Hi nature lovers! Our beautiful two ancient oaks will be cut down soon to settle a claim that has been going on for a long while! No-one has details for the claim and the only statement we are left with is that within 28 days they will be no trees on our green area in front of our houses! Why should they be cut? They are perfectly healthy! No one has investigated if the trees are causing damage to houses nearby and surely no-one can tell if they could be a future problem...We want our oaks!

"The trees give us air, and we need air to live." Jess, 8 The last plane tree on Senlac Road, SE12, is threatened with destruction following an insurance claim. It is the last mature tree on this busy road in South East London. Removing it would mean there is no shade and no green in this area.  It is a beautiful tree, about 70 years old - older than most of us! It has seen local children grow up and is well-loved by the community.  But more than that - this tree, like all urban trees, helps with water conservation, cools the air around it, absorbs dangerous air pollutants, and carbon dioxide. Even if it were replaced by younger trees, they won't be mature enough to do the work this tree does to look after our health for decades. We are in a climate emergency - we cannot afford to lose more of the trees that are keeping us alive and well.  We desperately need our mature street trees - please, please support us to keep this one by signing the petition! "We need the tree for our environment." Alice, 7

Deptford's Wavelengths Leisure Pool is under threat. There are no plans to reopen Wavelengths Leisure Pool now that lockdown has ended. It is in need of a big refurbishment and the council must find the money to fix it.  Wavelengths Leisure Pool is a treasured resource for our children and families​ in the most ethnically diverse area of Lewisham. ​​A​s ​children​ recover from the impact of Covid​, it's even more important to invest in their wellbeing​.  With millions from new developments in and around Deptford, we believe the resources can be found. We call on the Mayor and council to work with the local community to make sure our beloved pool is refurbished and reopened at prices that remain affordable to all.

Lewisham Council has announced that Little Nan’s Broadway Theatre Saloon in Catford will be closing down by the end of the year because it is "unsuitable" for the space, seemingly on the basis that it has a “club vibe”. For the many locals and visitors who come to Little Nan’s in Catford, we can’t think of a better use for the space. Little Nan’s a real gem. It has a lovely, community-based vibe and has brought in visitors from outside the area as well. It has a real mix of people and is not clubby or rowdy in the slightest. It has undoubtedly contributed to the Catford scene, in particular around Catford Broadway, that is being championed so well by Team Catford.  Quote from a spokesperson for Little Nan’s courtesy of News Shopper:  "We were chosen by the council to take on the space in Catford nearly two years ago, and we have invested a lot of our own love, determination and money to create a happy and safe place for all to enjoy in this public building. “We have just received a letter with a termination of our lease notice by the end of the year. We have tried to contact the individuals in the council who have actioned this, but they are currently not wanting to speak to us about the matter. "We have been given no reason as to the eviction. This is such sad news and we are so upset by this, as we love Catford so much." Catford loves you too! Lewisham Council is saying that it has offered to work with Little Nan’s to explore other spaces in Catford that they could relocate to (perhaps all is not lost), but surely attempts at finding a solution ought to be have been made before serving notice? Please sign this petition to show your support for Little Nan’s, whether they remain at the Broadway Theatre or have to relocate elsewhere in Catford. Let’s hope it’s the former.  #savelittlenanscatford

