Can this be Wembley?

The Green Party has long campaigned against clone towns and domination of  high streets by multinational chains so I give a warm welcome to the Montparnasse Cafe which has just opened in Bridge Road, opposite the Ark Academy. A Patisserie Boulangerie Francaise makes a welcome change from the ubiquitous chicken takeaways and betting shops. I was passing recently and noticed an excited huddle outside the door avidly reading the menu. A young woman with shining eyes turned to me and said. "I can't believe it. This in Wembley! The old place is looking up."

The cafe has French staff: "If you want excellent French food you have to have French people preparing it," said the proprietor. The menu has salads, rolls, paninis, galettes, quiches and omelettes as well as mouth-watering cakes. The coffee and tart I had this morning were delicious. A welcome addition to Wembley's small shops and one in the eye for the coffee chains.

The cafe takes telephone orders and will provide catering and delivery to meetings: 27 Bridge Road, Wembley Park. Tel: 020 8904 3443

So what would a Green led Council do?

This speech by the new leader of Brighton and Hove Council gives a taste. It will be no easy task in the present conditions but I wish him and his team well.

Brighton & Hove will become the UK’s greenest city, the city council’s new leader Bill Randall has said.

In his first major speech since taking control, Mr Randall set out three key aims for the next four years. Apart from the ambitious eco-drive, they also comprise tackling inequality and involving residents, community and voluntary organisations in the council’s work.

He set out a plan to reduce the city’s eco footprint and set up a ‘biosphere reserve’ with neighbouring authorities – both plans backed by the business community and other public bodies.

Initiatives also include adopting local carbon budgets, which run alongside financial budgets, as well as plans to fit solar panels on schools and other public buildings to take advantage of feed-in tariffs and increase the use of renewable energy.

While admitting that tackling inequality will not be easy because of the public spending cuts, he said the first priority will be to protect services for children, vulnerable adults and those on low incomes.

Other initiatives include introducing a ‘living wage’ and ensuring that the highest paid council officer earns no more than 10 times the lowest paid officer.

Involving communities is a high priority with plans being piloted to introduce neighbourhood councils with their own budgets and working closely with the city’s vibrant third sector and trade unions.

Mr Randall said the administration takes over in hard times but that there is a new spirit in the city.

“We believe we have captured that spirit to offer the city a fresh start through policies fuelled by fairness and driven by a desire to produce the UK's Greenest city and narrow the gap between rich and poor. We look forward to working with residents, public and private sector partners to achieve our aims."

Don't be Seduced by Free Schools

I must start with a confession:  I worked as a volunteer a 'free school' back in the early 70s. The school was an ordinary terraced house in Friendly Street, Deptford and we taught about 14 11-16 year olds, mainly boys. Many were from old Romany families who were in the scrap iron businesses operating from under the railway arches. The other teachers included a dance teacher and a rock musician. The work was tough but fun with a mixed focus on basic skills and more creative pursuits. A highpoint was when they appeared in an improvised BBC TV play based on their lives.

Most of the children were school refusers or regular truants but they also included what were known at the time as school phobics. Similar projects mushroomed across London at the time, often started by community organisations and settlements who found out of school kids hanging around their doors during the day. The workers in the projects often started from a libertarian critique of the state school system and formed an organisation called LEAP (London Education Alternative Projects).

At the same time other students were actively rebelling in the state schools and some schools began to set up Units for Disruptive Children. These were often off-site and sometimes in poor accommodation. Troublesome children were sent to them and the staff tried to offer an alternative curriculum. Although the Units were funded by the Inner London Education Authority, and therefore part of the 'system', their teachers joined LEAP as they saw themselves as providing an alternative to the 'system'.

By this time I was working in mainstream primary education in North Westminster and involved in anti-racist work in the local community. A group of parents, teachers, school students and community activists met regularly at the 510 Centre in Harrow Road to discussion educational and other issues. One of the attenders was Paul Boateng, then a young lawyer at the Paddington Law Centre, concerned particular with the 'sus' laws.  It soon became clear that racism in schools was a big problem and that one institutional response in particular was a great concern to parents. Many black children, mainly boys, were being labelled 'disruptive' and sent to these units. The curriculum varied between units but often seemed to involve keeping the children occupied with sports and adventure playground  type activities rather than educating them in either basic skills or academic subjects. Few of the units were able to enter the children for public examinations and the claim that the children could return to mainstream school, after a spell in the unit, was seldom achieved in reality.

