Now the NHS want to reduce the opening hours of the Central Middlesex Hospital Urgent Treatment Centre

2012: Candy Unwin of Keep Our NHS Public and John Lister warn of the impact of the closure of the A&E at Central Middlesex Hospital. Meeting chaired by Brent Trades Council LINK

You may wonder why I am posting the photograph above from 13 years ago here, well it marked the moment when the NHS began the run down of services at Central Middlsex Hospital (known to many locals as Park Royal).John Lister, who had been commissioned to write a report on NHS plans across the NW London area warned that closures of A&E departments could be the beginning of a process that would eventually lead to the  closure of local hospitals.

At the time much was made of the provision of an Urgent Care Centre at Central Middlesex that would offer treatment for less serious cases, while those needing A&E would go to Northwick Park Hospital, an awkward journey miles away.

We know now how busy Northwick Park A&E has become but the NHS are proposing to cut the hours of the Urgent Treatment Centre at Central Middlesex with the last patients being registered at 8pm rather than the current 11pm.

The proposalfrom London NW University Healthcare Trust, comes after the row over their closure of the hydrotherapy pool at Northwick Park, still not formally scrutinised by Brent Council Scrutiny Committee.  The lack of proper consultation was a major issue but the Trust admitted that consultation would not change their decision - it would only help shape their advice of alternatives.

The current consultation on a reduction in hours of the Central Middlesex Urgent Treatment Centre if of of the same ilk - it appears it would not change the actual hours reduction proposal.  LINK

Have your say on a proposed change to the Urgent Treatment Centre (UTC) opening hours at Central Middlesex Hospital

We are considering changing the opening hours of the Urgent Treatment Centre (UTC) at Central Middlesex Hospital. The UTC currently opens between 8am and 12midnight, seven days per week, with the last patient registered at 11pm. 

Challenges with current opening hours

Radiology services (X-ray, ultrasound, etc) at Central Middlesex Hospital are not available after 8pm. This means many patients who attend after this time must visit another centre that evening or to return for care the following day. This is both inconvenient and causes delays to care. Furthermore, the service only sees an average of four patients per hour after 9pm. This may be because it is well known locally that the hospital does not have an A&E department, leading patients to attend elsewhere. Given low patient numbers and our limited workforce, allocating staff to radiology services after 8pm is not an efficient use of resources.

 Review findings and proposal

A recent review of our urgent care services found that many patients who visit our UTCs out of hours would be more appropriately seen in a primary care or pharmacy setting. We are therefore proposing new opening times of 8am to 9pm, with the last patient registered at 8pm. The UTC would continue to open seven days a week and provide the same services as now. 

Your views matter

We would like to hear your views on this proposed change. Your feedback will help us understand how the change might affect you, your family, or the people you care for. It will also guide us in making sure patients can still get the right care, at the right time, in the right place. The survey should only take a few minutes to complete. All responses are anonymous, and your views will be shared with decision-makers to help shape the future of urgent care in your area.

 

Consultation Meetings  

• Thursday 23 October from 6pm to 7pm at Central Middlesex Hospital
• Friday 31 October from 12pm to 1pm at Central Middlesex Hospital

If you would like to attend either event, please register your attendance on EventBrite.

Online Quesionnaire 

 

Having failed dismally to hold the Trust to account on behalf of local residents over the hydrotherapy pool closure, will the Brent Council Scrutiny put this proposal on their agenda, urgently?

Brent Cabinet endorses pause on Wembley student accommodation boom

 

 Monday's Brent Cabinet approved the pause in purpose built student accommodation in the Wembley Growth Area. Cllr Grahl brought up the Matalan student housing development in her ward  and supported her residents' misgivings particularly in view of the local housing housing crisis. She suggested that the pause could also be applied in other parts of the borough. 

Leader of the Council, Muhammed Butt, in a rather confusing statement said the Council should 'share the love' across the borough which seemed to suggest support for student accommodation elsewhere in the borough but also looked forward to changes in the Local Plan regarding housing issues.

You can hear the discussion in the above video. 

