Brent Council puts the clock back

February 14, 2015, 8:08 am

≫ Next: Veolia Recycling Lorry Accidentally Leaks Oil in Princes Court

≪ Previous: Brent Fights Back Against the Cuts - Join us on Tuesday

The return of the refurbished Jubilee Clock to a new position in Harlesden High Street was celebrated today.

I couldn't resist a cry of 'Save Stonebridge Adventure Playground' during a lull in the public relations to cheers from some of the onlokkers and pursed lips and 'inappropriate' from some of the Labour councillors.

There was a good reception from local people to Brent Fightback leaflets advertising the 'Brent Fight Backs Against the Cuts' meeting that will take place at the Tavistock Hall, Tavistock Road, of the High Street on Tuesday evening. The cutting of school crossing patrols and the ending of funding to Stonebridge Adventure Playground were particularly unpopular.

The Clock was decorated with a large bow tie:

↧

Veolia Recycling Lorry Accidentally Leaks Oil in Princes Court

February 15, 2015, 3:03 am

≫ Next: Why I am standing for the Greens in the Kenton by-election

≪ Previous: Brent Council puts the clock back

The controversial Brent Public Realm contract handed over waste collection, recycling, street cleansing, parks maintenance, BHP grounds maintenance and cemeteries to Veolia. The contract also made Veolia largely responsible for monitoring itself. The Veolia out-sourcingis the Council's justification for the big cuts in the Environment Department.

In this Guest Blog, Denise Cheong of Wembley Champions and Friends of King Eddie's Park gives an account of a recent environmental incident with a Veolia lorry:

During the scheduled recycling bin collection on Friday 13th February 2015, Veolia Recycling Lorry (License Plate No: VK07 ZSO) developed a severe oil leak and spilled oil over a vast section of the end of the Princes Court highway just after 10am.

This blocked the driveway to no.25 Princes Court completely. Veolia vans which arrived at the scene obstructed access to and from nos. 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 & 26 Princes Court.

A Veolia foreman, when questioned, stated that the vehicles are maintenance checked following VOSA [Vehicle and Operator Services Agency, replaced by Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency in April 2014] guidelines every 6 weeks.

A question that was not asked is "Is it standard kit for Veolia foremen to carry a hammer and wrench?"

Within 10 minutes this vehicle was re-drivable and removed from the location at high speed.

Here is a bird's eye view of the gritted oil spill:

A foreman stated, the grit will need to be laid down for 24 hours to absorb the oil. This is the Veolia Truck with circular brushes beneath that drove forwards and backwards over the grit at 8.45pm on Friday 13th.

This is the scene on the morning of Valentine's Day Saturday 14th February:

More pictures:

↧

Why I am standing for the Greens in the Kenton by-election

February 15, 2015, 8:56 am

≫ Next: Turmoil as Butt and Pavey refuse to accept Labour Group vote for Council Tax rise

≪ Previous: Veolia Recycling Lorry Accidentally Leaks Oil in Princes Court

Michaela Lichten

Brent Green Party has selected Michaelle Lichten to contest the Kenton by-election

Michaela said:

I have been a Kenton resident for 19 years (and a Brent resident for 38).

Having raised my children in local schools and taught basic literacy skills to adults, I am particularly interested in education within the borough and advocating equal educational opportunities for all.

I am at present time a carer for my husband who has Alzheimer’s and so have an interest in elderly care delivery which at present is, worryingly, earmarked for cuts. Many of the people who will be effected by these cuts are in the difficult position of increasingly needing help whilst being decreasingly able to access that help.

Being lucky enough to live in Brent with the wonderful resource of our many parks and Fryent Country Park, I’d like to focus on the issue of fly tipping and litter which affects everyone's enjoyment of these open spaces and blights the streets where we live. This can only get worse with the introduction of selective payment for rubbish removal and proposed cuts in residential street sweeping. The cost of removing illegally dumped rubbish will far exceed the revenue raised and makes no sense.

As a Brent parent I’m anxious to see opportunities for young people to get into employment. New approaches have to be made to help them, we have to see that it is an asset to us all for our children to make the transition from education to the workplace as productively as possible. Apprenticeships, continuing education and help to set up their own businesses are ways in which this can be achieved.

I support the building of affordable homes which are truly affordable. I would like to see the estimated 3000 empty houses in Brent brought back into use and and an end of the Right to Buy scheme which further depletes the housing stock.

As we all become more budget conscious under austerity most of us are becoming greener through necessity, but being green has a relevance to our lives in the wider world and it’s my understanding that it is only The Green Party that has put the individual at the centre of their policies and is committed to a fairer society. That is why I’m standing as The Green Party candidate in this by-election.

↧

Turmoil as Butt and Pavey refuse to accept Labour Group vote for Council Tax rise

February 16, 2015, 4:30 am

≫ Next: Brent North to consider how Labour should decide Coalition arrangements

≪ Previous: Why I am standing for the Greens in the Kenton by-election

The Brent Council Labour Group is in turmoil after Deputy Leader Cllr Michael Pavey refused to accept a vote by his Labour councillor colleagues at Labour Group in favour of a 1.99% rise in Council Tax. The Group saw that as one way of saving some services from the proposed deep cuts.

Pavey argued that they could not go to the March 2nd Full Council with a list of cuts based on a frozen Council Tax and then raise the Tax.

There were some suggestions that a review of the proposed cuts could be held after the budget was approved on March 2nd.

