Brent Council apologises for Friday's email data breach - investigation underway

Alan Lunt, Brent Council's Strategic Director for Regeneration and Environment has written to the 970 recipients of Friday's email apologising for the data breach.

He said:

Please accept my apologies for the sending of an email on Friday regarding the consultation on the Neasden Stations Growth Area SPD, which showed email addresses when they should have been hidden. This was a human error. This security incident is being investigated by the data protection team.

We are reviewing our practice and process, in addition to exploring with IT ways of ensuring that this type of error cannot happen again.

The vast majority of emails recipients are for companies, stakeholders and staff and consequently we have assessed the risks to you in terms of any data mis-use as low.

Former Liberal Democrat councillor, Alison Hopkins, who was one of the recipients of Friday's email has replied to Mr Lunt:

I note that I have had no response to my formal complaint to Brent's DPO (Data Protection Officer)

I have spoken to the ICO (Information Commissioner's Office) this morning and consider your response to be wholly inadequate. They concur and I am raising a formal complaint with them.

Your statement that the risk to me is "low" is a dismissive brush off. It is presumably based on Brent's opinion, rather than any proven and sound foundation, and as such legally remains merely your opinion rather than any properly tested fact.

As someone with decades in IT and considerable experience of GDPR and safeguarding practice, the risk is considerably more than "low". Given the seriousness of the original "error", how am I to trust any assessment you have made, especially as you have given no detail of how this conclusion was reached?

I have no knowledge of the companies, stakeholders and staff you refer to, their credentials or probity. In any event, this statement is not acceptable under GDPR rules.

Brent Council and Shepherds Bush Housing Group shamed by neglect of Prospect House residents who are face eviction - action needed now!

 

Prospect House

The front entrance

Guest post by Selina, a resident of Prospect House about the issue that has galvanised social media in the past few days. See Kilburn Times coverage HERE.  The families are faced with eviction with no apparent help from Brent Council or Shepherds Bush Housing Group. See former councillor Alison Hopkins' post on the scandolous background to this issue HERE.

 

Selina writes:

The squalor office conversion flat BrenCouncil  dumped 17 families into meant, from the day myself and my son moved, in it has been one nightmare after another living here. 

The area is infested with rats, half the time and even up until now we have no hot water or heating.  We are constantly having to chase up Shepherd’s Bush Housing Group who are working for the private landlord of the property. 

Sometimes we have no running water from any of the taps for more than one day at a time. We shouldn’t have to face this in the U.K.

The property is located on the busy North Circular Road we are constantly faced with noise pollution and air pollution. 

The entrance gate is constantly broken so anyone from the streets walks into our car park and sometimes are flats' communal area. The other day a tenant was faced with a group of youths loitering around our flat communal stairway.  We should be able to feel safe. 

We are all being faced with eviction and  quite frankly I am happy to say good riddance to this building but my main concern and stress is where are all 17 families being rehoused?  Brent Council seems to be offering tenants little help and no options. Private letting landlords do not want DSS tenants or ask for high income guarantors which tenants cannot provide. so what are we left with little option and no response from Brent . 

Our eviction notice is up on May 23rd 2021 where are all 17 families going by that date, which will be fast approaching?

Some of the story on Twitter:

 

 

Flagship project? On the curious case of Prospect House, NW10 7GH - guest article by Alison Hopkins

 

 Prospect House

Yesterday former Brent Liberal Democrat councillor, Alison Hopkins, published a thread of intruiging tweets on the goings on around Prospect House in Brent - a conversion from offices to accommodation.

Recently Brent Council has adopted a policy of opposition to such conversions as the resulting accommodation is often of poor quality and low space standards.

Alison has kindly given me permission to publish her the thread as a guest post on Wembley Matters.

It reminds me of a children's book I used to use in class: 'Why are there more questions than answers, Grandad?'

On the curious case of Prospect House, NW10 7GH. How flagship Brent Council/Shepherds Bush Housing Association housing project seems to end with evictions and very strange finances.

 

It starts with a story about nurse being evicted from social housing in Prospect House. Brent Council refuses to comment. ALL tenants to be kicked out by 23 May 2021. She's scared of temporary housing. I get that. But why the mass evictions by Brent? So, I dig. I like digging.

 

Find this, back in 2016. Shepherds Bush Housing Association & Brent Council proudly proclaim Prospect House converted to social housing paid for with lotsa cash from the Councils Empty Property Grants LINK   Leader and Mayor are there. It's FAB they say.

