Principled Kilburn councillor, Abdirazak Abdi, removed from office

 

Cllr Abdirazak Abdi, elected as a Labour councillor but latterly sitting as an independent after action by the Brent Labour Group, has been removed from office Brent councillors have been informed this afternoon.

Cllr Abdi's integrity and his courage in standing up for what he thought was right earned him respect from many but the emnity of Council Leader Muhammed Butt. He follows in the footsteps of former Kilburn councillor John Duffy who was also a thorn in the side of Butt & Co who do not value independence of thought or deed.

The statement sent to councillors said:

I’m writing to inform you that with effect from Tuesday 22 March 2022, Councillor Abdirazak Abdi has ceased to hold office as an elected member of the London Borough of Brent.

Under Section 85 (1) of the Local Government Act 1972 all Members of the Local Authority are required to attend at least one meeting of that Authority within a six month consecutive period to avoid being disqualified from continuing to serve as a councillor.  Unfortunately, as a result of Councillor Abdi not being able to meet this requirement he has now ceased to hold office.  The election to fill this vacancy will be undertaken as part of the local borough elections on Thursday 5 May 2022 and the notice of the vacancy has  been posted today and can be found here: Election notices | Brent Council

 

.

It's the London Borough of Butt! Leader sees off challenge & strengthens his position

The first part of Brent Labour Group's AGM saw Cllr Muhammed Butt easily see off a challenge from Cllr Abdirazak Abdi. Butt got more than twice as many votes as his opponent with fewer than a handful of abstentions.

With the Labour Group officer positions going to members friendly to Butt and appointments for particular Cabinet positions under his control, Labour insiders interpret the result as consolidating Butt's power and patronage, leaving him in perhaps his strongest position  yet since he replaced Ann John in 2012.  

By the next Local Council elections in 2022 he will have been Leader for 10 years having been Ann John's deputy previously.

With only one Liberal Democrat and 3 tame Conservatives in opposition and firm control of his own party, Butt is now likely to lay claim to an outstanding record of political and electoral success.

Perhaps that record will help him move on to other political pastures...

Brent Council brickwalls Cllr Abdi's second complaint against Muhammed Butt

Brent Council's Chief Legal officer, Debra Norman, has turned down Cllr Abdirazak's reformulated complaint against Labour Leader, Cllr Muhammed Butt.

Norman refused the first complaint, breach of Members' Code of Conduct, on the grounds that Butt's actions were a Labour Party issue. Cllr Abdi then issued a second complaint, this time of political interference in the planning process, and Norman again says this is not a Council matter as Butt was operating in his party role:

Your complaint is in essence the same complaint as the previous one.  It remains the case that decisions about nominations to the Labour Group’s allocated seats on the Panning Committee are a party group matter.  Involvement by Cllr Butt in that process was a party group activity and not activity in his capacity as a councillor. 

I can only consider an allegation of political interference in Brent’s planning system by Cllr M Butt on the basis of evidence of actions in his capacity as a councillor.

As indicated in my decision in respect of your complaint, my decision on it was final, as provided for in the council’s procedure for dealing with such complaints.  There is no available appeal or complaint mechanism in relation to that decision.

It now appears that the only route open to Cllr Abdi is through the Labour Party's own disciplinary and complaints procedure.

This may seem to be a storm in a Labour Party tea cup but it has great significance for Brent residents who feel the planning system is out of control with high rise blocks being approved across the borough, often not complying with the borough's own planning guidelines, and in the teeth of opposition from local people.

-->

Leader of Brent Council accused of breaching the Members' Code of Conduct over Planning Committee intervention

 

A previous Butt planning controversy

Whether it is because he is in thrall to the glossy world of developers or  because he suffers from a particularly bad case of Kilburnphobia, it is clear that all is not well with Muhammed Butt.