There is anger amongst backbench councillors about what is seen as a denial of basic internal democracy and a letter of complaint has been sent to the Constitutional Officer of the Labour Party by a backbench councillor. I understand from my source that the author of the complaint is Cllr John Duffy (Kilburn).

I am writing to you as an elected Labour Party Councillor in Brent, we have over the past few weeks been discussing setting the budget. It has become clear that the budget making process is not a democratic process but a decision made by the leader (Cllr Butt) and the Deputy Leader(Cllr Pavey) without the endorsement of the Labour Group.

My complaint is not about the different versions or opinions around the budget setting, that is a matter for democratic debate. What I wish you to investigate and give a constitutional decision is the rights or wrong of being forced to support a decision that did not follow the internal processes of the Labour party.

The leader and deputy leader have refused point blank to allow the group to vote on their Budget.However during a Labour group meeting another member forced a discussion and vote (in which the leadership took part and voted) which was overwhelmingly agreed by the full Labour Group to put up the council tax by 2% to safeguard services.The leadership refused to accept this vote and the Chair of the meeting refused to count the votes, following that meeting the Leader and Deputy Leader chose to completely ignore the vote and said they would only consider it a straw poll.

The issue I wish to investigate and give a constitutional decision on, is what I believe is an affront to democracy which is taking place in the Brent Labour Group. The Labour group chief whip has indicated even though Labour group members have been deprived of a vote. I must vote for this budget which i believe is merely a dictate impose from the Leader and Deputy Leader without any democratic mandate.I have made it clear at all points of the budget process that I am more than willing to vote for and accept the whip if we follow the democratic process and have a vote.However unfortunately the Leader and Deputy Leader have denied me and others that right.

I wonder will you confirm whether the chief whip is right when she says that I have to vote for the budget that has not been agreed and voted on by the Labour Group and I would face disciplinary action from the Labour party (which I would of course appeal to NEC) if I did not support the Leader's and Deputy Leaders additional and unnecessary cuts package.

I have a number of years experience as a councillor and have been part of the leadership on many occasions,I have also contacted sitting Labour party colleagues in Islington,Harrow,Camden and Barnet to discuss the lack of democratic accountability and we are all in disbelief at the actions of the Leader and his Deputy. I believe unless you intervene with a ruling the Leadership of Brent's Labour group will bring the council in disrepute.Where the public and party will ridiculed the Labour party for acting like the characters from Animals Farm": every vote is equal but some are more equal than others" and all votes you don't like can be dismissed as a straw polls.

One Labour councillor pointed out angrily that Muhammed Butt had been boasting about freezing Council Tax and remarked, 'He is out-Pickling Pickles!'

↧

Brent North to consider how Labour should decide Coalition arrangements

February 16, 2015, 7:50 am

≫ Next: Last chance to have a say on the Welsh School plans in King Edward VII's Park

≪ Previous: Turmoil as Butt and Pavey refuse to accept Labour Group vote for Council Tax rise

With most commentators expecting a hung parliament after the General Election it is not surprising that all the parties are considering who they would ally with, as a formal Coalition or on a Supply and Confidence basis.

The issue is likely to be discussed by members at the Green Party Spring Conference March 6th-9th in Liverpool. For those who remember the Harold Wilson governments just one or two votes can make a difference. Tory leader Edward Health failed to negotiate a Coalition with the Liberals in 1974 and Wilson led a minority Labour government. After Labour's numbers were hit by by-election defeats a Lib-Lab Pact was agreed in March 1977.

Brent North General Meeting on Thursday will be discussing a draft motion for consideration by Constituency Labour Parties and it is interesting, in the context of the story below about the Brent Council Tax decision, that it focuses on how, and by whom such decisions are made:

This GC recognises that, whilst we all seek and expect a majority Labour government in May, a possible outcome of the election is that it may be necessary to consider a coalition or other forms of cooperation with other parties. This GC notes that the last time Labour was involved in a coalition at Westminster between 1941 and 1945, the proposal to do so was made by the party leader for the approval of both the NEC and the party conference. This GC therefore urges the NEC to agree without delay the procedure which will be used for seeking the party`s approval which, we believe , should include both the involvement of relevant elected bodies including the NEC itself in approving any arrangement, national policy forum policy commissions in approving any policy agreements with other parties, and a half-day recall party conference to approve any recommendations of the national executive.

Brent North last month passed a resolution questioning Ed Balls''austerity lite' approach to public spending LINK

At that meeting concerns were also raised over Safeguarding, recruitment of social workers, health and safety in schools, reduction in care for the elderly (especially those with mental health problems), stopping the free bulk collection and the decline in the service provided by Brent Housing Partnership with some residents waiting a long time for replacement windows.

↧

Last chance to have a say on the Welsh School plans in King Edward VII's Park

February 4, 2015, 3:45 am

≫ Next: Two important questions for Cllr. Butt to answer

≪ Previous: Brent North to consider how Labour should decide Coalition arrangements

The Planning Application by the Welsh School to take over the Bowling Green Pavilion in King Edward VII Park, Wembleyas a school and to build an additional classroom, lay a playground and remove 4 category B trees (a Monterey Cypress and 3 Irish Yew Trees) was deferred at the Planning Committee to allow for wider consultation and to consider alternative sites within the park for a land-swap. That consultation is now taking place. This Guest Blog from Denise Cheong addresses some of the issues involved.

Dear Wembley Matters Readers

Re-consultation has begun for planning application no. 14/4208 for the London Welsh School in King Eddie’s Park.

The London Welsh School has submitted 3 additional supporting documents.