Strategic CIL bonanza for some Brent youth facilities

 

The Stonebridge Adventure Playground team and suppporters

Ten years after Stonebridge Adventue Playground was closed by Brent Council, the Council has approved a £4m capital spend on youth facilities in the borough through another raid on the Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy Fund. It would have taken a tiny fraction of that amount to keep the much-loved  playground going but hey-ho, that's the way it goes in Brent.

So it is with mixed feeling that I welcome the improvements to youth facilities that are planned. There are a number of caveats to the plans including complications around ownership of some of the facilities, a tight ceiling on expenditure that may mean projects have to do some of their own fundraising if they go over budget or seek partners (that failed with Stonebridge Boxing Club's King Edward VII's park plans) and a long delivery timeline.

Because of the above there is a larger than usual 20% contingency on the budget:

At the end of August 2025, Brent had £156.9m SCIL with £80m committed and £72.9m allocated to pipeline schemes.[total £152.9] Therefore, there is £4m SCIL available for this programme and the Council’s Infrastructure Officer Working Group has approved this as an appropriate use of the SCIL funding.

 

Because these organisations are relatively small, they have limited capacity to undertake major capital projects. Therefore, the intention is Brent project manages the works on their behalf. This creates a risk that Brent is liable for overspends or changes in project specifications. Agreements with these organisations need to be clear that Brent’s maximum budgets are fixed and they will need to cover any shortfalls or changes in project specifications.

 

Organisations can also apply for alternative funding sources to supplement the Council’s contribution. Should organisations successfully apply for additional capital funds officers will seek to investigate these and any other funding streams to potentially reduce the SCIL request for this programme. It is however recommended to proceed with SCIL funding for the whole programme to ensure it proceeds in line with the projected timescale.

 

A welcome innovation is the involvement of a Youth Panel in selecting the projects that will benefit:

Eleven potential projects had feasibility studies undertaken, involving input and feedback from the youth facility provider. Examples of the proposed enhancement works included multi-use games areas, teaching kitchens, extension of existing facilities and amenities, and reconfiguration of currently unusable areas for multi-purpose youth provision.

 

A detailed scoring criteria was developed by officers that included points such as the length of existing lease on the building, location, current condition and anticipated higher levels of participation from disadvantaged and hard to reach young people.

 

Organisations then presented to a Youth Panel during a selection event. The Youth Panel was formed consisting of young people from Brent Youth Parliament, Youth Justice Service, Brent Care Journeys 2.0 and the voluntary and community sector, ranging from 14 to 20 years old. Members of the panel lived in different areas across the borough. Ten organisations ultimately attended the Civic Centre to present their projects to the Youth Panel at a Youth Facilities Capital Investment Programme Selection Event.

These are the projects and costs for each plus some comments from the Youth Panel: 

 

Cricklewood Boxing Club

 

Cricklewood Boxing Club, The Boxing Gym (Dollis Hill Ward) £826k – The current facility, situated in a four-story building located on the edge of a large residential district with nearby schools and community services, has outgrown its capacity. As a result, the club is currently forced to turn people away due to lack of space. This expansion proposal seeks to ensure the club can continue to serve the local community effectively. By upgrading essential facilities such as the kitchen, to provide space for teaching healthyeating, increasing bathroom and changing facilities to provide a more comfortable, hygienic, and accessible environment for young people, improving the connectivity at first floor level between the boxing ring and the gym space, and providing additional usable space where garages are currently located.

 

Jason Roberts Foundation, Gym and Sports Hall flooring (Stonebridge Ward)  £1.06m– This project aims to upgrade the foundation's facility in Stonebridge to better serve its diverse and growing community of young people. By providing a safe, weather-proof and accessible environment, the foundation will be better equipped to serve its mission: creating inclusive spaces that foster healthy relationships, build life skills, and support the personal growth of young people. The Youth Panel were impressed by the organisation hosting additional activities to those usually provided, with one young person stating, “it was unique” … “more than just football, sports that I have never seen before in London – American Football.” One of the female members of the group stated “girls-only football was great” and it “felt like the project is safe”. The feedback included positive comments about a “good sense of community”, with “good outreach and good positive opportunities for growing children and young people”. While The Pavilion venue where Jason Roberts Foundation deliver many of their activities is adjacent to SCIL growth areas, it was unanimously agreed by the Youth Panel that the organisation had a wide reach to young people who reside in neighbouring growth areas and would therefore be SCIL eligible. Jason Roberts Foundation were able to support this with their own data which was provided on request.