Behind the scenes the saga of Cllr Abdirazak Abdi’s removal from Brent Council Planning Committee has been burning away, emerging now and then in the Letters column of the Kilburn Times, and has now reached a crucial point. It is widely alleged that Abdi had been removed because he did not vote the ‘right way’, that is the way the Leader expected members to vote, although members on the Planning Committe cannot be whipped.

Cllr Abdi has submitted a Formal Complaint against Cllr Butt for breaching the Members;’ Code of Conduct.

The complaint, which has been seen by members of the Labour Group on Brent Council, sets out the background to the issue in detail and was sent to Debra Norman, Brent Council’s Chief Legal Officer.

I believe Cllr M Butt has breached the following Principles of Conduct in Public Life.

1. Objectivity. Failure to consult on the reasons why Cllr Abdi needed to be removed from the Planning Committee with Labour Group officers/Steering group in accordance with Labour Group standing orders.

2. Objectivity. The decision to remove Cllr Abdi from the Planning Committee cannot be justified based on the reasons provided by Cllr M Butt on 09 July 2018 and on the available information. Cllr Abdi is one of only two members on the Planning Committee who was not serving on any other committee (at the time). While 16 Councillors serve on 2 or more committees,11 serve on 3 committees and 5 serve on 4 or more committees.

3. Objectivity/openness. The justification given to Cllr Abdi by Cllr M Butt on 09 July, is not rational. If the purpose was to make sure all councillors serve on committees, why remove Cllr Abdi from the only committee he was on? (at the time).

4. Objectivity/Honesty/Openness. Cllr M Butt did not disclose the full reasons for the removal of Cllr Abdi from the Planning Committee (Please see emails on 09^th/ 27^th July 2018 from Cllr M Butt). This can be seen as misleading for not disclosing this information at the time. Breach of the rules of natural justice, right to be heard. Cllr Abdi was not given the evidence against him and even had Cllr Butt’s allegations against him been justified, Cllr Abdi was not given an opportunity to respond and challenge or develop in the role, before being removed from the Planning Committee.

5. Leadership. Lack of leadership for breaching the members’ Code of Conduct.

Muhammed Butt initially stated that Cllr Abdi had been removed from Planning Committee to make room for one of the new Willesden Green councillors elected in the by-election after the full council elections.  He said at the time that he thought Abdi was on another committee.

After protests Butt wrote to Cllr Abdi changing his grounds in a letter that manages to be both insulting and patronising accusing his colleague of posturing and pandering (to the public?) and threatening him with the Code of Conduct. Furthermore he brings council officers into the dispute sugegsting that they had ‘grave concerns’ over Abdi’s conduct. At one point he appears to suggest that councillors have to follow ‘prevailing expert guidance’ on planning issues. Does this mean the Committee should always rubber-stamp officers’ recoemmendations?

Dear Abdi,

I thought it would be helpful to try and clear up the mess that we find ourselves in.

Obviously we are at odds with regard to the recent change in your Planning Committee membership status. As Leader I have a number of obligations. In this instance I was caught between protecting this administration, and helping you, as a new member of Labour Group, avoid public embarrassment. In appointing you to Planning Committee I had hoped that you would take full advantage of the many opportunities available to grow into the role. Instead, it quickly became apparent that you were not prepared for the responsibility, nor willing to accept the multiple offers of impartial help and advice. Senior officers, committee colleagues, and experienced observers alike all expressed grave concerns about your conduct. In taking unsubstantiated positions on numerous applications, counter to prevailing expert guidance, and in failing to properly prepare for meetings, you were exposing yourself and this organisation to justifiable claims of bias, predetermination, and incompetence, not to mention reputational damage.

Your actions since have only served to reinforce my fears that you do not yet understand your role. For example, in making internal Group matters public you have broken party rules. And, in condoning your branch’s potentially libellous motion, you have exposed yourself to civil action. However, given the circumstances, I do not think it appropriate to take formal action. Indeed, I think it would be wise to put this down to naivety and inexperience, albeit on the proviso that any further such conduct will not be tolerated. Please understand that you have a mandate from the people of Kilburn, are governed by the rules of our party, and must adhere to this council’s code of conduct. As a result you have an obligation to do more than posture or panda to a vocal if ill-informed minority.

