New Brent Cabinet must lance this boil

Before the election the Brent Green Party called for an independent investigation into various controversial aspects of the running of Brent Council which had emerged in postings on Wembley Matters.

Brent Council refused to comment on these during the election period but now a new adminstration is in place it is time to launch an independent investigation so that a fresh start can be made which will win the confidence of Brent Council workers and residents.

These are the issues for investigation:

1. Corporate Management Team officers being paid through their private companies rather than normal pay roll (the allegation has been made that these are tax avoidance schemes)
2. The contractual arrangements for CMT officers and interim appointments (the allegation has been made that these are on more favourable terms and are less clearly defined than for ordinary Brent Council workers)
3. Previous employment and business connections between senior offices appointed by Brent Council on an interim basis (the allegation has been made that colleagues who worked together at Ofsted and Tower Hamlets Council have formed a new group of senior officers at Brent Council. Further that an officer in a personal relationship with another officer had adjudicated on fraud allegations against her)
4. The working culture of the Human Resources department (aside from a current Employment Tribunal case allegations have been made by individuals of bullying and harrassment aimed at moving them out of their jobs)
5. Brent Council's Whistle Blowing Policy to ensure that it adequately protects whistle-blowers from harassment and retribution

A further issue now that the election is out of the way is the appointment of a Chief Executive. Christine Gilbert's interim appointment was extended by the Brent Executive on the recommendation of Fiona Ledden until after the election.  The permanent position should now be publicy advertised with a transparent recruitment process.


LINKS: (Also see the comments on these posts)

http://wembleymatters.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/eric-pickles-urged-to-investigate-brent.html

http://wembleymatters.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/victimisation-bullying-racial-and.html

http://wembleymatters.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/revisiting-christine-gilberts.html

http://wembleymatters.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/brent-not-commenting-on-tewari.html

http://wembleymatters.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/eric-pickles-urged-to-investigate-brent.html

Clean up tasks for the new Labour Brent Executive

As the new Labour group prepares to meet to decide the size, portfolios and membership of the new Executive, just a reminder of the issues that need to be addressed.

First there is the matter of the Human Resources management at the Council and associated issues of interim contracts and salaries paid into private companies.

The Green Party has called for an independent investigation of:

1. Corporate Management Team officers being paid through their private companies rather than normal pay roll
2. The contractual arrangements for CMT officers and interim appointments
3. Previous employment and business connections between senior offices appointed by Brent Council on an interim basis
4. The working culture of the Human Resources department 
5. Brent Council's Whistle Blowing Policy to ensure that it adequately protects whistle-blowers from harassment and retribution

To which a reader has added:
6. Instances of council policies, procedures, standing orders, scheme of delegation etc being circumvented.

Secondly, there is the important issue of the appointment of Chief Executive.  Christine Gilbert's acting role was extended by the Brent Executive  until after the local elections on the recommendation of Fiona Ledden, Head of Legal and Procurement. The report stated:

The recruitment process for a new permanent  Chief Executive should be delayed because the current recruitment process for  three other CEs in London boroughs would limit the quality of candidates, to allow the restructuring of council senior management to go ahead smoothly, and  to ensure continuity and reputation management over the move to the Civic Centre and the 2014 local elections. 

At the time Paul Lorber, Liberal Democrat leader of the opposition, opposed the extension and raised the important issue of how the permanent appointment would be made.  Given the new overwhelmingly Labour composition of the council and the revelations about previous connections between members of the Corporate Management Team at Ofsted and Tower Hamlets, as well as personal relationship connections, a transparent recruitment process is essential.

Such a process would exclude from the recruitment process any officer with such connections and include opposition councillors as well as Labour backbenchers.

Thirdly, there is the task of ending all interim arrangements so that a permanent team with fully compliant contracts and paid through the council payroll are in place for the next four years. 

Brent Executive approves Copland land deal and landlord licensing

An unusually garralous Brent Council Executive last night approved the land deal which will see the Copland Community School site and neighouring land handed over to Ark Academy for 125 years. A new secondary school with an additional form of entry will be built away from the High Road (exact position not yet fixed) and nearby Elsley Primary School will double in size.

The Executive set aside issues around development restrictions on the site (although a restrictive covenant caused considerable problems for the Preston Manor expansion) and shrugged off threats of a judicial review from teacher unions.

Jean Roberts, speaking for the tecaher orgabisations, said that they had spoken to local residents in nearby streets who were overwhelmingly against the scheme and concerned about the impact on them as well as rights of way on the school grounds. Local children were playing on the grounds as they spoke to residents who told her that they were starting a petition against the scheme.

Although at pains to stress that this was about a land deal and nothing to do with forced academisation and an Ark takeover of state schools, Executive members nonetheless took the opportunity to attack the former management of the school and the quality of teachers - forgetting perhaps that they had oversight of the school at the time.