 

Link to publicity puff LINK

 

Apparently, office block owner Ashok Kumar Vohra contacted Brent. (This is all public domain stuff, btw.) He runs Sonal Trading who seem to refurbish ink cartridges. (!).  LINK. Seems to dabble in property development on the side.

 

Anyhow, perhaps this is all spiffy. But perhaps not: yes, this is Socialist Worker, talking about HEY, Prospect House!  LINK

All seems not well, despite the vast amount presumably spent on converting the offices to housing.

Now, we then look back at Sonal Trading & find it is a teeny company making not a lot of money, but yet had significant ownership by a Dubai based washing machine sales company from at least 2012. I do love Companies House.

 

In June 2020, the washing machine sales company seem to relinquish their holding and a new chap takes over 75 percent. Jagan Nath, who also seems to be Dubai based.This may all be irrelevant, but it's damn interesting if you've a mind like mine.

 

So, what happens next. By 2020, of course, the owners have had substantial rents. Let's say, oh, four years at £300 a week for 17 flats. Over a million? That empty property grant is, by the way, supposed to mean commitment of FIVE years social renting. Remember, December 2016.

 

The plot thickens. Still with me? Five years from Dec 2016 would be December 2021, yet the tenants are being evicted in MAY 2021. Hm. My suspicious evil mind kicks in again. Might there be a planning application.....?

 

Well, whoopie doo. Guess what happens in FEBRUARY 2017. Yup, three months after the presumed start of that FIVE YEAR commitment! This: 

Flats 1-17 INC and 18 Prospect House North

 

A planning application to add 4 storeys & redevelop Prospect House into 28 flats! It gets approved Oct 2018, DESPITE multiple breaches of policy. Yup, you guessed it: minimal affordable and minimal family accommodation. This is Brent, isn't it. Bear with me, I'm still going.

 

The officers report at para 15 makes cursory mention of the tenant decant costs, the cost of breaking five year lease & "repaying grants". That's the excuse used to justify not sticking with policy on affordable & family units.

 

There's also a throwaway about SBHA using units for "homeless" people. Yet, the existing tenants are being evicted, so will be homeless. Hm. The CIL amount is pretty low: £750K .

 

Oh and that CIL amount is BEFORE any reliefs for affordable units. The planning application was made by a company called Planning Co-operative in Ealing. Run by the former Brent head of New Investment & Policy & Projects.

 

Anyhow. The original conversion from offices to flats would now probably not get consent. I do know of other applications for the empty property grant related to offices which got bounced, too. Oddly, I can't find the original planning application.

 

So. We've tenants evicted from what seems to have become an unpleasant block rather fast. By a housing association. I can't find decant plans either.

 

We've a tiny company who had significant grants from Brent to convert offices to housing & lots of rental income. How much was the grant? Has it been paid back?

 

Why is Brent being so coy about commenting on Prospect House? How much due diligence was done? Why was there a redevelopment planning application almost as soon as the place was occupied? When did the pre application discussions happen?

 

Found the address, the place changed name & postcode. NW10 7SH. A chequered history: tried to convert to a college, then hotel. But the original successful application from offices to housing isn't there, so no financial details like CIL.

 

Now, there may be good reasons and explanations for evictions. I'd love to hear them. Transparency=good governance. The more I dig this, more convoluted it gets. I've my opinions on how planning is now manipulated.

Hello Barnet Council, anyone there? Can you hear us? Do you keep your promises? Yes, we're from Brent but we also matter...

Ex-Liberal Democrat councillor, Alison Hopkins, has written to Barnet CouncilChief Executive after officers and others have failed to keep their promises to makie contact:


Dear Mr Hooton

I am writing to you as a former Brent councillor and organiser of a major residents organisation in Dollis Hill in Brent. I am also Co-ordinator of the Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood Regeneration. 

Over the past several years, I and many other residents have attended consultation and engagement meetings about the Brent Cross redevelopment, as many of us are seriously worried about its impact here. 

On each occasion, we have raised concerns and issues, and then followed those up in writing. Each time, we have been faithfully promised contact by officers from Barnet, and staff from Capita and G L Hearn. Most recently, we attended a session at Crest Academy, were we were told contact would be forthcoming within days. Despite numerous phone calls, emails and contacts with Barnet, Soundings, and G L Hearn, there has been NO engagement from yourselves. 

