Vincent, Portfolio Holder for Economy, South Lakeland District Council “The application should be rejected because it is not in the national interest. From reviewing the documents submitted by West Cumbria Mining it is clear that the intention is to export the coal to Europe and Asia…The application to mine is too close to the Sellafield nuclear site and the proposal for another nuclear power station at Moorside. Underground mining can have a significant impact on the surrounding areas, recently a coking coal mine in Russia triggered an earthquake.” Coal Action Network "There are significant risks of subsidence offshore, where there are known to be layers of chemical and radioactive pollution on the sea bed. The application addresses this by extracting only a significant distance off shore, and pumping mining waste back into the voids which it is claimed will reduce the subsidence risk. a. Toxic substances disturbed by subsidence would move freely through the marine environment and there could be no way of preventing adverse impacts in protected areas, and to fish and other marine organisms. One impact which can bring the reality of the risk home to us, is that the percentage of multi-wintering salmon returning to Cumbrian rivers has reduced from 25% to 2-3%. All the rest die at sea. Our river salmon populations are plummeting, and have been described as an extinction event, and it is due to changes in the marine ecology and environment." Mrs Maggie Mason BA(Arch) Dip TP "As I understand it, the sole justification from a sustainability point of view is that the extracted coal will be coking coal, not thermal coal (for use in power stations), with some preposterous notion that this will apparently produce a lower carbon footprint than coking coal imported from other countries. Yet so far as I can tell, no detailed lifecycle analysis, both direct and indirect, has been done by West Cumbria Mining, so why would anyone swallow that particular pile of coking crap?" Jonathon Porritt "Given that this coal mine would extend to just 8km from Sellafield's high level radioactive wastes it is incumbent on Cumbria County Council to remember that the precautionary principle is at the heart of Environmental Law in the UK. A good reason to invoke the precautionary. principle is the possibility of liquefaction at Sellafield resulting from earthquakes in the West Cumbria area as described in a recent scientific paper by Martin Cross, Anass Attya, David J. A. Evans : The susceptibility of glacigenic deposits to liquefaction under seismic loading conditions: a case study relating to nuclear site characterization in West Cumbria". Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole, a Radiation Free Lakeland campaign "When the coal mines are exhausted, there is a high risk that the exhausted empty coal mines will be used as a nuclear waste repository, wherein nuclear waste fragments from nearby Sellafield will be mixed with liquid concrete and then injected under high pressure into the empty coal mines to backfill them. If the concrete encapsulation fails, the coal mines will be a constant source of nuclear contamination in future.." Dr Timothy Norris The Environment Agency, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Scientists for Global Responsibility, Dr Laurie Michaelis IPCC author and others continue to state that insufficient evidence has been provided by the developers with no independent assessments having been carried out or asked for by the Council.. The Committee was misled into unanimous approval of the coal mine. We urge the Secretary of State to call this application in for his own determination at the earliest opportunity.

