Perspectives on London's housing emergency - affordable homes supply and threshold, CIL relief for developers, reduced powers of councils

 Below are three different perspectives that feed into the debate about how to address London's current housing emergency.

From the London Assembly

Rising costs, funding constraints and a lack of strategic focus are slowing the delivery of the affordable homes Londoners need most, particularly family-sized and accessible homes.

A new report from the London Assembly Housing Committee – Assessing delivery, needs and challenges of the Mayor’s Affordable Homes – warns that London’s affordable housing system is failing to keep pace with need, despite public investment through the Mayor’s Affordable Homes Programme. Delivery under the current programme has been slow, with 64 per cent of homes still to be started as of September 2025, less than a year before the programme is due to end in March 2026.

The Committee found that certain types of homes are in particularly short supply. Family-sized social rent homes and accessible homes for Deaf and Disabled Londoners are not being delivered at the scale required, leaving many families trapped in overcrowded or unsuitable accommodation. The report also raises concerns about the lack of progress in delivering sites for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities and the growing pressure on supported housing providers.

To address this, the Committee calls for a more targeted approach to funding affordable housing. Key recommendations include increasing grant rates and setting clear targets for family-sized and accessible homes under the 2026–36 Affordable Homes Programme, so that public investment better reflects London’s most urgent housing needs.

Other recommendations in the report include:

·          improving support for councils to acquire existing homes for social rent, as a faster way to increase supply

·           requiring better monitoring and reporting on homes delivered for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities, to ensure commitments translate into delivery

·          securing sustainable funding for supported housing, including revenue funding alongside capital investment

Chair of the London Assembly Housing Committee, Zoë Garbett AM (Green Party), said:

London’s housing crisis is hitting families and disabled Londoners hardest, yet the homes they need most are the ones least likely to be built. The report highlights that delivery has slowed sharply since 2023, at the same time as demand for genuinely affordable housing continues to rise.

Evidence to the Committee showed that rising construction costs, high land prices, increased borrowing costs and new building safety requirements have all reduced the capacity of councils and housing associations to bring forward new homes. Without changes to how funding is allocated, the report warns that delivery under the next Affordable Homes Programme risks falling further behind.

Menwhile Brent Council reacted to Government and London Mayor proposals on the Housing Emergency that included reducing the affordable housing threshold and temporary relief on the amount of Community Infrastructure Levy required from developers.

Councillor Teo Benea, Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Planning and Property published a statement on the Council's position:

While we support urgent action to unblock housing delivery, the current proposals risk doing the opposite in places like Brent, reducing the number of affordable homes delivered while significantly cutting the funding that pays for the infrastructure that our borough relies on.

Brent currently has 2,054 households living in temporary accommodation, and tens of thousands of residents on our housing register who will face waiting decades for an affordable home; unless grant funding for building new council homes is increased.

Lowering the effective affordable housing threshold and introducing substantial reductions in borough level Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) would remove vital investment in schools, future transport schemes like the West London Orbital, public realm improvements, as well as community and medical facilities, without addressing the real barriers to delivery.

Our submission is clear that Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) makes up only a small proportion of overall development costs, and that cutting it would have a disproportionate impact on Brent, particularly in areas that are already growing.

We want to work with Government to help realise their ambition of 1.5 million new homes, getting more families into secure and genuinely affordable housing, and supporting first time buyers onto the housing ladder.

That means introducing policies that increase delivery without undermining affordable housing, or stripping out the funding needed to support growing communities. We have submitted our formal response to both consultations, urging a rethink so we can deliver homes, infrastructure and opportunity together.

The Just Space Alliance, the campaign against the dominance of developers and landowners in planning, have written a detailed response that you can read HERE 

Here is a key extract:

Part 1: Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Relief
 

We note that;

 Local authorities already set CIL levels to ensure developments can be viable and can choose not to charge CIL.
 

 Local authorities can already give Exceptional Circumstances Relief (ECR), if a scheme is unviable. This proposal would effectively over-ride local authority discretion.
 