Local community campaigns were launched against the units as parents began to see them as similar to the ESN schools (old terminology: Educationally Subnormal) exposed by Bernard Coard (1) earlier where children were labelled on the basis of racist stereotypes. There were disproportionate numbers of black boys in Disruptive Units just as there had been in ESN schools. In our campaigning we began to call the Units 'Sin Bins'.  I wrote and spoke on the issue widely at the time and a key issue that arose was the concept of 'disruptive'. This label was a negative one attached to the child and took what he was 'disrupting' as the norm - his behaviour was the problem rather than the institution he was disrupting. We sought to replace 'disruptive' with 'disaffected' so that we could examine what the children were disaffected from: the school. Our focus soon revealed the problem of racist attitudes on the part of some teachers, low expectations and an inappropriate curriculum.

Thirty years later in 2005, I was asked to be a member of a panel discussing a new book: 'TELL IT LIKE IT IS: how our schools fail Black children' (2).  The meeting at Harlesden Library was crowded with angry and frustrated parents who still felt that their children were being treated unfairly in the system with the disproportionate number of black boys excluded a big issue. The historical development seemed to be: ESN>Disruptive>Excluded. In addition there were other issues about the curriculum and setting for examinations. What emerged during the discussion was that after the closure of Sladebrook (now the independent Swaminarayan School) the Harlesden area lacked its own high school. Queens Park was some distance away and then there was the City Academy in Willesden and faith schools. People felt that  having no school of its own impacted on the community with no central, unifying focus of a school 'of and for' the local community, a beacon reflecting its positive aspects in terms of culture, ethos and aspiration. Several parents said they wanted to campaign for a new high school for Harlesden.

I have written on this blog before about the imbalance between the north and south of Brent (roughly divided by the North Circular Road) in terms of secondary school provision. During the debate over the ARK Academy in Wembley campaigners made the argument that what was required was a new high school in the south of the borough, not yet another one in the north of the borough. The Council denied this was the case but ear-marked 50% of the ARK places for children from the south of the borough who had to travel some distance across the North Circular to school.

The campaign for the new school to be in the south of the borough was lost but  now a group have come forward with a Free School proposal for  secondary school in the Harlesden/Willesden area. The suggestion is for a Ma'at school. U.S. exponents call it 'Afrikan Centred' education:

As used by the Ancient Africans, Ma'at was a concept that stood for "universal order." Ma'at represents reality in all its manifestations both spiritual and material. It is the divine force that encompasses and embraces everything that is alive and exists. As an ethical system, Ma'at is often discussed as seven cardinal virtues (truth, justice, righteousness, harmony, balance, reciprocity, and order).

Further information about what the Harlesden group stand for can be found on their website, including their policy of 'no exclusions'. LINK Although I respect the reasons for their Free School application and deplore the fact that they have been let down by successive Brent administrations, I have strong reservations about using the Coalition's free school policy to set up a new school. I think free schools will be divisive in several ways. They are paid for by the government and the money for them will be taken away from the local council funds, reducing money available to other schools. They are not democratically accountable in the same way as local authority schools are via the council and local elections. They do not have to employ qualified teachers and their buildings do not have to meet the quality standards of normal schools. Most importantly they will make planning for school places across the borough extremely difficult.

I am worried that in order to keep classes small the schools will have to make other sacrifices such as employ more unqualified staff and operate from unsuitable premises. The 'no exclusions' policy is laudable but hard to implement. The socialist educationalist Chris Searle, who worked for Maurice Bishop and Bernard Coard in Grenada,and contributed to 'Tell it Like it Is', tried to operate such a policy in Sheffield. Teachers tried to work with the policy but eventually the teacher unions took action against him as members found it hard to teach in those circumstance. There is a possibility that in some ways the free schools will end up with some of the deficiencies of the 'sin bins' - not  in educational philosophy but in teaching and building resources. Just as the Disruptive Units let the local authority off the hook in terms of making changes in the mainstream, there is a possibility that such a free school would do the same for existing secondary schools. Dissatisfied parents may be told, 'Why don't you apply for the Ma'at if your are not happy?'  I am torn because I am well aware that after more than 30 years of trying black parents and teachers will be asking, 'How much longer must we wait?'

I see academies and free schools as part of an attempt to break up and privatise the state system. I have plenty of criticisms of the state system myself and the Green Party has firm ideas on how it should change. LINK However, I don't think we should be seduced by the free school project. There are plenty of groups who want to put their own educational ideas into practice, and that includes some close to the Green Party LINK but there is a debate to be had about using spaces created by reactionary policies for progressive causes.  I will be urging proponents of this approach  to fight for changes in the state system to achieve their aims - not follow the free school route.