I implore you to end Brexit. Understanding how beneficial joining the European Union has been to both our nation and the European bloc, leaving the EU has become a game of Russian Roulette and I fear we’re nearly out of empty chambers in the gun. A winner of the Nobel peace prize, the EU has given us many benefits; Peace, the single market, foreign aid, improved air and water quality, democracy & human rights. All of which are in jeopardy as we approach the cliff edge. So where are we now? A referendum was called, and I put it to you that now is not the time to leap into the unknown with simply dreams to fuel us. After years of failed austerity policies, the UK’s most vulnerable have already been brought to their knees: the homeless are freezing to death sleeping on the streets, many of which suffer from mental illness: too many face a huge struggle to survive on Universal credits (some of which are now dying) should they receive any benefit after being interrogated by Atos; thousands have died after being declared fit for work and suicide appears all too often to be the only option. Specifically denounced by the UN, the government ignore it and seek to remove more human rights: we now have the abomination of Foodbanks which is a path any first world nation should never have to venture upon, yet they are now the norm and used by working families; Education budgets are being cut and our children’s development is therefore stifled. Children are developing rickets, a disease that was believed to have been eradicated years ago. The future of following generations in insecure. Wages have been stagnant for years, zero hours contracts increase as worker’s rights are diminished, yet the cost of living rises. Police numbers have been reduced while extremism has risen. Many of these scenarios are Reminiscent of the 1930’s, a pattern we need to avoid repeating. The cycle of cause and effect continues to go unchallenged. The national debt has risen from £850 billion in 2010 to £1.5 trillion today. Where we used to lead the way forward we are now leaderless. Strong and stable we are not and yet now we choose to leave our biggest trading partner at a cost of £40 billion which we as a country can ill afford. This ship needs to be strong if it is to not sink. A foolish, idea where we look ridiculous to the rest of the world, without a plan for departure and without impact studies on every industry. Most people cannot appreciate that trade deals take several years to complete. Brexit is dangerously right wing! The British press has been overtaken with neo fascist propaganda and fake news. Nowhere can a citizen buy a paper that presents a well-balanced argument allowing the public to make an informed decision. We must share this planet and survival depends upon collaboration, not death and division.

Ever since PCM was introduced by the Bracknell Forest Homes, instead of solving the parking crises whithin Bracknell, unfortunately Parking has significantly aggravated and made it even more difficult throughout the streets of Bracknell. Many of us have already contacted Bracknell Forest Homes as well as our Local Authority - Bracknell Forest Council requesting their reasonable and legally bound support and assistance only because we are the local residents and we have been deeply affected by the restrictions and the awfully £100.oo charges issued by PCM. Moreover, as a result of their action, parking has became a real nighmare and we literaly seam to be imprisoned in our own home. No visitours or family members can come and visit us due to this parking crises. Aggrieved by these dreadful circumstances, a large number of our residents are currently parking on the pavements and on the grass verge causing unnecessary real messe and unnecessary difficulties in our neighbourhood. Thus represents serious concern for acces to emergency services and endangering lives. Forevermore, our property value and our house price has significantly droped due to the aggravated parking situation in our neighbourhood and throughout Bracknell. Therefore, through this petition we join our efforts united together consolidating our voice and efforts to put an end to these hideous moneymaking operation against the local residents without any further delays. We strongly oppose the operation of PCM scheme authorised and supported by Bracknell Forest Homes because the scheme was introduced without any democratic consultation with the local residents and without priorly due consideration. Moreover, there was no mutual agreement with the local residents or the local household and privately house and garage owners, not with the tenants of the rented garages where the scheme operates. We join our effort and voices together requesting our Bracknell Forest Council Mayor, Madame Tina McKenzie-Boyle and our respectful elected MP - Dr Phillip Lee as well as our local councillors to prompt intervention and assist the local residents legally rewing and without any further delays, to put an end to the parking enforcement scheme operated by Bracknell Forest Homes & PCM. 1. We request all the necessary assistance in preventing them to penalise the local resident. 2. We would highly recommend investing consciously and without further delays in providing efficient public parking facilities in our residential areas. 3. We solely request clear and transparent plans to be urgently put in place that will be implemented by The Local Authorities as to prevent future similar crises.

I personally have just got over breast cancer in 2017 and like so many of us, 1 in 8 now in the UK population, I am hoping and working hard with treatment to try to ensure it doesn't come back - but then part of that future is not in my hands. I have seen men and women, young and old experience cancer - some have survived others not. But at some point, unfortunately this disease will effect us all at some point. Please join me in petitioning government to protect cancer treatment and its diagnosis - our lives matter as much as anyone elses'! Help us to save our lives - and that includes your's ....

