Happier days

Employment Judge Nebeau of the Employment Tribunals last month issued his Reserved Judgment in the case of Imam Abdul Sattar versus Wembley Central Mosque. Sattar was claiming unfair dismissal. The Judgment stated: 'The unfair dismissal claim is not well founded and is dismissed.'

The Judge said that although the case was about Sattar's dismissal the evidence showed tht there was in existence a fissure that became apparent three years prior to the claimant's dismissal. 

The Mosque was closed for three weeks early last year over the dispute between the Mosque Committee and worshipper allies of Imam Abdul Sattar. LINK

 Wembley Central Mosque, Ealing Road

More than 600 pages of documents were considerd by the telephone hearing last Autumn and the Judgment itself is 39 pages long.

Among the issues covered perhaps the most important was that of Speakers' engagement,  and risk assessments of speakers about which the Charity Commission had expressed concern.

Other issues considered including the issue and stamping of Nikah (Muslim marriage) certificates and Nikah fees,  selling of CDs at the Mosque, leafleting protests inside and outside the Mosque, unauthorised access to the Imam's office and the role of the religious sect Tablighi Jamaat. LINK

The Judgment gives an account of the attempt by the Imam of the Monks Park Mosque to mediate.

Judge Nebeau concludes his Judgment:

It must be borne in mind that the situation in 2018 and 2019 was getting beyond control. There were regular protests outside of the Masjid involving the police. The Masjid was split between those who followed the claimant and those who supported management committee. Based on the evidence before me there was also a serious breakdown in the employee employer relationship which seemed to be irretrievable. Under those circumstances, it is difficult to see a way forward as attempts at trying to resolve matters informally had been rejected. At the end of the day management committee had to manage the Masjid. Even if the three reasons found at the appeal stage in support of the claimant’s dismissal, did not apply, the apparent irretrievable breakdown in the relationship between the claimant and the management committee, would inevitably have necessitated the claimant’s dismissal.

Accordingly, I have come to the that the claimant’s unfair dismissal claim is not well-founded and is dismissed. Any hearing listed remedy is hereby vacated.

The full Judgment can be read HERE

Tenants of some local  'Build to Rent' schemes have found themselves trapped in the freeholder's contracts with utility and broadband suppliers, with no ability to switch accounts.  Fuel Poverty Action reveal similar problems in a new build development in Tower Hamlets.

Fuel Poverty Action is today publishing a remarkable exposé showing how families have been left in the cold because their unaffordable heat network and their social housing tenancies have created a legal limbo. For their heating, they are tied to one supplier, but they have no control of prices, no contract, no legal rights, and no one to complain to. This crisis has been created by a toxic - but increasingly common - mix of unaccountable housing and unaccountable heating. The tenants have led a long fight for affordable warmth and against the odds, have won major price reductions.  

Phoenix Works is a new build development in Tower Hamlets with 28 ”affordable rent” tenants housed by Peabody housing association(1). When they moved in, tenants “couldn’t believe” what their prepayment meters were consuming. Many simply could not pay the up to £250 a month required to keep warm. Some had to move out and stay with relatives, some got ill, some went deeply into debt. Meanwhile their landlord and heat provider passed the buck to each other, displaying a sense of impunity, and dazzling incompetence. 

The tenants’ heat is provided by a “Heat Network”. Heat networks are like central heating for a whole estate, and are being heavily promoted and subsidised by the government on the grounds that they offer a low-carbon alternative(2). Customers of a Heat Network cannot switch, nor is there any price cap or, as yet, any regulation. Assessed as eligible for “affordable housing”, the ex-council tenants had no warning of the extra costs, and no heat contract. They could not even find out who was responsible for their heating and tariffs: the estate management, KFH, or their social landlord, Peabody?  

Ms Lewis, who has led the fight for affordable heating at Phoenix Works says,

“Peabody can’t escape responsibility for allowing tenants to suffer. Some have had to choose between heating homes and feeding families during winter months, all because of the lack of information and accountability from the very beginning.  Do we have to just put up and shut up with whatever charges KFH decide to throw at us?  We would never have chosen to live this way had we been given the choice.”

Ruth London from FPA says, 

“Cold kills. 10,000 people die each winter in the UK because they can’t afford to heat their homes.  And that was the number before a respiratory pandemic! 

Heat Networks are supposed to provide low carbon, low cost, reliable heat. But FPA work with residents in many such estates who are fighting huge bills, constant heating breakdowns, or both.The sheer unaccountability of both heating and housing management has never been more blatant than at Phoenix Works.” 

With Fuel Poverty Action(3), tenants are calling for a public inquiry to uncover what has happened and what structural and legal changes are needed to prevent it happening anywhere again. 

Tenants from Phoenix Works are available for interview.  Also available are residents from other heat network estates in Tower Hamlets and all over London who are suffering from high prices or frequent outages, both of which can leave households without either heat or hot water.  