(1)  How the West Indian child is made educationally subnormal in the British school system: the scandal of the Black child in schools in Britain, Bernard Coard  (New Beacon Books 1971) [Reprinted in (2) below]
(2) Tell It Like It Is: How our schools fail Black children, Ed Brian Richardson (Bookmarks and Trentham Books 2005, reprinted 2007)

If global warming was a bank, governments would already have saved it

Jonathan Neale's Willesden Green Library talk on Monday evening stimulated a good discussion there, and afterwards in the hospitable Rising Sun pub in Harlesden Road.

Neale suggested that those problems around climate change that could be solved through capitalism had been. But that capitalism with its emphasis on competition and reliance on neo-liberalism could not tackle the fundamental issues which required government action at a global level. He likened the situation to that of the Second World War when government intervention was required for the war effort. He said that now the need was for government action to save lives, not destroy them. This required cooperation - not competition.

He rejected notions of a monolithic, 'evil' capitalism, but instead argued that it was a complex system with different interests playing out against each other. Coal-based economies such as China, United States, India and South Africa were blocking the international level of cooperation needed. However the New York Times was in the forefront of reporting on climate change and had linked it to food shortages and uprisings.

Without the necessary cooperation conflict that we are already experiencing over competition for water, rising food prices (and subsequent food riots), and huge population movements would worsen.

Neale argued that the environmental movement was big enough to save whales but not big enough to save the world from climate change. He said that the working class were big enough to take the issue on but that the economic situation regarding employment and cuts undermined its capacity to do so.

However, the current political dominance of ideas supporting a smaller state, lower taxation, reduced public sector and privatisation were being challenged because the argument for market solutions had been undermined by the financial crisis and the exposure of the role of banks. The banks themselves had screamed for government action rather than settle for a market solution. He repeated the slogan 'if global warming was a bank governments would already have saved it'.

He ended on an optimistic note saying that the dominant idea that we couldn't change anything had been challenged by the uprisings in Egypt, Yemen and other countries. People internationally were generalising from that and had been inspired by it, affecting for example teachers in Wisconsin who, barred from striking over restrictive union laws, had all called in sick for the day and occupied state buildings, quickly followed by their students.

Neale called for campaigners on climate change to build a mass movement with trade unionists and the wider community with the demand for a million new jobs at the centre of its demands.

Videos of Neale's talk are available on Brent Greens Blog HERE

Many thanks to the Brent Campaign Against Climate Change for organising this talk and Willesden Green library for hosting it.

Lucas Bill Tackles Company Tax Scandal

A new Tax and Financial Transparency Bill, which could help the UK recover billions of pounds of lost tax by forcing companies to be more transparent in their accounting, is on the agenda for debate in Parliament on Friday 10 June.

The Bill, launched by the MP for Brighton Pavilion and Green Party leader Caroline Lucas in March this year, is due for its second reading in the House of Commons - and will also feature on BBC Radio 4's Decision Time programme tonight (8pm)

The Brighton Pavilion MP launched her campaign after posing a number of Parliamentary Questions to the Chancellor, in which she exposed the fact that H M Revenue & Customs is failing to prevent serious tax evasion which could amount to as much as £16 billion in lost tax.

Mark Serwotka, General Secretary of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS), said:

This bill goes right to the heart of the economic issues facing our country. If the Government was serious about protecting the most vulnerable people in our communities from the cuts, it would start investing in tax collection and proper regulation so that companies are not allowed to simply disappear without paying the taxes they owe.

 A report published by Tax Research UK  in March revealed that around 500,000 companies "disappeared" from the UK's Register of Companies in the year to March 2010 - with billions being lost to the Exchequer as a result.

Caroline Lucas MP believes that urgent measures are needed to stop companies that are formally dissolved from trading fraudulently, thereby undermining honest businesses who do pay their taxes.She is also calling for a requirement on multinational companies to publish information on where they make their sales, record their profits and pay their taxes, in order to ensure that corporations make a fair and proper contribution to society.

Caroline said:

The first aim of this Bill is to tackle the scandalous reality that around 500,000 companies every year appear not to be paying tax in the UK. Tax Research UK estimate that regulatory failures by H M Revenue & Customs and Companies House mean that around 500,000 companies a year fail to pay their tax or file their accounts.

A great many are simply struck off the Register of Companies as a result, never to be heard of again. It is thought that up to £16 billion of tax a year might be lost to the country as a result. This Bill would ensure that banks have to provide details on all accounts they maintain for companies operating in the UK so that H M Revenue & Customs and Companies House can chase those companies who do not file the returns they're obliged to make for the missing information - and the tax they owe.