We simply want answers to the questions we have repeatedly raised and we want officers to meet with us and explain why certain decisions have been taken. Frankly, Barnet’s attitude comes across as dismissive of a neighbouring borough and its people at the very least. It is discourteous and shows no empathy with how deeply worried people here are for their future wellbeing and our environment. 

Can you please ask your officers to make contact, and keep their many promises over the past years? I do intend to raise formal complaints if needed, as well as utilising those contacts I have within the London Assembly, as well as local and national media. However, I would like to offer Barnet a chance to put matters right.

Alison Hopkins

-->

Alison Hopkins rages against the machines - both mechanical and political!

Former Liberal Democrat councillor and Dollis Hill resident Alison Hopkins has reacted angrily to Sadiq Khan's decision to allow the Cricklewood Aggregate Superhub to go ahead.
In a statement for Wembley Matters she said:

This just shows that protests by some Brent councillors to the Mayor of London were simply grandstanding in the run up to the election: those photos of them wearing facemasks were a stunt. When Brent Labour realised the depth of fury at the proposals for both the aggregate terminal (Cricklewood Superhub) and the waste transfer facility (WTF), Cllr Butt hastily asked Barnet to arrange a so-called “consultation” meeting at the Crown, earlier this year. But, Brent councillors had ALREADY had presentations from Barnet about how wonderful Brent Cross would be back in October 2017! They didn’t bother telling any residents about the WTF planning application though – and there have been far too many cosy behind the scenes meeting between both the Leaders of both councils and senior officers, as well as with developers. 

Sadiq Khan is the latest Mayor of London not to support people in Brent, Barnet and Camden who oppose the Brent Cross “Regeneration” and the resulting mess. Livingstone lauded it, Boris approved it and Sadiq has rolled over in front of the juggernaut that is Hammersons and the Brent Cross developers. There’s far too much cosiness in all this. Originally, for example, the North London Waste Authority objected to moving their WTF to “our” side of the tracks. . They suddenly withdrew ALL objections at the last possible moment . I've done several FoI requests since, but they are evasive as hell on the subject. Add in the fact that the developers have consistently been mendacious about so called consultations and the results of said consultations and you’ve the perfect storm. 

As I’ve said before, those of us who live on the edges of Brent and Barnet are ignored by our respective councils. In Dollis Hill we could end up being the filling in a sandwich of rubbish dump and aggregate terminal. 

For Brent, it’s all about Wembley. And shops. For Barnet, it's all about Brent Cross. And shops. Not much difference between them, is there? 

I've asked Barnet Council when the WTF will go to their Planning Committee, but they’re being very evasive on that. The recent rubber stamping of what’s known as the Brent Cross CPO3 – Compulsory Purchase Order 3 – by the Secretary of State might have been a very different matter if there had been real political opposition from Brent councillors and MPs. But instead, what happened was active support by Brent for road layout changes which will have an appalling impact on people in Dollis Hill and Cricklewood. 

But then, I’ve an email from one from one councillor who thinks the WTF isn't that bad – and during the elections, Labour canvassers and councillors simply didn’t know the difference between the aggregate terminal and the WTF. One of them actually told me that the WTF had been given planning permission by Paul Lorber. (!) They also consistently told local people that it was far too late to stop the dump or the aggregate terminal. That really wasn’t the case, but it would have taken real political will and challenge which seems to have vanished entirely. 

Both the WTF and aggregate super hub are a disaster for us all. It's also appalling that what used to be a cross party and almost all party campaign against the so-called Brent Cross regeneration  is now not. This transcends party politics and ought to have had proper opposition from Brent and from local MPs as it once did. Navin and both Carolines are honourable exceptions in all this, as are the local Greens, but who is actually standing up for us?

-->

Metropolitan Housing respond to Archery Court concerns

Alison Hopkins has now received a reponse from  Metropolitan Housing regarding the concerns she raised over conditions at Archery Court, Wembley that were publicised on Wembley Matters. LINK

Dear Ms Hopkins

Thank you for your emails to Geeta Nanda, Chief Executive Officer received on 15 and 28 December 2017 Geeta was concerned to note the continuing difficulties residents in Archery Court are experiencing at this time. She has asked this team to look into your concerns and to feedback to her.

I firstly must offer our sincere apologies for our failure to respond to your earlier communication of 15 December 2017. Whilst it is evident there has been a lot of work carried out by ourselves and Barratt Homes it has become apparent that we did not take the opportunity to update you personally. I agree that this is disappointing, and we will be seeking to understand why such a fundamental part of the process was overlooked.