The Executive went on to approve an 'Additional'  licensing scheme for landlords in Brent but deferred a decision on 'Selective Licensing' in Wembley Central, Harlesden and Willesden Green.

There will be further consulation over a two month period about what other wards, namely Dudden Hill and Mapesbury, should be included in the Additional Licensing scheme.

The Additional Licensing scheme charge will be set at £550 for the 5 year licensing period. Challenged that this would be passed on to tenants, Muhammed Butt said that landlords would be able to claim it back as part of their business costs.

Margaret McLennan said that the scheme was not about gentrification but bringing private rented properties up to the bare minimum regarding matters like gas safety checks. She said that the scheme would also protect good landlords from bad tenants.

Enforcement will begin in January 2015. The Executive did not discuss the vexed question of potential unintended consequences if landlords evict tenants in order to deal with overcrowding or unsafe premises.

Crucial Executive vote on Monday on Princess Fred expansion plans

On January 4th LINK I wrote about the officer's report going to Monday's Brent Executive recommending the expansion of Princess Frederica Primary School in Kensal Rise, despite 90% opposition from parents.

On December 17th 2013 there had been a well-attended public meeting about the issue which Cllr James Denselow reported on his blog LINK where Princess Frederica's case was discussed along with the more general issues around rising school population and school places provision.

The Council, schools and parents are in a difficult position because of Michael Gove's policy that local authorities cannot build new schools - these have to be provided by free schools or academy chains. The local authority is left with little option but to expand existing schools on their present site and exceptionally open 'annexes' near a school such as has happened with Leopald in Harlesden and the old CSD building in Brentfield Road and Stonebridge Primary and the disused day care centre on the opposite side of the road.

Expansion on existing sites can reduce play space, convert shared spaces such as school libraries, computer suites and assembly halls into classrooms and create more crowded conditions with more children occupying less space. Parents often prefer smaller primary  schools because of the family atmosphere where the head knows every child by name and the youngest of children feel safe and secure.The officers' report makes the case for larger schools (large school successes in the borough, teachers' career prospects, curriculum opportunities, outside school provision) but doesn't balance that with the case for smaller schools.

Free school providers cash in on this by planning small schools as local schools become bigger and end up competing with them.  So far primary free school providers have not come forward in Brent, instead we have four secondary free schools where generally at present there is not a shortage.

The rub is that in seeking to preserve the positives of space, intimacy and ethos and deciding against expansion other children will be deprived on any education at all.  The real villain is Michael Gove and his policy but children suffer either way.  That is why there is a growing movement, supported by the Green Party, the NUT, Michael Pavey LINK and Barry Gardiner amongst others to restore local authorities' power to build new schools.You can support the School Places Crisis campaign by signing the petition HERE

NUT research suggests that by 2016 2/5 reception age children in some parts of London will not have a school place.

It now appears that as a result of the public meeting and strong opposition to Princess Frederica's expansion that the Executive will reject the officers' recommendation. Michael Pavey told the Wembley Observer 'We are listening to the views of the community and they got their mesage across very clearly'.

Rejection of a tabled report is unusual under the present administration. .It would have been more likely to be withdrawn before the publication of the Agenda if it was clear Executive members, and particular the lead member, were against it.

Th following message appears on the school's expansion blog today:

 The next milestone in the expansion proposal project is on Monday, 13 January 2014 at 7.00pm when the Brent Council Executive will review the report on the outcome of the statutory consultation at the Board Room in the new Brent Civic Centre: http://democracy.brent.gov.uk/documents/s21137/cf-princess-frederica.pdf

This report still recommends that Princess Frederica should expand, subject to planning permission.

However, in a significant recent development, Councillor Michael Pavey, Lead Member for Children & Families, Brent Council, has suggested that he may vote against the proposed expansion of Princess Frederica CE VA Primary School.

In the meantime, the governing body continues to await key information from Brent which would allow it to make a definitive decision about whether or not it supports the proposal to expand.

As soon as we can, we will update you further.

 Unfortunately I cannot go to the Executive on Monday but I will be interested to hear of the outcome.

Meanwhile another consequence of Gove's ban on LA's building new schools is emerging as Brent Council  has started 'instructing' headteachers to take additional Key Stage 2 children who currently are not in school despite their schools being full. This would take class sizes above 30 and conflict with the NUT's class size limit. Some of these children will be new to the UK and some may not have been to school before so they will need additional resources and teacher time.

Brent Council to rely on volunteers for Meals on Wheels provision

Brent Executive approved the handing over of the provision of Meals on Wheels and meals at Day Care Centres to the voluntary sector this evening. There were passionate speeches by Brent Fightback and Labour Party members Michael Calderbank and Graham Durham expressing concern over the proposals and posing some incisive questions. Their speeches caused Cllr Pavey to hesitate saying they had raised legitimate concerns and Cllr Denselow said that he could see the concern, in an era of cuts, over a Big Society style solution, but he preferred to see it as a cooperative solution offering vulnerable people choice and control.