The document titled “Additional Statement” uploaded on 26/1/2015 states in the introduction that:

”This additional statement was produced by the Welsh School in conjunction with Brent’s Property and Projects, and Sports and Parks Service.”

Point 2) refers to the Brent wards the park is located within and borders.

The additional statement incorrectly states that:

”This park is located in Preston ward but its boundaries border Wembley Central and Tokyngton Ward.”

A Brent borough ward map shows that King Eddie’s park is actually located in both Wembley Central and Preston Wards, bordering Tokyngton Ward.

Annotated London Borough of Brent Ward Boundary Map Showing Locations of Bowls Pavilion and Bowls Greens, Wembley Central, Preston and Tokynton Wards © Crown copyright and database rights 2013 Ordnance Survey 100025260

- The bowls pavilion and both bowls greens are located in Wembley Central Ward.

- Collin’s Lodge (the mock tutor house beside Park Lane), the derelict yard (assigned to Veolia as a depot) and the steep bank proposed for the land swap are within Preston Ward.

Wembley Central Ward Councillors are: Cllr Sam Stopp, Cllr Krupa Sheth, Cllr Wilhemina Mitchell-Murray

Preston Ward Councillors are: Cllr Matthew Bradley, Cllr Patricia Harrison, Cllr Jean Hossain

Tokyngton Ward Councillors are: Cllr Muhammed Butt, Cllr Orleen Hylton, Cllr Ketan Sheth

(as listed on Brent Council website on 04/2/2015)

The case officer has said that she will accept comments up to and including Wednesday 18^th February 2015.

With Martin’s extensive coverage of this planning application you will all be aware of the background to this proposal by now.

We urge all Wembley Matters readers, if you have any thoughts whatsoever on this scheme, to make formal comment either via the council website or via written correspondence with the case officer, Victoria McDonagh, planning application no. 14/4208 LINK

Now is the time for your voices to be heard.

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Denise Cheong

Your Wembley Central Resident Neighbour

Member, Princes Court & Keswick Garden Residents Association

Chair & Blog Editor, Friends of King Eddie's Park: Friendsofkingeddies.blogspot.com

Blog Editor, Wembley Champions: Wembleychampions.blogspot.com

Steering Group Volunteer Member & Communications Editor, Big Local Wembley Central: http://www.biglocalwembleycentral.org/

Team Member, Wembley Crime Prevention: http://www.wembleycrimeprevention.org/

↧

Two important questions for Cllr. Butt to answer

February 5, 2015, 9:31 am

≫ Next: Brent Odds-On for Private Eye Awards 2015

≪ Previous: Last chance to have a say on the Welsh School plans in King Edward VII's Park

Guest blog by Philip Grant

This week’s “Brent & Kilburn Times” carries an article, “Council to revamp its equalities policies” on page 5. I am glad to see that, rather than simply repeating Brent’s press release about Cllr. Pavey’s review, the article also reminds readers about the Employment Tribunal case which gave rise to it, referring to ‘the treatment endured by Ms Clarke from her line manager, HR director Ms Davani’, and concluding:

‘Brent Council has refused to disclose if any disciplinary action would be taken against Ms Davani.’

After reading Cllr. Pavey’s report last weekend, I sent an email letter to the editor of our local newspaper, which I hoped would be published in the same issue as any story about the results of his review. Unfortunately, the “Brent & Kilburn Times” did not have room for it in this week’s edition, carrying instead (on page 15) two very good letters about vital services threatened by the Council’s proposed budget cuts. My letter included two important questions addressed to the Leader of Brent Council, Cllr. Butt, and as I believe these questions should be put to him publicly, I have asked Martin if he would “publish” my letter here. I know that Cllr. Butt may not be a “Wembley Matters” reader, but I will ensure that he, and his colleagues, receive a copy of this letter.

Dear Editor,

A lesson not learned by Brent's HR review

In September 2014 an Employment Tribunal found that former Brent Council employee, Rosemarie Clarke, had been constructively dismissed, directly discriminated against because of her race, and victimised by both the Council and its Director of HR, Cara Davani.

Brent Council responded by appealing against the Employment Tribunal judgement, and by asking its Deputy Leader, Cllr. Michael Pavey, to review its HR policies and practice ‘to ensure that we learn lessons from this case’.

In December 2014, a judge threw out the Council’s appeal as it had ‘no reasonable prospect of success’, because ‘none of the grounds disclose any reasonable ground of appeal’. The report on Cllr. Pavey’s review was presented to the Council’s General Purposes Committee last week. Although it shows that a great deal of effort has gone in to suggesting improvements to Brent’s HR and Equalities policies, the report does nothing about the key lesson which should have been learned from this case: that even the best HR policies and practices are of little use if the officers who should follow them are allowed to ignore them.

The detailed evidence in the Employment Tribunal judgement showed that the victimisation began after Rosemarie had the courage to complain about the bullying and harassment she felt she was suffering from her line manager, Ms Davani. It also showed that the victimisation continued over a number of months, and that interim Chief Executive, Christine Gilbert, failed to stop the victimisation when it was brought to her attention, or to follow the Council’s own grievance procedures, so that Brent was found guilty of breaching its employment contract with Ms Clarke.

The actions of these two senior officers have brought the Council into disrepute, as well as leaving it liable to massive compensation, damages and costs, but no action appears to have been taken against them. The Council Leader, Cllr. Muhammed Butt, does not appear to have made any public statement about the case, and has not replied to several emails I have written to him about it. When he became Leader in May 2012 he told your newspaper that under him the Council would be ‘more open and transparent’.