As well as Fuel Poverty Action, the Phoenix Works tenants have won support from SHAC, who contributed to the dossier, from the Heat Networks team at BEIS  (heatnetworks@beis.gov.uk), and from their MP, Apsana Begum. 

The Dossier is published HERE on our website or you can download a PDF here. 

For substantial coverage in The Times see HERE.

NOTES 

1. New developments are required to set aside a proportion of flats for “affordable housing”. Rents in these lower standard apartments are up to 80% of market rates, which in some places, like London, can be extremely high, and tenants may face lower standards and “poor doors”. Most of the other residents are leaseholders. 

2. Heat networks pipe heat into homes from a communal gas boiler. Also known as “District Heating”, this system are said to save carbon emissions by being more efficient than gas boilers, by producing electricity at the same time as heat if using a central “Combined Heat and Power” boiler, and because they have the potential to use renewable or waste heat sources instead of combustion. But where systems are badly designed, installed, or maintained, residents can go cold, and carbon savings in practice can be nil. 

3. Fuel Poverty Action is a grassroots organisation started in 2011, which since 2017 has been supporting residents all over London who are organising for reliable and affordable heat from their heat networks. In 2017 we published Not Fit For Purpose, a report on the heat network on Myatts Field North, which is now being pressed into service again by residents there. Our many consultation responses on the issue can be found here.

When Brent Council's £100m Civic Centre was built it was decided that a building of such distinction required an equally distinctive road surface so £852,000 was spent on block paving. Given that it was a route for heavy construction lorries it soon deteriorated although Brent Council also blamed severe weather.

Further money has been spent on ongoing repairs but observers have now seen that a section of Engineers Way outside the Civic Centre  has been stripped:

Engineers Way yesterday

 Former Brent Liberal Democrat leader Paul Lorber, has written to the Council to ask if the road is going to replaced  by asphalt as in other parts of the borough and why similar remedial action cannot be taken at Station Approach in Sudbury.

It looked yesterday from the stack of blocks visible on the site as if the block paving is going to be replaced. I think we need to know the additional costs involved.

Meanwhile with Engineers Way closed while work continues on the controversial , Fulton Road is the main access road to the stadium area. Residents of the new build have been complaining about the traffic jams caused by huge trucks accessing building sites with considerable difficulty and the damage caused when they have to mount the pavements.

At the other end of Olympic Way work is continuing on the linking of North End Road to Bridge Road with considerable incovenience to pedestrians. An initial justification given for the link was that  buses could use North End Road as a detour on event days and maintain a better bus service to residents. The 206 to the Paddocks was curtailed on event days. It now appears that there may have to be a weight limit on the new link which might affect these plans.

After I published John Healy’s personal account of his fears as a disabled pensioner, living on the 5^th floor of a South Kilburn council block with no fire alarm system, of succumbing to a fire in the wake of Grenfell LINK as no Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan (PEEP) was in place LINK, Brent Council issued this statement:

Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEP) are essential for anyone who may need assistance in the unlikely event of being advised to leave a building because of fire. We're concerned that something seems to have gone wrong here and have contacted Mr Healy to put it right.

Last year, we proactively reached out to all tenants, asking anyone who needed assistance to complete a PEEP. We don't seem to have received a PEEP from Mr Healy and will be investigating what has gone wrong here, along with Mr Healy's comments about not being able to reach us.

Three weeks later and 7 months since John first completed his PEEP application form the PEEP is not yet in place and the assurance he needs that his hearing and mobility disabilities would be catered for in the event of a fire has not been provided – Brent Council is failing in its duty of care to one of its vulnerable tenants.

John told Wembley Matters on March 31^st:

After 26 emails and numerous phone calls during the whole of March, they annoyed me yesterday by asking me "to clarify why I need a PEEP?".

In the previous 26 emails, I have given several council officers and councillors all the information they asked me for, as to why I need a PEEP but none of it seems to have been understood by any of them.

I now know how those Grenfell residents must have felt when they tried to inform Kensington and Chelsea council and their TMO.  To be honest I expected more from Brent Council but they have shown me that they are no better than any other council in London.

The council say they only became aware of my situation when I completed a new PEEP application online on the 19th March 2021 and entered it on their PEEP database on the 22nd March 2021.  All my previous emails and phone calls over the previous 6 months have no bearing on my new application,  says my Buildings officer.  In other words, he never even saw the article in Wembley Matters as it was published on the 12th March 2021, or anything else that I sent since early Sept. 2020, after returning my first PEEP application form.

 I made a first stage complaint, but I sent it before hearing from the council, that my application only began on the 19th March 2021. After sending in my complaint, I did receive an apology from the Lead Officer for Housing, Neighbourhoods and Community Wellbeing, which I assumed was in connection with the complaint but the officer never actually mentioned the word 'complaint' in her email.