Calderbank expressed concern over redundancies at the current provider, payments to be made to new providers, whether the voluntary organisations would be paid the London Living Wage that the Council had committed itself to, the report's 'high risk' with  'medium' probability assessment that vulnerable people may go without a meal with a number of different voluntary sector providers.

Stressing he was not opposed to voluntary organisations providing services, but that this should not be  a cover for cuts, or at the cost of a reduction in quality, he asked about monitoring of quality and hygiene standards, and wanted confirmation that the new service would not longer provide puddings.
 
Calderbank said he couldn't believe that the Council was going ahead on the basis of such a small pilot project with one provider. This was not a strong basis for a major change. He asked what sanctions would be applied to providers who dropped out.

Durham said that he has spoken to the minister at Harlesden Methodist Church which had operated the pilot and found that the only person to be employed was a 0.7 cook, all the rest delivering the service would be volunteers. This was not a partnership with the voluntary sector but reliance on unpaid volunteers. The Council was creating no jobs and guilty of creating unemployment when it was already at 8.4%

Through the NHS Patients group he had heard complaints about food being undercooked, the lack of puddings and food put into one container like baby food.

He said with disparate providers there was a need for strong contract compliance to ensure  continuity of quality of food and reliability of delivery. The real motive seemed to be the £300,000 of 'savings' - where was the Council's much vaunted London Living Wage?

Phil Porter, Acting Director of Adult Social Services, responded rather than Cllr Krupesh Hirani, lead member for Adult Social Care, who was absent from the Executive Meeting. Porter said the changes had been drivem by better service and increasing cost and control, not by cuts. The previous provider had provided only one option from their base in Leicester. The new range of suppliers would give more choice. The Council had been honest in publishing negative comments from service users but the 8 in the pilot had been 'very happy. (In fact the pilot numbers were reduced to six with one dissatisfied and seeking alternatives and 'very happy' doesn't really describe some of the other users' comments),

He said there would be no change of service for vulnerable individuals without a review of their needs carried out by social workers to understand their capacity and support network- managing risk was part of the review.

There was no contract compliance because the Council had a new role facilitating the market rather than establishing a contractual relationship. This was part of a broader move which the Council was undertaking. It created a challenge and removed the comfort blanket of a single provider.

Porter said the Council couldn't make the providers commit to the London Living Wage  - they could only encourage them t pay it. It was fundamental to give power to the provider and all the support required to make sure the provision is also safe, The scheme would deliver savings and a better service.

He said 5 or 6* people employed by Apetito in Brent would be affected by redundancy. He could make no undertaking that jobs would be created because some providers would be able to provide within their existing infrastructure and others may not. 

Cllr Roxanne Mashari intervened to say that she had been concerned about nutritional standards being maintained in the new arrangements and had visited Cricklewood Homeless Concern to see their provision. As a result she thought it was a fantastic move and should have been made earlier. The food was fresh meat and fish, fruits such as avocado, not baby food, and was served in ceramic type containers. Cricklewood Homeless Concern were able to build on their existing relationships with their clients.

To protests from the audience that their questions had not all been answered, the Executive went on to approve the new arrangements.

* Please note earlier version because of a typographical error rendered this figure as 506. My apologies.

Looking for the X Factor at Brent Civic Centre's first Executive meeting

Well not really! The X Factor was filming outside the Civic Centre in Arena Square and Cllr Krupesh Hirani was quite overcome by seeing Nicole Scherzinger strutting her stuff, but inside Boardrooms 4 & 5 the X Factor or almost any other factor was decidedly absent. The photograph should be evidence enough.

A discussion on parking charges went on for ages and nearly made me rush out and throw myself off the Boardroom's balcony thoughtfully provided by the Civic Centre designers  for any Brent residents who can't stand it any more.

The parking discussion, where actually there appeared to be no major disagreements, was about ten times as long as the discussion on two major housing reports which will have a much more serious impact on families and individuals forcing some of them to leave Brent and others to choose between paying their rent or buying food for themselves or their children.

As Robin Sivapalan of Brent Housing Action pointed out from the floor, the report on Supply and Demand almost seemed to welcome the Coalition's Bedroom Tax as a way of shifting tenants from 'under occupied'  housing, while other actions appeared to reduce demand only by redefining overcrowding or disrepair rather than by  providing actual housing. The second report promised action to build new affordable housing but lacked detail while action was promised both to tackle poor landlords but also to encourage more landlords to rent out properties.

Michael Pavey in an outbreak of left rhetoric called private foster agencies exploitative but then seemed only to want to get a better (cheaper) deal out of them, He also suggested primary school expansions were preferable to the 'anarchy' of free schools.