On reflection, I should have been explicit on the need for this change. I realise that you were caught off-guard by the speed with which things occurred. While the same cannot be said for your subsequent actions, I can see now that your immediate reaction was understandably indignant. With the benefit of hindsight I am sure we could have gotten to this point without incident and I apologise for not having found another way forward. I do believe that you have what it takes to be an effective local councillor and a valuable member of Labour Group. You are clearly a keen and well intentioned advocate as evident in your already impressive casework record, which is why it is such a shame that we have started out on this poor footing.

I hope you understand that, as an official substitute, you have the opportunity to redeem yourself on Planning Committee and moving forward any other committee, and that you will now avail yourself of the support and advice available. In the meantime, I’d be very grateful if you’d consider becoming a member of Brent’s Pension Board. You’d be tasked with overseeing the management of hundreds of millions of pounds of investments on behalf of this organisation’s past, present, and future employees. While the board meets quarterly, given the subject matter, I’m sure you can appreciate that a lot of interesting and important work goes on in between. If that sounds like something you’d be interested in, do please let me know.

In closing, if you ever want to talk anything through on this or any other matter you will always find my door open.

Cllr Abdirazak responded: 

Thank you for your email on 27 July 2018, explaining your decision on09 July 2018 to remove me from the Planning Committee. I am writing to reapond to your accusations and to again provide my view of why I was removed from the Planning Committee.

I would like to make several observations and comments on the allegations you make in your email, ‘it quickly became apparent that you were not prepared for the responsibility, nor willing to accept the multiple offers of impartial help and advice. Senior officers, committee colleagues and experienced observers alike all expressed grave concerns about your conduct. In taking unsubstantiated positions on numerous applications, counter to prevailing expert guidance, and in failing to properly prepare for meetings, you were exposing yourself and this organisation to justifiable claims of bias, predetermination and incompetence, not to mention reputational damage.’

Comments: The timing and context of these new accusations, you are making are very convenient, considering the following:

On 09 July 2018 when you first informed me of your decision, you said there following, “we are making quite a few changes on committees today right and er I am going to make you an alternate on planning right, because I need to put Elliot Chappell and three of the new councillors on committees. I am making those changes right” I objected and I said “I am not happy” and you said “You’re on scrutiny as well”. I said “No” and then I followed up by saying “you do what you have to do and I will do what I have to do but I am not happy with it and I am not going to accept it”. You provided a clear and explicit reason for your decision to make a change on the planning committee above, and you are now providing a completely different reason without any substantiating evidence, it seems like you are trying to cover up the faults of your original decision to remove me from the planning committee.

The subsequent revised reason you provided on your e-mail dated 27 July, explaining your decision to remove me from the planning committee, was made after I made my accusations of the possibility of political interference in the planning process. In an e-mail sent to labour group members on 09 July 2018 at 17:44. This further explanation was provided after you had already provided a reason (above) and after three weeks had elapsed from your decision on 09 July 2018.

In response to your accusation ‘nor willing to accept the multiple offers of impartial help and advice’. I did not receive any offers of help, advice or guidance as claimed. Further no one, either the Chair, deputy Chair, committee members or officers, discussed or made any concerns known to me about my decision-making or preparedness on the planning committee. I would appreciate any evidence or communications that you have in this regard.

In fact, on 16 May 2018 after the mandatory planning committee training session I expressed concerns to the deputy Chair of the planning committee, about you and Shama Tatler’s conduct. On 16 May 2018 We had a mandatory training session on planning. Please see my account of the training session. ‘The session was led by Alice Leicester Head of Planning and David Glover a senior planning Officer. The Lead member for regeneration, Shama Tatler also significantly contributed, and raised new points while elaborating on the points in the training. She sat next to the lead officers. I felt this was inappropriate as this training was tainted by the political agenda of the leadership in the council. Half way through the same training session Cllr Muhammad Butt came in and sat down, next to the other members, he opened his tablet computer and began to look at the tablet screen and type on his keyboard, throughout the session. He was not there to learn, which was obvious to me from his actions but to pressure members to fully accept and act on the information that was being imparted on to us. I felt this was inappropriate as the planning committee is independent and members were being influenced towards a certain political agenda.