If everyone who saw this, signed and shared it would achieve its objective within the hour! NO WASTE INCINERATOR IN CAMBRIDGE: PROTECT OUR AIR QUALITY AND PUBLIC HEALTH Unborn babies, infants and children are most at risk from incinerator emissions research has proven. Waste incinerators are associated with direct causal links to all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and mortality from lung cancer, higher rates of adult and childhood cancer, birth defects, increased respiratory hospital admissions, a range of emotional and behavioural problems in children, learning difficulties, and delinquency, cell level genetic changes which pose a risk to future generations , and in problems in adults including violence, dementia, depression and Parkinson’s disease, after adjustment for other factors. These findings come from a wide variety of peer reviewed research, meta-analysis and reports conducted by The World Health Organisation (WHO), British Heart Foundation, British Lung Foundation, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, Lancet Commission on Pollution and Health, The British Society for Ecological Medicine, DEFRA, Asthma UK, Client Earth. All conclude that incinerators should NOT be approved. This directly affects your health and that of your family and friends. Don’t say you weren’t warned! YOUR VOICE MATTERS and IT DOES COUNT. If approved against all advice from world leading environment, climate change and health advisory bodies, Cambridge air pollution WILL increase, forever, with significant and predictable life threatening and life changing health consequences for many, particularly affecting the most vulnerable youngest members of society. Amey Cespa proposes a £200M waste incinerator in Cambridge that will burn 250,000 tonnes commercial and household waste /yr, from 5 counties incl. Isle of Wight (selling surplus to China), fed at this rate minimum to justify investment. AC already provides facilities for waste recycling, composting, landfill and mechanical biological treatment. Yes, it proposes energy for 45,000 homes and 300 jobs during construction and operations but does that justify proven and predictable health effects above? Read them again – all-cause mortality, cancer, mental health, adverse effects in unborn babies, infants and children who by nature are in a biological window of vulnerability. AC submitted their application 20th Dec for a 21 day public consultation, just before the busiest holiday period of the year. They have followed min. statutory requirements to notify the public. For such a major infrastructure application that presents enormous city wide public health and environmental impact, providing 2 short notice site public information meetings (advertised briefly in neighbouring villages) and 2 recent short notice neighbouring parish council meetings, it does appear like AC would rather prefer the application flew very much under the public radar. The UK and Cambridge has a problem with waste management but if incineration is the answer, somebody asked the wrong question. Waste incineration in Cambridge will produce an unprecedented health risk for people living in and around the city, air pollution WILL increase and forever with significant and predictable health consequences. AC cannot guarantee that waste incineration is safe for public health. Toxin emissions and particulate pollution have to go somewhere. EC reports advise reducing NOT increasing air pollution to reduce and prevent land, coast and sea ecosystem damage due to acidification, thus also protecting water, food chains and organic farmers. There is already local evidence of significant health impacts from the AC Cambridge waste management site. 2016- AC was fined by Cambridge magistrates £50,000 for causing sickness and adverse effects on human health, and prior to these incidents, received 3 enforcement notices 2015 by the Environment Agency. ‘AC fined £50,000’ by F Snoad, Cambridge Evening News, Sep 2016. The environment agency continues to receive regular calls reporting problems with air quality relating to this site. Local newspapers have reported ongoing problems with local residents and workers complaining of feeling sick, gagging, wheezing, sore eyes and throats, constant unpleasant smells causing them to have to keep windows shut. ‘The waste park is poisoning us: Cambridgeshire villagers concern at Amey recycling centre’ by Samar Maguire, Cambridge Evening News, Sep 2017. It is enshrined in EC and UK legislation that reducing emissions produces true health benefits, prevents unnecessary burden on healthcare, and protects against the impacts of acid air and water on local and wide ranging ecosystems including land, coast and sea. Costs of incineration, together with research investigating nonstandard emissions from incinerators, has demonstrated that the hazards of incineration are greater than previously realised including that relating to fine and ultrafine particulates. Operating waste incinerators in urban areas results in dangerous health and environmental consequences from both construction and operation. The accumulated evidence on the health risks of incinerators is simply too strong to ignore and their use in Cambridge cannot be justified now that better, cheaper and far less hazardous methods of waste disposal have become available. The planned chimney stack height is out of keeping with surrounding local village architecture and the Fenland landscape: contravening NPPF guidelines. The proposed site is greenfield which will potentially be adjacent to major new residential areas. Waste minimisation, recycling and composting through innovation and behavioural change are the answer not incineration and certainly not in urban areas. Residents of Cambridge have human right to clean air and their health protected.