I hope that Cllr. Butt will honour that promise, and give Brent’s staff and residents his answers to the following questions:-

1. How can staff have confidence in the Council’s latest round of job cuts, when it is being presided over by two senior officers responsible for victimisation, racial discrimination and failing to follow the Council’s HR procedures?

2. Why is Cllr. Butt still “protecting” these two senior officers, when he has known about their misconduct in the Rosemarie Clarke case since at least September 2014?

Yours faithfully,

Philip Grant.

↧

Brent Odds-On for Private Eye Awards 2015

February 5, 2015, 10:31 am

≫ Next: Learn more about Fairtrade, February 25th, Brent Civic Centre

≪ Previous: Two important questions for Cllr. Butt to answer

Local bookies braced for surge in betting

Guest blog by I.L.Wager

Brent Staff Achievement Awards are not the only annual awards likely to prove a continuing embarrassment to Brent Council’s Butt, Gilbert and Davani over the coming months. The Brent Leadership’s attempt to figure in Private Eye magazine’s regular Rotten Borough Awards ( given to local councils who have demonstrated particular talents in the areas of corruption, greed, stupidity or cronyism) failed last year as they left their trump card ( the Rotten Boroughs article on the racist bullying verdict, jobs-for-the-girls, inflated salaries, romance in high places etc) too late in the year to overtake boroughs like Tower Hamlets and Rotherham who had made the most impressive early running. Not wanting to make the same mistake again, Brent have put down an early marker for the 2015 Cash for Cronyism category by getting the following article onto the Rotten Boroughs page of this week’s edition of Private Eye:

‘A heartfelt welcome back to Lorraine Langham, newly-appointed £140k ‘chief operating officer’ at the London borough of Brent. Ms Langham made frequent appearances in Rotten Boroughs in the Noughties, thanks to the umbilical link she appeared to have with her chum Christine Gilbert, wife of disgraced former Labour minister Tony ‘Second Home’ McNulty.
In the early Noughties, when Gilbert was chief executive of Tower Hamlets council, Langham was its communications supremo. Then in 2006, Gilbert became the boss of Ofsted and Langham was appointed director of corporate services. Now Lorraine has joined senior management at Brent following a ‘restructuring’ overseen by (amazing coincidence) the council’s ‘interim’ chief executive…….Christine Gilbert. Small world!’

An unflashy, solid start from Team Brent but timing is all, and with the Failed-Rosemarie-Clarke- Appeal-Waste-of-Money story soon to come, and who knows what else up the sleeves of Butt/Gilbert/Davani/Langham, the smart money is beginning to take Mo’s girls’ chances for silverware in 2015 Very Seriously Indeed.

Go Team Brent!

↧

Learn more about Fairtrade, February 25th, Brent Civic Centre

February 17, 2015, 8:34 am

≫ Next: Sufra Foodback Election Hustings, March 11th

≪ Previous: Brent Odds-On for Private Eye Awards 2015

This year Brent Council is marking Fairtrade Fortnight by hosting a training session on Fairtrade, the system that enables people shopping in the UK to ensure fair incomes and decent working conditions for producers of commodities such as coffee, sugar, fruit and cotton. The purpose of the training is for participants to learn more about Fairtrade and to be equipped with information and skills to promote Fairtrade. There is no commitment involved in attending the training but those who wish to do so will qualify as Fairtrade Ambassadors to promote Fairtrade in the local community.

The training will involve listening to and discussing presentations and taking part in group exercises that explore questions that people often ask about Fairtrade. It will be led by Peter Moore of Brent Fairtrade Network at the Civic Centre on Wednesday 25 February, 7-9 pm. The training is open to everyone over the age of 18 who lives or works in Brent and will be informal, enjoyable – and free. Places are limited to 10 people so please contact Peter soon on p.moore883@ntlworld.com if you are interested in taking part or want to know more

↧

Sufra Foodback Election Hustings, March 11th

February 17, 2015, 8:46 am

≫ Next: Tories step into Brent Labour's Council Tax Row

≪ Previous: Learn more about Fairtrade, February 25th, Brent Civic Centre

From Sufra Foodbank and Kitchen

In the run up to the general election, we invite you to attend a hustings event for Brent Central on Wednesday 11 March 2015 from 6:45pm.

The event is hosted by Sufra NW London, in partnership with Mitchell Brook Primary School and St. Laurence’s Larder, and will provide an opportunity for local people, including those directly affected by food poverty, to challenge local candidates on policies affecting the future of the community.

Invited guests include:

Alan Mendoza (Conservatives)

Shahrar Ali (Green Party)

Dawn Butler (Labour Party)

Ibrahim Taguri (Liberal Democrats)

Venue: Mitchell Brook Primary School, Bridge Road, London, NW10 9BX

RSVP here.

↧

Tories step into Brent Labour's Council Tax Row

February 19, 2015, 2:54 am

≫ Next: Fighting spirit alive and well in Brent as community challenges the cuts

≪ Previous: Sufra Foodback Election Hustings, March 11th

Brent Central Conservatives released the foloowing Press Release yesterday

-->

The Conservative Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Brent Central has called for the Labour controlled Brent Council to cease its internal argument over whether to raise the rate of Council Tax by 1.99%, and instead to work together to reach a decision which is best for the residents of Brent.

Dr Alan Mendoza, a former Brent councillor who announced that he would run as the candidate for Brent Central in January, made his call for unity after an anonymous letter emerged on community blog site WembleyMatters.blogspot.co.uk, claiming to be written by a current Labour councillor.

