| Home | Bookmark | Tell | Active petitions in over 75 countries | Follow GoPetition |
Petition Tag - cuts
Child benefit is to be axed for higher-rate taxpayers from 2013, ChancellorLabour said the benefit should remain universal and the families who wanted to "get on" were being penalised.
Mr Osborne also revealed the total state benefits one family can claim in future will be capped at about £26,000.
This will mean that no family on welfare will be better off than one earning an average income from work, the chancellor said.
He outlined the steps in a major speech in which he defended the government's austerity measures as cuts "not for their own sake" but savings "to secure our future".
About 7.7 million families with children currently get child benefit, costing about £12bn a year. George Osborne has announced.
62. Protect Reading's elderly and vulnerable people 
The new Conservative and Lib Dem administration in Reading have announced plans to review the eligibility criteria for the care they provide to elderly and vulnerable people such as those with learning difficulties. Elsewhere in Berkshire where this has happened thousands of people have lost much needed services.
The Local Green Party believes that the cuts will affect thousands of Reading families who rely on these services to support them in living their day to day lives and it is essential that we fight to keep these services.
Recent local news articles on the proposed cuts can be found on line by following the links below.
http://tinyurl.com/32hvof5
http://tinyurl.com/33ar6mq
If you or anyone you know are concerned about how these cuts might affect you, please have your say by signing the petition.
If you would like to get more involved in campaigning against these cuts then please get in touch with Rob White or Melanie Eastwood through the Reading Green party website.
63. Save Jobs at the University of Reading
The University plans to appoint a reader/professor in theatre and sack one lecturer specialising in film and one lecturer specialising in television. This is part of the University’s plans to both save money and to reshape the University ‘strategically’. The two lecturers who will be dismissed are most likely to be junior members of staff (the department has a high proportion of young lecturers) and the new reader/professor will certainly be on a much higher pay scale. Therefore, the cost saving objective behind this plan is not apparent. Neither does the ‘reshaping strategy’ (e.g. scaling back film and television while investing in theatre) have any clear reasoning behind it. Repeatedly, the University has claimed that the decision to favour theatre in the current plans is based upon perceptions of relative research strength. For example, early in the process of planning where to make cuts, the University management suggested that film performed less well in the last RAE (Research Assessment Exercise). It was pointed out that this was pure speculation (the RAE results are completely anonymous and do not identify individual lecturers let alone separate theatre from film or television) and they eventually retracted this claim (or, rather, stopped saying it). However, they continue to point to the perceived greatest value for the department of theatre as a research discipline as the basis for their decisions. Whenever they are questioned on the academic basis for their strategy, the University management is unable to point to any factual data, any objective or empirical evidence. We, the undersigned, point out that the University seems to be basing their continued strategy, which will destroy two careers, on gossip and innuendo.
Moreover, by singling out film and television specialists, the University is effectively undermining the interdisciplinarity of the department, which is one of its renowned features. For example, the BA in Film and Theatre is a single-honours degree. The disciplines are substantially integrated through the department’s teaching, both at undergraduate and postgraduate level, as well as through the department’s research. Moreover, the recently advertised post of reader/professor in theatre would be the replacement of a retired member of staff whose job title was ‘professor in film and drama’.
We note that the department has been unable to appoint at reader level or above in theatre on two separate occasions (the post was last advertised in August 2010 and the University was unable to draw up a shortlist of a sufficient calibre). In effect, this means that the University will fire two (almost certainly junior) academics in order to have the ‘research leadership’ of a person who they cannot find. This is not only morally indefensible but is also severely misguided. The department is a very young one (in terms of the age of its lecturers), the University having repeatedly invested in the long-term potential of junior staff. Neither the University nor the department has ever suggested junior staff are not fulfilling this potential, so they should have the patience to realise the long-term vision their previous appointments demonstrated and reward the excellence in teaching and research displayed by this vibrant department. The University has also invested in an £11 million building for the department (opening Easter this year), which will contain state of the art facilities for theatre, film and television, and we, the undersigned, suggest the University should better value the staff who will work in its new buildings.