Mr Healy is ready to give up and resign himself to sleepless nights over his fears for himself and other residents caught in this bureaucratic nightmare.

Surely Brent Council, which has been awarded ‘Disability Confident Leader Status’ as a provider, commissioner of services and an employer LINK, should be doing better?

There are three items at Tuesday's 10am Cabinet meeting relating to the Climate Emergency. (The meeting can be viewed live HERE).

In an unusual move the campaign group Divest Brent is presenting a petition calling on the Brent Council Pension Fund to divest from fossil fuels.

The Cabinet  will also be considering the approval of the Brent Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy 2021-2030 that has gone through some changes as the result of consultation and submissions.

Unfortunately the Strategy does not include specific targets and milestones. The Council explain:

Due to the long-term nature of the Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy the current financial situation facing all councils following the Covid-19 pandemic the detailed document does not contain a detailed action plan or route map for the next ten years.

The overall aim is to achieve carbon netrality by 2030. Readers unsure of the difference between carbon neutrality and zero carbon can read more HERE.

The third item is a £3.234 grant to improve the energy efficiency of some Brent Council owned buildings. The grant is fro  the Public Sector Decarbonisation Scheme managed by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. I was struck by how many of the buildings chosen are comparatively new or recently refurbished.

The officers' report provides examples of decarbonisation measures for 10 of the buildings:

 The start of the long-running patient campaign to persuade Brent Council to divest its pension fund from fossil fuels

From Divest Brent

For over 3 years campaign group Divest Brent have been working to persuade the Council to divest its Pension Fund from fossil fuels. In 2019 the Council declared a Climate and Ecological Emergency and specifically agreed to redirect investments to renewal, sustainable and low carbon funds. Indeed some investments have been made in this area but the majority of the Pension Fund is still invested in funds which include fossil fuels. 

Extract from the Climate Emergency Strategy

Simon Erskine, Co-ordinator of Divest Brent, said:

We welcome any moves by the Pension Fund to invest sustainably and to help with the transition to renewable energy – but the fact is that whatever green investments the Fund may have, while it continues to invest in fossil fuels it is part of the problem.

Having achieved nearly 1,400 signatures Divest Brent is now ready to submit its petition to the Council. On April 6 Councillor Matt Kelcher will present the petition to the Brent Cabinet on behalf of Divest Brent. Mr Erskine said:

We were originally going to present the petition to the full Council meeting in July but the Cabinet will be discussing the Council’s draft Climate Emergency Strategy. Following campaigning by Divest Brent the draft Strategy now includes a section on the Pension Fund’s investments – and we decided that this was the best time to submit the petition, when the Cabinet was anyway looking at the issues involved.

 

Divest Brent has written a joint letter to Councillor Krupa Sheth, Council Environment lead, with Brent Friends of the Earth, calling on the Council to divest the Pension Fund as part of the Climate Emergency Strategy.

 

The presentation of the petition comes hot on the heels of a report entitled “Divesting to protect our pensions and the planet” which gave a comprehensive breakdown of the extent that UK Councils were invested in fossil fuels. 3% of Brent’s Pension Fund is thought to be invested in fossil fuels - £26 million. Compared to the £40 million invested in 2017 this looks like an improvement – until it is realised that much of the reduction is due to a fall in value of fossil fuel investments. 

The Council has admitted that, while much of the Stock Market has suffered from Covid 19, they have lost £8 million by failing to divest from fossil fuels before the pandemic. They are not alone in this – with UK Councils having lost £2 billion altogether over the last 4 years – but £8 million is still a serious loss compared to the Pension Fund total of £800 million.

With the outlook for fossil fuels never worse as the electric vehicle revolution starts to kick in and governments look to move away from gas as a means of heating our homes, Pension Fund committee members could find themselves in breach of their duties to protect the value of the Fund if they do not start to move seriously towards divestment.

Watch the Cabinet meeting and hear the Council's response live at 10am tomorrow LINK

 Lucrative

Recently it has often seemed that planning officers speak directly on behalf of developers at Brent Planning Committee, rather than giving a balanced view in the light of an application's short-comings and the submissions of local residents.

Wednesday's application by Wembley National Stadium Ltd to increase the number of full capacity non-sporting events, an attendance of up to 90,000 rather than 51,000, is no exception.

The proposal:

Many objectors consider that the number of events currently held at the stadium already has an unacceptable level of impact on local residents. However, it should be borne in mind that this application does not affect the number of events that take place at the Stadium, just the capacity of the crowd. Unlimited events at up to 51,000 can take place within the terms of the existing planning consent. Additional mitigation measures would be secured. Some of these measures would relate to all major events and some would relate to the additional non-sporting events. These mitigation measures  are considered to be sufficient to warrant the additional 9 full capacity events proposed.