Secondly, the bill would force companies to 'publish what tax they pay', requiring all companies filing accounts in the UK to include a statement on the turnover, pre-tax profit, tax charge and actual tax paid for each country in which they operate, without exception.

If they only trade in the UK, this has no impact on them. This information would, however, mean that the answers to the questions asked of Barclays Bank earlier this year about where it earned its profits, how much profit was recorded in tax havens, and where it paid its taxes could be answered for all companies trading internationally.

The Brighton Pavilion MP added:

This information is vital if we are to ensure that multinational corporations make a fair and proper contribution to our society. Companies cannot opt out of corporate social responsibility - and paying tax to the country that provides them with their opportunities to trade is an essential part of it. You can't be socially responsible and accountable unless you say where you are and what you do in each place that you trade.

Caroline's Tax and Financial Transparency Bill will feature as the main topic of discussion in BBC Radio 4's Decision Time programme tonight (8 June 2011) at 8pm with Nick Robinson. Caroline will be joined in the debate by former Trade Minister Lord Digby Jones, Sir Nicholas Montague, former head of the Inland Revenue, Michael Jacobs, a former special adviser in the Treasury and Number 10, and Fraser Nelson, editor of the Spectator. The programme will be available to listen again here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b011pkqn

Battle for a fair and representative voting systems continues - Lucas

The recent election results released were full of promises for the Green Party, but provided a disheartening result for the 'Yes to AV' campaign. Green Party leader Caroline Lucas, responding to the "No" vote in the AV referendum said:

This is a disappointing result for all of those who have campaigned for positive change in our democracy. The political context meant it was always going to be an uphill struggle; with the Tories united in opposition, a divided Labour party, and unpopular Liberal Democrats.

In the end, the nature of the choice over AV was not clear enough, thanks in no small part to the alarmist rhetoric and misinformation which characterised the ‘No’ campaign. Many have been shocked at the degree to which ‘No’ campaigners patronised and misled the British public. Rarely did we hear positive arguments in favour of FPTP – just desperate arguments begging us to cling to the status quo.

The result should not be seen by the Government as a signal that voters will not support truly progressive change. The battle for a genuinely fair and representative voting system continues – and the Greens will push for proportional representation at every opportunity.

Greens now largest party on Brighton Council

The Green Party is now the largest party in Brighton, with 23 seats. It's still five seats short of a majority, but the city that chose Caroline Lucas as the UK's first green MP last year has cemented its support for her party at local level. FULL RESULT

This is the first time a local council in the UK has elected the Greens as the largest party. Brighton and Hove Green convenor Bill Randall said,

The city has listened to the Greens and we have listened to the city.

Greens would now sit down and plan how to take the city forward in these difficult times This is the first time the Greens have been the largest party on any council in the UK and people seem to be  genuinely enthused by the option of a Green-led council.

It's a great result for the city and a huge vote of confidence in the Greens. People went Green across Brighton & Hove. We held all our seats and gained 10 more. We now have 23 Green councillors, making us the largest Green group of councillors in the country.

The next step is for us to talk to other parties about how we will work with them and implement our manifesto pledges at a very challenging time for local government budgets.

We can't say how this will work until we have entered into discussions.
 

Fur will fly on AV in Mapesbury Tomorrow

Mapesbury Residents Association holds its AGM tomorrow and top of the bill is a debate between Cllr Ann John, Labour leader of Brent Council and Cllr Paul Lorber, leader of the Lib Dem councillors, on Alternative Voting. Ann John and most of her colleagues have rejected Ed Miliband's stance in favour of a YES vote in Thursday's referendum and have publicly urged residents to vote NO. Little has been heard of any Labour dissenters from the John line - she is not well know for letting a hundred flowers bloom!. List of Labour Councillors opposing AV HERE

The current London Green News which we are distributing locally, urges people to 'Vote YES to fairer votes' with a message from Green MEP Jean Lambert saying 'This is an opportunity to move away from our out-dated unfair voting system'.  Greens are in favour of proportional representation and we were frustrated when the other parties blocked our proposal to have PR included in the referendum. At our autumn conference last year members voted to support a YES vote on the basis that AV was an improvement on the present first past the post system, albeit not our first choice.

The argument is that AV will enable people to make a positive vote for the party that they really support. This is a message from Caroline Lucas, Green MP and leader of the Green Party:

Under AV, voters rank candidates 1, 2, 3, etc. People can vote 1 for their first choice candidate, safe in the knowledge that their vote can still count just as strong for their second choice if their preferred candidate is not successful.