In the current climate, many will feel that financial savings must be made at Reading and at other universities. However, here as elsewhere, savings can be made by voluntary redundancy and the non-replacement of staff. We do not accept the University pursuing a misguided and short-termist agenda that will destroy careers, staff morale, will weaken the diversity of research and teaching in the department and is part of a ‘strategy’ that is ill-conceived and lacks an objective grounding in fact.
Please read on...
To those signing the petition, we ask if you would please email as many of the senior members of the University of Reading management that you can in order to protest against its mistreatment of staff and to demand that it withdraw from its plans for a new appointment in theatre so that it can save existing posts.
The email addresses are below and we have also included a suggested template for the email at the bottom. Please use/don’t use as you see fit. We would be so grateful if you can show your support for the staff in Reading FTT in any way you can and protest against the sacking of two lecturers in order to get in a new, more senior member of staff. This is all part of a severely misguided (not to mention callous) management agenda.
Thank you so much for your support!
Gordon Marshall (Vice Chancellor): g.marshall@reading.ac.uk
Christopher Fisher (President of University Council): cfisher@penfida.co.uk
Tony Downes (Deputy Vice Chancellor): t.a.downes@reading.ac.uk
Rob Robson (Pro-Vice Chancellor for Teaching and Learning): pvctandl@reading.ac.uk
Sue Walker (Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Humanities): s.f.walker@reading.ac.uk
Jonathan Bignell (Head of School of Arts, English and Communication Design and member of FTT department): j.bignell@reading.ac.uk
Dear *,
I call on the University of Reading to withdraw its plans to make two lecturers redundant in its Film, Theatre and Television department (FTT) while appointing a new reader/professor in the same department. The University says that its ‘intention remains of course to avoid the need for compulsory redundancy where this is possible’ yet these redundancies are clearly avoidable here – a reader/professor clearly costs a lot more than the lecturers the University plans to dismiss. These redundancies will not only potentially destroy two careers, they will undermine the interdisciplinarity the FTT department is known for and the diversity and vibrancy of its teaching and research.
In the current climate, the University management clearly feels that financial savings must be made. However, here as elsewhere, the savings can be made by voluntary redundancy and the non-replacement of staff. I contend that this would be a much less divisive and much less destructive way of coping with the current funding crisis and would therefore prove to be a much more effective management policy in the longer term.
Thanks for your time in reading this.
Yours *
64. PCS - save our cultural assets petition
Thousands of PCS members who work in galleries, museums and historic sites are launching a campaign to defend the country’s cultural assets.
To coincide with the European Trade Union Confederation’s day of action for jobs and growth, the union is publishing a statement for supporters of the campaign to sign up to oppose cuts in culture, media and sport.
The statement aims to show the level of support against short sighted government cuts which will mean massive job losses and seriously harm the UK economy.
PCS General Secretary Mark Serwotka said: “As the coalition government forges ahead with massive cuts in DCMS and the entire arts and heritage sector, more voices are raised in pointing out the lack of sense in their approach.
There is widespread concern that cuts of between 25% and 40% will have a devastating impact on our heritage, our culture and our ability to be competitive in sport. It’s now time to show the strength of feeling against these cuts and let the government know that we are not prepared to let them ruin our valuable cultural heritage.”
Sign the petition below and join the campaign to save our cultural assets. In addition to the e-petition, we have received over 260 hand-written signatures in support. Please join the campaign today.
65. Support Modern Languages at Swansea University
Swansea University management proposes to make redundant more than half (12) of the 22 academic staff in Modern Languages, by summer 2011.
Swansea University’s Department of Modern Languages has an excellent reputation for teaching and research. Its work is vital to the University’s local, national, and international mission. It is strategically important for the Welsh economy and Welsh society. The proposals would delete Italian immediately, render Hispanic Studies practically unviable, and grievously weaken French and German. The proposals are reckless, hasty, and unnecessary. They will damage students, the University, and Wales.
Swansea University’s motto is: ‘Gweddw crefft heb ei dawn’, Welsh meaning: ‘Technical skill is incomplete without culture’. Students of Modern Languages at Swansea University acquire both the language skills and the cultural knowledge that global citizens need. The University must live up to its motto.