Richard Osborn-Brooks, 78, was at his home to be awoken by by two much younger intruders trespassing in his home with the intent to cause damage and theft, and potentially harm to life.  There have been reports (unconfirmed at this stage) of Mr Osborn-Brooks being forced into his kitchen by one of the assailants brandishing a screw driver, whilst the other disappeared upstairs. Somewhere between the assailants entering the house, and the 00:45 GMT call out to the Metropolitan Police, one of the assailants suffered a fatal upper-body stab wound, and the other fled the scene, his whereabouts still unknown at the time of releasing this petition.  Mr Richard Osborn-Brooks was initially charged with GBH (grevious bodily harm) and later re-charged with murder which isn't sitting well with many at this moment in time.  For those unfamiliar with the British legal system here is a run down of the basics. To be guilty of an offence you have to be guilty of two things; 1. The Actus Reus (the guilty act itself) and 2. The Mens Rea  (the guilty mind).  To satisfy the actus reus of murder: -The defendant did the act or omitted (failed -to act) to do a legally recognised duty.-The act was deliberate.-The act was unlawful. (As opposed to killing in self defence).-The act was a significant cause of death. To satisfy the mens rea: - Malice aforethought, meaning: (a) an intention to kill; or(b) an intention to cause grievous bodily harm Now unless Mr Osborn-Brooks knew the two assailants and planned on killing them that night, or had a malicious intent to kill them in general then surely he cannot be convicted of murder regardless of whether his actions caused the death, and this seems an obvious case of self-defence. According to reports, the whole situation was caused solely because the two assailants entered the house without permission causing Mr Osborn-Brooks duress and fear.  According to the CPS (directly quoted from ://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/self-defence-and-prevention-crime): " ...it is important to ensure that all those acting reasonably and in good faith to defend themselves, their family, their property or in the prevention of crime or the apprehension of offenders are not prosecuted for such action." The basic principles of self-defence are set out in (Palmer v R, [1971] AC 814); approved in R v McInnes, 55 Cr App R 551: "It is both good law and good sense that a man who is attacked may defend himself. It is both good law and good sense that he may do, but only do, what is reasonably necessary." The common law approach as expressed in Palmer v R is also relevant to the application of section 3 Criminal Law Act 1967: "A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large."" "A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for the purposes of: -self-defence; or-defence of another; or-defence of property; or-prevention of crime; or-lawful arrest. In assessing the reasonableness of the force used, prosecutors should ask two questions: was the use of force necessary in the circumstances, i.e. Was there a need for any force at all? andwas the force used reasonable in the circumstances? The courts have indicated that both questions are to answered on the basis of the facts as the accused honestly believed them to be (R v Williams (G) 78 Cr App R 276), (R. v Oatbridge, 94 Cr App R 367). To that extent it is a subjective test. There is, however, an objective element to the test. The jury must then go on to ask themselves whether, on the basis of the facts as the accused believed them to be, a reasonable person would regard the force used as reasonable or excessive." -------------------- I do not believe that Mr Osborn-Brooks would have used any more force than he felt necessary in that sitiation, particularly as he did not put himself in that position, and nor did he contribute to the underlying factors that created the situation. As a reasonable person I (and the majority of the country) would regard the force as reasonable given even just the basic circumstances. He did not want this to happen! As a 78 year old man (or any age for that matter), being subjected to the fear of that present situation, and the fear of the unknown, it is impossible to state how you should or should not react, or what exact measure you should use to defend yourself. However, it is possible to state that the two assailants should not have been there, they should not have evoked such a reaction, and they should not have burglarized Mr Osborn-Brooks' home in the first place or put themselves or Mr Osborn-Brooks in that situation.  It would also be worth pointing out that had Mr Osborn-Brooks' reaction been so out of touch with reality, then surely the deceased's partner in the crime would have at least stayed around to help save his friends life or volunteered to be a key witness and identify Mr Osborn-Brooks as the cold blooded killer? Instead he ran and hid away from the scene, and left his friend, which indicates their level of blame and culpability. Many of the residents and locals to the scene of the crime have reported and indicated a high level of burglary and crime in the area prior to the incident, with many installing CCTV and complaining to local councils and authorities of the growing crime rate (particularly in relation to burglary), and the expectation of these crimes. Yet another indication of the imminent fear and hostility experienced by residents and Mr Osborn-Brooks. This is sending a message to burglars that they are protected and able to carry out such crimes with safety and security, and giving law abiding citizens a fear to protect themselves, their families, and their property. I for one could not say for sure how I would react in such an out of the normal situation, but I can testify that had I been in a situation where myself or my family was in danger then I would use whatever force necessary to prevent harm betroething us. When you break the law and enter a strangers home without permission, you know exactly the risk that you are taking. Mr Osborne-Brooks did not take a risk, he did not set out to break the law, he went to bed and was then put in an impossible situation through no fault of his own, and he should not be made to suffer the injustice or consequence of another persons illegal actions or mistakes. Mr Osborne-Brooks is not a cold hearted and premeditating murderer, he is an old age pensioner who was put in a tragic situation through no fault of his own, and defended himself the best way he knew and just as most of us would too. Let's end this injustice and start a new way of thinking, where justice means protecting the law abiding citizens and not those who abuse the law. Mr Osborn-Brooks should be able to recover this horrendous ordeal with his family and loved ones, and not a jail cell door. I would like to see the charges reversed and the real criminals brought to justice, and possibly a change in the law surrounding the stigma of self-defence and burglary. Who knows it might even reduce trespass related crimes in the UK. Please share and sign for change. #IamRichardOsborn-Brooks  **All information above has occurred through research and reports, and is not an admission of facts relating to the investigation, and only what has been reported in the media. I am not in any way involved or a part of the investigation, and to put it crudely I do not have a dog in this race, just an opinion shared by others. I am simply a member of the Great British public with a passion for justice, who feels an injustice is being done and I would like to make positive change where possible.