It is vital that we do not lose sight of any unresolved issues moving forward, and as such I have recorded your concerns as an official complaint, as this will enable us to keep track and, more importantly, keep you appraised. A formal acknowledgement will follow in due course.

In the interim, I wish to advise you of the action taken thus far:

·         A number of residents reported individual failures of electrical items in their homes to the concierge on duty at Archery Court on 09 December 2017. This appears to be the consequence of a power surge;

·         I understand that Barratt Homes, our developers, visited Archery Court over the weekend of 09/10 December 2017 in response to these reports and to effect repairs. I believe there were staff from Barratt Homes present to address any immediate concerns residents had during this weekend;

·         As a consequence of the significant numbers of electrical problems being experienced by a number of residents, helpfully summarised by yourself, we identified we should carry out emergency electrical checks of each flat to ensure there were no ongoing concerns, this being over and above what Barratt Homes were doing. These checks did not reveal any immediate risks;

·         We provided temporary heaters to those residents who had lost use of their heating, again over and above what Barratt Homes were doing;

·         I was particularly concerned to note from your email today that one resident has no hot water Barratt Homes have attended the flat in question today and diagnosed a fault with the programmer, a consequence of the power surge. I understand a similar scenario occurred in other residents’ homes and programmers have been replaced. Please be assured we are now working with the resident and with Barratt Homes to ensure a replacement is fitted as quickly as possible;

·         Barratt Homes are currently carrying out further investigative work to identify any ongoing faults with the communal heating/ventilation system, and we are liaising closely with them to understand the current position, and to establish what the next steps will be to resolve this. We should have a clearer understanding of the position early next week.

I agree that consideration needs to be given to how each resident has been affected by recent events, and as such we will consider the impact on a case by case basis, based upon the information you provided on 15 December 2017 to identify the support we are able to offer.

If you are aware of any other residents who experienced difficulties or damaged electrical items, please do let me know.

We will contact each resident affected in due course.

In summary I believe that appropriate steps have been taken as quickly as they can, but acknowledge there remain some issues which are still under investigation, and more importantly some concerns residents have about losses they may have incurred.

I am amenable to discussing your concerns further. I was unable to locate a contact number for you, but I can be reached on the direct number below this afternoon before 6pm.

Metropolitan Housing and Barratt Homes fail to rectify dangerous conditions in Wembley social housing block

Ex local councillor Alison Hopkins has decided to go public regarding dangerous conditions in new build social housing managed by Metropolitan Housing and built by Barratt Homes after Metropolitan Housing failed to respond to urgent concerns.

Hopkins said:

Residents  got in touch with me as I am their former local councillor. The flats are new build and have been plagued with faults since their first occupation.

 

Over the past months, they have had serious and dangerous issues with the power supply to the flats. Given the Grenfell event, they are extremely worried. Many of the families have special needs children. Some have no heating or only temporary and inadequate heating.

 

The following is a summary of issues raised so far: they have been collated today by a resident knocking on the doors of those at home.  These issues require urgent and immediate action from Metropolitan and Barratt's.

 

Archery Court HA9 0FR – issues to date. Each is a different flat

• communal  antenna not working.
• just temporary heating meaning they have no control on the heating, the ventilation system is not working, washing machine (with clothes still in it) so she has to foot the bill of buying school uniforms again, when she turns on the washing machine it blows the electricity in the entire flat. She has 5 children ages 15,13,10,6 and a 3 month old baby.
• this lady had an issue with her electricity since the end of November, she went without heating for 1 1/2 weeks her electric box trips out she calls them (metropolitan housing repairs) every time she has an issue an and they tell her that’s she’s always complaining and why is it her flat alone that have these issues... she has 3 children age 12, 9,and 6 The 12 year old is wheel chair bound with special needs and is home schoole
• washing machine, dryer, all mobile phone chargers are blown, internet box has blown and heating is not working along with the ventilation system too. She has 2 children age 5 and 6 months her son is also special needs. They have also told her that they will not reimburse her the money that she used to stay at a hotel in which I might add we were told to go to a hotel and we would be reimbursed!!
• heating is temporary ie. has not control over the heating other than turning it off completely if it gets too hot, has no ventilation system at all, expensive laptop charger and iPad charger too blown, sound system blown and coffee machine blown too 
• fridge not working and will be calling the insurance people today and just found out last night that have an electrical problem with my heating in the front room!!!!
• cooker timer not working children’s DVD player is blown.
• heating is temporary, no ventilation system.  
•  living room heating is not working and ventilation system not working. Her son was stuck in the lift for 20mins!!!
• ventilation not working but has terrible damp an mould in a cupboard also a leak in the bedroom however we all had a visit from our housing officer November 30th which she reported but metropolitan told her they have to wait on Barratt's permission to do some cut in the wall!!! And to investigate the other flat!!!