THIS PETITION IS NOW CLOSED.
Swansea University has dropped the proposals for cuts to the Modern Languages Department. WE THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR INVALUABLE SUPPORT for our campaign, and for taking the time to sign and comment on this petition.
66. Save Jobs and Services - Middlesbrough & Teesside
Middlesbrough and the whole of Teesside face devastating cuts in jobs and services, which will affect workers and service users, shops and shoppers, schools and students, families, pensioners and claimants, and our communities across the board.
67. Southwark Labour councillors must not pass on Tory cuts
Southwark Labour councillors should refuse to implement the Tories' cuts. This economic crisis was not created by working class people, and we should not pay for it.
We will defend the jobs and services we need. We demand that Labour side with working class people.
68. Stop HS2 (High Speed Rail)
On 11th March 2010, the outgoing Labour Government announced plans for a High Speed Rail (HS2) link from London Euston to Birmingham. It was reported then that it would cost £11bn, but that figure was 6 years out of date. On the same day you could have got information from the Department for Transport which put the cost at £17.4bn or from HS2 Ltd, which put it at £25.5bn, or 2.8% of our generational national debt (based on a total national debt estimate of £916.6bn).
Despite all the cuts we will face as a nation, and the fact the new Prime Minister has stated that "things are worse than we thought", the Coalition Government still want to go ahead with HS2 and even extend it to link with Heathrow and HS1, meaning it will cost even more than the current £160 million per mile.
The business case assumes three times the number of passengers carried by the West Coast Mainline (45,000 increasing to 146,000 per day), despite there has been no increase in long-distance train travel since 1995 and the only increase has been on discounted fares.
This also ignores the fact that in 15 years time when it is scheduled to be ready, people will need to travel for work less, as who knows what we will have in terms of internet connections and video conferencing.
When announcing the sale of HS1 in Kent, Secretary of State for Transport, Philip Hammond said; "High Speed One is a national success story." This is despite the fact half the trains have been cut to stem the losses. HS1, like HS2, was meant to be great for business and was going to carry 21 million people per year. It has managed 7.5 million. HS1 is being sold for £1.5bn, about a quarter of the £5.8bn it cost to build.
Just to make sure people will use it, as in Kent, current services will be cut. Commuters from Coventry currently enjoy three London trains per hour. If HS2 goes ahead, the two express trains will be cut, meaning even if people go up to Birmingham International to use HS2, it will take them longer to reach their destination.
Supporters and politicians are quick to say HS2 will be good for the environment, however when you read the actual plans, you find out this is not the case. HS1 passengers are responsible for 35% more CO2 emissions than car passengers, but HS2 will go faster, so the CO2 emissions will be higher, but we don't know how much higher as there is no passenger train in the world that travels at the proposed 250mph to compare it with. It will also lead to more flights, not less, as Birmingham International Airport is being extended and it will be about 40 minutes on the train from Euston and now will be directly linked to Heathrow. Birmingham will provide Heathrows third runway.
The HS2 report admits that the plan may lead to an increase in CO2 emissions, but in those calculations they ignore the seven years of construction and roadworks that will mean and the fact that in some places a 75 metre (83 yard) wide strip of 'green stuff' will be turned to concrete, due to 25 metre 'no vegetation zones' on either side.
Yes, 75 metres! The pitch at Wembley is only 69 metres wide. The plans state that where the trains will travel at top speed, the tracks will have to be 25 metres to stop passing trains blowing each other other the rails, and there will have to be a 25 metre 'No vegetation zone' on either side.
HS2 will cut right through the heart of the countryside at a noise level of 95 decibels. The noise level at which sustained exposure could cause permanent hearing damage is 90-95dB. It's not planned to go next to motorways (existing transport corridors) as that would cost even more and to travel at 'high speed', the line has to be very straight.
This will create massive social damage to towns and villages along the line. While the government say it is 'good for business', HS1 and the M6 Toll were justified for the same reasons, but have not devilvered the promised benefits. All they have delivered is large losses. The business case takes no account of businesses which will be destroyed, and businesses will only get land value when it comes to compensation.