Muhammed Butt was very tetchy and lost his cool on at least two occasions, giving the impression that opposition councillors had no right to disagree with him.

Does this report REALLY tackle Brent's housing crisis?

Click on image to enlarge

A report going before the Brent Executive on Monday July 15th lays bare the extent of Brent's housing extent and how it has been exacerbated by the Coalition's changes to benefits.

The graph shows that Brent has been much more affected by landlords ending tenancies than our neighbouring boroughs. 47%of homeless acceptances in 2012-13 were homeless due to the ending of a private letting in the wake of the changes in the Local Housing Allowance. The private rented sector itself continues to grow with 31,784 households living in private rented accommodation in the 2011 Census, compared with 17,043 in 2001. The sector accounted for 28.8% of Brent households.

Unmet demand for housing assistance stands at 10,366 households. This excludes those on Band D who are assessed by the Council Allocations Scheme as having no housing need.

Current demand on the Housing Register, including the homeless in temporary accommodation and those on the Transfer list is just over 19,000 households. In contrast the Council expect to make just 844 lettings of permanent social housing tenancies by the end of 2013-14.


These are allocated thus:

Looking ahead the Report notes the pressures that will be experienced:

1. Local Housing Allowance changes will continue to impact and make it harder for the Council to procure private rented accommodation as landlords will be unwilling to 'engage with tenants in recipet of benefits'.
2. The changes in LHA payable to single people under 35, which limits payment to a single room in a shared house, will mean they will find it increasingly difficult to find accommodation in the private rented sector.
3. From 12th August 2013, over a five week period, the Overall Benefit Cap will limit the total amount of benefit payable to a non-working couple or a single parent to £500 per week, and £350 per week for a non-working single person. The OBC was expected to impact on 2,700 Brent households, but some have taken measures so as to be exempted and the DWP assesses the total as 2,267 now. The bulk of these are in temporary accommodation or the private rented sector.
4. The Bedroom Tax will reduce benefit for rent  for social housing tenants by 14% (average £17.50 pw) with one 'spare room; and 25% (average £32.66 pw) for those with two 'spare rooms'.
5. Many households will be making a minimum contribution of Council Tax for the first time when they are also faced with  financial pressure from other welfare reforms.
6. The DWP is predicting that approximately 40% of claimants currently receiving Disability Living Allowance will not qualify to receive the replacement Personal Independence Allowances. The report notes: 'these claimants will be a high priority for receiving support from the council to cope with changes in circumstances' as receipt of DLA by a member of a household previously exempted them from  the Overall Benefit Cap and Council Tax charge.

The consequences of all this, the report says, is that families are likely to live in over-crowded and poor quality accommodation in the borough rather than move out to cheaper and better quality accommodation outside Brent. 'Unscrupulous' landlords may take advantage of families affected by Welfare Reform by refusing to deal with disrepair issues, knowing that the families will be reluctant to report them for fear of losing their accommodation. Brent Council has therefore drafted a Private Housing Action Plan to deal with these issues.

The report confirms actions already approved by the council including:

1. The introduction of fixed term tenancies by the council with partner housing providers determining their own policies as long as they are 'broadly consistent with the council's priorities'.
2 To use Flexible Tenancies (fixed term tenancies at either social or affordable rent) on the same basis as approved for other social landlords.
3. Introductory or starter tenancies of 12 months will be used for all new tenants in concert with fixed-term tenancies as relevant, 'Five years normally but with shorter and/or longer periods for specified groups/circumstances'.
4. Changes in the Allocation Scheme which means the residence qualification is established through living in Brent at the time of application and continually throughout the last five years. (NB this is a tightening of the previous proposal of living in Brent for three of the last five years).
5. The definition of 'living in unsuitable accommodation', which gives priority under the Alllocation Scheme will be tightened so that 'households with only minor disrepair issues are not being given priority for rehousing'.
6. Households who are over crowded by 'just one room' should not automatically be given priority in the new scheme - each case will be considered 'on its individual merits;.

The Mutual Exchange scheme, originally aimed at providing an incentive to 'under-occupiers' to downsize as as a result of the bedroom tax, will be extended to cover for example those over retirement age who are not affected by the current benefit changes.

The maximum payment for someone wishing to downsize would be £1,000 plus assistance wit removal costs and access to a handyman service. Full payment would be made for a 'perfect fit' exchange and pro rata for others.

It does seem to me that while the Private Housing Action Plan to protect private rented tenants is welcome much of the report is really fiddling while Rome burns. Changing definitions and tenancy arrangements is not dealing with the underlying issue which is a shortage of social housing and the failure (cf Quintain Wembley Regeneration, Willesden Green Library development, Queensbury development, and the Bridge Park/Unisys development) to build truly affordable housing.