 CIL is not cited as one of the causes of ‘non-viability’ (causes are Covid, high interest rates, construction and labour costs, new regulations, fall in demand for unaffordable housing).
 

 There is a danger that CIL relief will not be time limited, once introduced it will become the norm for financing developments.

We strongly object to the proposals for the following reasons

 If the Government allows both a significant reduction in CIL payments alongside consents that provide only 20% affordable housing this simply benefits landowners and developers with no corresponding public benefits. Land values will rise, driving up house prices and rents.

 These proposals would reduce the money that local authorities have to spend on essential improvements to the local area and providing social infrastructure for new and existing residents. Councils do not have the money to make up this shortfall, so it would have a long term impact on communities across London.
 

 The measures give priority to the delivery of ‘units’ rather than the sustainable development of appropriate homes addressing identified need – which is for social housing, not more unaffordable housing.
 

 The consultation contains no evidence of its necessity or effectiveness. It is extraordinary that the government has not provided its own financial modelling to support these proposals. The developer’s lobby have done so. It is deeply concerning that the affordable housing requirement may be reduced based on untested evidence provided by developers.

 If the govt wants to encourage developers building the homes we need, they could propose a reduction in CIL for schemes that commit to providing at least 35% affordable housing and for this to be the primary approach.
 

 The proposed £500,000 threshold discriminates against small schemes and the potential contribution of SMEs, which the Government purports to encourage.
 

 There would be no cut to Mayoral CIL. It is not clear why the boroughs are bearing the burden.

 The proposal for applications for CIL reductions to provide sufficient and truthful evidence to support viability modelling is welcomed. Information provided should be put into the public domain and the approach extended to apply to viability assessments used to reduce affordable housing contribution in planning applications.

Part 2: increasing Mayor’s powers to approve applications

The proposal is firstly to extend the Mayor’s power to ‘call in’ much smaller schemes of over 50 homes, but only if the borough intend to refuse the application – and the Mayor could then approve. Secondly it is proposed that the Mayor would be given additional powers to‘call in’ applications to build on the Green Belt or Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) .

These powers are designed to over-ride potential refusals by local councils of inappropriate schemes – all too rare an occasion anyway (many boroughs haven’t refused any major
schemes for years).

Local decision-making by local planning authorities (and local planning committees) is essential for transparency, legitimacy, and local democracy. We do not consider it appropriate for the Mayor to be given the power to over-ride the local authority’s democratic decision making process for schemes smaller than 150 homes, which are essentially local matters. Similarly it is not appropriate to give the Mayor specific additional powers of approval over-riding boroughs in relation to sites which are within the Green Belt or Metropolitan Open Land. This would fundamentally upset the relationships set out in the Greater London Authority Act 1999.

For these reasons we do not support a further extension of the Mayor’s call in powers.

In conclusion, we believe that the whoe package of measures - including those being concurrently consulted on by the Mayor - are fundamentally flawed, unevidenced, contradictory to the core principles and policies set out in the statutory London Plan, and therein fundamentally improper and open to legal challenge.

 

 

UPDATED: Number of pupils in Brent primary schools continues to fall - no closures at present

In common with many London boroughs the Brent primary school population has continued to fall due to a variety of factors including families having to move out of London to find affordable housing, the long-term impact of Brexit and a declining economy causing European workers to return home, and a falling birthrate.

New developments have not 'yielded' the expected number of children as the occupants are often single flat sharers or 'dinkys' (Double Income No Kids). The proposed Ark primary school next to Wembley Stadium station has been abandoned as there are spare spaces at nearby Elsley Primary.

This results in pressure on school budgets as the main finance is based on the number of pupils. Some schools have seen a steeper decline than others, with those that were expanded during the pupil 'bulge' particularly hit.  One solution has been reducing the Planned Admission Number (PAN) for such schools so they may have 2 forms for each age group rather than three - a planned reduction often involving staff restructuring.