 

 The OK Club

 

The OK Club, Sports Hall refurbishment (Kilburn Ward)  £550k – The proposed project will involve a full redesign and refurbishment of key areas within the building to create more inclusive and sustainable spaces. There was, positive feedback from the Youth Panel about the longevity and inclusivity of the organisation and activities – “they own the building which is good” and “it is open to all” and supports “a decent amount of kids.” This in turn means the club will be able to better achieve its goals of meeting the growing needs of young people, improving access and enhancing the safety and well-being of young people in the area.

 

Roundwood School and Community Centre with Sport at the Heart (Roundwood Ward) £390k - The building is spread over three levels, offering a media suite, performance area, outdoor multi-use games area, IT suite, dance studio, art room, café, and flexible meeting spaces. While the existing facilities serve as an essential resource for young people, this project will focus on maximizing the space and improving its functionality to inspire creativity, promote physical activity, and support the well-being of students and staff alike. Members of the Youth Panel wrote in their comments that this project had a “clear vision” and “would have a big impact.” They felt that this was in “an area that is needed, well known, and the impact is already big, and this would increase it.” The organisation, venue and project were described as “youth centred”, “very accessible” and “all ages, safe area”. The young people understood the aims clearly, appreciated the style ofpresentation, and identified that “they [Beckmead and Sport at the Heart] want to help continue providing activities and hobbies for all children and young people including [those with] SEND.” They were also impressed by the “offer of a diverse range of activities for all age groups, all needs and all different groups on the weekends, with SEND specific activities.”

 

Young Brent Foundation, The Anchor Youth Hub (Roundwood Ward) £500k – support the continuing establishment of the new facility, whose tender was awarded in June 2024, with capital investment. The facility will provide young people with access to a wide range of recreational, educational, and wellness opportunities, fostering a safe and supportive environment for personal growth and development. The Youth Panel fed back that “the organisation is well known in the borough and are aware of the context of the area.” There was positive regard towards the organisation, with one young person stating that “They seemed genuine – they showed that they know the situations with different areas and showed evidence of someone with lived experience changing.” There was also an appreciation for how they demonstrated that “they know how to keep young people from trouble.” The project and venue were described as “accessible” and “seems like an  organised project” with “good risk assessment” and it was identified that “there are no gyms in the area so this project fills that.” 

The report suggests that the grants will help residents and you people to see the 'benefits' of development: 

The application of Strategic CIL can be used to demonstrate to communities the benefits that new development can bring, through the provision of key infrastructure projects, place-making and local improvements. This proposal aims to fund structural changes and improvements to premises used by youth organisations to enable better access and an increase in facilities and activities for young people in the London Borough of Brent.

Do remember that these are capital projects and that youth facilities face a cotinuing problem of securing funds to pay staff and running costs. 

 

 

 

Wembley Park road closures from 8am on Sunday for NFL game

 From Brent Council

Wembley Stadium will be hosting NFL - LA Rams vs Jacksonville Jaguars on Sunday 19 October.

Please read below to see how this might affect you.

Timings

- NFL - LA Rams vs Jacksonville Jaguars kick off will be at 2.30pm and road closures will be in place from 8am for above event.

We expect the area around Wembley Stadium to be very busy before and after this event so please avoid the area if you can, unless you have a ticket for the event.

Event day parking

Event day parking restrictions will be in place from 8am to midnight on main roads and from 10am to midnight on residential roads on Sunday 19 October.

If you have a paper permit, please make sure you clearly display it in your vehicle. If you have an electronic permit, you do not need to display this.

Abbey Wood, Bexley Council, tall building lesson for Brent?

News from Bdonline is of interest. Major planning applications go to the London Mayor consideration.  The project below was turned down by the local council but their decision was overturned by the London deputy mayor. It is similar to many applications in Brent but contained a higher proportion of affordable accommodation, at 17.5% London Living Rent, than we often see. It did not comply with local plan and London Plan criteria re tall buildings but the design was considered acceptable.