The full report can be found HERE

More Brent schools to expand as Gove restricts new LA school builds

Michael Gove receives a vote of 'No Confidence' from headteachers but at the same time his Tory leadership bid, launched last weekend regarding Europe, seems to be going well. The New Statesman this week carries an article suggesting a Tory leadership combination of Boris Johnson and Michael Gove ('BO-GO'). Enough to give you nightmares.

But the nightmare is already with us because Gove's policies are wreaking havoc. Most obvious at the moment is the ludicrous requirement that any new school must be academy or free school - despite the latter being mainly set up in places with a current surplus of places. Local authorities such as Brent are denied the opportunity to rationally plan new local authority schools in areas where there is a shortage.Instead they have to wait for the market to provide and meanwhile add extra classes to existing schools, or even annexes or 'satellites' to escape government restrictions. Boris adds his tuppenyworth by ear-marking any surplus GLA buildings for possible use as free schools.

Some primary schools are increasing in size to more that 1,000 5-11 year olds, an issue that I have raised several times on Wembley Matters and taken up on Saturday by the Guardian(1,000 pupils and rising - primary schools go supersize LINK )My view is that these are just too big to provide the care and contact that young children need but others think that given the right internal arrangements and ethos these difficulties can be overcome.

Meanwhile the new Brent Executive will tomorrow consider the latest report on primary school expansion which will be presented my Michael Pavey, the new lead member for children and families, and himself Chair of Governors at one of Brent's largest primary schools, the four form entry Wembley Primary.

Some schools have already doubled in size to cope with the shortage and in some cases have lost valuable play space or halls, music rooms or IT suites.  The report LINK includes for 2013-14 the following possibilities:

• 7 primary classes housed in modules at Kingsbury High with the children eventually transferring to Kingsbury Green Primary when it expands. 
• 15 primary classes at the Centre for Staff Development (Gwenneth Rickus Building) in Brentfield Road ) next to the Swaminarayan Independent School. This building will be vacated when the few staff that remain transfer to the Civic Centre. Originally it was ear-marked for secondary places but the required building money is not available.Both Mitchell Brook and Brentfield primary schools are close by but I have heard it may become a satellite of Leopold Primary in Harlesden.
• Use of temporary classrooms previously used by Preston Manor and Brentfield schools and creation of more 'bulge classes' - one off additions to a school rather than a change in the numbers of forms of entry.

There are schemes suggested to provide full new capacity by September 2014 at:

• Wembley High School - a new building providing a 4 form of entry (840 children) primary school making Wembley an 'all-through' school along with Ark and Preston Manor.
• Uxendon Primary - an additional 2 forms of entry (420  children)
• Harlesden Primary - an additional 2 forms of entry (420 children)
• Preston Park, Princess Frederica and St Joseph Primary will all add 1 for of entry (210 children)
• Vicar's Green in Ealing but serving many Brent children will add 0.5 forms of entry (105 children)

These schemes would provide new capacity between September 2015:

• Elsley Primary - an additional 2 forms of entry (420 children)
• Stonebridge Primarary - an additional 1 form of entry (210 chilren)
• Malorees Infant and Junior - an additional 1 or 2 forms of entry (210-420 children)
• Oriental City Primary - 2 forms of entry (dependent on Section 106 agreement - not clear re governance)

Other longer term sites in case the need continues have been identified.  These include the Wembley Quintain site for a 2 form entry primary school (420 children), Our Lady of Lourdes (Stonebridge) additional 2 forms of entry (420 children), John Keble and St Francis and St Andrew additional 1 form of entry (210 children) each.

Tiggers oust the Eeyores in Brent but who's Pooh, Owl and Piglet?

One of Brent's more sophisticated political commentators has suggested that the Executive changes represent a victory of the 'Tiggers' over the 'Eeyores' in the Brent Labour Group.

Which is fine as far as it goes as an analysis but any suggestions for equivalents  for some of the other characters?

Butt 'excited' about 'dynamic,energetic and talented' new Executive

In a statement released this morning following the Brent Labour Group AGM, Group and Council leader Muhammed Butt said:

I want to thank the outgoing Executive Members for the dedication to Brent and commitment to public service that they have shown. I am incredibly excited about starting work on Monday morning with our dynamic, energetic and talented new Executive. 

The Government has caused a recession, a dramatic fall in living standards for our residents and are implementing cuts to welfare that will devastate our community. We still have a lot of work to do to protect the people of Brent from this onslaught and I am confident that we have the best possible team to do so.

The new Executive now has 50% of its members from a Black and Ethnic Minority background compared to 30% previously and the average age has reduced to 46 from 60.  However three women lost their posts in the election and only two gained posts.