The letter has revealed an internal argument in Brent Council’s Labour Group, over whether to raise the rate of Council Tax, with backbench Labour councillors accusing the Council Leader Cllr Muhammed Butt and Deputy Leader Cllr Michael Pavey of refusing to accept a vote to raise the rate in order to protect Brent from further proposed service cuts.

The letter, which likens Cllr Pavey’s actions to those in George Orwell’s novel Animal Farm, claims that the Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council refused “point blank” to allow the Council to vote on the Budget, and that, when members of the Labour Group did force a vote, the Leadership chose to “completely ignore it”. The letter also referred to the incident as “an affront to democracy” that will “will bring the council in disrepute.”

Dr Mendoza said: “This internal dispute is indicative of how the Labour controlled council is failing residents in Brent. Instead of working together to reach the best decision for Brent residents, it is focused on playing politics and squabbling amongst themselves.”

Speaking on the proposed increase in council tax, Dr Mendoza said: "The lie that Brent Council has no choice but to make massive cuts because of central government policy has been exposed by this rift in the Council's Labour Group. It turns out that this policy has been enforced by the Labour leadership against the will of backbench Labour councillors. I look forward to the 'nonaffiliated' anti-cuts group Brent Fightback organising its next march outside Cllr Butt's and Cllr Pavey's offices".

↧

Fighting spirit alive and well in Brent as community challenges the cuts

February 19, 2015, 5:28 am

≫ Next: Councillor Sam Stopp Appeals to Wembley Matters on Affairs of the Heart

≪ Previous: Tories step into Brent Labour's Council Tax Row

Reposted with permission from the Kilburn Unemployed Workers highly recommended blog LINK

By Dude Swheatie of Kwug

Paul K of the KUWG and I attended last night's Brent Fightback public meeting against Brent Council's further erosion of public services.

Platform speakers included writer and broadcaster Owen Jones, along with Anne O'Neil (Brent Mencap), Anne Drinkell (Defend London's NHS), Moses from Stonebridge Adventure Playground, Jasmin from Our West Hendon.

Anne O'Neil said that under the proposed budget cuts, daycentre services would be substantially reduced if not completely destroyed, limiting support for people wanting help in applying for ESA. These matters should be referred to at General Election hustings and in any contacts with parliamentary candidates, she said. She also said that care workers' contact time with the vulnerable adults they support would be halved from 30 minutest to 15 minutes.
Something she did not say about that that I know from previous painful 2005-2006 experience is that care workers do not get paid for the time taken in getting from one shift to the next, nor the travel expenses involved. That will make the plight of care workers untenable under Universal Credit, where people in paid employment would be liable to sanction of all their benefits for allegedly not trying hard enought to become financially independent of income-top-up payments!
Anne Drinkell reported that older people have been largely scapegoated as a drain on A&E services; GP services are being largely privatised and the Health & Social Care Act should be scrapped; the Harmoni out of hours medical advice service has been taken over by the infamous CareUK; and hospital closures lead to a bonanza for property speculators. She too stressed the importance of General Election campaigning as an opportunity to put pressure on politicians.
Moses from Stonebridge Adventure Playground said that Stonebridge has actually been a borough-wide service and its fiscal eradication would be a crime against the community. Stonebridge Adventure Playground allowed kids a safe place for recreation and a badly needed break for hard-pressed parents. Closure of such safe places would put kids more prone to mischief. Adventure playgrounds had given the speaker — an ethnic minority member — advantages for advancement in life that he would not otherwise have had access to.
Jasmin, The Our West Hendon speaker told of the incremental displacement of social tenancies to make way for privatisation of housing, and also said that the tenants had become a force to be reckoned with collectively while their tenancy rights had become eroded over time.
Owen Jones said that Brent Fightback had acquired a well-earned reputation for fighting back against public services cuts and people should make maximum use of the General Election 2015 for redressing the damage caused by 5 years of cuts in public services. He also referred to the benfit sanctions fiasco and the way victims of cuts had been maligned, and Ukip's attacks on migrant workers as yet another example of scapegoating. Instead of Cameron and Osborne enlisting the services of tax-dodger Sir Philip Green to advise Government on how to cut costs, it would be much better for public services funding in this country if Government squeezed the tax dodgers and reduced the influence of the big four accountancy firms and Google etc that find all the loop holes they can to preserve the wealthy's advantages at the cost of thhe public purse.

Several floor speakers followed, with about two minutes per speaker. I was first of the floor speakers and had already been photographed by Kilburn Times phoographer outside the venue with placard.

In my short floor speech I emphasised our motto 'Never Attend Anywhere Official Alone' and corrected Owen Jones' statement that we had had 5 years of cuts by saying that disabled people had experienced cuts in services for several years previous and that the big difference for the past five years was that cuts in public services had become more mainstream. The situation for disabled people as disadvantaged people was similar to that Martin Luther King referred to in his 1963 'I Have a Dream Speech' where he said that where it came to equality of opportunity for American blacks it was as if a checque had been returned to themmarked 'insufficient funds'. It's important to ask why people are disadvantaged, I emphasised. Eg, Q: why are there so many Polish migrant workers in this country? A: Because capitalism fucked up the Polish economy after the collapse of the Iron Curtain. [More specifically, as Naomi Klein reports"the fact that [Poland] accepted [the] radical prescription of free market economic shock therapy" led to a situation in which the restoration of capitalism in Poland has "created a social wasteland."]