As people who live, work and travel in Catford we are deeply saddened by yet another fatal road accident on our streets.  It has been known for years how dangerous Catford Road is. The stretch of the South Circular which passes through Catford, around the gyratory, past the Council and Broadway Theatre, past Catford and Catford Bridge station and onto Forest Hill and beyond. The bridge over the rail line is too narrow. Buses, lorries, cyclists and pedestrians squeeze across this major road. There is no pedestrian crossing on the main road outside the two stations or across many side roads, many choose to try to cross at the traffic lights but there is no pause in traffic flow.  The underpass is unwelcoming, people don't feel safe using it and most choose not to. We know what needs to be done and there are already some plans in place. But work isn't due to start until 'after 2020'.  We need Transport for London to work together with the Council and others to bring this work forward urgently AND to take any possible steps to improve safety in the interim. Show your support for urgent action by: 1. Signing and sharing this petition 2. Sharing your ideas for improved safety and voting for ideas you support on the Council's consultation page: https://catfordtowncentre.commonplace.is/ Thank you.

Remove the road blockages from lee to Lewisham.  Brow hill road and lee high road is far too busy as it is 

Love it or hate it, you can't disagree that the Catford Cat is an icon. Yet, there are people who would love to see it disappear in the upcoming redevelopment of the area. The Council are consulting on how our town centre right now and will be collecting comments until the end of the year. If you agree that this piece of history should stay, there's three things you should do: 1. Sign this petition today to show Lewisham Council how many people care about the cat 2. Tell your friends and family why you want to Keep the Catford Cat and ask them to sign this petition using 3. Vote for ideas that protect the Cat on the Council's consultation page: https://catfordtowncentre.commonplace.is/

Hither Green Lane is being considered to be closed to traffic. This will affect businesses who have shops on Hither Green Lane, and those who rely upon a vehicle as part of their job. Hither Green Lane is one of the main roads linking to to the South Circular.  This cannot be considered as a proposal as the amount of vehicles currently being diverted from other LTN’s proves how vital this road is for trade and for commuting.  This proposal must be stopped.

One tree may seem like just one tree.  But to us, our community and our school kids, it's more than that.  Every tree counts and this mature London Plane Tree seems just to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Lewisham Council has given permission to fell the tree, which has stood for easily a century, in order that a crane platform can be constructed, for just one weekend's work.  Incredible, eh? It is fantastic that the Council is replacing the footbridge - but there must be a way to do this that doesn't mean the destruction of the tree. They have made their decision just based on cost: let's talk about value, in that case.  A tree is about the water it diverts, the shade that it casts, the CO2 that it captures, the diversity it supports, and the spirit it gives to our neighbourhood.  See here for more information on the research about the value of mature trees. We're taking inspiration from the Cox's Walk Footbridge campaigners, who successfully saved two oak trees from felling: Southwark Council was prepared to look differently at engineering solutions and we call on Damien Egan, Mayor of Lewisham to be able to do the same. After all, Lewisham Council declared a climate emergency in 2019, and p40 of their Climate Emergency Action Plan states, 'In short, the value of trees is immeasurable.' Please sign this petition to show support for the Sydenham Park Footbridge Plane Tree.  We don't have much time: the tree is scheduled to be felled before works start week commencing 31st Oct!