It is unclear whether there will be any political change of direction as a result of these changes and Muhammed Butt's statement concentrates on dynamism and energy rather than policy. It does appear to be more of a generational change than a shift to the left. However some Labour sources hope for a more robust approach to children's centres,  free schools and forced academies from Michael Pavey and a more proactive and sympathetic engagement on housing issues from Margaret McLennan. Michael Pavey will be talking to parents and carers at Gladstone Park Primary school tomorrow who are fighting forced academy status in a meeting arranged before Saturday's AGM.

Labour 'Young Turks' may challenge for Brent Executive positions

The challengers are probably too young to remember this!

The Brent Executive may have a more youthful profile following Labour's Annual General Meeting in May. AGMs of any organisation are an occasion for elected positions to be open to challenge and part of that process is for members to assess the performance of the incumbents and consider alternatives.

According to my sources among the incumbents under particular scrutiny this time round are Cllr Lesley Jones, Cllr Mary Arnold and Cllr James Powney. 'Alternatives' that have been mentioned include the very able Cllr James Denselow who has a background in journalism; Cllr Michael Pavey, energetic Barnhill by-election winner, who is  a school governor and has launched a high profile campaign to safeguard Children's Centres; and Cllr Roxanne Mashari who yesterday announced she was not standing for the Brent Central parliamentary selection. Presumably experience as a member of the Brent Executive would stand her in good stead in any future parliamentary bid. I have heard that Cllr Lincoln Beswick is not expected to carry on but Jim Moher, contrary to weekend reports, is to stand again.

Meanwhile Cllr Butt himself has contributed a new blog on the Council website which calls on residents to campaign on cuts to the fire service and on the A&E closures. This adopts a slightly harder line than previously.  LINK

Following my posting yesterday on the front runners for the Brent Central selection I have had somewhat conflicting information. There has been a suggestion that Cllr Ann John has joined James Powney in backing Catherine West but others claim that West is seeking nomination in another constituency.

Apparently there has been some disquiet that members of the short-listing panel, who it is claimed should remain neutral, have been involved in backing particular candidates. Meanwhile I have let all the  prospective candidates I am aware of  that in the interests of an informed public I am happy to carry their Guest Blogs on this site.

Will Brent Council continue to leave the public out in the cold?

It will be interesting to see what happens at tonight's Full Council Meeting regarding the admittance of the public.

The November 2012 Council Meeting passed the following Procedural Motion:

Councillor Butt moved a procedural motion stating that it was with considerable regret and sadness that following advice received from the Director of Legal and Procurement, in order to enable the proper democratic meeting of the Full Council  to take place, he had felt it necessary to exclude a number of members of the public who had previously caused such disruption to Council meetings and meetings of the Executive to the extent those meetings had not been able to continue without moving to another room and thereby restricting the rights of the public to observe the proceedings. Councillor Butt added that he would continue to require officers to work to find a better solution than excluding members of the public from the Town Hall.
RESOLVED:
that the exclusion from this Full Council meeting of members of the public who have caused disruption to the previous Full Council meeting and/or to the previous  meeting of the Executive and/or the Budget and Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee be endorsed.

 It seems that the democratic right to make a protest is in conflict with the Council's need to meet undisturbed to pass policies with which members of the public profoundly disagree. Recent there have been demonstrations, including occupations at Liverpool, Sheffield and Birmingham councils as they approve more cuts. Other Councils seem to manage dissent better and as I pointed out in a recent blog Barnet Council provided an over-flow room with a TV link to the council chamber when the public gallery was full during a very heated confidence debate.. I wonder if the Civic Centre has been designed so as to maximise public access to meetings?

The present policy does pose a s number of questions:

• What does the Council constitution say about the right of the public to attend meetings or the Council's right to exclude them?
• How does the Council define disruption?
• How have they identified those they wish to exclude?
• Have they provided their private security guards with photographs of the excluded?
• If so have those who have had their photographs taken been informed?
• Does the Council have a database of the persons concerned?
• Is the Council or their hired security guards entitled to ask for proof of identity/proof of address from members of the public wishing to attend a Council meeting as they did at one such meeting last year?

A wider consideration is the need to consider why the public feel excluded from, and frustrated with, the 'democratic process'.  This has not only been been anti-cuts protesters that the Council probably see as the 'usual suspects' but solid middle of the road citizens concerned about the closure of libraries, sports centres, day centres and regeneration projects. The disaffection stems from consultations that turn out to be done deals, Executive meetings that rubber stamp decisions already made in pre-meetings, an Opposition that seems ill-prepared and flying by the seat of its pants, and full Council meetings with no real power but reduced to an arena for political jesting and grandstanding. As with the House of Commons it sometimes appears to be a cosy club despite political differences. 'Us against them' becomes councillors against their active citizens.