Several other floor speakers followed, including a rep from Advice 4 Renters saying that she would welcome listening to people's stories of renting. I had great difficulties hearing most of the floor speakers, but there was a Trade Union & Socialist Coalition (TUSC) speaker as well as Marie Lynam. There was even a Ukip parliamentary candidate, whose contribution was generally unwelcome. For me, the best of the floor speakers was our friend and comrade Sarah Cox. She denounced the racism of Ukip and scapegoating as means of bringing in an anti-social agenda, and emphasised the forthcoming demonstrations outside Conservative and Lib Dem offices set for the afternoon of Saturday 21 February.

Brent Fightback will also protest outside the Council budget setting meeing on 2 March, she said.

Brent Council's current budget proposals for the next few years seem to pre-empt the result of General Election 2015, I recall her saying, and we should make the most of the General Election campaign to say 'no' to further cuts and privatisation in public services.

Saturday 21 February 2pm protest outside offices of Brent Central MP Sarah Teather, Walm Lane, Willesen Green, and at 3pm outside Brent Conservatives' offices, Preston Road, Wembley

And our friend Ben Samuel as Green Party parliamentary candidate for Hendon learned the hard way the value of getting up early to speak from the floor, as his potential contribution was timed out.

In platform speakers' follow-through Anne Drinkell said that the Ukip speaker should be ashamed of the way his party maligns migrant workers who are a mainstay of the NHS. And Owen Jones emphasised the difference between most Ukip members' desire for a free at point of delivery NHS and renationalisation of our railways with the plans of the Ukip leadership for privatisation of public services.

After the meeting, I noticed the presence of Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt who had apparently remained silent during the meeting. I wonder whether he 'got the message' that those present did not welcome his budget proposals?

↧

Councillor Sam Stopp Appeals to Wembley Matters on Affairs of the Heart

February 19, 2015, 7:49 am

≫ Next: Moses makes passionate plea for Stonebridge Adventure Playground to be saved from closure

≪ Previous: Fighting spirit alive and well in Brent as community challenges the cuts

Well, have to have a headline that will make you read this message from Councillor Sam Stopp! Putting aside political differences it is for a good cause.

You may have heard through the grapevine that I'm running the London Marathon for the British Heart Foundation, with the aim of raising £1500 for the charity.

You probably know that Wembley Central, and indeed Brent at large, has a very high rate of cardiovascular-related diseases. But the British Heart Foundation commissions life-saving research to fight this blight on our lives.

I would therefore be grateful if you could share this tongue-in-cheek video I've made promoting the charity. Would be delighted if you could mention it on your blog :)

The video is HERE

Cheers,

Sam

Cllr Sam Stopp

↧

Moses makes passionate plea for Stonebridge Adventure Playground to be saved from closure

February 19, 2015, 8:19 am

≫ Next: Children, young people and parents will challenge Brent Cabinet over cuts on Monday

≪ Previous: Councillor Sam Stopp Appeals to Wembley Matters on Affairs of the Heart

Speaking at the Brent Fights Back meeting on Tuesday, Moses, Chair of the Brent Play Association, made a passionate speech on why the playground should not be closed. The closure is due to be discussed at the Cabinet Meeting on Moday where the Brent Play Association will present a petition signed by hundred of Brent residents.

Meanwhile the spirit is strong as this sequence from Stonebridge Adventure Playground Facebook shows:

↧

Children, young people and parents will challenge Brent Cabinet over cuts on Monday

February 19, 2015, 8:31 am

≫ Next: Deferred Welsh School-King Eddie's Park planning application to be heard on March 4th

≪ Previous: Moses makes passionate plea for Stonebridge Adventure Playground to be saved from closure

Monday's Cabinet will be approving the budget to go to the Full Council on March 2nd amidst press coverage of the row over the leadership refusing to take account of the vote of the Labour Group in favour of a Council Tax rise.

Meanwhile residents, and particularly the young and parents, have got togather to challenge some of those cuts.

The Cabinet will be receiving an unusually high number of petitions, accompanied by speeches from the petition organisers, which indicates the strength of feeling in the borough.

I am sure they will welcome support from the public at the meeting which starts at 7pm in the Civic Centre.

These are the petitions:

Cabinet – 23 February 2015

Petitions have been received in the following terms in response to the budget proposals:

1)Keep Stonebridge Adventure Playground Open “We the undersigned insist that the redevelopment of

Stonebridge School and the new housing, includes keeping the Stonebridge Adventure Playground open.”

From: Brent Play Association

2)Keep Welsh Harp Environmental Study Centre open This petition comprises numerous letters from individual children at Chalkhill Primary School.

From: Chalkhill Primary School

3)Save our youth service (paper and e petition)

“Youth services are vital for young people as well as the community and we

believe there will be an adverse effect if the service no longer exists. This will

put added pressure on statutory services such as the Youth Offending

Service, the police and social care. We call on Brent Council to consult with young people effectively before making any cuts to any youth provision in the borough.

We call on Brent Council to scrutinise existing provision to ensure that these

resources are appropriate and effective. The young people of Brent are willing and able to assist Brent Council with this important task. We call upon Brent Council to consider the voice ofyoung people in the light of these savings!”

E-petition: started by Roisin Healy (Brent Youth Parliament)

4)Save School Crossings Patrols

“Brent Council is under a legal duty to promote road safety and to promote sustainable transport, such as walking and cycling. Road traffic accidents are the biggest killer of children in the UK (they peak when children start primary school and secondary school). 2011-2020 is the United Nations Decade of Action for Road Safety. School Patrol Officers are an integral partof the community, ensuring the safety of our children and they encourage children to have independence. Many schools in Brent are on busy roads (e.g. Salusbury Primary School and Islamia on Salusbury Road in NW6) which are only going to get busier with new housing developments with a new influx of cars and residents. Our roads should become safer places for our children, not more dangerous. And children should be encouraged to walk and cycle to school rather than be driven.”