AV will therefore reduce tactical voting. This would be a good thing for the Green Party and for our democracy as a whole. It could have a significant impact on the way the big parties and the media approach elections. If people are voting positively, rather than negatively, parties and the media are likely to focus more on ideas rather than the political 'race'.

A Yes vote will also send a clear message to the Government that people want political reform. It will make further reforms, such as an elected upper chamber and voting reform for local elections, more likely. A No vote could set back political reforms by decades as the political establishment would be able to claim that there is no public appetite for reform - which we know is not true.

A No vote is primarily being pushed by the Conservatives, the right of the Labour Party and the BNP. Let's be on the side of progress in this referendum. Let's take the opportunity to make this small but important change to the voting system and send a clear message that we need political reform.

We urge you to vote Yes on Thursday and spread the message to your friends, family and collagues.

We had a good discussion on AV at a recent Brent Green Party meeting and although there was no 'split' there were inevitably differences in terms of enthusiasm for the option being offered. Central to the discussion was a concern that AV could lead to a soggy consensus politics that would blunt the cutting edge of the radical policies needed to combat the real issues facing us such as the need to restructure the economy and to combat climate change. On the other hand increased Green representation would mean that the arguments on these issues could reach a wider audience and our support in a finely balanced result could be decisive.

I will be voting YES on Thursday but won't be cartwheeling into the polling booth!

Download the low-down on threat to NHS

Download this very useful broadsheet HERE

Green Party Urges Nurses to Unite Against Health Reforms

The Green Party's health spokesperson has called on nurses to unite against the draft Health and Social Care Bill.

Stuart Jeffery, himself a registered nurse, has written to the Royal College of Nursing's president, Andrea Spyropoulos, and its general secretary, Peter Carter, calling for the RCN to come out fighting against the devastating changes to the NHS being driven through by the coalition government. He has pointed out that the internal market deprives the NHS of up to half a million nurses.

Stuart Jeffery said: "At a time when nurses are propping up the NHS with increasing levels of unpaid overtime and clinicians are becoming concerned about the NHS reforms, the RCN needs to take a strong stance against the government's NHS reforms. The quality of care is suffering as cuts bite into the NHS, and yet the government wants to waste even more increasing the scope of the internal market and in privatising more hospitals. This is simply immoral.

"There is enough money tied up in running the internal market to fund up to an additional 500 000 nurses, far more than we need, yet the government is wedded to the idea that a market can run the NHS. It is time to challenge the 'market knows best' attitude which will spell the end of the NHS. I have written to the RCN urging them to come out fighting against the immoral health bill and to fight to save the NHS. I hope they take note.

"Nurses have key roles to play in health care. Fighting to keep the NHS running, and out of the hands of corporate sharks, is one of them. Let us hope the RCN takes up the challenge."

Cuts we can and can't afford

Primary School Temporary Classes - My full statement

The Wembley and Willesden Observer today publishes a short quote from me about the provision of temporary classes in Brent primary schools as a result of the shortage in school places. The quote was part of a longer statement which puts the issue into context. I reproduce the original full statement below. Only the last paragraph was published:

Brent Council is still running to stand still on the issue of providing additional primary school places - and even then not quite succeeding.  A long-term strategy involving a review of provision and demand across the borough seems just as far away as when I suggested it several years ago. The Council's capacity to devise such a strategy, including a consideration of the educational implications, is now limited by the staffing cuts it has had to make and the redundancies of many experienced senior personnel.

I was pleased to see officers' acknowledge that in the case of a possible expansion of the Capital City Academy into primary provision the impact on nearby Donnington Primary School would need to be considered. This was a principle  they failed to acknowledge in the proposals for primary provision at Preston Manor.

However I am concerned at possible future actions outlined in the Executive document which include: 

more all-through schools providing for children from 4-19 years, we need an informed public debate about the advantages and disadvantages of such schools; 

the possible expansion of primary schools into 5 forms of entry giving a primary school of more than 1,000 5-11 year olds. I think these are far too large and that young children need a smaller, 'family' style environment in which to feel safe and happy;

and an increase in class sizes above 30 in the junior phase (7-11). The maximum class size of 30 has been hard fought for and still compares poorly with the much smaller class sizes in the private sector. 

There is a real danger that in the absence of a 'champion' for the values of primary education within the Council,  that expansion will be just a matter of cramming increasing numbers into any available space, ignoring the impact on the quality of teaching and learning and children's vital first experience of school.