 

 

NWLA's 'totally inadequate' response on why they changed their mind on the Cricklewood dump

Further to the question posted in my last post regarding the Cricklewood dump and the North London Waste Authority’s original opposition to the resiting: ‘Has anything changed?’
Here is Alison Hopkins’ request to the NWLA asking why they had changed their position and the (‘totally inadequate’ according to Alison) response:

I am writing to you as a resident of Brent – Dollis Hill, to be specific – and the former ward councillor here.  I have also submitted evidence to the Public Inquiry held this week into CPO3.
The NLWA submitted a most comprehensive objection to the CPO orders. Your statement included many of the issues which we living here have with the proposed Geron Way site, including those related to traffic, environmental issues and very close proximity to an infants school and houses. 

I am told by the Clerk to the Inquiry that the NLWA has withdrawn its objection. If this is the case, then this is deeply disappointing and extremely worrying. Residents here have opposed the resiting since it was first proposed back in the early 2000s. 

Could you please inform us why the NLWA has withdrawn its objection? The problems with the proposed Geron Way/Selco site have not gone away, and as a public body, we believe the NLWA has a duty of care to Brent residents. Moving the current WTF to the proposed site directly conflicts with that duty and is not in the public interest. 

From NLWA:

NWLA and LondonEnergy Ltd have agreed terms with the London Borough of Barnet for the provision by the London Borough of Barnet of a new waste transfer station at Geron Way, NW2. Given that the Authority has now been offered an acceptable replacement, we have withdrawn our objection to the London Borough of Barnet’s application for a compulsory purchase order that included the current Hendon transfer station. It is currently expected that the new waste transfer station will be ready early in 2020.

Why NLWA originally opposed the resiting of the Cricklewood dump - has anything changed?

In her submission to Barnet Council on the proposed waste transfer facility on the Edgware Road LINK, Alison Hopkins mentioned the North London Waste Authority's orginal opposition to the resiting.

For information here is their original objection:

Hopkins lambasts Cricklewood Freight Hub Horror

 Ex-councillor Alison Hopkins has lambasted the plans for a rail freight superhub next to the A5 in Cricklewood.  Today is deadline day for submissions to Barnet Council - go to LINK to make a comment. Please make sure you include your email address on the online form.

Hopkins wrote:

This is a truly appalling plan which will blight the lives of tens of thousands across Barnet and Brent. It is, of course, not planned for the leafy glades where the wealthy live in Barnet, but right on the border with Brent, where the less well off, the ordinary and the down right disadvantaged live, work and go to school. 

As well as the dump already planned on the doorsteps of Dollis Hill, with hundreds of lorries a day, Barnet now plan to impose a polluting miasma of choking dust on us. A few hundred yards from an infants school, NEXT to a college, and behind a supermarket? The A5 is already the most polluted road in London: this adds yet more muck, with more ill health and more early deaths. 

It’s about time Barnet listened not only to its residents, but also to its neighbours.Brent is as badly affected by the mess you are creating all along the A5 - and yet, you do not reply to emails, you spread misinformation at so called consultation meetings and give the nod to appallingly damaging plans like this. 

In summary: this proposal is wholly unacceptable on the grounds of pollution, massive traffic increases and the utterly adverse effect on real people with real lives.

Activist slams Capita & Barnet Council over Brent Cross regen plans

Local activist Alison Hopkins has written to the current Public Inquiry into the the compulsory purchases of the Brent Cross Regeneration Scheme outlining its impact on local residents. It is long so please use the 'Read more'  button to get the whole picture

I am writing to you as a long-time resident – over forty years - of Humber Road NW2 in the London Borough of Brent, and as the former Brent councillor for this ward, Dollis Hill. I am also representing many local residents and associations in this letter.

I request that you pass the following to the Inspector leading the Public Inquiry into CPO3 for the Brent Cross Regeneration scheme as a matter of urgency.

