Residents Dismayed as Developer Begins Work on Threatened Trees.

 

Residents in Bradwell, Newcastle-under-Lyme, have expressed dismay as developer Seddon Homes began to carry out ‘work’ on trees they are campaigning to protect.

Around 120 trees on land to the North of Bradwell Hospital are under threat due to plans to build 85 houses on the site.

In a letter to Michael Jefferson, Managing Director of Seddon Homes local Jessica Mellor who lives on Knype Way in Bradwell writes of the impact the threat to the trees has had on her, saying she has had ‘Watership Down’ nightmares as a result.

MS Mellor goes on to say “The news genuinely gives me anxiety. I work from home and have the privilege of enjoying those trees along with the wildlife they bring to me every day”.

Writing about the feeling towards the development in the area she says, “our community strongly objects to these proposals and would like to see the tree lines retained with landscaping proposals being made around the tree’s and enhancing them”.

An issue of particular concern it the potential impact of loss of a vital habitat will have on wildlife, MS Mellor writes about the need for any landscaping on the site to “protect the birds and the mammals, who will have their homes destroyed” if current plans go ahead.

Residents have also expressed concern about increased traffic noise and a loss of privacy if the trees are felled.

Work on the trees on the Bradwell Hospital site has taken place over recent days, this, it is suggested, is to remove dead growth.

Residents have expressed concern that this has taken place before the landscaping proposals have been approved and that the work was done during the nesting season.

North Staffs Green Party have supported the campaign to protect the trees, a spokesperson said, “it is worrying that developers have started to work on the trees before public concerns about the landscaping proposals have been fully considered”.

Adding that, “we support the campaign for this important wildlife habitat to be protected and call on Seddon Homes to take no further action until the concerns of residents have been taken fully into account”.

Jessica Mellor writes that her letter to Seddon Homes MD Michael Jefferson is “one of many attempts” by local people “to preserve the tree line and protect the animals living in it. I hope you can find this in your heart from one human to another to investigate this and listen to our cries for it not to happen.”

In a reply to MS Mellor’s letter Seddon Homes said they were ‘working through’ the comments that have been made by residents ‘along with all other matters relating to our application with the local planning authority and all points will be duly considered’.

The proposals for the site are still open for comments from residents and other concerned parties, details can be found at:

https://publicaccess.newcastle-staffs.gov.uk/.../applicat...

The reference for the proposal is 21/00470/REM.

 

Report Calls for Improvements to Mental Health Services in UK Prison System.

 

Leading mental health campaign group, The Centre for Mental Health has published a report on the state of mental health services in English prisons.

The report written by Dr Graham Durcan ‘The future of prison mental health care in England’ was commissioned by NHS England and NHS Improvement and the data used was gathered during the Summer of 2020. It is the latest in a series of reviews carried out by the Centre for Mental Health over the past 15 years.

The report finds that in general prison mental health services are working well and identifies several examples of good and innovative practice, however it points to actions that need to be taken in some key areas.

The report notes that the provision of services varies markedly in quality from prison to prison, noting problems around screening and assessment and accessing psychological therapies.

Problems were also noted in relation to pathways in and out of prison, particularly for inmates serving short sentences, support services for inmates following release and the impact of the pandemic on services and the mental wellbeing of prisoners.

Many of the problems identified in the report relate to England and the UK in general using custodial sentences more than its European neighbors. An issue of particular concern, the report found, was the ‘churn’ in prisoners serving multiple short sentences, making it problematic to provide support for those identified as having mental health issues.

There is, the report claims, strong evidence that were short term prison sentences to be replaced by community ones it would be of benefit to both individual offenders and wider society. This though, it also notes, is not reflected in current government policy, which focusses on building larger prisons to accommodate an ever-growing population.

Problems were identified in relation to communication between community mental health services and those in the prison system, with inmates often having difficulty accessing things like medication. Screening and assessment of newly incarcerated inmates presents problems, the report found that 75% of people needing support are not identified during induction.

Being released following completion of their sentence can also be a difficult time for people living with mental health issues. Many have difficulty finding work and accessing community support services, these problems have been intensified by cuts to the probation service.

The data used in the report was gathered during the first national lockdown when prison visits had been stopped and many activities such as education and work had been suspended indefinitely. These measures, though necessary to control the spread of the virus, led to most prisoners being in what amounted to solitary confinement, with an associated impact on their physical and mental wellbeing.

Unlike in wider society there was no corresponding move of meaningful activities online to provide at least limited mitigation, although the report finds that in many cases this could have been done.

The report makes seven recommendations for how services can be improved across the prison system, these include

Prison staff need to be better trained in understanding the mental health vulnerabilities of inmates coming into the system and reducing the use of short-term sentences with a realigned focus on using community punishment instead. The report also calls for improved continuity of care and support for people entering and leaving the prison system and improving the digital service capacity across the prison system.

The full text of the report can be read at:

https://www.centreformentalhealth.org.uk/sites/default/files/publication/download/CentreforMentalHealth_TheFutureofPrisonMentalHealthCare_0.pdf

 

 

 

North Staffs Greens Back Fight to Save Berryhill Fields.

