Saturday, 5 July 2025

Guest post: 'We cannot rely on the private market to solve the housing crisis. We must think outside the box and demand more from central government'

The former Liberal Democrat councillor for Alperton, Anton Georgiou,  drew on his experience in Brent when he addressed the London Liberal Democrat Summer Forum as part of a panel on housing. His address is published here as a guest blog post.  Housing is a major national and local issues and other guest posts on the issue are welcomed.

 

I am a former Councillor in a part of London that has experienced its fair share of development and building. In my time as a Councillor, I was a vocal, often lone voice, on the need to prioritise the delivery of genuinely affordable family homes and for local authorities to focus on increasing their own Council stock to address ever growing house waiting lists. 

 

The key to tackling the housing crisis in London and nationwide must be to vastly increase the type of homes our communities require. There must be recognition that most people who are trapped without a decent home, on housing waiting lists cannot afford to privately rent and they are not able to buy their own home. Saturating the market with more of the same, mostly unaffordable, unattainable properties, is not the answer. I know from personal experience that taking this line, does put you in direct conflict with the ‘build, build, build’ brigade, but I strongly believe we must, as a party, develop an approach that both ensures the delivery of more homes and most importantly what Londoners actually need – far more genuinely affordable homes and social/ Council properties.

 

The problem in a nutshell is that ever since damaging policies like ‘Right to Buy’ were introduced, Council and social housing stock across London has significantly depleted. We having been knocking down and selling off annually more social homes than we have been building. All governments, political parties have failed to address the diminishing Council homes stock problem, which is why we are now in a situation where local authorities are frankly unable to even begin to reduce the number of people on housing waiting lists. Every week, thousands of Londoners present at Town Halls, Civic Centres, across the city, as homeless. They join tens of thousands of Londoners who sometimes wait upwards of a decade for a suitable Council home to be available for them to move into. The problem is much the same in other parts of the country, and whilst we feel it acutely here, given our population, I can tell you from my time working in temporary accommodation hostels in other parts of the country – the situation is dire nationwide.

 

Local authorities are currently spending huge amounts of money on temporary accommodation, in the case of Brent, BnB’s outside of London, simply to ensure individuals who have no where to go, do not end up on the street. If local authorities had been prioritising the building of social homes, as they should have been for the past 40 years, we may not be in as bad a situation as we are now. 

 

Some will lead you to believe, that this is a simple supply and demand problem. Increasing the supply of all tenure types, including leasehold properties, which should be banned, Shared Ownership units, which simply put are a scam that should never be classified as ‘affordable housing’, as well as unaffordable for most, private market tenures, will deal with our current crisis. This could not be further from the truth. 

 

We will not tackle the housing crisis by continuing the path that London, the country, has been on since the 1980’s. Things are not getting better – they are getting much, much worse.

 

What needs to happen now, is a revolution in Council home building, but also in ensuring maximum use of existing stock, including bringing empty properties back into use. It will require bold action, and frankly for us to think outside of the box and demand much more from national government to make it happen.

 

The Chancellors recent announcement of £39 billion to drive an increase in the number of affordable homes across the country over the next decade, should be welcomed, but as ever, the devil is in the detail. Detail that has not been very forthcoming to date. And I fear, like most of this Labour government’s announcements, when the detail is revealed, things will start to unravel.

 

Despite the £39 billion commitment, the government have not set a target for how many social and Council homes they will build with this money – nor have they been explicit about the tenure types, they will include as part of their affordable homes offer. I know from my time in Brent, that often a whole load of tenure types are lumped together within the ‘affordable offer’ to boost numbers and falsely project that those in power are meeting their housing targets. This must not be allowed to continue.

 

As Liberal Democrats we need to be clear in our resolve that we will only accept investment in high-quality, permanent Council homes, as the best use of this money from the Treasury, and indeed any further money that we must all hope will be identified to ensure the delivery of Council homes at scale.

 

I was pleased to see Liberal Democrat MPs push for a vote to force the government to set a far more ambitious target on increasing social homes – 150,000 in this Parliament alone. This is something we also need to be demanding of every single local authority in London too, as well as from City Hall.

 

However, when targets are in place, it is essential that we hold those in power to account, in delivering them. There is simply no point in having targets, as most local authorities do, often wedded into Local Plans, that state private developers must deliver 50% ‘affordable’, which is an ambiguous term that has never been universally defined, when in the end most Councils let developers off the hook because of ‘ever increasing costs’ and the ‘financial viability’ excuse.