Figures going before the Schools Forum tonight  shows a net decrease in the primary population of 448 pupils. Most badly hit is Harris Primary Academy South Kenton (formerly Byron Court Primary) with a reduction of 128 children, accelerating a trend that started before forced academisation. This is a 14% reduction and equals £564,547 At a similar percentage loss, but at the other end of school size, Carlton Vale Infants has only 38 children on roll with a loss of 10 equalling a fall of 13% and £67,319 loss.

In the secondary Catholic sector St Claudine's School for Girls (previously Convent of Jesus and Mary) has an 8% fall in pupils (78 pupils) and £583,943 loss in funding and Newman Catholic College a 7% fall (55 pupils)  and £359,141 funding loss.

Brent Council has taken action through its Primary Places Strategy and the document outlines the approach it takes to help schools in difficulty despite its own financial constraints:      

Contingencies

The proportion of schools relying heavily on reserves remains high with 43% of schools in deficit planning to use 50% or more of their reserves, compared to 42% in 2024/25. It is therefore proposed to continue to de-delegate funds to support schools in financial difficulty, however at a reduced amount of £0.150m, in line with the forecast spend in the current financial year. This would lead to a reduction in the per pupil de-delegated rate of £1.19 at £7.78 compared to £8.97 in 2025/26.

 

Schools Forum agreed in January 2024 that if in exceptional circumstances school redundancies are eligible to be funded centrally, where the funding criteria is met in line with the redundancy policy, then these will need to be found from within wider Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) funding. It was agreed that redundancies should be funded from the Schools Facing Financial Difficulties Fund (SFFDF). It is proposed to maintain this allocation at £0.3m. There is a £0.21 increase in the proposed rate for 2026/27 at £15.55 per pupil due to a fall in pupil numbers compared to the last financial year.

 FULL SCHOOL ALLOCATIONS SPREADSHEET 

At the meeting, Cllr Gwen Grahl, Lead Member,  answering Lucy Cox, representing the NEU, said that when she came into the post she was determined not to close any schools in the face of falling rolls. She could not rule out closing schools in the future but would use lots of strategies to avoid that. One of those was to locate Additional Resource Provision (ARP) for SEND pupils,  in schools with spare capacity.

John H repair saga not finished yet after 2 months

Although John H's heating is working after a very long wait for repairs, the South Kilburn pensioner is still waiting for the reconnection of his meter and damage  made good. There has again been a lot of passing the buck and failure to answer phone calls etc. The process has now been going on for 2 months.

Yesterday John wrote to me:

Abri Housing Association  (who took over  Octavia) emailed me this morning to inform me that they are working with their relevant parties to try and complete the repair to my wall mounted meter.

'However, we still cannot give you a date for when we will carry out the repair.'

This afternoon I rang Octavia and my responder said they rang their repairs team but there was no answer, so they sent an email to them but there was no reply.

So after 2 months I am still waiting for my repair to be completed and to see how much credit I have left, as my credit balance remains frozen since the 6th January, when the SureServe engineer disconnected my meter leaving a blank screen.

I am concerned that if my credit runs out, my heating will be shut down again.

I sent emails to everyone at Brent Housing this morning and also to Cllr. Donnelly-Jackson but she did not reply and neither did anyone else reply to my emails.

John  has had recent problems with credit payments elsewhere which may be the result of the frozen credit on his meter. He has heard no more from anyone concerned today.

He said tonight:

I tried to send my complaint to the Housing Ombudsman but it seems I must wait for Octavia to respond to my 2nd stage complaint.'

As it took Octavia 7 weeks to respond to my 1st stage complaint, I could be in for a long wait.

Preston Community Library Opening: 'A proud and extraordinary achievement'

 

 

There were crowds outside Preston Community Library this morning as the community came out in droves to welcome the official opening of the library that they campaigned for, helped fund and staffed with volunteers.

Barry Gardiner MP was there, and ward councillors  were present but it was the people who were there for what Philip Bromberg,  described as a 'a proud and extraordinary achievement that took pride of place.

Reflecting early debates over strategy on library closure,  Philip said, 'Everyone here at Preston Community Library still believe that all public libraries should be properly funded with  paid and trained staff.'