The removal of the bus stop is important for several reasons: 1. Pollution levels at the school are over the legal limit. 2. 44% of the pollution at the school comes from buses. And as much as 25% of pollution from buses travelling on their route is caused by them idling at bus stops. The potential for reducing pollution by removing the bus stop is therefore significant. 3. Children are especially vulnerable to the health impacts of air pollution, which include cardio-respiratory illnesses. This is because their immune systems and lungs are still developing. 3. A study has shown that children at school in high-pollution areas are slower to develop cognitively (i.e. their attentiveness, memory and brain development). 4. Removing the bus stop is one of the only ways to reduce the amount of toxic air our children are inhaling. We want action now!

Please sign this petition to safeguard the young children that use this crossing and to prevent near-misses turning into a tragedy. Railings will prevent cars and buses from mounting the pavement, and children stepping into traffic. 1. This is a very busy, main trunk route through the city of Wakefield, heading south into the city centre, and north to the M1 and M62. At rush hour, the three-lane main road is used by cars, buses and HGV's, travelling at speed. 2. The pavements on either side of the road are not wide; the curb directly outside Centenary House is low and buses using the bus lane travel past very close to the pedestrians. 3. This section of road is used by very young children during the busy school runs, as it is directly outside Centenary House which provides for children aged 4 - 7. This crossing is also regularly used by large numbers of girls from the Wakefield Girls' High School, as their playing fields are situated at the end of Blenheim Road. Children of various ages at the other schools in the QEGS foundation and other local schools, such as St.Johns CE Junior and Infant School, all use this crossing. 4. This crossing and the roads in this area will become even busier with the new Redrow housing development that has been granted outline planning permission, on the site of the old Bishopgarth Police Training Centre. 5. I understand the School has requested railings in the past, but no response has been forthcoming from the Council. 6. On 19 July 2017, I approached the council requesting consideration be given to installing railings, and if this was rejected, what was the risk assessment that had informed that rejection. I was given a reference number: RS-002855. I have, in the intervening months, chased this issue numerous times, but have been unable to get a response. 7. I have written to the relevant councillors, and the deputy Mayor, to progress this matter. I am awaiting their response. 8. With the support of Mrs Gray, Head of QEGS Junior School, the time has come to press for a response to this issue from the council. The current non-response from the council is unacceptable. 9. If funding is the issue, consideration can be given to fundraising to safeguard the children using the local schools now, and in the future.

The equipment in Wroxall playground, located just up the road from Wroxall school, was taken down a few years ago because they were not up to the current government standards. Now we are left with a swing, a balance beam and a mess. South Wight Housing are considering giving a grant to help Wroxall Playground but will only do this if they think that enough people want it. They have said that if we can get people to show support by signing petitions, they will donate money. Please sign! My children would love a local playground and I’m sure yours would too! The playground is situated near an ever growing school so there are a lot of children who could benefit from this area. These areas are widely understood to help children develop physically, socially, cognitively and academically. We could also explore the possibilities of getting some outdoor gym equipment or a skate ramp. Let's use this space instead of leaving it as a an eyesore! Please show your support and help children have this place to play!