They later remark:

 WNSL do not currently intent to hold concerts on more than four consecutive nights.

Note the 'currently'.

Live music events contributed substantially to WNSL's income in the past and went into deficit when music events were scaled back from the 2015-16 and this is clearly an attempt to to retrieve the position. LINK

There were 37 representations made on the planning portal, including one from Barn Hill Residents Assocation. All but 2 were opposed to the application, one was in favour and 2 neutral.

Local residents were concerned about the impact of the increase on the quality of their daily lives, already impacted by crowds at the stadium in normal, non-Covid times.

This is the planning officers' conclusion to their report:

The objections received indicate that there is a level of impact currently experienced by local residents as a result of events at the stadium, with concerns predominantly focussed on anti-social behaviour, transport issues, air quality and noise. Some impacts are to be expected, given the size of the stadium and its siting in a location surrounded by residential properties and businesses, within a dense urban area.

 

The original cap on events was imposed to manage the impacts until such time as specific transport improvements had been made. Whilst most of these have taken place, not all of them have been realised. Circumstances have changed since the original planning permission in 2002, which suggest that the final piece of transport infrastructure (the Stadium Access Corridor) will not be provided in its originally envisaged form, but other changes to the road network have now taken place or are currently underway. Therefore, the Council considers that the cap remains relevant.

 

Clearly, to increase the number of higher capacity events to accommodate up to 9 additional major non-sporting events per event calendar year would imply an increase in the impact. However, a wide range of mitigation measures are proposed to help mitigate these impacts. There are ongoing efforts to reduce the number of vehicles on an event day. A number of mitigation measures are proposed to continue this work, including additional parking enforcement capacity and an updated Event Day Spectator Travel Plan to promote sustainable travel patterns. WNSL and public transport operators work closely to promote sustainable transport solutions and maximise the efficiency of the network. This in turn contributes to reducing noise and air quality issues.

 

Infrastructure works including two-way working in the area to the east of the stadium and the opening of a link between the western end of North End Road and Bridge Road to provide an east-west route past the Stadium that is capable of being kept open at all times before and after Stadium events will improve traffic flow in the area and assist residents’ movements on event days.

 

The Trusted Parking Scheme aims to ensure authorised car parks are responsibly run in a way that would limit their impact on neighbouring residents and reduce local congestion, whilst the Private Hire Management Scheme would reduce the number of vehicles in the area around the stadium after events have finished.

 

Employment and Training benefits for Brent residents would also be secured by the proposed scheme.

 

With regard to antisocial behaviour, a financial contribution would be paid by the Stadium to Brent Council per additional major non-sporting event. This would go towards mitigation measures as agreed between WNSL and the Council which may cover measures to address anti-social behaviour such as additional public toilets.

 

Whilst it is appreciated that local residents face challenges on event days, the direct economic benefits for the local Brent economy of stadium events are also recognised including spending on accommodation, food, drink and other ancillary items within the Wembley area. The uplift in the event cap would also create additional event day steward and catering positions. Whilst some types of business would suffer on event days, many would benefit from the influx of people to the area.

 

In summary, it is recognised that there is a level of impact associated with major events now, and that this would increase with an increase in the number of high-capacity major events. However, the measures proposed would ensure that this is moderated as much as is reasonably achievable. All are considered necessary to mitigate the increased number of major events which this application proposes.

 

A further consideration is that the stadium can be used for major events up to 51,000 now without restriction and remaining within this limit would mean that no additional mitigation measures would be formally secured. Measures including the training and employment opportunities would apply more broadly to stadium events, not just the additional major non-sporting events for which permission is sought under this application and would therefore provide wider benefits to local people and the local economy more generally.

 

The proposal is considered to accord with the development plan, having regard to material planning considerations. While there will inevitably be some additional impacts associated with an increase in the number of higher capacity non-sporting events, a range of mitigation measures are proposed, and some benefits are also anticipated. The proposal is, on balance, recommended for approval.

About this Event

An opportunity to hear from the local London Assembly candidates about how they will address the Climate Emergency and other environmental challenges. The candidates will outline their existing proposals and respond to questions from local groups as well as the wider community.

REGISTER HERE

Note - due to a glitch you cannot register if you leave the question box blank. If you do not wish to ask a question just type 'No question' in the box and you will be able to register. 

Today's Cabinet will be asked to approve procurement for the next phases of the South Kilburn regeneration project. It includes a plan for  Brent Council funding  (via Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy) of infrastructure to make the project more attractive to developers:

Within the NWCC project, there is a high level of affordable housing (54% by habitable room) which may have an impact on the overall viability of the scheme. 

Therefore,it is proposed,to make the procurement more attractive to potential developer partners, the Council will contribute to the infrastructure/public realm costs. The infrastructure and public realm costs relate to the external works,which include soft and hard landscaping, and infrastructure works including drainage, utilities and services (electricity, gas, water and telecoms). 