 

INSIDE THE LIBRARY

 

Join, borrow, return and renew at the front desk

 

 

 

Computers are provided

The Library Kitchen

There is also a large community room that can be used for meetings, classes (Yoga anyone?) and regular cinema film shows.

On the eve of its offical opening a review of the peoples' struggle for Preston Community Library and Hub

 

The latest election leaflet from Labour councillors in Preston ward (extracts above) would almost make you think that the Brent Community Library is a Brent Council library and a Brent Labour project.

It is a little more complicated than that.

The new Preston Community Library has its official opening tomorrow by the Deputy Mayor of Brent. For the context of how we got to this point we have to go back nearly 15 years to the SOS Brent Libraries Campaign when campaigners against the then Labour adminstration's closure of 6 Brent Libraries (half the total number of libraries in the borough) - Preston, Tokyngton, Barham, Neasden, Kensal Rise and Cricklewood- organised in the community.

 It is their grit, determination and sheer hard work that has kept 4 of those libraries open. A campaign for the Neasden Library never really got off the ground in a working class area of time poor people, and Tokyngton Library was sold to a Mosque for use as a community centre. Muhammed Butt was a member of the Mosque Committee.

Some of the background: 

 

February 2011 Petition

 

Keep Preston Library Open We the undersigned petition the council to keep Preston Library open and give full consideration to alternatives to the removal of essential local library services to the Preston ward under the Brent "Library Transformation Project". We oppose the sale or redevelopment of the site that does not include a Brent public library. : We oppose the closure of Preston Library, a cost-efficient local service that is well used by all the local community.

It provides essential facilities for some of our community, particularly senior citizens and those with limited mobility, schoolchildren, and the unemployed and others who may not have access to a computer.

Preston Library service is more accessible and meets the needs of a greater number of local people than would a multimillion-pound mega-library at Wembley Stadium, to which many users would find it difficult to travel.

We demand that Brent Council give adequate time and due consideration to alternatives plans to the closure of Preston Library, including the revision of proposals for the library at the Civic Centre.

We also oppose the sale or disposal of the Preston Library site for any redevelopment that does not include a public library for the use of local citizens.

Because this blog post marks its official opening I will concentrate on the Preston Library  but is it important to note the concerted effort made by all  in the SOS Libraries in the legal challenge that went all the way to the High Court but finally failed despite making national headlines.

May 2011 First Salvo Fired in Library Legal Campaign

Brent Council has now been sent the Letter Before Action from Bindmans that begins the legal process for a judicial review. The action is backed by S.O.S. Brent Libraries which brings together the campaigns against the closures of six Brent libraries.

The Letter Before Action in summary claims:

1. a fair-minded and informed observer, having full regard to the facts, would conclude that there was a real possibility of predetermination by the decision-makers that these closure proposals should go ahead (indeed that there was no alternative) which, in turn, meant the results of the consultation exercise were not taken into account conscientiously and with open minds on 11 April 2011;
2. insufficient information was gathered to enable the decision- makers to take into account mandatory relevant considerations at the appropriate time, particularly in relation to questions of need for library services and equality;
3. some consultation responses were not made known to members, significant errors of fact were made in the consultation document and officers’ reports and irrational conclusions drawn;
4. the Council misdirected itself on the means by which its duty to provide a library service could be discharged; and
5. those who had made alternative proposals were not dealt with fairly.

Unless Brent Council backs down the legal process is expected to proceed by way of a judicial review of the council's decision.

David Butcher from Kensal Rise speaking on behalf of the Brent SOS Library Campaign said,

Thousands of people across the whole of Brent are supporting the campaign to save the local community libraries of Barham, Cricklewood, Kensal Rise, Neasden, Preston and Tokyngton. 

While Councillors Ann John and Powney are using the resources of Brent Council to force through the closures local people are determined to fight their closure plans all the way.