This is on the grounds that not only are Barnet Council and Capita utterly failing to listen to local people, as has been their pattern for over a decade, but are also gravely misleading the Inspector. I have been personally attempting to have proper discussions and gain true answers to the points raised here for almost a decade. I have constantly been stalled by Barnet, Capita and their partners, especially G L Hearn.

Most recently, residents who attended the so-called public consultations in Dollis Hill were promised full responses, but these have never been forthcoming. G L Hearn promised to arrange a meeting with Barnet officers after the latest consultation meeting in April. Despite repeated emails from me, and others, this has never happened. We are being neglected and ignored by Barnet/Capita deliberately.

As we are in a neighbouring borough, they feel entirely free to do so, to our huge detriment, presumably because we do not constitute their electorate. Dollis Hill is DIRECTLY ADJACENT to the development and will be more affected by these proposed road changes than ANY residential part of Barnet. This is unfair under common law.

23 storey block on historic Dollis Hill site likely to be opposed

The 'Pre-Application Presentations' now made at Brent Planning Committee are useful as an early warning of planning applications to come. The public are not allowed to make representations but can watch the presentation.

At the November 16th Committee there is a presentation on plans for 403-405 Edgware Road/corner of Oxgate Lane that includes a 23 storey building. The present building has a fascinating history. It was completed on the site of an existing admiralty building, known as the Admiralty Chart House in 1940 and housed navy and civilian staff in case Whitehall became unusable because of bomb damage. Since then it has had multiple uses uncluding a carpet warehouse LINK:

SCHEME:
replacement with mixed use development (including tall building up to 27 storeys), comprising:
• Flexible Class B1/B2/B8 employment space (approx. 1,375 sq. m), predominantly located on ground floor, with some also on first floor;
• Banqueting and conference centre, comprising one large hall, two smaller halls, (located on the first floor, with ground floor lobby/reception area);
• Fitness centre and health spa (including a swimming pool);
• Residential accommodation (providing approx. 150 apartments);
• Roof garden and outdoor terrace;
• Dedicated service yard within the building to service the employment floorspace, accommodate other delivery vehicles and for refuse/waste collection;
• Three levels of basement car parking, providing space for approximately 166 spaces, together with cycle storage.

Ex Dollis Hill Councillor Alison Hopkins has already made her views known on behalf of Dollis Hill residents:

Firstly, there’s obviously the fact that the site is of major historical interest. We’d most certainly push for Listing if there were any attempt made at demolition. The current owners illegally removed the Crittall windows and were served a notice to replace them, too. Other modifications have also been made by them and the building has been deliberately neglected.

The idea of a conference centre to serve over two thousand people is, frankly, insane. The local transport system simply can’t support it and our roads cannot take the volume of parked cars. The owners of the building have already caused massive disruption at times by using the building for festivals and exhibitions. The knock on impact of their inconsiderate parking has been felt within a mile or more radius here in Dollis Hill.

A further point on the conference centre is that it is highly unlikely to be used by local residents, given the salary levels and deprivation levels in Dollis Hill. The functions which the applicant has already held in the building have been attended by people who were most certainly not local. Having talked to several, they came from as far away as Reigate and Brighton!

As you rightly state in the report, it will also cause massive pressure on the businesses who park locally.

I don’t know if you’re also aware that Highways have already stated that a CPZ will be needed across Dollis Hill once the Brent Cross scheme gets going: the funding for that is apparently coming from Barnet’s S106/CIL monies.

In terms of transport, whilst there may possibly be a new Brent Cross Overground station one day, access to it from Brent is very limited for pedestrians, so I’m not convinced it will improve the PTAL rating overmuch. The applicants claim of 30 buses every hour on that stretch of the A5 is, frankly, nonsense.

Additionally, the idea of a 27 storey tower block is unbelievable. It’s totally out of context, intrusive and represents a development that is massively out of place in what’s still a mostly residential area. I note you’ve stated that the surrounding buildings are three of four storey, but the  1920s and 30s two storey housing is not far away. Given the topography of the area, it will be very obvious – just as the 27 storey block in Barnet on the Welsh Harp is LINK.