A cost plan was prepared by the Council’s cost consultant, Deloittes.This proposed contribution will in turn support the overall viability of the scheme, which will lead to the Council receiving the desired quantum of affordable housing and envisaged outcomes and wider benefits.

The Councils Capital Investment Panel, in April 2020, supported £4.9mfrom the capital pipeline for infrastructure and public realm projects for the external works, from Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy funding.

The Council plans to dispose of some of ther sites on a long lease and say, 'there is potential capital receipts and future overage payments from the private units'.

The proposed rents for the affordable units managed by Brent Housing are set out:

The new affordable homes in NWCC and later developments are available to existing South Kilburn Council tenants currently living in properties due for demolition as part of the South Kilburn regeneration programme.

As with all schemes that are part of the South Kilburn regeneration programme, full consideration is and will continue to be given to residents and leaseholders with protected characteristics, particularly people with disabilities and / or other types of vulnerabilities due to older age, childcare and/or caring responsibilities, socio-economic status (single parents and large families). The Council will/has ensured that the options put forward to tenants and leaseholders provide reasonable and affordable alternatives that enable them to remain in the area and maintain their family and community ties, as per Article 1 of the First Protocol and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The re- housing team provides help to secure tenants through the moving process, additional support and services to those who require it.

The presentation and discussion of the Divest petition

Cllr Matt Kelcher today presented a petition of nearly 1,400 Brent residents calling for Brent Council to divest its pension fund from fossil fuels. In the video above you can see him outline why investing in fossil fuels is bad policy, bad economics and bad politics. He said local people feel strongly about the issue in the light of the climate emergency and Brent Council should follow the lead of 9 Labour boroughs with divestment policies,. 'Not to divest makes us part of the problem and not part of the solution...We should do it NOW, when we can make the biggest impact.' 

In her response Cllr McLennan (Deputy Leader and lead for resources) offered to  work with Divest Brent and Friends of the Earth on the issue.

Brent Planning Committee has just unanimously approved Wembly Stadium's application for 9 additional full capacity non-sporting events annually at the venue. Full details of the conditions attached by the Committee will be available later.

Meanwhile Brent Council has published this information on their website:

Wembley Stadium will host two pilot events in April as the Football Association, Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS), Brent Council and partners work together to bring fans safely back to the National Stadium.

For the FA Cup Semi-Final, on 18 April, 4,000 tickets will be on offer to local keyworkers, many of whom are vaccinated. 8,000 spectators are expected to be able to watch the League Cup Final in person on 25 April with the same testing and safety measures in place.

A Brent Council spokesperson said: “It is right and proper that COVID safety procedures are tested thoroughly before considering whether larger numbers of fans can safely return to the stadium later in the spring and over the summer. We look forward to examining the results of the two test events in April so that any lessons can be learned ahead of the FA Cup Final on 15 May. Wembley Stadium is the spiritual home of football and a very important part of life in our borough so we are keen to see more fans return when it is safe to do so but this needs to be a gradual process based on reviewing the evidence after each test event.”

The data and learnings that the DCMS gathers will help inform planning for the Euro Football tournament in June and July.

Fryent Country Park, Kingsbury

 From London Friends of Green Spaces Network

From Divest Brent/Brent Friends of the Earth

For over 3 years campaign group Divest Brent have been working to persuade the Council to divest its Pension Fund from fossil fuels. On April 6 Councillor Matt Kelcher presented the 1,400-signature petition (including 1,200 Brent residents) to the Cabinet on behalf of Divest Brent.  

Coming as it did immediately before the Cabinet discussed its 10-year climate strategy Councillor Kelcher’s hard-hitting presentation carried added weight. Following campaigning by Divest Brent the draft strategy, which was agreed at the meeting, included a section on the Pension Fund’s investments.

Responding to the presentation, Council Leader Muhammad Butt, Deputy Leader Margaret McLennan and Environment lead, Krupa Sheth all spoke positively and in particular Councillor McLennan looked forward to working with Divest Brent and Brent Friends of the Earth to take the agenda forward.

In 2019 the Council declared a Climate and Ecological Emergency and specifically agreed to redirect investments to renewable, sustainable and low carbon funds. Indeed some investments have been made in this area but the majority of the Pension Fund is still invested in funds which include fossil fuels.

Simon Erskine, Co-ordinator of Divest Brent, said “We welcome any moves by the Pension Fund to invest sustainably and to help with the transition to renewable energy – but the fact is that whatever green investments the Fund may have, while it continues to invest in fossil fuels it is part of the problem. We therefore look forward to working with the Council to develop a road-map for divestment in the short term.”