 

Brent SOS Libraries; Save Our Six Librarie have agreed to raise funds for the judicial review of the council’s decision. The Legal Services Commission requires a ‘community contribution’ of £30,000 towards the costs. Each of the library groups has pledged to raise a contribution.

 

Brent Council erected hoardings around Preston Library to thwart any attempts at occupation. The hoarding soon became what some called a 'Democracy Wall'  or 'Wall of Shame' like those in China used to criticise the Chinese authorities. There was a lot of anger and the comments were not always polite. Council officers 'raided' Kensal Rise Library and removed the books to the horror of campaigners who had mounted a regular picket outside.

 

 

The unpopularity of the library closures were evident and Muhammed Butt then deputy leader, made a bid for the Brent Labout leadership at the 2012 Labour AGM.

 

The the Labour Party member and former councillor  Graham Durham (now Your Party) wrote to Cllr Butt.

      

Dear Mo,

 

Thank you for your telephone call of 9 May 2012 in which you invited me to vote for you as Leader of the Council at the Brent Labour Party hustings on 10 May.

 

As you know I am opposed to the Brent  Labour Group record over the last two years of implementing the Tory /Lib Dem government cuts and thus severely damaging the life prospects of many of the most vulnerable people in Brent. Naturally I was anxious to know how you would change matters and specifically how you would propose to make the Tory/Lib Dem cuts you made clear you are committed to over the next two years 

 

I was pleased  to hear your response on the question of libraries which I recorded.You said

 

'I feel we handled libraries very badly.I always wanted to consider partnership with community groups as Camden Council has done and was blocked by Ann John who  insisted we had to be seen to be backing officers and closing the six libraries.This will change if I am Leader.'

 

On future budget cuts you said

 

'We have far too many senior officers in Brent ,a record number of Directors on very high pay and they all build empires of Assistant Directors.I think we could save £3 million a  year  on these costs by 2015 '

 

Whilst I do not wholly agree with these two proposals I did concede that they represented progress from the intransigence and hostility to community groups displayed by Ann John and senior officers over the last two years .As promised  I advised Labour Party members I know of your views and asked them to consider if the changes you promised were sufficient to enable them to vote for you as Leader.

 

You have become Leader of Brent Council  at a time when working  people across  Europe  are realising that the disastrous policy of austerity is leading to impoverishment and misery everywhere.Voters in France and Greece have realised that the solutions of  cuts in services and basic benefits and pensions are incapable of creating jobs and protecting a reasonable standard of living for working people.

 

In Brent we have seen the extraordinary GLA vote in which Labour heavily  defeated the Lib Dems in every single ward of Brent Central - a great opportunity exists for us to remove Sarah Teather and cuts agenda at the next General Election.

 

You will need to be resolute in challenging Brent Council officers on every aspect of their work.In particular Gareth Daniel,Chief Executive, must be reigned in and told to stop spreading government cuts propaganda to Brent Council staff.

 

I am sure that the local newspaper, the Brent and Kilburn Times, has misquoted you in stating that you now support library closures and the matter is closed. I do not believe that you would have completely reversed the promises you made to Party members during your leadership campaign nine days ago.

 

I know that Brent SOS Libraries Campaign have written to you asking for  an urgent meeting and I look forward to discussing this issue with you then.Labour should be embracing local campaigners not treating them with disdain.

 

On a wider programme Brent Fightback want to work with Brent Labour Council in opposing Tory/Lib Dem cuts.We have also requested a meeting to discuss how to work together to resist  NHS Cuts such as the closure of Central Middlesex hospital  as well as local government cuts.

 

I look forward to meeting you to discuss further co-operation 

 

A notable aspect of the campaign was the support of children from a nearby secondary and prinary school who were users of the library for homework and as a safe place.

 

 

 

 

8^th May 2014 (Before the local election)  A crowded  public meeting of the Preston Library Campaign heard speakers from Brent Labour, Liberal Democrats, Conservatives, Greens and TUSC on the future of the closed Brent libraries.  This is my speech:

         

I am speaking primarily as the Green Party spokesperson for children and families, because I am particularly concerned about the impact of the closures on young children. I did childcare for a pupil of Preston Park Primary who used the library regularly, did her homework there and always felt secure with helpful staff available. But of course it is not just Preston Library but five others that have been closed.