 

The Green Party in North Staffordshire has given its backing to campaigners fighting to save Berryhill Fields from being developed for housing.

 Campaigners from the Save Berryhill Fields Action Group wrote to all 43 members of Stoke-on-Trent City Council in April asking for the site to be protected as the council draws up its Local Plan.

A quote written in support of their petition to Stoke-on-Trent City Council says: Quote from petition site SOTCC “Berry Hill fields brings so many benefits to our community and should be given funding to be more accessible to everyone across the city due it being such a beauty spot”.

This would see 21,480 new houses built across the Potteries by 2040, under the original Local Plan created in partnership with Newcastle Borough Council 1,316 homes were planned for the Berryhill Fields site.

The joint Local Plan has since been abandoned and the site, which was previously designated as part of a local nature reserve, has been declared unsuitable for housing. However, campaigners fear the city council may change its position if government funding becomes available. 

Speaking to the Sentinel in April Save Berryhill Fields Action Group vice chair Dave Burgess said “In the strategic housing land availability assessment, Berryhill Fields was listed as not viable for development. But that status could change if the council gets some new funding from the government – that could mean it becomes viable”.

Adding that “is why we want the land retained as a local nature reserve, to prevent any future development." [1]

Sam Hackney of the action group has since launched a petition calling for Berryhill Fields to be protected from development, the text of which reads: ‘We the undersigned petition the council to We want the council to completely and unequivocally rule out building on Berry Hill fields as residents have time and time again said we do not want this to happen due to their being a vast array of brown field sites within the city that can be used instead’.

A spokesperson for North Staffs Green Party said, “over the past year and a half we have all learnt how vital green spaces are for our physical and mental wellbeing, they are also key to halting the rapid decline in biodiversity”.

Adding that, “we fully support this campaign and hope to work with them on protecting Berryhill fields for generations to come to enjoy”.

The Petition has gained more than a thousand signatures and can be accessed on the city council website by following: 

http://www.moderngov.stoke.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?id=229&TPID=49793014

 

[1] https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/news/stoke-on-trent-news/campaigners-resume-fight-protect-berryhill-5355627https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/news/stoke-on-trent-news/campaigners-resume-fight-protect-berryhill-5355627

 

Action Needed to Stop the Toxic Legacy of the NHS Data Grab.

 The Green Party is calling on new Health Secretary Sajid Javid to halt plans to collate millions of NHS patient records from GP surgeries into a single database, this will be accessible to private companies.

Green Party health spokesperson Peter Cranie has urged Sajid Javid to dismantle the ‘toxic legacy’ left by his predecessor Matt Hancock.

He said that “Once again we see this government prioritise profits over people. These plans could enable US health companies to potentially make huge profits off the back of processing some of our most sensitive and personal data”. 

 

He said plans to make patient data accessible were part of an ‘ideological drive to turn one of the UK’s most treasured assets into a money-making scheme for US health companies’.

 

He went on to warn that were this to happen the NHS “may then face the prospect of having to buy back the processed data, with the resultant cost to taxpayers. We will end up paying for their shareholder distributions”.

 

The proposed ‘data grab’ is part of the government’s plans for the introduction of a data sharing scheme called General Practice Data for Planning and Research (GPDPR) put forward by the coalition in 2013.

 

The Green Party has concerns, along with many health campaigners, about patient privacy and the potential use of data held to be used to enrich private companies. Government promises about maintaining patient anonymity have so far proved unconvincing.

In their manifesto for the 2019 General Election the Green Party pledged to “end the sale of personal data, such as health or tax records, for commercial or other ends” and their opposition to the latest iteration of the proposal continues that position.

A spokesperson for North Staffs Green Party said, “at the recent by-election and during the county council elections in May the NHS was one of the issues people wanted to talk about most”.

Adding that “everyone we spoke to was dismayed at the paltry 1% pay rise offered to NHS staff who have been national heroes over the past year. They were equally concerned that data gathered by such a trusted institution could be used by private companies against their wishes”.

Green Party Health Spokesperson Peter Cranie said in a press statement “Healthcare should not be used to enrich private companies with commercial interests when there is already a strong infrastructure in our UK Higher Education system to analyse this data confidentially in a not-for-profit way”.

 

Then warned “this will not only cost people their privacy, in the long run it will hit us all in the pocket and it must be resisted”, before going on to say, “We urge Sajid Javid to listen to campaigners and drop the plans to share peoples’ data with private companies and hold a proper consultation on the rest of the plans.”

Collection of data from GP surgeries starts on 1^st September, patients have the opportunity to opt out of the scheme by completing a form accessible by using this link: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/data-collections-and-data-sets/data-collections/general-practice-data-for-planning-and-research#type-1-opt-out-opting-out-of-nhs-digital-collecting-your-data- , some surgeries have set a deadline of 23^rd August for forms to be completed.

Campaign group Open Democracy have launched a petition calling for the plans to be scrapped accessible by following this link: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ournhs/petition-dont-share-our-health-data-profit/