HS2 will of course lead to the filling in of greenbelts, as once they are blighted by the fact upto 40 trains per hour (1 per 90 seconds), a quarter of a mile long, going past at 250mph, creating 95dB, it's not going to be a green belt any more. There is also the chance of extensive development around the Birmingham International station as a result of this plan.
The thing is with HS2 is it sounds like a good idea, but when you look at the details, you find that most parts of the plans are bad, unjustified ideas. The main thing is that it is going to be a collosal waste of money that will help bankrupt the country even more than it is now.
Just think of what would not need to be cut if it wasn't for committing to at least 25.5 billion pounds on one train line, connecting two cities, when there are already two train lines doing the job.
69. Defend LLU+
On Friday 18th June the whole staff team at LLU+, London South Bank University, were called to a meeting with Mike Molan, Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Human Sciences.
The team were presented with a 'change document' which proposes the phasing out of LLU+'s work and redundancy/redeployment as provision is run down or transferred for the whole staff team.
70. Save our free swimming sessions for pensioners and children!
Our current Con-Dem coalition government is considering cutting free swimming sessions for pensioners and children.
We hereby petition them to change this policy.
71. Save Natural History Museum Micropalaeontology
It is our understanding that budget reductions approved by the Natural History Museum (NHM) Trustees will entail the loss of some 40 posts across the NHM. To this end, we believe that the “strategic” closure of the Micropalaeontology Research Group has been proposed within the Department of Palaeontology “based on an estimation of the ability of the current micropalaeontology research programme to contribute to delivery of the NHMs scientific research strategy.”
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100611/full/news.2010.294.html
Given the many energy resource and environmental challenges facing our planet and society, it is our contention that micropalaeontological expertise is becoming more, not less, significant in industry, paleoceanography, evolution and mitigating the effects of global change. The NHM Micropalaeontological Research Group has made key, international-renowned contributions in all of these areas. The loss of this research expertise will damage both the UK and International Science community’s ability to respond to these challenges and the training of the next generation of industry and research micropalaeontologists – in terms of education and training perhaps irrevocably so.
Although we accept that NHM researchers are not directly responsible for collections management, it is extremely important to have high-level research micropalaeontologists in residence at the NHM who can interface with the many professional users of the NHM’s resources. Further, we understand that the Micropalaeontological collections manager is also to be made redundant, with no prospect of a replacement in the near future. The NHM houses one of the world's most important collections of natural history materials and an invaluable one for the discipline of micropalaeontology. We believe that the use and development of this collection will suffer long-term harm from the closure of the Micropalaeontology Research Group and redundancy of the Micropalaeontology collections manager.
On 8th June 2010, parents and nursery staff were told by a member of Goldsmiths College’s Senior Management Team that in 3 months’ time, they plan to completely close the college’s nursery. Staff and Students have asked for an enquiry into the handling of the whole matter. Meetings informing staff and students were only announced with 24 hours notice, resulting in inevitably poor attendance at meetings crucial to the livelihood of many staff and students.
The atmosphere in the Nursery is special; educational, creative, friendly and safe. It is very rare to find the kind of care, support and attention to children that you find at Goldsmiths Nursery. It is a central part of College life, and should be respected and nurtured as such. The kind of care offered enables staff to return to work after maternity leave and students to return to their studies as parents, in the full knowledge that their children will be well looked after, nearby and safe.
If College is committed to Equal Opportunities and encouraging the best professional women and men in the workplace, then the issue of childcare provision is highly pertinent. The lack of adequate on-site childcare is a classic barrier to women in terms of career development, but, conversely, the provision of high-quality childcare is a valuable incentive. Taking away the Nursery, especially when there is no comparable local provision (and Ofsted ranks the Goldsmiths Nursery as ‘good’) is a shot in the foot.