 

We cannot rely on developers alone to tackle this crisis. By their nature private developers are driven by profit, their interests are not often the interests of our communities. Therefore, local authorities need to have greater control when dealing with these profit minded organisations across the city. However, we can still make use of private developers. One thing I would want to explore is finding a way of negotiating with private developers to reduce Community Infrastructure Levy and Section 106 contributions, in exchange for them delivering additional genuinely affordable units, social homes, at or under the LHA rate. The concept of CIL is about offsetting the impact of development, well I see no greater way to payback to the community, than by potentially increasing the number of homes available in our communities – for people who desperately need them.

 

To add, Councils are always glad to collect CIL contributions, but what I have found from my time in Brent and in accessing the data from other London authorities, is that many tens of millions are hoarded rather than spent effectively quickly, as should be the case. I would much prefer to see developers guaranteeing the delivery of further genuinely affordable units, over allowing Labour Council’s to hoard money, because frankly, I do not trust Labour to spend money well.

 

The money that does currently exist, in Brent for example, over £100 million in the CIL pot, could and should be unlocked to assist the Council in ramping up its own Council homes building programme. Council’s need to be given greater tools and resource to build their own quality stock. The government and City Hall need to step in to realise this ambition. 

 

I will end by saying this. Every Londoner deserves a decent, safe, affordable place to call home. This after all is the foundation for all our lives. Without this foundation, people are massively impacted, one’s ability to work, to study, to feel secure, it robs our young people of the ability to not just get by but get on and take full advantage of living in the best city in the world. This is why we need to be bold and radical in our approach. There isn’t time to tinker around the edges, and place sticking plasters on this crisis. We cannot rely on the private market to solve this crisis. It will take an interventionist approach, and the Liberal Democrats in London must lead the way on this.

 

 

Friday, 4 July 2025

Brent Community Land Trust Consultation Days - July 12h and July 17th

 


Member Newsletter

June 2025

Welcome to Brent Community Land Trust's June Newsletter!


Our June newsletter is a little late 😅 , but that’s because  so much has been happening, we wanted to make sure we included all the latest updates.


As always, please get in touch with us if you want to find out more.



Have you told a friend about Brent CLT?


Please do share this newsletter and encourage others to become members of Brent CLT or  to join our mailing list.  Our social media posts are also an easy way to share what we do with a wider audience.

Brent CLT Events Calendar


12 Jul 2025 - Community Consultation, 10am-1pm, Gloucester Close/Stonebridge Park, NW10

17 Jul 2025 - Community Consultatiom, 6pm,-8pm, Gloucester Close/Stonebridge Park, NW10

14 Sep 2025 - Queen’s Park Day,  (stall location tbc) 12pm - 5:30pm, Queens Park NW6



Ends July 12th: Exhibition - Decolonising Brent: Erasure and Visibility, Resistance & Representation - Willesden Green Library

 



Thursday, 3 July 2025

BREAKING: MLM Property Management to take over management of 'several' Quintain blocks from FirstPort including Emerald Gardens


 In 2015 First Port announced  with a fanfare that they had been appointed by Quintain to manage the Emerald Gardens scheme in Wembley Park. FirstPort wins Quintain’s Emerald Gardens regeneration project

Nearly 10 years on they are handing Emerald Gardens over to MLM Property Management.

CHANGE OF MANAGEMENT – Emerald Gardens, North West Village, Wembley, London, HA9 0FT

As you may be aware, FirstPort will sadly no longer be managing Emerald Gardens from 19 August 2025. We are deeply disappointed to lose you as a customer and we will ensure the handover of information is as seamless as possible so that there is minimum disruption to you and your fellow residents.

Your new managing agent is MLM - Michael Laurie Magar and they will take over all management responsibilities on 19 August 2025.

The balance owed on your account at 18 August 2025 will be removed from our system and transferred over to MLM - Michael Laurie Magar - this will include any credits accrued on the account. All funds owed at that point will need to be paid to your new agent and not FirstPort. If you pay for your charges by Direct Debit, this will be cancelled on our system.

On behalf of FirstPort, I would like to wish you all the best in the future with your new managing agent, and If you have any questions or need assistance, please visit our Contact Us page at https://www.firstport.co.uk/contact-firstport/.

MLM confirmed to Wembley Matters they are taking over the management of several of Quintain's Wembley Park blocks in addition to Emerald Gardens but full details will only be revealed when a press release in agreed with Quintain.