 I have seen eager children arrive at Neasden Library, only to turn home crestfallen when they realised it was closed for good. Without internet access at home they were dependent on that library to use a computer for their homework.

 Libraries are important for book borrowing, homework and a social space but most importantly are  'local'  - where older children can visit independently, families drop in and elderly people access with ease.

Labour realised belatedly that  the closures were a mistake and this led to a change of leadership and recent attempts to recover lost ground. However, the damage has been done and a 'fresh start' cannot make up for that.  We believe in publicly funded, properly staffed, local libraries and will fight for the restoration of local library provision.

Greens care about the quality of life and not just the quantity of goods. This is important not just in terms of  libraries but in educational provision public spaces and housing where we intend to enhance everyone's quality of life rather than focus on acquisition of goods.

At the end of the meeting a show of hands clearly demonstrated support for a professionally staffed and publicly funded library with a slightly lower number in favour of a volunteer run library. However, afterwards some indicated if a voluntary run library was the only solution they would reluctantly support that.

So a volunteer library it was.  

 The Preston Library site re-opened as an additional class for Preston Park Primary School and the Preston Library Campaign were granted a licence to use when it was not in use by the school:

 January 2014 Philip Bromberg of the Preston Library Campaign wrote ahead of the local council election on May 22nd:

 

First of all, can I wish you a very, very happy new year, and thank you for your continuing support. This week sees the third anniversary of the campaign to save Preston Library. The fact that the campaign - here, and in Barham Park, Cricklewood and Kensal Rise - is moving into its fourth year is a testament both to the vital importance of local public libraries and to the hard work of a very remarkable group of people. Please continue to do whatever you can to support the campaign in 2014.

 

We are fortunate in one respect - the Preston Library building is still in public hands, and is likely to be vacated by Preston Park School at some time in the next eighteen months. As most of you will know, there will be local elections in all London boroughs on May 22, and candidates will be seeking your votes. Please continue to tell candidates and councillors what the loss of the libraries has meant to our communities, and ask them to work with us to restore our public library in Carlton Avenue East.

      

15^th Feb 2015  Barry Gardiner – evidence to the The Culture Media and Sport Select Committee Inquiry into library closures.

 

In Brent the Council has set out its intention to improve the service that is offered at the six remaining libraries. Their hope is that by improving the service in a reduced number of outlets, more people will be encouraged to use the service overall. In this regard I think Brent is an interesting case study in the review of what should be considered comprehensive and efficient. In particular does the service in the remaining six have to be improved before the other six cease operating? 

 

What has been overwhelming in my constituents’ response is the value they put on the locality of library provision and how if you remove the local element this disadvantages certain communities, irrelevant of whether the service at a library located further away is being improved. I would argue that this should be a central component of what constitutes a comprehensive and efficient library service. In rural communities this may be replicated by regular visits of mobile libraries to small local communities. 

 

The libraries closing in Brent serve a highly dense and often multiply disadvantaged population for whom ease of walking access is economically vital. This factor is particularly poignant for the most vulnerable library user groups such as the children and the elderly. It is these groups that are unable to make the journey to a library that is further away either as a result of the added costs or because they are physically unable to make such a journey. By removing local libraries there is an unfair impact on these vulnerable users. As such it is important that when redefining a comprehensive and efficient library provision that the ease of access for vulnerable communities should be a key criterion. 

 

There is a sad trend in councils up and down the country to run down service provision in what are seen as non-revenue raising areas such as libraries and allotment gardens. The argument is then adduced that the service is under-used or costs too much per capita and the case is made by Council officials to sell off the buildings or the land. This is what appears to have happened in Brent. 