The college’s decision to close the Nursery has a history. In 2008, the College presented parents and staff with plans to outsource nursery provision but was a bungle, and arose from some previous, ill-formed plan to relocate the Nursery in a new building. The business plan for this was flawed, but the discrepancy between estimates and quotes for the new build was never investigated and these plans were suddenly jettisoned, without letting staff and users know. Staff protested against this and were reassured by the college’s Senior Management Team that, ’as [they] move forward [they] will be consulting with staff and nursery users and keeping [us] closely informed’. This has not, however, been the case.
The timing of the closure for September leaves staff and students with no childcare provision and some term time only staff with almost immediate dismissal, and although a letter distributed by the College states that they will do ‘what [they] can to support parents with children in the Nursery who will have to make alternative childcare arrangements’, how is this to happen? Surely alternative arrangements should have been put in place before we were abandoned? At the very least, parents and staff should be given another year to make other arrangements. Students who have already started courses will have to take time out from their studies in September and Nursery staff should be given time to consider their options. As all parents know, the waiting list for a good nursery is at least a year.
More recently (2009), a Working Party was set up by the College, to look at the ways in which the Nursery could become cost-neutral and sustainable. However, the college dismissed the Working Party’s suggestions without full or proper investigation or explanation.
73. Begin the immediate withdrawal of British troops from Afghanistan
During the election campaign many politicians are trying to avoid the issue of the war in Afghanistan.
This is because despite the massive popular opposition the the war, all three main parties support it.
We believe the war should be a central issue in the election campaign. British soldier deaths and expenditure are spiralling upwards just at a time when
all parties are calling for massive cuts in public spending. The projected costs of the war this year are almost the same as the amount the government plan to cut from the NHS.
Meanwhile the war is creating misery and destruction for the people of Afghanistan.
74. United Against the Cuts - West Dunbartonshire Trade Unions and The Community
We are aware that West Dunbartonshire Council are making significant cuts to services over the next three years.
These cuts come from the Scottish Parliament and will directly affect the most vulnerable in society.
75. Stop Planned Cuts to Higher Education
Just before Christmas, Peter Mandelson announced that funding for higher education will be slashed by over £900m over the next three years. This amounts to £190 less in resources per student than in 2009.
This has taken place despite the fact that over 50,000 students were denied places for 2009, the UK's average for NEETs (young people not in employment, education or training) is higher than the OECD average, and the UK spends 10% less of its GDP on universities than the OECD average.
76. No Cuts To Highland Rheumatology Unit
The only one of its kind in Scotland, the Highland Rheumatology Unit in Dingwall provides unparalleled inpatient and outpatient care for people suffering from inflammatory acute & chronic joint disease as well as other severe joint and bone conditions. The Unit transforms the lives of people, allows them to remain independent and have less of a need to call on GPs' time and that of other local services.
The following services are all provided under the one roof: Specialist Physiotherapy, Hydrotherapy, Orthotics, Podiatry, Dietician, Dermatology Nurses, Specialist Occupational Therapy, X-Ray, Dexa Scan, Inpatient Treatment & Outpatient Clinics. Biologic/Rheumatology Specialist Nurses, Education, Injection Therapy, Intravenous Infusions and Consultant ward rounds.
This all provides an holistic approach to management of systemic conditions for patients and are provided by remarkable, caring staff. They continue to provide this despite the fact that five nurses who retired have not been replaced.
NHS Highland is now considering making cuts which in one form or another, will drastically reduce such care for thousands of people. Arthritis may be thought of as an illness affecting elderly people but there is a large and increasing number of young people suffering and requiring long term care. It can hit anyone at any time. NHS Highland is suggesting that the concentrated, invaluable care that is provided at the Unit could, perhaps, be provided by GPs and other community health professionals. Their resources are already fully stretched. They do not have the specialist knowledge to ensure that up-to-date treatment is given.
Excellent specialist services are usually provided in large towns and cities but here in the rural Highlands, with our challenging geography, we have a brilliant, unique service that should be cherished. NHS Highland should be praising and expanding the Unit, rather than reducing it. Many people want to fight cuts. In addition to this petition, we have an email address: friends.of.hru@googlemail.com to which you can send support for our campaign.
77. Wyre Forest Restoration of the Use of Bus Passes before 9.30 am
Despite the District Council getting back some of our money from Icelandic Banks, the Tories still have not reinstated the use of concessionary bus passes before 9.30 am.