 Much has happened regarding FirstPort since 2015.. In 2018 here were complaints from residents in other blocks in Wembley Park about steep rises in service charges  Forum and Quadrant residents face huge service charge increases  that FirstPort tried to justify  First Port attempt to justify leap in service charges at Quadrant Court, Wembley Park

Barry Gardiner MP for Brent West brought up the conduct of several managing agents, including FirstPort in the Westminster Hall Leaseholders and Managing Agents debate on the 28th February 2023 LINK 

 Gardiner said about FirstPort:

 FirstPort’s response to those and the more than 500 more complaints like them that I have received is to make no response and ignore things for as long as possible—for months and years, not days and weeks. There is a lack of accountability and transparency over what the residents are charged for and whether the costs are reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount. There is a total failure to provide leaseholders with a breakdown of service charges. Many of my constituents can wait more than 20 months for accounts to be finalised.

Even when FirstPort admits that refunds are owed to the leaseholder because of double counting, overcharging or charging for services not provided, the requests for the return of the overpayments are often ignored, or the returns can take many months to be made. FirstPort also charged multiple administration penalty charges of £60 each when someone queried the costs. One resident ended up being billed for more than £400 of admin charges and was then browbeaten into paying because of the threat of legal action.

In 2019, Nigel Howell, the then chief executive, conceded to me that it was unlawful for his company to impose late penalty fees on leaseholders who had disputed their charges—but not all leaseholders have been refunded. Nigel Howell also confirmed to me that his company had charged costs for areas not under FirstPort’s management and promised that a 20% refund would be given in the following year’s accounts. Strangely, Nigel Howell was removed from his post as chief executive.

After years of suffering, one brave, resilient resident finally took FirstPort to the tribunal. FirstPort sought to rely in its defence on two factors: it tried to rely on the payments made by leaseholders—in other words, by paying up they had intimated consent; and, especially ironic given the FirstPort practice of delay, it tried to rely on the length of time the leaseholder had taken in bringing the challenge to the tribunal.

On Friday 13 January, the last working day before the hearing, I received the following email in my office from my constituent at 5 pm:

“They are settling all of the claim. Their lawyers harassed me all week and made the offer on Friday afternoon, just hours before the hearing this Monday. They did not want this case heard as they have been lying to Barry. They owe money to 202 families.”
 

Complaints from residents across the country moved Labour MPs to convene a meeting with FirstPort about their concerns in January this year. FirstPort under fire from MPs over service charge hikes   

David Pinto-Duschinsky, who co-chaired the meeting with FirstPort, said: 

I’ve had dozens and dozens of complaints about FirstPort’s unacceptable service charge hikes, poor service and lack of responsiveness and transparency.

All too often they are using leaseholders as little more than cash cows to be milked for every penny. People are paying more and more, and getting less and less. Enough is enough, this group of Labour MPs has come together to do everything we can to hold these unscrupulous managing agents to account.

In the same month leaseholders in Faversham Lakes new build project managed to oust FirstPort as managing agents: FirstPort dropped from Kent housing estate amid residents’ revolt over fees

 In February this year the relevant  trade body suspended FirstPort:  FirstPort suspended from its own trade body the Property Institute


Wednesday, 2 July 2025

'We demand the London CIV divests from companies involved in genocide & war crimes' - protest Thursday July 3rd



Brent Council Pension Fund invests a large portion of the fund through the London Collective Investment Vehicle (LCIV), in common with other London boroughs. The CIV lacks democratic accountability - a situation that will worsen if government plans to merge CIVs into super investment vehicles are enacted.

Local borough divestment campaigns have recognised that as well as lobbying their local pension fund committees to divest they have to unite across London to put pressure on the CIV fund managers.

Shake the CIV write: 

On Thurday 3rd July, Shake the CIV – a grassroots coalition of over 30 London-based groups – will protest outside the London Collective Investment Vehicle (CIV) Summer Conference at the Tower of London, demanding an end to the use of council funds to finance companies complicit in Israel’s genocide in Gaza and illegal occupation of Palestine.

Shockingly ahead of the July 3 annual meeting, the London CIV has removed their previous statement of complicit companies from their website. LINK

While Israel continues to rain bombs on innocent civilians, London councillors will gather at a lavish conference to discuss how the funds they manage can be further invested in the companies facilitating the bloodshed in Gaza. 

Shake the CIV will greet councillors attending the conference and demand that the over £7 billion of complicit funds the CIV manages immediately divested from arms manufacturers, bonds, and corporations profiting from war crimes and occupation.

The London CIV pools pension funds from all 32 London boroughs. Those funds are currently invested in weapons and technology firms including Elbit Systems, BAE Systems, and Lockheed Martin, all of which supply the Israeli military.