The presentation of the petition comes hot on the heels of a report entitled “Divesting to protect our pensions and the planet” which gave a comprehensive breakdown of the extent that UK Councils were invested in fossil fuels. 3% of Brent’s Pension Fund is thought to be invested in fossil fuels - £26 million. Compared to the £40 million invested in 2017 this looks like an improvement – until it is realised that much of the reduction is due to a fall in value of fossil fuel investments.

The Council has admitted that, while much of the Stock Market has suffered from Covid 19, they have lost £8 million by failing to divest from fossil fuels before the pandemic. They are not alone in this – with UK Councils having lost £2 billion altogether over the last 4 years – but £8 million is still a serious loss compared to the Pension Fund total of £800 million.

With the outlook for fossil fuels never worse as the electric vehicle revolution starts to kick in and governments look to move away from gas as a means of heating our homes, Pension Fund committee members could find themselves in breach of their duties to protect the value of the Fund if they do not start to move seriously towards divestment. Said Mr Erskine, “We look forward to Brent joining Lambeth, Southwark and Islington Councils (to name just a few) in committing to divest its pension fund from fossil fuels.”

Emma Wallace of Harrow Green Party, and out GLA constituency candidate for Brent and Harrow, convinced many environmentalists yesterday evening at the hustings organised by Brent Friends of the Earth.

Labour's Krupesh Hirani slumped to 26% after the hustings compared with 54% before he had spoken.  Emma Wallace gained 11% to take the lead and  Liberal Democrat Anton Georgiou quadrapled his vote from a meagre 4% to 17%.

The Conservative  candidate was invited but did not attend.

We are holding an open meeting for people to share their experiences of TFL and Network Rail's destruction of habitat in their local area.

We will then discuss ideas for action to change their behaviours and policies. 

REGISTRATION 

A group of campaigners for the Welsh Harp (Brent Reservoir)  have published a 15 point vision for its future. There has been a problem with littering around the Welsh Harp for a long time   but the recent lowering of the waterline, so that dam repairs could take place,  have revealed what was in the water itself. A truly shocking revelation.

Only one metre below the surface. Debris and contaminated alluvium build-up on the protected East Marsh, revealed during lowering of water levels, January 2021
© Ben Watt

The vision for the 170 acres of the area and its Site of Special Scientic Interest would require the Canal and River Trust (owners of the reservoir and shoreline), Brent and Barnet Councils (owners of the open areas), Environment Agency (overseers of the two inflowing rivers and the reservoir's flood control function, and Natural England (who advise on environmental issues and adjudicate on SSSI status), to work together. 

That is a tall order but if anyone can achieve that it will be this band of determined, hands on campaigners.

Please get behind them by reading the full vision, written by Ben Watt, and making your voice heard. LINK

We wish them well and ultimate success so that a healthy and thriving natural resource will be available for future generations to treasure.

 FROM BRENT COUNCIL

Brent residents are being encouraged to get tested twice a week as part of their regular routine as the national lockdown in England loosens further.

From today (April 9) everyone in England, including those without symptoms, is eligible to take a free rapid COVID test twice a week to do their bit to ensure they are not spreading COVID. 1 in 3 people with COVID show no symptoms at all so could be spreading it without knowing if they don’t test regularly.

Alongside the rollout of the vaccine, getting tested regularly is vital to help control the spread of the virus – including variants – as more shops and services start to open up again.

Dr Melanie Smith, Brent’s Director of Public Health, says:

Testing is the only sure way to know whether you are carrying the virus as around a third of people with COVID don’t show any signs at all so could be spreading this deadly virus to loved ones and around the community without knowing. Rapid testing does exactly what it says on the tin – providing a result in less than 40 minutes. This means positive cases can be detected quickly and infected people can slow the spread by immediately self-isolating.

From Friday, residents will be able to access rapid lateral flow tests (LFDs) for themselves and their families to use twice a week. Rapid testing had been limited to those most at risk and people needing to leave home for work. Now rapid testing will be offered to everyone – not just frontline NHS workers, care home staff and residents, and schoolchildren and their families.

Since rapid testing was introduced over 120,000 positive cases have been identified. These would not have been discovered without the widespread use of LFDs. By extending their use still further, even more cases will be detected and we can break the chains of transmission and save lives.

Updates will also be made to the NHS COVID-19 app in England to coincide with the offer of rapid testing for everyone. Since its launch in September, over 22 million people have downloaded the app. 

Over 100,000 businesses in England have registered their interest to provide rapid tests to their employees, and the offer of free testing is being expanded to companies with over ten workers where on-site testing is impossible. 

The expanded testing offer for people without symptoms will be delivered by:

·       A home ordering service, which allows people to order lateral flow tests online to be delivered to their home

·       Workplace testing programmes, on-site or at home

·       Community testing, offered by all local authorities – there are five locations in Brent

·       Collection at a local PCR test site during specific test collection time windows

·       Testing on-site at schools and colleges.