French parent voices doubts about Wembley Lycée

French parents in Central London have not been too impressed by the possibility of a  Lycée in Wembley.  A  French parent sent me this statement:

We were all surprised by the decision because it does not reconcile with Wembley regeneration plans with the creation of jobs for the Wembley local community nor the creation of school places for the local Wembley kids !! Basically it will be a rich kids school for parents living in Westminster and Chelsea. Although the last Brent Executive meeting suggested that they needed the money for the new Civic Centre (last Brent Executive minutes on the net).

Indeed a French school will provide jobs for builders for a while and a few 'dinner ladies'. The rest of the staff lives in Central London. The French children going to school in Wembley will be transient i.e. go into the borough for school and go back home to their Central London homes. Most French families live in the vicinity of the current schools. 

The French community is not happy with the choice of Wembley because they will be imposed Wembley for their children regardless of their home address in London. 

In France and in the UK, the school for your children is normally decided upon by your home address. This means that for those French parents who have three children at different school  locations (South Kensington, Kentish Town, Wembley) will be expected to do the school run between South Kensington,. Kentish Town and Wembley simultaneously for 09.00am by tube!!! 

When asked about this, the French Embassy dismissed the parents' concerns. with a 'take it or leave it' attitude.

Moreover French parents are very worried at letting their 10-11 years old children commute on their own from Central London to Wembley and back. The timings of the French school day is anything between 08.00 and 18.00 (unlike the UK). Furthermore, it appears that the children might have to walk 15 minutes or so, on their own, from Wembley Park station into a tunnel/motorway to reach Brent Town Hall. Again the Embassy does not seem to be concerned about the safety or welfare of kids nor about the time that these kids will need to spend in commuting  from their home in Central London to go to school and back.. The Embassy is treating children as though they were adults going to a new place of work.

Another problem? What will happen when there are no tubes to get from Central London to Wembley? bus? car? What time of the morning will these kids need to get up if taking a bus from South. Ken or Battersea to go to Wembley for 09.00!? Again the French Embassy did not seem to care too much.

Secrecy surrounds Brent Town Hall bidder

Brent Town Hall this evening

The identity of the potential purchaser of Brent Town Hall is the subject of some speculation following the Council's decision to keep many documents secret at the recent Executive that approved sell-off plans.

The disposal of the site is not as straight-forward as first thought. The report to the Executive noted:

The Town Hall land is subject to a number of covenants including a covenant that no part of the land shall be used for any noisy noisome or offensive trade or for the erection of workmen’s dwellings or flats for the housing of the working classes other than such quarters or caretakers lodgings as are usual and necessary in connection with a Civic Centre.

There is the risk that the above covenant could be capable of being enforced by injunction thus preventing the construction and use of the site for a redevelopment consistent with the Town Hall Planning Brief. The appropriation and use of Section 237 powers is required with the object of removing this risk and to facilitate the carrying out of redevelopment scheme.

The application of Section 237 powers would ease the problems although there is still a risk of legal challenge. Another issue is that the site includes open space in the marriage garden that borders The Paddocks. I for one missed the following advertisment in the local press:

The Town Hall site includes a Grade II Listed Building and open space.Public notice of the proposed appropriation to planning purposes of the Town Hall site under Section 122 of the Local Government Act 1972 and disposal of the open space under Section 123 of the Local Government Act 1972 was advertised in the local press on 13th and 20th September 2012. No objections were received

The site concerned can be seen in the pan below and covers a considerable area:

There have been rumours in the past about the possibiolity that the site could be used as a school and the need to address the problem of  'noisome uses' and the inclusion of the public space might reinforce that. The need for getting maximum profit from the site and the proxomity of the Ark Academy  had seemed to make that unlikely but the report includes this intruiging passage - again we don't have sit eof the confidential item in question:

Comments on end user

Members are asked to note the confidential letter received at Appendix 3.

As the Executive is aware from the report considered at its August meeting, the Council is projecting a shortfall of school places and has developed plans to expand primary provision. In addition, proposals to increase secondary provision (where the demand is manifested in later years) will be brought to the Executive for consideration in January.

The Town Hall is not identified specifically as an education site and is not factored into any of these plans, firstly (in terms of secondary provision) because of its close proximity to Ark Academy and secondly because its sale at market value is required to enable the Council’s move to the Civic Centre.

Education uses outside the state-funded sector on this site might have some wider benefits for the local population but their impact would be mainly neutral in terms of their impact on local state education provision.

The last paragraph seems to suggest that there might be the possibility of use by a private school. The Swaminarayan may have decided not to apply for free school status at present but would they be interested in this site?  It is a long way from the Swaminarayan Mandir but is more central and closer to Harrow which supplies many of the pupils. The school told me last month:

The Swaminarayan School is considering applying for Free School status. Whilst we have not found a site, we would wish to locate to a site in the heart of the Hindu community. The excellent education that the school provides at present will be open to all.

Even if free school status is rejected, would they be interested in a prestigious site such as the Town Hall?  Is it 'in the heart of the Hindu community'?