In terms of traffic, I have VERY grave concerns indeed about the impact on Dollis Hill. It is not currently possible  to turn right into Oxgate Lane (or Humber Road) from the southbound A5, and the only access to the site, whether from the A5 or Oxgate Lane is from the northbound Edgware Road. Barnet’s Brent Cross Regeneration plans call for a new road junction at Humber Road, allowing a right turn from the southbound A5, but this is being opposed strongly, and so may not happen. But in any event, as matters stand anyone approaching the development from the southbound A5 would need to rat run through Dollis Hill, by using Oxgate Gardens or Dollis Hill Lane, then Coles Green Road for access. We already face tens of thousands of extra cars each day from the Brent Cross plans, so this would be a major issue.

The detailed pre-planning report can be found HERE.

Sarah's secret: A Lib Dem reflection on Sarah Teather

I have published Labour and Green views on Sarah Teather's decision not to stand again. Here, in a guest blog, is the view from Alison Hopkins,  Liberal Democrat councillor for Dollis Hill

Sarah called me on Saturday to tell me personally of her decision not to stand again in 2014. I was and am very saddened, both on a personal and professional level. I’ve known her for many years, first coming into contact when, like thousands of other Brent residents, she helped me with a problem that no one else had managed to fix. I then got to know her better through her sterling and invaluable efforts to help the campaign against the Brent Cross plans, which meant chaos for Dollis Hill and the wider Brent area. I still remember how trenchant and forthright she was at public meetings with the developers and I realised then that this was a woman with a sense of purpose, fiercely intelligent and not afraid to say what she thought.

As a result of getting to know her better I decided to enter politics properly, having campaigned and worked locally for decades, as I could see that far more could be achieved within a more formal role. I campaigned for her in the 2010 general election and it was one of the most exhilarating, exhausting and rewarding things I’ve ever done – only bettered by being a councillor in Dollis Hill! Our team proved that despite the predictions of victory from Labour and figures suggesting otherwise, we could turn a notional loss into a pretty good win.  I’m absolutely sure that most of that was down to Sarah’s record of working her socks off for local people, knowing Brent in minute detail – I swear she has the electoral roll in her head – and to her brilliant local office.  Brent has had the luxury of a local MP, with help accessible five days a week to constituents: how many other constituencies get that level of commitment?

Her hidden secret is she's also a great pastry cook: the Brent Cross coalition were fed amazing cookies the first time we met her formally in the Commons and she’s notorious for feeding her helpers and staff.  Most people see her serious side, but I’ve been fortunate enough to see her sitting on my dining room floor giggling uncontrollably during my by election.

I’ve not always agreed with her decisions or the way she’s voted, but I’ve never had the least doubt that she hasn't thought long and hard about everything she’s ever done as an MP. I also know that any decision she makes comes from a strong sense of right and wrong, from conscience and from an ethical and moral framework that I wish more people generally had.  She gets angry with injustice, whatever its form, and she won’t pander to the popular or take the easy way out.

One of my neighbours sent me an email about her, and I think it says it all: “Really sorry she’s going. Worked hard and kept her nose clean.”  I’ve no idea what she’ll do next, but I’m absolutely certain that whatever it is, she’ll make a difference to people’s lives for the better, just as she has for the past decade in Brent.

Brent unites against Barratt Homes' 'vandalism' of the Welsh Harp

This was first published on the Save Our Welsh Harp' blog LINK

Shahrar Ali, Muhammed Butt, Roxanne Mishari and Navin Shah

The audience

A meeting held at short notice about the regeneration of the West Hendon Estate on the banks of the Welsh Harp was well attended this afternoon.

Cllr Roxanne Mishari, Labour councillor for Welsh Harp,  introducing the meeting,  outlined the main aspects of the scheme, its height, high density, its closeness to the wildfowl reserve, lack of infrastructure and impact on Brent.

Navin Shah,Labour London Assembly member for Brent and Harrow spoke about the planning aspects and the role of the Major of London. He said he had arranged a delegation to the Barnet Planning Committee which would consider the application which breached the Council's own planning guidelines. He described the plans as 'no more than vandalism of a critical site. Only 20 of the 2,000 homes would be 3 or 4 bedrooms when the need was for family housing. Only 25% would be social housing.

Shahrar Ali of Brent Green Party and a local resident showed a video taken this morning at Barratt's marketing office for the 'Hendon Waterside' development. The sales team clearly expected the development to go ahead and described it as a partnership with Barnet Council. The remaining 8th floor two bedroom property in the recently completed 12 storey development was offered at £340,000 plus £1,700 service charge and an agreement with the water and energy supplier of Barratt's choice. It was clear that the private flats were on the waterfront and the social housing behind close to the A5.