Martin Francis
Brent Green Party spokesperson on children and families

Continue the Fightback - come to Monday's meeting

The next Brent Fightback meeting is tomorrow, Monday April 18th 7.30pm, at Brent Trades Hall/Apollo Club. 375 High Road, Willesden - Dollis Hill tube. 

All are welcome, we will be discussing the next steps in building the campaign against the cuts, in particular:

• The continuing campaign in defence of Brent’s libraries after the Council’s decision to close six;
• The proposal to conduct a “People’s Scrutiny” of the cuts on May 7th in Wembley;
• Building for the MARCH TO SAVE THE NHS, Tuesday 17 May 5.30pm

Labour Councillor: Closing libraries is 'the best thing we've done'.

I am just back from holiday and catching up on local news. It was no surprise to hear that the Brent Executive voted through the library closures as that decision was anticipated by the budget approved by the Council earlier, by the officers' report to the Council and by Cllr Powney's utterances throughout. 'Consultation', 9,000 petition signatures, 'Big Society' schemes and even two hours of eloquent  presentations to the Executive. mean nothing if the Labour leadership and its supine councillors have already made up their minds.

The attitude of some Labour councillors is summed up by this comment posted on the Save Preston Library Facebook page. Cllr Colum Mahoney was alleged to have said at the end of the meeting when demonstrators said how gutted they were at losing their library:

He said with a wide grin on his face, "It's the best thing we've done." As we he was walking out of the Town Hall doors, he shouted back at us, "Go and read some books."

The issue of the Civic Centre has come to the fore as a result of the press and TV coverage and the Conservatives on the Council, despite being part of the previous Council Coalition that initiated the project, are now more vocal in their opposition. When all the political parties on the council voted unanimously for the Civic Centre, the Greens were the only voice of opposition.  Cllr Reg Colwill can bee seen on the London ITN News criticising the project:



Interestingly even the Wall Street Journal LINK suggests that Brent Council could move into cheap office space:

......instead of constructing what it aims to be "the greenest building in the U.K." Forgoing the new center's wedding garden, winter garden, terrace, and charging points for electric cars might also leave a little more cash for libraries.

My colleague Shahrar Ali has posted a report on the Executive Meeting HERE

The question for me remains, 'What price local democracy?' The Willesden and Brent Times last week in a editorial echoed my warnings about the impact of poor consultation procedures, decisions made in advance of consultations and the rubbishing of active citizenship on the electorate's long-term relationship with the Council. The Council may express concern that only 20% of residents use the public libraries - those same 20% are probably a much bigger proportion of those people who actually vote at local elections (only just over half of those on the electoral roll last May).

Will New Waste Sites Will Make A Bad Situation Worse?

The consultation on the West London Waste Strategy which will see new waste facilities in West London ended on Friday.  This is Brent Green Party's submission:

1. The consultation suffers from a major weakness in that it  concentrates on selection of sites and not on the processes that will  take place on them. We submit that the type of process is a major aspect of the choice of sites, especially if some form of incineration is planned. We are being sold a pig in a poke.
2. A further weakness is the separation of the process of site selection  from the SA Objective to 'minimise the production of waste and increase  reuse, recycling, composting and recovery rates' . Urgent action on this
objective as a priority must surely have an impact on the need for sites and the type of processes that will take place on them.
3. There is already a concentration of waste facilities in the Park Royal (Ealing/Brent) area and the new sites suggested will increase this concentration and associated traffic.
4. The Sustainability Assessment shows that Brent is already the most densely populated West London borough (6,278 people per square kilometre against the London average of 4,779 and Hillingdon's 2,161) - yet new waste facilities are to be sited in the borough or on its borders. The SA states,  rather obviously,  that 'In general terms it can be expected that the greater the population density, the more people that are likely
to be affected by the waste facility'.  We are against choosing sites that will have a potentially detrimental impact on larger numbers of people.
5. Brent is ranked as the most deprived borough in West London and is in the 20% of the most deprived boroughs in England. Will the quality of life of its inhabitants be improved by more waste facilities, and will the trade-off of increased employment opportunities be sufficient to make up for the negative impact on health and the local environment?
6. Brent has the lowest average age of all the West London boroughs and has a growing child population as demonstrated by the increased demand for school places. Young bodies are much more susceptible to damage caused by pollutants and poor air-quality. There is a danger that more waste sites with increased levels of heavy traffic, alongside as yet unknown emissions from as yet undecided processes, could severely damage young people's health.
7.  In conclusion although the  Sustainability Appraisal report admits, 'Waste facilities have the potential to negatively impact on human health through increased noise or worsened air quality'  the proposed sites are in an area of high population density with large numbers of young people, and with a population already suffering from the poor health and other problems associated with economic deprivation. Siting the facilities here has the potential to make what is already bad, worse.