Every decision I took on the planning committee, I made based on material planning considerations, as the committee approved all these decisions. I was not asked and neither did I provide explicit reasons for voting in any particular way. 

It seems like you are making an implicit suggestion that officers’ recommendations have to always be accepted, in response to your suggestion. What is the purpose of having a planning committee, if we always have to approve the officers’ recommendations?

I would like to also make this further observation about the lead member for regeneration Shama Tatler. On 25 June 2018, we had a Planning committee members’ briefing from developers looking to submit their planning applications. The lead member for regeneration, Shama Tatler, sat in on part, of this briefing. Her presence was not helpful as she was neither a committee member nor a substitute and because it could dissuade members from asking questions and being open to raise issues early on in the process, so the developers can amend their applications. 

In short, I believe I was removed from the planning committee because I voted against planning applications favoured by you and Shama Tatler and not for the reasons currently claimed; lack of capability, ineptitude or lack of preparedness. If these reasons provided were true, then there would be concrete evidence that these issues, mentioned above, were brought to my attention, an opportunity provided for me to refute or comment, and if needed a development plan put in place. There is no evidence of any of these steps being taken and this is a convenient reason provided to defend against the accusations I’ve made.

Leak in pensioner's flat spreads into sitting room

As councillors gather for tonight's Full Council, meeting I have just heard from John Healy that the saga of his flooded flat on South Kilburn Estate continues.  Despite the best efforts by Cllrs Long and Abdi, discussion at last week's Housing Scrutiny Meeting and visits from housing officers and Wates, the leak has not yet been repaired.

John tells me hat the leak is still in the kitchen but in a worsening of his situation has now spread into his living room as well.

He says that nobody from the council has been in touch today even though on Friday they said they would contact him today to offer him temporary accommodation.

I really did hope for better from Brent Housing now that it has been brought back in-house. The Council took over from BHP on the 27th September, 2017 promising big improvements in their performance targets, especially regarding repairs.

Latest on pensioner without power in Brent Council flat for 10 days

The case of pensioner John Healy who has spent 10 days without power in his flat at Dunbar House on South Kilburn Estate has been taken up by Cllr Janice Long and will be raised at Housing Scrutiny Committee tonight and Cllr Abdirazak Abdi is also pursuing the issue with the Council.

Nadia Khan, Communications and Marketing Manager at Brent Housing Management has emailed me for details and promised to look into the matter first thing tomorrow.

Meanwhile John has written to me late this afternoon:

Hi Martin, it has still not been repaired and it may be a long time before it is.

I spoke with Marc, the council's surveyor face to face in the South Kilburn office and he says they think the leak is on the 'dry riser', which is located between flats.

Oakray have restored my heating and microwave but they say not to use them until the Wate's electrician has checked them over and he has not arrived yet.

Kilburn Labour Party is standing up for democracy on behalf of local people

There was a pretty astonishing letter in last week's Brent and Kilburn Times. It came from Paul Scott, Secretary of the Kilburn (Brent) Labour Party and was about the sacking of Cllr Abdirazak Abdi, a Kilburn Labour Councillor, from the Brent Planning Committee.

Scott pulled no punches:

Cllr Abdi Abdirazak, a newly-elected Kilburn councillor, was sacked from Brent Planning Committee on July 9 by the Brent council leader (“Sacked for voting the wrong way”).

Cllr Abdi and the Kilburn Labour Party believe this happened because he “voted the wrong way” on a number of planning applications, but our attempts to find out more have failed because the council leader Cllr Muhammed Butt has refused to answer questions at local meetings, and has so far not responded to my invitation to discuss the background.