Despite claiming that "responsible investment is not only a moral imperative but an economic necessity," the CIV has failed to take meaningful action to divest from these companies. 

Speaking on why they are protesting, campaigner Sarah Omar said

At a time when councils are strapped for cash, the CIV is splurging on a lavish day out for councillors, complete with a guided tour of the Crown Jewels, the very symbols of colonial plunder that many of these investments sustain. 

It’s an insult to Londoners and a betrayal of Palestinians suffering under genocidal companies the CIV continues to bankroll.

We demand the London CIV divests from companies involves in genocide and war crimes, and that our councillors use their decision-making power at the CIV to make this happen.

 





Double events to unite the Brent community July 3rd and July 6th with the Met and Multi-faith Forum

Towards a safer and more united community: 

The Brent Multi-faith Forum and the Metropolitan Police invite you to take part in an interactive public meeting and workshop focused on creating a safer, kinder, and more united community. These events will bring together faith leaders, community leaders, and local residents to address key concerns and collaborate on actionable solutions.

 


 

Event Details:

 

Date: 3 July 2025  Time: 4 - 7pm  Location: Neasden Temple, The Swaminarayan School, Brentfield Road, London, NW10 8HE. 

 

 


 

 

Event Details:

 

Date: 6 July 2025  Time: 4 - 7pm  Location: St Mary with All Souls, 134A Abbey Road, London, NW6 4SN  

 

 

 

Topics for Discussion:

• Safety for young people 

 • Safety for women and girls 

• Cohesion, kindness and promoting prosocial behaviour What to Expect: 

• Group workshops with focused table discussions. 

• Facilitated sessions to identify practical, community-led solutions. 

• Refreshments

Bush Farm Stables, Kingsbury – find out about plans for their future on 9 July at 6pm

 Guest post by Philip Grant in a personal capacity

 

The existing stables building at Bush Farm, June 2025.

 

Below:  Google Earth view.  


 

The stables building at Bush Farm, by the entrance to Fryent Country Park from the junction of Salmon Street and Slough Lane, is in a sorry state. It is owned by Brent Council, but has been neglected by them, with a series of temporary “patch-up” repairs, and it is now unsafe and desperately needs to be replaced. 

 

The Council says that it does not have the money to replace it, so the Bush Farm Collective, which rents the stables and two fields for their horses, obtained some Neighbourhood Community Infrastructure Levy funding to prepare plans for a new stables building, and to explore how this could be paid for. Plans have been prepared, and are about to be submitted to Brent’s Planning Department, and the necessary funding has been agreed by the Government’s Community Ownership Fund, as long as the work begins by the end of 2025.

 


 

Bush Farm Collective are holding an open meeting for residents to come and find out more about the plans, in front of the stables at 6pm on Wednesday 9 July. I would encourage people to take up the invitation, as there have been misunderstandings in the past, and it is important that the local community understand and get behind its planning application.

 

As a result of conflicting advice from different Brent Council departments, a planning application for the temporary siting of two containers in a paddock was submitted in May. It was withdrawn, after Planning Officers told the Collective that this should be part of the application for the new building itself. There were some objections from neighbours to that application, and under the new application those are answered by moving the location of the containers (which are necessary for storing the contents of the barn while the work is carried out) so that they will be inside the construction site, not out in the field.

 

Among the requirements that Brent’s planners are insisting on is that the application documents should include a Heritage Statement, as Fryent Country Park is a heritage asset. That is how I became involved, when I heard about it. I volunteered to prepare the statement, as I live near the Country Park and have written about its history (for Wembley Matters!). I have, on several occasions, criticised Heritage Statements prepared by professional planning consultants, who would charge a four-figure fee for a document based on little evidence or understanding of the asset they are writing about. I believe my document, in support of the application, is an honest assessment worthy of the Heritage Statement description.

 


 

As part of preparing the Heritage Statement, I needed to see the plans for the proposed replacement building. They include two meeting rooms (convertible into one), which can be used independently from the stables, with an accessible outside toilet. These would provide an excellent facility for school nature visits to the Country Park, or for other community groups carrying out activities there, as well as the Collective’s own events. I am looking forward to being able to provide some material for a Country Park “heritage wall” in one of those rooms!

 

Bush Farm Collective set out their hopes for providing a much bigger community offer three years ago, and if they can get their planning consent in time to go ahead with the replacement building, those hopes will become a reality. Please go to the event on 9 July if you can, see what is proposed, and get behind the plans for this improved community facility. Thank you.

 

Philip Grant.