 

The six libraries put forward for closure are said to be "poorly located and have low usage". It is clear to me that people living in Preston, Sudbury, Northwick Park and Kenton do not regard Preston or Barham Park Library to be nearly as poorly located for them as the closest alternative. Where there really is under-usage the solution should be to invest in improving the service on offer so that the locality aspect is maintained as much as possible.

 

A comprehensive library service must also reflect the needs of modern communications with a minimum number of computer terminals with full fast internet access where students of all ages can conduct research. The number of terminals should reflect demographic factors that will influence community demand such as age profile and household wealth. 

 

Poorer areas with a high school age population should be required to have a far greater number of terminals than wealthier areas with a low number of school children. 

 

Areas of high immigration should reflect the indigenous languages of significant local communities in their stock of books.

 

In 2016 Cllr Michael Pavey, Lead Member for Stronger Communities announced plans for the library site:

Preston Community Library have done an absolutely superb job in keeping a library running in extremely difficult circumstances. They have delivered a truly inclusive range of exceptional activities and have brought the whole community together.  

I would make the small point that although many of the Library volunteers are indeed Preston residents, many others live in Barnhill and surrounding wards - they all deserve immense credit.  

We plan to redevelop the Preston Library building to provide new housing, however these plans will also incorporate high quality new community space. Cabinet felt that the published report paving the way for this redevelopment did not sufficiently recognise the excellent work of the Preston Community Library, nor did it do enough to pledge ongoing support for that library.  

Consequently Cabinet committed to take three months to work with Preston Community Library, as well as the community libraries in Cricklewood, Kensal Rise and Barham Park, to develop a new Community Library Strategy over and above which the Council has a duty to provide. In addition to broader issues, this strategy will directly address access to the new Preston Library building. 

Cabinet has also stated a very clear preference that both the tender process and the rental level for the new community space at the redeveloped building should be clearly weighted towards social value, rather than financial value. 

All four Brent community libraries are extremely important partners of the Brent Library Service. We are grateful for their excellent work and look forward to working with them to develop an exciting new strategy to assist in securing the long term future of each library.

Cllr Pavey, rejected the  Cabinet report's terminology of a 'pop up library' to describe Preston Community Hub.  The bookcase at Willesden Green station was a 'pop up' - Preston with its shelves of books, classes and cinema was much more than that. He argued for the primacy of social value in any procurement process rather than financial value. The financial equivalent of the volunteers' efforts should be included in a calculation of social value. Pavey suggested that in any design for the new building the library space should come first and the flats second

A majority of the Preston Library Campaign, some relectantly, accepted the proposal and the library moved to temporary premises while the building works took place.  SKPPRA (South Kenton Preston Park Residents Association) took the initial planning committee decision to Judicial Review and it was found unlawful, but then approved in the second submission.

There were concerns about over-development of the site and some opposition to social housing.

In 2017 Brent Council advertised for a temporary librarian to support the community libraries:

Title: Professional Librarian

Funding Available: up to £40,000 for period of approx 20 months to 31 October 2018

Commitment: Actual hours will be negotiated but should start by or before 1 April 2017.

Project ends: October 2018

Location: working across Brent

Travel information: Brent is within London Transport Zones 2/4.

 

Professional community librarian sought by a small network of libraries in Brent, North West London, operating as independent volunteer-run community libraries.

 

The Brent Community Libraries (BCL) network is made up of four community libraries, spread across Brent, which are at different stages in development and operation. The libraries are all registered charities and each library is supported by a strong group of residents. Brent is one of the most diverse areas in the country and this post offers the opportunity to develop services for people across a wide range of ages, backgrounds and abilities.

 

The libraries are committed to providing a lively top quality service in their diverse neighbourhoods. We are in an innovative position, collaborating with each other, local community groups and the Council. This is a great opportunity to create a whole new way of approaching how libraries serve the community.

 

The Preston Library temporary site was not as accessible as the former library but the campaigners managed to keep it going. An application was granted for Neighbourhood CIL monies to fit out the new premises. 

The library pays a peppercorn rent but all running costs are paid for my fund raising including the monthly quizzes at the Preston Pub, room hire etc and volunteer labour is of course free.