 

The deputy mayor of London has overturned a council’s rejection of plans for a 228-home build-to-rent tower in Abbey Wood.

Bexley Council had previously refused permission for Abbey Wood Sedgemere Limited’s plans to demolish existing commercial buildings and build a 25-storey tower next to the Elizabeth Line.

The council rejected the plan, designed by architect GRID, for several reasons, including the height of the building, harm to the nearby Lesnes Abbey and increased flood risks.

The scheme was called in by the Greater London Authority and Jules Pipe, has now said in a decision notice: “Considerable weight and importance has been attached to the harm caused by the proposals to Lesnes Abbey. However, it is concluded that the public benefits delivered by the scheme, improved over the course of the application, would clearly and convincingly outweigh the heritage harm.”

Pipe added that the scheme would “make a positive contribution” towards achieving housing targets in alignment with the National Planning Policy Framework, London plan and Bexley’s local plan.

The developer made several changes to the scheme since it was called in. The scheme will include 35% affordable housing, and the proportion of these homes that are London Living Rent was increased from 30% to 51%. The flood risk assessment and drainage strategy was also altered. It proposes to discharge surface water into the sewer within Harrow Manorway.

The notice said the development is considered to be largely in accordance with relevant design policy requirements. It said that while there are partial conflicts with London plan and local plan policies relating to tall building criteria, “the overall design is considered to be acceptable in response to the surrounding context and emerging character.”

Pipe said: “The proposed development would deliver new homes and affordable homes, along with non-residential town centre floorspace, public realm and landscape improvements within a highly accessible location. It would bring forward an underutilised brownfield site in close proximity to Abbey Wood Station.”

LETTER: Not enough Climate and Bio-diversity Action in Brent? Join us.

 

Dear Editor,

ACE Brent is a coalition of 13 groups who want to see more climate action in Brent. We started working together in November 2023. Can your readers support us or be involved?

 

So far we have :

 

- Agreed a set of our own priorities for climate action in Brent (on Transport/active travel, Insulation and retrofitting, Divestment, Planning and Regeneration, Renewable energy, Food/Plant based consumption, Trees/green space). We have an overarching priority of mechanisms for public participation in and scrutiny of climate action (most neighbouring councils have these). We have received responses to our priorities, and accept the arguments about lack of funds, but believe more ambition, creativity and transparency is needed when other councils are doing better. https://councilclimatescorecards.uk/#jump=london-borough-of-brent

 

We are currently working on actions we want to see in the party manifesto's for the May 2026 Council Elections:

 

- Increased discussion about climate action across the council; through delegations to Full Council and the Public Realm Scrutiny Committee, and by writing to all councillors with comments on key climate reports. One result is the current work of a Kerbside Management Task Group which is looking at actions for more climate and people friendly streets.

 

- Pushed for Monitoring the effectiveness of local climate measures, and benchmarking with relation to other London councils; resulting in a new monitoring dashboard (not yet publicised or available for public scrutiny)

 

- Influenced (maybe) the appointment of new climate roles : Cabinet member for Climate Action and Community Power (Cllr Jake Rubin), and Climate Champion (Cllr Mary Mitchell)

 

- Met regularly with Cllr Jake Rubin and Oliver Myers, Head of Environment Strategy and Climate Action. We have pushed for mechanisms for public participation, more frequent climate reporting to the Scrutiny Committee, and better information on the council website. 

 

We were able to input to the Tree Strategy before it was written, and have had discussions about planning, active travel, food issues, use of NCIL and Strategic CIL etc.

 

The meetings are useful but not a substitute for full public participation. We now have agreement that the council will publicise future meetings with ACE Brent.

 

The next meeting is on Planning and the Climate, Nov 3rd, online at 7pm, and will be attended by the senior council members and officers.

 

We are aware that many Brent groups with environmental concerns are not yet aware of ACE Brent. We welcome all groups to get involved who want Brent Council to be doing more on the climate and bio-diversity. You do not need to agree with all of our suggestions so far. You can see work in progress at the moment here https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-G0zJmmH8th96TrUf5dCQiSDwnqlyfRfBxEsAfHYFCk/edit?tab=t.0

 

Join in for news, to take part in working groups and participate in meetings with council. 

