Dear Wembley Matters,
The government has just released its "English indices of deprivation 2025" https://deprivation.communities.gov.uk/ . The media has been full of this story, looking at the most deprived areas of the country, making for depressing reading. The site allows you to put in your full postcode and find where it fits in the national picture, narrowed down to areas with about 1,500 residents.
Its not a competition, no area should have to endure the multiple deprivation revealed, but I thought I'd look a bit closer to home. My part of South Kilburn is rated among the 20% most deprived areas of the country. This despite 20 years of regeneration which, we were told, would raise the standard of living in the area (the rest of South Kilburn has roughly similar results). One Councillor at the start of regeneration was always keen to tell us how bringing in people with higher salaries would raise the standard of living for everyone in the area (an understanding of basic arithmetic was never their strong point). Rather, it has made no difference. Hardly surprising, given the poor quality of the new housing, the general neglect of the area by the Council and the fact that they have introduced expensive housing into the area.
Given Brent Council now tells us that regeneration of South Kilburn will continue for another 30 years, your readers may understand the cynicism of residents who feel that whoever is benefiting, it's not them.
Pete Firmin, South Kilburn resident
11 comments:
Regarding the neglect of area part, unfortunately it’s the same across all of Brent, unless you report the issue to them via report.Brent.gov.uk aka FixMyStreet they will turn a blind eye to it. But point taken about Kilburn regeneration.
Hardly regeneration when all they have done is demolish crappy flats and houses and replace them with new crappy substandard housing, much smaller and more densely populated, unaffordable, less amenity space for existing residents.
Great post Pete.
Back in 2001 South Kilburn was awarded 50 million pounds from the New Deal for Communities (NDC) initiative set up by the Labour Government of that time.
We were judged to be the most deprived area in Brent ,just a little bit worst than St. Raphael's. Some of the funding was used to teach Latin to SK students in order to improve their chances of getting a well paid job but did it work
There has never been an evaluation of all the NDC projects, so we do not know the outcomes of any of them,including the students taught Latin.
Another project was to send young SK footballers to Brazil to learn the finer points of playing the game but nobody knows if any of them ended up as professionals back home, or even in Brazil?
Well at least we can see all the new buildings, as some of the NDC funding was used to start off the SK Regeneration Programme in 2005.
Most of the New Deal money in Brent was a waste of time. I speak from experience. It did benefit training organisations though.
Regeneration in South Kilburn 45ha is nearing 25 years, if you take the arrival of NDC funding in early 2001/ community-led neighbourhood masterplan (revoked by Brent two weeks after Grenfell) as the starting point. There was a phase recent times when Brent wanted to deny even this fact, Brent preferring a year zero approach.
Before that it had been from 1979, 22 years of extreme mismanagement and neglect to free-up this public 'land' for re-development, this policy has not in fact changed, so we are in year 46, nearing year 47 of permanent development/ social abuse/ neighbourhood denial. A tall building zone since 2019, yet with no masterplan for a tall building zone and how that functions as a high quality new neighbourhood? How colonial can you get?
30 more years, I would disagree. South Kilburn is permanent re-development zoned.
MIND THE GAP
Also looks a bit cooked regarding lower layer super output areas which are each of '1,600 average population size.' Wonder how wide that average used by government is in this process?
South Kilburn was 6000 population in 2001. Its lower layers are 034A, 034B, 034C and 034D. On governments population averaging sleight of hand in 2025 there is no population growth these 25 years of South Kilburn re-development??? Average population gets us to 6,400 in 2025 (where part of 034B is outside South Kilburn north of the electrified mainline railway line severance).
Government should state the population of each of these lower layers rather than 'averaging' and thereby unfairly cooking its data books.
New Kilburn Wall has to have some meaning in terms of assisted living support infrastructure even if it is all only unentitled tenants zoned there.
Massaged population data. South Kilburn should in fact be a council ward and that would get highly interesting as councillors must surely have to engage with tenanted zoned-in constituents issues of systemic inequalities and exclusion.
What do you think about off-setting access to nature, greenways, welfare state infrastructure investments and growth to more worthy conservation area freehold family houses zones? Ready to live bleak bare life in a no neighbourhood?
Key government policies are growth and fairness. But should these two policies remain separated and zoned by a Labour ('socialist') government with a 140 majority - Change, what change for the tenanted? It very much remains....
Unfairness growth in 'build, baby build' permanent development zones.
Fairness and even de-growth in protected resilience building conserved zones.
A political open door for May 26 this one.....
A no masterplan for car-free housing tall buildings zoned- only more intense tower-by-tower, bit-by-bit, ad hoc land developer war to 2050.
Why the deafening silence from other parties. All are on the same page regarding zonal planning perhaps? Zoning for inequalities and so many Londoners with clipped wings excluded in these re-development colonies.
Post a Comment