Cuts - where do we go from here?

There is an organising meeting of Brent Fightback tomorrow Monday March 7th, 7.30pm at the Trades Hall/Apollo Club, Willesden High Road and Brent Friends of the Earth have a meeting on 'The recession and its impact on the environment and the green agenda' at the Rising Sun, Harlesden Road,  7.30pm on Tuesday March 8th. Fightback will be assessing the effectiveness of the lobby of Monday's Council meeting and the current position regarding cuts, planning for the March 26th demonstration, and reviewing future strategy.

The upshot of the Council's decisions is that there were some concessions after community campaigning:  reprieves for the Wembley youth clubs (albeit with two merging), restoration of funding (with 12% cut) for the Law Centre, Citizen's Advice and Private Tenants Rights Groups; reprieve for the Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre (with 50% private funding from a local builder).

There may be a temptation to attribute these successes to effective campaigning  but libraries, where campaigning was most vociferous and got national coverage, are still likely to close. Campaigners are rightly asking how the council can set a budget which assumes their closure before the consultation ended. Cllr Powney tries to answer that point HERE  There are also murmurs amongst some councillors that the reprieves are more to do with the Labour leader's 'pet projects' than pressure from rank and file Labour councillors.

Apart from the library campaigns feeling let down by the Council there is also unhappiness in the Charteris Sports Centre campaign where the Council led them to think there was a possibility of a 'Big Society' option (the Campaign was notably absent from the lobby on Monday)  but they have now been told them the Centre will close at the end of March. The issue of the Council stemming/diverting opposition by dangling 'Big Society' possibilities and then going ahead with closure is likely to rankle for some time. This goes alongside the short-term impact of the Council's barring of the public from  the budget meeting and the joking and bantering behaviour of some councillors during the meeting.

Only one Labour councillor abstained on the budget.  Other potential rebels, as I predicted, were brought into line by the concessions. We need to re-assess our future relationship with Labour councillors and the potential for joint campaigns after Monday's decisions.  In terms of the Labour Party generally there has been little lead from Ed Miliband, or the London-wide party, on fighting the cuts.

As far as school budgets go, in the two schools where I am a governor we have been looking at the budget for 2011-12. As predicted although the budget figures are stable they disguise the fact that more services will now have to be bought in at higher prices and there will also be inflation in the price of resource and utilities. In my schools, because of relatively high numbers of children on free school meals, there is some cushioning from the pupil premium, but schools with lower numbers of FSM will face budgetary constraints and may have to make staff redundant. These are likely to be classroom assistants, school meals supervisors etc. There will also be pressure to employ contractors for cleaning etc, who pay lower hourly rates than the Brent Council rates - without pension contributions and holiday pay.  At a broader level as central services provided by the Council are reduced, cut or charged at higher prices, there are likely to be more calls for schools to end their links with the local authority and apply for academy status.

So we are likely to see  libraries and the Sports Centre being closed at the end of March, some redundancies/non-renewal of contracts in schools from April, and the national measures (VAT increase, child benefit freeze, public sector wage freeze, cuts in childcare element of the Working Tax Credit) kicking in at the start of the new financial year.  The latter will see an increase in child poverty and problems for families in finding the cash to pay rent/mortgages (council rents are also going up). There will also of course be a rise in local unemployment as public sector job losses mount. The Housing Benefit cap does not now come into force until 2012 but already private landlords are serving eviction notices on tenants they anticipate will not be able to afford the  rent under the cap.


The Friends of the Earth meeting is relevant as it brings a wider perspective which raises the issue of the wider economy. There is now a developing consensus that the post-Big Bang domination of the economy by the financial sector must come to an end but the Coalition, with its anti-state intervention stance, has little to say about the necessary re-structuring. Ed Miliband in his speech to the Resolution (not Revolution!) Foundation on February 28th admitted that the Labour Party was wrong not to focus more on the type of economy they were building, the need to 'break out of the low-pay, low-skill cycle' and the need for high quality jobs. He also supported the introduction of a living wage.  We would go further in wanting to discuss the restructuring of the economy to gear it towards sustainability with the creation of skilled, socially worthwhile employment that both combats climate change and tackles inequality and poverty.