E petition started by: Michelle Goldsmith on behalf of local residents .

5)Leopold Primary School - save our School Patrol

Officer

“Brent Council is considering removing our Lollipop crossing patrol at Hawkshead Road. The School is surrounded by several busy roads. We believe this is unacceptable and will directly put our children in danger of a road traffic accident.”

From: the Parent, Teachers and Friends Association of Leopold Primary

School

6)Keep Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre Open

“The centre provides a venue for many members of our local community and plays a vital part in our leisure time. Many of us use the facility on a weekly basis to play football, use the gym, relax in the steam and sauna and meet friends. The centre hosts children education, courses and activities th at are beneficial to their development. The centre serves as a venue where rooms can be hired to many different groups who hold meetings, training and celebrations. Closing Bridge Park would affect all of us in different ways. We need this Centre to remain open so that our young people have a place to meet and do sports in a safe environment.

Stonebridge is a deprived area and we feel that crime and unsocial behaviour will increase if the centre is closed. Unlike a few years ago the centre now is used by men and women of all ages and faith. People come to Bridge Park to get fit and improve their health. Although we understand that the council funds are limited, the cost of dealing with health and antisocial behaviour will far outweigh the cost of operating our leisure centre. We have signed below to show our opposition to the closure.”

From: Mr Adam, Tordjok, local resident.

↧

Deferred Welsh School-King Eddie's Park planning application to be heard on March 4th

February 19, 2015, 10:14 am

≫ Next: Claim back our cash: Reclaim our Services! - Coalition to be invoiced tomorrow by Brent campaigners

≪ Previous: Children, young people and parents will challenge Brent Cabinet over cuts on Monday

Here are the details from the Planning Department:

Bowling Club and Collins Lodge, King Edward VII Park, Park Lane, Wembley

I refer to the planning application for the above site which proposes:-

Change of use of the bowling pavillion and adjoining land (Use class D2) into a primary school (Use class D1) also including the erection of a single storey classroom block, and part change of use of the land adjoining Collins Lodge (Use class C3) into parkland (Use class D2)

The application will be formally considered at the meeting of the Planning Committee on 4 March, 2015. The meeting will be held at Brent Civic Centre, Engineers Way, Wembley, HA9 0FJ starting at 7.00pm. You are welcome to attend the meeting and listen to the proceedings. It is possible to speak to the Committee subject to the restrictions set out in the Council's Standing Order. These provide for one objector and/or one supporter of the application to speak. The Chair has the discretion to increase this to two people from each side. In doing this, the Chair will give priority to occupiers nearest to the application site or representing a group of people. To address the committee you must speak to Democratic Services at least one clear day before the meeting and arrive at the Brent Civic Centre at least 15 minutes before the meeting starts. Please telephone the Democratic Services Officer, Mr Joe Kwateng, on 020 8937 1354 during office hours.

Whether or not you attend the meeting you will be subsequently informed in writing of the Council's decision.

The Chief Planner's recommendation for this application is to Grant Consent.

For a full copy of the report which Members will be considering AND to view information that explains who the members of the Committee are; the "Standing Order" of the Council which permits members of the public to address the meeting, details of the layout of the room and an explanation of the types of decisions Members can make, visit our website at www.brent.gov.uk/planningcommittee

↧

Claim back our cash: Reclaim our Services! - Coalition to be invoiced tomorrow by Brent campaigners

February 20, 2015, 3:55 am

≫ Next: Powney: Cabinet's 'blatant disregard makes everyone involved look ridiculous'

≪ Previous: Deferred Welsh School-King Eddie's Park planning application to be heard on March 4th

Brent Fightback will be presenting an Invoice to local represenatives of the Coalition partners tomorrow for all the money that has been taken away from Brent residents through the cuts in local government funding. Fightback encourages local people, suffering from the cuts, to join them for just a few minutes at Willesden Green (2pm) or Preston Road (3pm) or both.

↧

Powney: Cabinet's 'blatant disregard makes everyone involved look ridiculous'

February 20, 2015, 5:03 am

≫ Next: The price you pay for 'BIg Name' local convenience stores

≪ Previous: Claim back our cash: Reclaim our Services! - Coalition to be invoiced tomorrow by Brent campaigners

Front page of this week's Kilburn Times

Former councllor James Powney takes up the issue of the Labour Group vote in favour of a Council Tax rise, and the leadership's decision to ignore the vote in his blog LINK

Cllr John Duffy has made a formal complaint to the Coinstiutional officer of the Labour Party over the issue.

This is what James Powney said:

Reports of the discussion of Council Tax increases cause me some embarrassment as a member of the Labour Party. It seems that the Labour Group debated and voted on the issue, deciding in favour of a rise just short of what would trigger a referendum. This seems eminently sensible to me for reasons I have explained.

It now appears that the Executive plan to simply ignore the majority of the Group, and freeze the Council Tax. I have never heard of such a thing in Brent or in any other authority, or indeed any other party. Such blatant disregard makes everyone involved look ridiculous.

It is normal for Budgets to be subject to Group whipping, but since the majority voted in favour of an increase, I would have thought the Labour whip is in favour of the increase rather than against it.

↧

The price you pay for 'BIg Name' local convenience stores

February 20, 2015, 7:10 am

≫ Next: Is Brent Council in breach of Trust Agreement over King Edward VII Park Welsh School proposal?