Instead he has ducked, dived and backtracked (at one point asserting that Cllr Abdi was on another committee – not true).

The bigger issue here is not how one council leader can avoid accountability, but about ensuring Brent’s committee appointments are transparent and accountable to the electorate.

If an elected councillor, representing local residents can be removed from a committee against his will and with no satisfactory explanation, how can we be sure this isn’t how many our Brent committees are managed – with a disregard for accountability and due process?

Clearly the whole Brent committee system needs a close look – this latest incident is worrying for local democracy.

I warned before the local election that Brent was in danger of becoming a 'one party state' with Cllr Butt gathering even more power to himself.  His antipathy towards Kilburn showed itself in his dealings with Cllr John Duffy who asked too many well-researched awkward questions about the running of the council's waste services and Cllr Butt's dealing with developers and he has been impatient with Labour Party members who lived on South Kilburn Estate who pursued issues over the regeneration and in particular the Council's decision to persuade HS2 to locate a vent shaft next to housing and a primary school, rather than on more suitable land next to Queens Park station.

Although Paul Scott says the bigger issue is not how one council leader can avoid accountability,  his description of Cllr Butt's ducking, diving and backtracking is exactly what Brent residents have encountered, particularly notable in his dealings with the Stonebridge community over the closure of Stonebridge Adventure Playground.

Butt looked unassailable after his crushing of other parties at the Council election  and it is to the credit of Kilburn Labour Party that there are at least some members who are prepared to talk truth to power.  They deserve our support whether we belong to another political party or are not a member of any. 

In the absence of any effective opposition on the Council they are standing up for us.



 

Hampstead and Kilburn CLP back Abdirazak over sacking from Planning Committee

The proposed Ark Primary School to be built on the York Hopuse car park

Last night Hampstead and Kilburn Constituency Labour Party overwhelmingly backed a motion submitted by Kilburn (Brent) branch on the sacking of Cllr Abdirazak Abdi from Brent Planning Committee.

The resolution sets out the background and concurs with an opinion voiced on this blog that the Report submitted to the Full Council Meeting stating that Cllr Abdi had resigned was untrue. The amounts to misleading councillors and the public.

This branch/CLP/LCF notes:

Abdirazak Abdi, a recently elected first-time Kilburn Brent Councillor, has voted on eleven planning applications since being on the planning committee of Brent Council since May. He voted against four of the eleven applications because of material planning considerations. As a conscientious Councillor he is doing his best to promote truly sustainable development in Brent. The four developments he voted against include:

* An application to build a 630 pupil primary school on the busy Wembley Hill Road connecting Wembley Central and Wembley Park with a rooftop playground and concerns around air pollution;

* An application for a part 21 and a part 15 storey housing block in Wembley, criticised  by local residents, and also queried by Sadiq Khan's office for containing too little `affordable' housing especially as the scheme received public funding;

On the afternoon of Monday 9th July Cllr Abdi was informed by the leader of Brent Council that he was being removed from the Planning Committee. This was transparently because he was not endorsing decisions approved by the leader.

His removal from planning committee went ahead at full Council that evening despite objections from Abdi (including at the full Council meeting) and his Labour Party branch secretary.

The Council record states that Abdi "resigned" from the planning committee, which is blatantly untrue.

We call for:

Brent Labour Group to reinstate Cllr Abdi to the planning committee as a matter of urgency;

Brent Labour Group to instigate democratic procedures for decisions on committee places and to put an end to the current patronage, which could be interpreted as political interference in planning decisions.

[Resolution to be sent to Brent Central and Brent North CLPs, Brent LCF and all members of Brent Council Labour Group]

[LCF is Local Campaign Forum, a Party body with delegates from all 3 CLPs in the borough (and from the Labour Group]

For additional information, Abdi was told he was being taken off planning to make way for one of the Councillors elected in the late Willesden Green election. Abdi was only on one committee (planning), this is the breakdown for others: 

Excluding leader, deputy leader and members on the cabinet.