18,500 people in Wyre Forest are still suffering from this savage Tory/Liberal cut.
Please make sure that you sign our petition for restoration of the use of concessionary bus passes during peak hours.
78. Opposing Cuts to Southern Services via Forest Hill
Southern Railways are planning to cut trains to Brockley, Honor Oak Park, Forest Hill, and Sydenham in December 2009 and again in May 2010.
In December 2009 they plan to cut our direct evening service (and Sunday service) from Charing Cross, running all trains from London Bridge. This is a well used service and provides a direct connection from the West End after 7:30pm. As this is an off-peak service we reject Southern Railway's claims that there is no capacity through London Bridge.
In May 2010 Southern Railways plan to reduce evening peak services and daytime services from London Bridge by over 30%, from 6 trains per hour to just 4 trains per hour (the same as the off-peak service). They will continue to run 6 trains per hour in the morning, meeting the demands on the line, but will not provide a similar service in the evenings, hoping that customers will switch to East London Line services or put up with serious overcrowding.
79. Stop California's Budget Cuts
People around California are losing their jobs. Why? These budget cuts are meant to save money that are supposed to be used for their salary. The plan for them is to fire thousands of Americans so they can 'save teh economy'! People affected are number one, teachers; the government will fire a countless amount of them and make the ones who aren't to take the responsibility of more kids-their classes can grow up to 40 kids! Second, people affected include people for law enforcement. We will see many investigators and such fired and sections of jails shut down. How can we do the work of justice if this happens? How can we disadvantage our children, the futures of America?
Would you want your children to be in a class of 40 kids? This would bring a disadvantage to their education, as the teacher will have a great number of kids to educate already. Do you want more crime to come by shutting down whole sections of jails and thousands of law enforcers? Signing this petition would help bring a stop to the firing of thousands of more teachers, educators, and law enforcing workers who are at a risk of losing their jobs. Think, how does making teachers lose their jobs, giving kids learning disadvantages, and allowing the stop of law enforcement helping the economy?
The high school band is one of the best in the Metro East area and is also ranked high on the IHSA Music Sweepstakes.
Cutting music classes and the assistant band director position in the high school jeopardizes the band's chances to be successful.
In turn for the cuts, the potential for students to perform well and go on to do well in college will drop.
81. BreinsAmnesty Proposal Social Security Payroll Tax Cut 2031 Petition
Why do Republicans in the House of Representatives, choose not to support the Social Security bill? Failure to maintain substantial payroll tax revenues will allow the government to perpetuate the Social Security Trust Fund.
So why should We The People who can least afford to pay employment taxes under the guise that it is for retirement. Let's stop The government from diverting trillions of dollars of employment taxes for other purposes under the disguise of charity.
82. Save The College Experience at UT Martin
A Petition to save the college experience at UT Martin.
The causes of the NHS financial crisis are legion – but many are due to Government failure:
Ministerial meddling: There have been ten major reorganisations of the NHS since the Government came to power. Each of these reorganisations has been costly: the merger of Primary Care Trusts and the regionalisation of Strategic Health Authorities in 2006 alone are together estimated to have cost £320 million.
Waste: The Government's financial mismanagement has encouraged a culture of profligacy and waste within the NHS. The number of managers in the NHS is increasing almost three times as fast as the number of doctors and nurses. There are now 264,012 administrators in the NHS, compared to 175,646 beds. In the last year alone, 5,000 more administrators than nurses were recruited. By 2004-05 the extra cost of employing NHS administrators was almost £1.6 billion a year more in real terms than it was in 1999-2000.
Unfair funding: The Government's system of resource allocation means that the areas with most demand on their health services no longer receive the most money. Until Labour came to power, NHS resources were allocated to areas in a way that secured 'equal opportunity of access to healthcare'. However, the Treasury has specifically added an element to the allocation formula which aims to tackle health inequalities, meaning that some areas with a low disease burden, but deemed to be socially deprived, receive much more funding than areas deemed to be affluent but with a high burden of disease.