≪ Previous: Powney: Cabinet's 'blatant disregard makes everyone involved look ridiculous'

Guest blog by Michaela Lichten, the Green party candidate fro the Kenton By-election

On the campaign trail one of the most common responses to a discussion on sustainable and local/farmer’s markets food shopping is: that it’s all right for people that have got money but that people living in the ‘real world’ have to watch their budgets and that means a trip to one of the big 4 supermarkets.

Let me share my response: if you use the small ‘local’, ‘express’ or convenience stores of the big 4 you could be paying up to 40% more for your shopping!

Yes, in 2013 an orange in a Tesco Express shop cost 40% more than at one of their superstores according to The Daily Mail (13/5/13).

Prices analysis showed that Sainsbury’s, Waitrose and Tesco all put hefty premiums on the limited stock in their smaller outlets.

The average consumer doesn’t realise that there can be a routine difference of 11% in pricing between Tesco Express and its superstores whilst a sample basket at Sainsbury’s Local costs 10.2% more than at a larger store and Waitrose downsized branches can be up to 7% more expensive.

What price convenience indeed!

The second way that these giants hit at the pocket of those on a budget is, that they are often the only convenience store on estates, new builds, in poorer areas or in areas poorly served by transport links and so the poorest often find themselves paying the most for their food.

Plus we are changing the way we shop with an increase in ‘top-up’ shops fuelling a surge of almost 10% in the number of convenience stores owned by supermarkets in recent years.

Therefore the perception that these large companies offer the best value is one that is costing us dear.

↧

Is Brent Council in breach of Trust Agreement over King Edward VII Park Welsh School proposal?

February 20, 2015, 8:17 am

≫ Next: Brent Fightback Final Demand to Coalition: Give us Back Our Money

≪ Previous: The price you pay for 'BIg Name' local convenience stores

Collins Lodge

Guest blogger Jaine Lunn raises a vital issue that puts a big qustion mark over the London Welsh School's bid to open a school in King Edward VII Park, Wembley.

Collins Lodge in King Edward VII Park has a plaque that reads "Queen Elizabeth II Award Jubilee year 2012 by Fields in Trust LINKfor Sport and Recreational use in perpetuity.”

Having contacted this organisation they responded I quote:-

"Brent Council entered into a deed of dedication with Fields in Trust in 2012. The deed is registered at the Land Registry and states that King Edward VII Park is held as a “public playing field and recreation ground, inclusive of a bowling club and sports pavilion” in perpetuity. I have attached our guidance document on how we protect recreational land which may be of interest.

If the landowner of a protected site wants to make a change that is outside of the permitted use then they will need to formally seek the consent of Fields in Trust. We have a process in place for that and I attach that information for your reference. This guidance outlines what our responsibilities are with regards to assessing such matters. All decision are taken by our Trustees.

Fields in Trust do not get involved in the local management of sites as this very much stays in local hands. So any changes to a site which fit within the agreed user clause do not require our consent. There is some flexibility built into the deed of dedication, for example our Trustees may at their discretion consent to the disposal of land provided that betterment for local communities in terms of outdoor sport, recreation and/or play can be demonstrated.

I can confirm that Brent Council did submit a formal request to Fields in Trust with regards to granting a lease on the disused bowls pavilion area to the London Welsh Language primary school on a 15 year term, and in addition to erect a single storey classroom block and convert the paved hard landscape area to an all weather playground. We were advised that the bowling green and Pavilion are unused and the area fenced off, furthermore there was no bowls interest.

I can confirm that the Council’s request was rejected by our Trustees in January 2015 because the site is protected for recreational purposes and the proposed new use would be outside the objects of the Deed of Dedication. In order for the matter to even be reconsidered by our Trustees the Council would need to offer up for protection a replacement site of at least the size of the land being lost or provide a payment which is to be made available for investment in the facilities within the remainder of the site. To date we have not received a revised application, which I believe would only be forthcoming should planning consent be granted."

As we have all seen on the site visit It is not a fair and equitable swap as it neither matches the size of the land proposed to be built on neither is it comparable to be used for sports. In the additional documents that have been submitted in the interim period the idea that residents should be able to sit on this land and be able to access a view comparable to the view from Primrose Hill over Central London is laughable and whoever cited this as acceptable "should have gone to SpecSavers" about covers it, or suggests they are taking some form of medication to enhance their very vivid imagination.

Knowing all of the above, what really baffles me and to which I seek answers to the following questions.

1) Who originally suggested/proposed the idea to the London Welsh School that this was a suitable location for their school?

(After all they had investigated 98 other locations, 65 of which was outside of the London Borough of Brent.)

2. Why did the Brent Planners not reject this immediately knowing that the land was protected?

3. Having ignored the fact, made an application, which had they thoroughly read and understood the deeds of dedication they had signed would have realised that it would be rejected?

4. Why are they still supporting this application to grant permission, knowing that they must make another application to Fields in Trust for approval when the suggested land swap is also unlikely to be approved by the trust.

5. How are they justifiying a complete and utter waste of time, money and resources of all concerned?

I would appreciate any answers to the above, from anyone!

To Brent Planners I say stop this nonsense and reject now.

This land is public owned Land and should remain so for the people of Wembley to enjoy as was originally decided when bought by the local Council back in 1913 to compensate for loss of Parkland at Wembley Park.

MF A further question would be to ask why Brent Council have not informed the public about this agreement as part of the documentaion on the planning application. It is clearly a 'material consideration' for the Planning Committeee to take into account.

↧