The Government led Mid and South Essex Sustainability and Transformation Partnership (STP - formerly known as Success Regime) are 'selling' their scheme to the public by stating that separation of emergency and planned (elective) care alongside the centralisation of emergency care facilities, will relieve the burden on the three hospitals in this area, thus improving patient outcomes and relieve the current bed shortages, financial and recruitment crisis facing Southend, Basildon and Broomfield ( Mid Essex) hospitals. The bottom line is that this is a financially driven scheme and they need to slash the £400-500 million estimated financial deficit by 2020/21. The health of our local population is being sacrificed in the name of savings in an already highly underfunded NHS which is in crisis. If the Mid and South Essex STP plans are allowed to progress, annually over 5400 patients from the Southend Hospital catchment area alone will have their planned and emergency care re-located to either Basildon or Broomfield hospitals. There are a huge number of concerns that many of their preferred pathways for re-locating and centralising planned and emergency care specialities are detrimental to patient outcomes and will enforce a 'postcode lottery' for NHS services for our local, ever expanding population. The STP had to shelve their dangerous scheme in July 2017 for the A&E downgrades and blanket re-direction of 999 ambulances from Southend and Broomfield Hospital to a 'super A&E' at Basildon, following exposure that the 'on the floor clinicians' were NOT behind the plans and there was the mass public pressure, led by our campaigns. We acknowledge that there are certain conditions such as complex trauma and neurological issues which do indeed benefit patient outcome by transfer to specialist centres and those pathways are already in place. We stand by the opinions of the 'on the floor' clinicians working at our local hospital. We are all for any modernisation of health services IF there is a CLEAR, CLINICALLY EVIDENCE BASED CASE FOR CHANGE supported by adequately staffed community health services, early GP access and increased provision of social care beds and home support to assist discharging patients. There is however little independent clinical rationale for their proposals and the STP to date have not provided any detail about how they will transfer these vast numbers of acutely ill patients between the three hospitals, other than claim they will provide an 'in house transfer team' so they do not increase the pressure on the already understaffed and over-burdened East of England Ambulance Service. We say - by who? With what staff? At what cost to life? With emergency general surgery to name just one example, being moved from Southend to Broomfield - we feel it's a long and busy journey from Southend when you are in an ambulance desperately in need of an operation. If we are honest, we do not think the STP leads have ANY intention of such provision for a large, complex and expensive internal transfer service and the long term goal is to return to the downgrading of both Southend and Broomfield A&Es, redirecting most of the 999 emergencies to Basildon or Broomfield according to their medical or surgical pre-hospital diagnosis. Then there's the HUMAN factor - that many of our loved ones won't be in our LOCAL hospital at their time of crisis, where we can pop to see them (emotional well-being and support from family plays a huge role in patient improvement) or how do we get there 'in time' if we get 'the call' to come quickly. The Mid and South Essex STP are on a Government led timeframe to achieve massive financial savings and the whole STP proposals are built on mass improvement in primary care services (access to GPs, mental health practitioners, community nurses, physios, specialist children's practitioners etc) in the community via 'Locality HUBS' which allegedly will PREVENT many unnecessary hospital admissions. There is also a huge focus on 'self care' and the increased use of web-based apps for self-diagnosis and treatment. Currently and historically, there is a huge GP crisis in South Essex and a significant drop in the numbers of nursing and allied health professional applicants plus unfilled vacancies across the whole of the healthcare sector. Hubs may be located at increased distance from resident's homes than their current GP facility therefore causing issues of accessibility for many patient groups. Then there's the issue of actual investment in the creation of these 'locality hubs' and that these will take YEARS to actually significantly reduce the hospital admission rate in an area with an increasingly elderly population group and massively growing commercial and residential infrastructure. Despite all this, the Mid and South Essex STP still feel it is your best interests to completely re-structure acute hospital services and 'centralise' emergency care for acutely unwell medical and surgical patients in our town. We believe that they must not alter our acute hospital services if there is not the community care resources proven to be in place first. There has been no mention in the STP for provision of community social care beds for those patients discharged from hospital, yet still requiring further care or rehabilitation before they can safely go home. Investment in this would reduce the 'exit block' from our A&E, provide timely discharges back to the community and prevent cancelled operations, as there would once more be the availability of inpatient beds. These simple measures would alleviate much of the pressure on our local hospital without the need to re-locate essential and life-saving services. Our NHS is in crisis and we refuse to become collateral damage in the name of cuts. For further details of all of the concerns, please follow the SaveSouthendNHS page https://www.facebook.com/SaveSouthendNHS/ Twitter @NHSunited.