5 councillors not appointed to serve on any committtee

16 councillors only serve on 1 committee
14 councillors serve on 2 committees;
11 councillors serve on 3 committees; and
5 serve on  4 or more committees;

-->

Cllr Abdirazak loses his place on Brent Planning Committee

UPDATE Cllr Abdirazak Abdi WAS replaced on the Planning Committee by a vote of Brent Council last night. The item was moved up the Agenda and taken before his fellow Kilburn councillors arrived in the chamber.

Below posted before the Council Meeting

I understand that Brent Council's Labour Leader is set to remove Cllr Abdirazak Abdi from the Planning Committee at tonight's meeting of Brent Council.

Cllr Abdi has proved to have a mind of his own on the Committee and voted against several planning applications.  Councillors on the Committee are of course supposed to be independent of political decisions but unfortunately Abdirazak's independence appears to have displeased 'The Leader', who is quoting the need to find committeee places for the recently elected Willesden Green councillors as the pretext for the removal.
 
As several Labour councillors hold a number of committeee positions this does not hold much water. Abdi is only on one committee.

Butt's decision has to be ratified by this afternoon's  Labour Group meeting which precedes Full Council.

Cllr Andi is due to be replaced by Cllr Elliot Chappel, newly elected for Willesden Green. LINK

Cllr Abdirazak Abdi represents Kilburn ward where Cllr Duffy was previously councillor. Duffy famously stood up to be counted over a number of issues including Paddington Cemetery asbestos and the Council's waste policy.

ADDITION

The Secretary of the Kilburn (Brent) branch of the Hampstead and Kilburn CLP has now written to Brent Labour Group Executive members about the issue:

To executive members, Brent Labour Group

As secretary of Kilburn (Brent) Labour Party branch, I'm appalled to hear that Councillor Abdi Abdirazak is being removed from his position on the planning committee of Brent Council, and at such short notice that it will be ratified at the Council meeting this evening.

Although the pretext appears to be to make room for the newly elected Willesden Green Councillors, this is clearly not the case, since Abdi is only on one committee whereas there are councillors on several who could have made way.

It is clear that Abdi is being "punished" for voting "the wrong way" on the planning committee. Abdi reported to our branch last week on his work on planning committee and had the support of the branch.

On behalf of the branch, I ask that you withdraw this proposal.

We will be discussing this at our Branch EC meeting and will decide what further action needs to be taken; I would therefore welcome an early reply so that this can be taken into account.

UPDATED A new face selected for Kilburn ward and the possible return of an old one in Willesden Green - Margaret McLennan rejected

Faduma Hassan

The first results are coming in for the selection of Labour candidates for the 2018 Brent Council Elections.  In Kilburn ward Rita Conneely and newcomers Abdirazak Abdi  and Corbyn supporter Faduma Hassan have been selected.

This leaves John Duffy, who has been extremely active in holding the Brent Cabinet to account, unselected in his current ward. I understand there are still some wards where short-listing is still open.

Elsewhere,  I understand that the architect of the 'Library Transformation Project, which saw 6  of Brent's 12 libraries closed, James Powney, has been short-listed for Willesden Green.  Powney has continued to hail the 'success' of that project on his blog but  has also used it to critique some Brent Council decisions as well as the leadership of Councillor Butt. LINK

Following rejection by Stonebridge ward last night local party members are asking if Deputy Leader Margaret McLennan will go back to seek selection in Northwick Park.  I understand Abdi Aden (currently Sudbury)and newcomer Promise Knight have been selected for Stonebridge. Ernest Ezeajughi has been reselected. Promise describes herself as a mentor and educator and previously worked as as campaign assistant to Dawn Butler and was one of David Miliband's communication team.

A reader has also been in touch to say that he understands all three sitting Queensbury councillors have been short-listed..