 

You are welcome to :

 

1) Join us as a member group. The bigger our coalition the stronger our voice will be (see our current members below)

 

2) Join our mailing list as a group or individual. You will be updated on our activities, meetings - approx 6-weekly - meetings with the council and other key news (mailings max weekly, except when urgent matters)

 

3) Sign up for quarterly updates only

 

 

We look forward to hearing from you. And please let Elaine know Ace@brentfoe.com if you want the Microsoft Teams link for Nov 3rd at 7pm.

 

 

Best wishes,

 

Elaine Sheppard

on behalf of Action for the Climate Emergency Brent

 

Call for dialogue with Campaign Improvement Board on Brent Labour candidate selections

Rather belatedly, Brent Labour councillors are being asked to support an open letter calling on the London Region Campaign Improvement Board to reconsider their decisions on selections for the 2026 local election.

The letter, written in a respectful tone, cites the loss of effective councillors and disquiet amongst Labour members and local residents about the process.  It argues that the process has had the opposite of the intended effect of ensuring a democratic process and selection of a group of diverse and effective candidates, and could affect electoral performance in May.

The letter calls for a reconsideration of decisions and a dialogue  with party members, candidates and residents about thir concerns.

The Board is due to revisit the selections in January 2026. 

 

Brent Council seek pause in Wembley student accommodation building as proportion of students in population predicted to reach 26.8% within next 3 years

 

 

A drastic slow down in conventional home building in Brent  and a boom in purpose built student accommodation (PBSA) has led to fears of an unbalanced community, particularly in the Wembley Growth Zone.

In 2023-25 planning permission was granted for 8,000 conventional homes in Brent but there were only 656 net additionas to housing stock. Delays were blamed on shortages of labour and materials and updated safety requirements. 

Meanwhile the PBSA figures (bedrooms) were:

Completed 6,257

Under construction 1,617

Permitted/approved 1,559

Awaiting decision  2,010

 In discussion but declared acceptable by planning officers 918

 

The Wembley Growth Area 

Most of these are in the Wembley Growth area LINK:

As identified however, the spatial distribution of PBSA provision has been focussed on Wembley Growth Area where to date 6058 bedspaces have been constructed. Currently 21.8% of the Growth Area’s population is students either in PBSA or in all student households renting homes.

 

A further 1617 PBSA bedspaces are under construction and planning committee has been minded to approve 759 more bedspaces, subject to an appropriate S106 obligation. Some sites are subject to current applications and others are also in relatively advanced pre-application discussions where the principle of PBSA has been identified as acceptable. If all delivered, a further 3500 student bedspaces could be supplied in the next 3 years, resulting in 9558 bedspaces in total. It is anticipated that 1871 additional dwellings will be completed in the area in the next 3 years. Students would in three years comprise 26.8% of the overall population.

 More than a quarter of the total population would be students and this is not considered appropriate in terms of a balanced community. A planning statement is proposed that would pause  PBSA building. The officers' report suggests this would enable building of conventional housing to catch up and the student proportion of the total population would return to an acceptable 20%.

As this is an interpretation of policy in relation to clarifying the position in terms of PBSA over-concentration/ supporting balanced and mixed communities, rather than writing new policies, it is suggested that the Council issues a policy position statement. Although not officially recognised in planning statutes as a Local Development Document or perhaps having the weight of a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), if consulted upon and following the same processes as a SPD, once adopted by the Council it can be regarded as a material consideration in the determination of planning applications with some weight.

 

This will provide clarity to prospective developers or investors in PBSA, particularly in Wembley Growth Area that, other than schemes already subject to approval or with clear advice from the Council through the pre-application process that the principle of PBSA is currently acceptable, the Council is unlikely to support their scheme in the short term.

 Given developers' enthusiasm for profit-making student accommodation and the limited legal status of the 'planning statement' we may well see appeals in the future if applications are refused. Backbenchers have expressed disquiet at the amount of student accommodation being approved versus the lack of truly affordable housing. Whether building of normal homes will actually accelerate is currently unclear but as an interm measures is proposed PBSA developers rather than providing a proportion of afford student accommodation would instead make a contribution to the building of affordable homes elsewhere in the borough.