A new ‘Pharmacy Collect’ service is also launching which will provide an additional route to regular testing. People aged over 18 without symptoms will be able to visit a participating local pharmacy and collect a box of seven rapid tests to use twice a week at home.

The best route for testing can be found at NHS.UK/get-tested. If testing at home, individuals will need to register their results online, or by calling 119. After any positive LFT test, they will also need to self-isolate and order a confirmatory PCR test. 

For more information about testing go to: www.brent.gov.uk/testing

Symptom-free tests are available at the following locations seven days a week from 9am-6pm:

• Brent Civic Centre - Engineers Way, Wembley Park, Wembley, HA9 0FJ
• Ealing Road Library - Coronet Parade, Ealing Road, Wembley, HA0 4BA
• Harlesden Library - Craven Park Road, Harlesden, NW10 8SE
• Kingsbury Library - 522-524 Kingsbury Road, Kingsbury, NW9 9HE
• The Library at Willesden Green - 95 High Rd, Willesden, London, NW10 2SF
  

NHS Covid-19 app updates

To coincide with the offer of free rapid testing for everyone, there will be updates to the NHS Covid-19 app in England from 8 April:

·       Everyone in a group must check in – In line with new regulations, when a group enters a hospitality venue, every individual must check either by scanning the official NHS QR code poster with the NHS COVID-19 app, or by providing their contact details. Previously, only the lead member of the group needed to provide contact details to check in.

·       Venue history sharing – if an app user tests positive, they will be asked to share their venue history in a privacy-protecting way via the app. This will allow venue alerts to be generated more quickly, and improve the ability to identify where outbreaks are occurring and take steps to prevent the virus spreading.

·       Additional venue alerts – if a person has been at a venue on the same day as several other people who have since tested positive for Covid-19, they may receive an alert, advising them to book a test immediately, whether they are showing symptoms or not. This is to support finding asymptomatic cases who may have caught the virus but are not displaying symptoms.

·       New QR code posters – There will be new posters displaying QR codes for hospitality venues in England. Work has taken place with the industry to make the posters clearer and easier to use. All venues in England in scope of the regulations are legally required to display an official NHS QR code poster. 

Gardeners at the Chalkhill Community Allotments beside the Metropolitan Line on Chalkhill Estate are delighted at works being undertaken by Metropolitian Housing Thames Valler who manage the estate and their maintenance team Pinnacle.

The allotments have been in existence for a number of years but were limited to some extent by the fact that the growing beds were made out of builders' bags that dried out quickly, limited the numbers of worms in the soil,  and collapsed without support.

Using rescued  decking Pinnacle have been constructing raised beds to replace the bags and compost has been provided.  At the same time the maintenace team have removed rubbish, cut the grass and cut back brambles and other vegetation.

The Chalkhill Community Growers* that now include the Lounge Cafe,  Daniel's Den and Chalkhill Primary School are very pleased with the results.

Before - the sack beds with one wooden experimental raised bed

Raised beds under construction (Photo: Amanda Rose)

After - this bed has wheelchair access

* Declaration of interest: I am chair of Chalkhill Comunity Growers Group

This presentation was made at a recent meeting of concerned residents who have witnessed the removal of much of the vegetation on railway embankments. TfL's contractors have removed shrubs and scrub as well as mature trees, even when they appeared not to impinge on railway tracks and were healthy. In the process, they have removed habitats of birds, mammals including badger setts and bat roosts. No proper ecological damage assessments appear to have been made. The presentation was compiled by Emma Wallace, Green Party GLA candidate for Brent and Harrow who set up the Facebook Group publicising the issue. 

The Facebook Group has more than 100 members who share information about the damage being done in their area and are planning future action. LINK

A petition on the issue was recently presented to Mayor Sadiq Khan by Green Assembly Member Caroline Russell:

In this guest post, written in a personal capacity, Philip Grant returns to the the contentious planning issues surrounding the placement of advertising over the Bobby Moore murals at the Olympic Way underpass. It may be long but makes for rewarding reading as it reveals meticulous research and the polite but unapologetic logic of Philip Grant's position.

On 1 March, Martin posted a “guest blog” from me which included an update on the dispute over whether Quintain has the right to cover the “footballers” mural, in the Council-owned subway near Wembley Park station, with adverts on “event days”, including the Euros football matches this summer. It included the text of a message I’d sent to Carolyn Downs, Brent’s Chief Executive, on 25 February, showing how the dispute could be resolved immediately. Six weeks later, it has still not been resolved. Why?

The footballers tile mural, with the lights of “light boxes” just visible at either side of it.

Quintain had agreed in 2019 that this mural would be put back on permanent public display, even though the other mural scenes on the walls of the subway would be covered over with “light boxes” on which advertising material could be displayed. But the secret deal by Brent Council officers, extending Quintain’s Bobby Moore Bridge advertising lease until August 2024, included a clause which said that they were entitled to cover this tile mural with adverts on a number of stadium “event days”.