The question now is where does the anti-cuts campaign go from here?  What should be our objective/s? How can we be pro-active, putting forward alternatives, rather than be merely reactive?

Three Greens Compete for London Mayor Nomination

The Green Party in London will be selecting its candidate for Mayor over the next two weeks. Here are the candidates' statements (in alphabetical order):

Shahrar Ali
I'm standing for selection as the Greens' Mayoral candidate to provide voters with a strong, Green, alternative to business-as-usual politics. As a lifelong Londoner, I advocate radical, Green solutions to the everyday problems faced by us all. Elected Greens thrive on service to the people, whether by investing in public transport, holding the police to account, or realising sustainable jobs in renewable energy and waste - to promote quality of life for all without harming the planet. There's more to politics than a rerun of the Ken and Boris road show: we need Greens!

I want to get elected not for its own sake, but in order to pursue the Green Party's noble aims. I'm not afraid to take on government administrations, opposition politicians or big business, or to form alliances when strategically necessary.

Siân Berry, the Green Party's Mayoral candidate in 2008, says: "Running for Mayor is tough: it's an uphill battle competing for space and attention with the other candidates. I have no doubt that Shahrar's drive, personality and detailed knowledge of London's issues will do the job of standing out for the Greens and standing up for our values."

Farid Bakht
I want Greens to move beyond their comfort zone and build a coalition around students and young people, the one in three Londoners of foreign origin and over a hundred thousand small businesses starved of credit by banks.

My priority is to widen our appeal to people from all communities including the working class within London". Why is it that white working class people don't generally vote for us?

I want to demolish the myth that we are a white, middle class party interested only in a narrow agenda not in tune with people's everyday lives.

We need to demonstrate we are the real opposition to three very similar parties by playing a central role in the anti-cuts movement.

We need to attract Londoners with our message of environmental and social justice, our humane approach to immigration and our commitment to free education, health and council housing.

Half Basque, half Bengali, and born in Hackney, I was brought up in London. I am married with a nine-year old daughter and live in West London.

Jenny Jones
My vision for London is of a sustainable city with less inequality between rich and poor. To achieve sustainability, we must introduce measures to tame the traffic, create a planning system that enables small businesses to thrive and encourages green measures such as affordable zero carbon housing, develop a single waste authority that rejects incineration, and reduce total carbon emissions by 90% by 2050 with annual targets.

To lessen inequality we must commit to reducing poverty to a less shameful level through policies such as the London Living Wage for all companies, decreasing pay ratio differentials in regional and local government, and increasing affordable housing. This can be done through strong partnership working with the boroughs, and with campaign and community groups, and by lobbying the government to stop tax loopholes and guarantee that the richest pay their fair share of taxes.

Finally we must ensure the police are fully accountable to their communities as well as fully representative. The May 2012 election will be an opportunity for us to explain our alternative to the disastrous cuts programme of the coalition government and explain that going green creates jobs, saves money and protects the planet.

Fury at Council Lock-Out on Cuts Decision Meeting

The Wembley Observer has posted this video of the anti-cuts protest at Brent Town Hall on Monday.

Some interesting (and rather depressing) comments from inside the Council Chamber on the Save Kensal Rise Library blog HERE

Democracy in action? Cuts protesters barred from debate.

A group of protesters entered the Town Hall while others continued to protest outside

I am unable to bring you a report on tonight's Brent Council meeting, which was voting on a cuts package that will seriously damage the people of Brent,  because police barred me, and many others, from attending the meeting of the Council. Admission was by ticket only with a limited number issued. There were empty seats in the chamber and on other occasions the public have been allowed to stand. Not tonight.

I was told by the police that they had been called by the Council and instructed to remove me from the building  (Brent Town Hall)  because I was trespassing.  When I said that I was there to see democracy in action I was told that democracy was voting in elections and protesting was nothing to do with democracy. When I said that I wanted to report on the debate and the arguments for and against the cuts, I was told that it was for the Council to decide whether they wanted their proceedings reported and that Parliament  didn't let the public into all their debates.

Frustrated campaigners continued to protest outside the Council chamber for some time until they left in orderly fashion. They left having made their point that they were not prepared to accept the supine position of Labour councillors who appeared prepared to damage the very people that they had been elected to serve and protect. 

Groups from a variety of campaigns had lobbied outside the Town Hall from 6pm in a good-humoured but determined show of solidarity.

"Those who created the crisis should pay for it" - Caroline Lucas

Caroline Lucas spoke about the cuts and the Green New Deal at the Green Party Conference in Cardiff this weekend.