Cllr Muhammed Butt, Labour leader of Brent Council, said that he was 100% behind the campaign which he described as 'over-excessive'. He read out the main objections submitted by the Brent Council planners and said these would be made available on this site. The proposed 2 form entry primary school would not be big enough and Barnet Council was riding rough-shod over its own planning policies which stated that buildings should be no more than between 8 and 20 storeys high.. School provision, wildlife and transport would all be affected with repercussions for Brent residents.

Cllr Alison Hopkins and her fellow Lib Dem councillor Javaid Ashraf sent the message which Martin Francis conveyed to the meeting, which appears on the Welsh Harp blog in full.  LINK They  particularly drew attention to the social housing tenants being placed alongside the traffic pollution of the A5. They had opposed the development in their roles on the Welsh Harp Joint Consultative Committee which includes Barnet representatives. Attempts to arrange a site visit had not been successful.

There were many contributions from the floor and among the issues raised were:

1, Why does Barnet keep developing on the borders with Brent which affects our own infrastructure (while they collect the Council Tax from the developments)
2. A youth officer from the West Hendon Estate said they had collected 500residents'  signatures on a petition against the development and the loss of their green space andwere going to protest at the planning meeting.
3. Barnet Council should declare their relationship with Barratt Homes.
4. We should see if Euoropean legislation can be used to oppose the development.
5. We should examine the public health repercussions for people, and particularly children, in the area.
6. The high-cost luxury flats gained a beautiful view across the Welsh Harp to the opposite bank but people on that bank would see a hideous new high-rise development.
7. The West Hendon Estate had been run down for years but the tenants would be unlikely to be able to afford the rents in the new development.
8. We should get someone like Bill Oddie to champion our cause for the bird life, the waterfowl refuge and the SSSI.

'Transformational thinking' response to unfair Coalition budget cuts

In his speech to the Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee last night, Graham Durham drew attention to the unfairness of the central government cuts imposed on Labour local authorities compared with those run by other political groups.

Over the last 3 years Labour councils have lost an average of £107 per head, Lib Dems £38 and Conservative £36. The highest loss is the London borough of Hackney at £266 and the lowest North Dorset at £2.70.

The figures for Brent was £120.21 per person.

Durham, stating that this was a concerted attack on Labour councils asked councillors , "What job are we doing?"  and answered himself, "We should not be carrying out cuts on behalf of the Coalition posh boys!"

Condemning the council for complying with Coalition policies by sending families to Hastings he reminded Cllr Helga Gladbaum that she was once one of the councillors who alongside him had fought against making cuts.

He concluded by arguing that a Labour Council should not do this to the people of Brent and instead should set a needs budget.

Isabel Counihan was given her first opportunity to address councillors about the light of her family. She described the background to her family losing their housing in Brent and the impact of localised payments of Housing Benefit.  The family had launched a campaign which had received widespread community support.

She said that her family were one of thousands of homeless families in the borough and asked how the council could justify spending £102m on a Civic Centre in these circumstances. Isabel described how there had been another attempt to evict the family from their temporary accommodation where they could not afford the rent. At the same time she claimed that social services had threatened to take her five children into care. She had told them how expensive that would be, particularly a some would need special needs support,  compared with helping them with their rent.

Isabel Counihan concluded by saying that Brent had got its priorities wrong and backed calls for them to set a needs budget.  She invited councillors to join the Counihan Family March on December 1st.

After the deputations there was a presentation by Allison Elliott on the Adult Social Care budget. She claimed that the council, through a West London Alliance procurement had not 'reduced the service but had reduced the costs'. However she said that the reduction in costs could not be sustained and that there would be a budget gap of £6.87m in 2014/15 if nothing was done.  She said that the council would have to think differently in order to reduce the budget and that this would require 'transformational thinking' - which drew 'You mean cuts!'  and 'What's going to happen to the old people' from the audience.

There were sharp exchanges between Graham Durham and the chair of the committee, Alison Hopkins (Lib Dem) over the availability of committee documents for the public. At one point the police were called into to remove Durham when he protested  but Hopkins managed to procure some copies of the documents for the public.  However police were called again when Graham Durham asked questions from the floor about the council budget, claiming that councillors were failing to ask challenging questions of Mick Bowden, or the council leader or deputy who were present. He demanded, 'You are here to scrutinise - do your job!'. Five police officers and CPOs remained in the public seats for the rest of the meeting which worked out at about one for each member of the public present,