An officer had replied on 25 February, on Ms Downs behalf, to say she would ‘ensure you are provided with a response as soon as possible.’ When I’d heard nothing more two weeks later, I decided that a letter to our local newspaper might encourage the Council to “do the right thing”, and the “Brent & Kilburn Times” kindly published it (the headline was not mine).

The following day (Friday 12 March), the Council officer emailed to say that I would receive a response ‘early next week’. More than a week later, this is what I received:

'I apologise again for the delay.  We are in the process of obtaining external advice in respect of the issues you have raised.  We will be able to send you a substantive response once we have received that.'

Why were Brent Council paying an outside lawyer for more advice, when I had already given them a clear explanation of the answer to this point, with full supporting evidence, for free?

When I received the “substantive response”, as part of an email from Carolyn Downs on 30 March, the Council did at last agree that the 2019 advertising consent ‘does not extend over the Footballers’ Mural.’ Hooray! They’d finally accepted the facts I set out to them more than a year earlier.

But there was a sting in the tail. There had been an original advertisement consent application, made in 2013, but not dealt with by Brent’s Planning Department until August 2017. Ms Downs said: ‘I am therefore advised that advertisement consent 13/2987 remains in place for the display of vinyl adverts attached to the tiles surface of the Footballers’ Mural provided they are attached to the tiles.’

It did not take me long to dispose of that point, and I replied later the same day: ‘I have to tell you that whoever is giving you advice on this planning matter has got it wrong, again.’ I explained in detail why that was the case, and summarised the position as follows:

Application 19/1474 was made, dealt with and approved on the basis that the advertisement consent 13/2987 was replaced, as far as the Bobby Moore Bridge parapets and subway walls were concerned. The consent until 24 August 2022 under 13/2987 only applies to covering the tile murals on the flanking walls outside the subway.

There was ample supporting evidence for my statement, including this section from the agent’s letter of 18 April 2019, submitting the advertisement consent application (19/1474):

I thought that should be enough to settle the matter, but no. On 9 April, I received an email from Brent’s Legal Director, Debra Norman. It claimed that the consent under application 13/2987 still allowed Quintain to cover the “footballers” mural with vinyl advertising sheets:

‘Officers have considered the elevation drawings referred to in the Consent and are satisfied that they show the east and west walls of the underpass and adjoining Olympic Way which are tiled. In consequence, the Council does not agree with your contention that the consent only applies to the tile murals outside the subway.’ … and further:

‘… there is nothing in the later consent (19/1474) which prevents continued reliance on the Consent to the extent that the two consents are compatible.’

Well, actually, there IS something in consent 19/1474 which means that consent 13/2987 no longer applies to the “footballers” mural. I agree that both consents applied to that tile mural, but the later consent specifically replaced the original consent, for the whole of the Bobby Moore Bridge and its subway! Again, I replied on the same day to explain the correct position.

I will ask Martin to attach the documents showing the two exchanges of views (30 March and 9 April), so that anyone who is interested can read them, and draw their own conclusions on their respective merits.

But why are Brent Council, and its top officials, so desperate to claim that Quintain can put adverts over the “footballers” tile mural?

Are they afraid to tell Quintain the truth? Well, they shouldn’t be, because under the conditions of the advertising lease (as extended) it is Quintain’s responsibility to obtain any consents they need in order to display advertisements on the Bobby Moore Bridge, and Quintain have failed to do that for the “footballers” mural.

Are they embarrassed because Brent’s own property lawyers failed in their “due diligence” over clause 10.3 of the extended lease, which claimed to entitle Quintain to cover that tile mural with adverts on “event days”? That was an error on Brent’s part, particularly as they had allowed Quintain’s property lawyers, Squire Patton Boggs (UK) LLP, to draw up the “Deed of Variation”.

Is Brent’s top lawyer determined not to concede a legal argument to an ordinary member of the public? Anyone can get things wrong (I do myself, occasionally), but when you are left “clutching at straws”, perhaps it is best not to embarrass yourself further! [If it is any comfort, although I do not have any formal legal qualifications, I have the experience of a working life dealing with complex legal points, and preparing cases for tribunal and court hearings.]

Or is it that Brent does not want to give up the chance of potentially earning “a few dollars more”, from the share of profits it might receive from Quintain, if it can sell the “footballers” tile mural advertising space for big events at the stadium?

Who knows why (and I don’t suppose they will ever tell me)? I hope that Brent Council will now concede this point, agree that Quintain does not have advertisement consent for covering the “footballers” mural, and that it will not waste further time, effort and money (your and my Council Tax money!) in pursuing an argument it knows it has lost.

Philip Grant

 THE EMAILS - FIRST EXCHANGE  (Click Bottom right for full page view)

 THE EMAILS - SECOND  EXCHANGE (Click Bottom right for full page view)