This is pure speculation but I did report back in May 2009 LINK that the Swaminarayan were considering a move to the north of the borough. This would free the present site, which used to be that of Sladebrook High School, as a possible site for a much needed secondary school in the Harlesden area - with the added bonus of the neighbouring Centre for Staff Development becoming free when it moves to the Civic Centre in Summer 2013. As I said pure speculation....

Meanwhile the report approvingly notes that in the bidder's plans for the Grade II listed building::

The key ‘character spaces’ in the existing building are thoughtfully used with minimum design intervention, and the extensions are shown in locations that the brief identifies as being suitable for additional building/enlargement.

A new thorn in the side for the Brent Council Executive?

A Brent branch of the LRC (Labour Representation Committee) is to be launched tomorrow.

The LRC takes its name from the 1900 committee which was the forerunner of the Labour Party. Its chair is John McDonnell MP and its group in the Commons are known as the Socialist Campaign Group. Jeremy Corbyn MP is a prominent member. The journal Labour Briefing is associated with the group.
 
The LRC which is said to have about 1,000 members is open to Labour Party members and socialists who do not stand against the Labour Party in elections. It is supported by several unions including ASLEF, CWU, FBU and the RMT.

Brent connections currently include the affiliated Kensal Green Labour Party and Pete Firmin, chair of Brent TUC who is joint secretary of LRC nationally..

The LRC has a website HERE  which is not as dynamic as I expected it to be, Only one of the policy statements has received any comments and as far as I can see the blog postings have received no comments at all. Things will need to be a little livelier in Brent if it is to make any impact and it will be interesting to see how relationships develop with the recently formed Brent TUSC (Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition) LINK  as well as Brent Fightback, which includes independent, Labour, SWP, Socialist and Green Party members.  A major issue is likely to be the position Labour councillors should take on the forthcoming budget, a possible rise in Council Tax and the iimplementation of cuts.

Will the Brent LRC have the Brent Executive trembling in their boots? Will the Brent LRC persuade those of us who have long given up on Labour to join them? Answers in the comment box below, please.

NO TO AUSTERITY-BUILD THE FIGHTBACK
Tuesday 30th October, Learie Constantine Centre, NW2 7pm

(the Centre is at the junction of Dudden Hill Lane and Villiers Road – 2mins walk from Dollis Hill tube on the Jubilee Line)

Activists and left wing Labour Party members in the Brent area have agreed to come together to organise a local section of the Labour Representation Committee (LRC) - the organisation that aims to make the Labour Party represent the working class and fight for its interests.

All are welcome - Labour Party and non-Labour members.

SPEAKERS INCLUDE:

John McDonnell, MP for Hayes & Harlington
- Chair, Labour Representation Committee, speaking on the fight against austerity

Speaker from the Counihan Family Campaign
- This family of 6 has been made homeless by Brent Council and are leading an inspiring local campaign for housing rights

Speaker from the NW London NHS Campaign

Local trade unionists

About the LRC

The original Labour Representation Committee was formed in 1900 to fight for political representation for the Labour Movement. In Britain today we face a similar crisis of representation. The LRC has been re-formed to secure a voice for socialists within the Labour Party, the unions, and Parliament.

Never in the history of the Labour Party has the need been so great to make the case for peace and socialism. The advocates of global capitalism and war have taken control of the political agenda. The task for today's LRC, founded in 2004, is to fight for power within the Labour Party and trade unions and to appeal to the tens of thousands who have turned away from Labour in disillusion and despair. Therefore we are calling upon all socialists, Labour Party and trade union members, constituency Labour parties and union branches to join our campaign and join or affiliate to the LRC.

The LRC is a democratic organisation committed to fighting for a socialist future:

- We need a foreign policy based upon peace, justice and solidarity
- Britain is a more unequal society than at any time since the Second World War. The LRC is fighting for a living wage, a decent state pension, council housing and public services run to meet our needs not sold off for private profit
- All people are equal. We believe in fighting all forms of prejudice and discrimination
- With global capitalism in control of the political agenda, there is an urgent need for a major shift of wealth and power in favour of ordinary people
- The LRC was setup to fight for workers’ rights, civil liberties and political representation
- With the planet on the brink of environmental catastrophe New Labour’s answer is more nuclear power and an expansion of aviation. We need a green energy policy based on renewable and the development of public transport

This is an exciting time to join the LRC – we are continuing to grow rapidly as Labour supporters, trade unionists and other socialists look to develop a radical agenda around which the movement can unite in the face of the resurgent Tory threat.

We have local LRC groups right across the country bringing together socialists and trade unionists to fight local campaigns.

 

Shared Public Health post ditched but Executive goes ahead with Barnet privatisation plans

The plans for a shared Director of Public Health with the London Borough of Hounslow were withdrawn this week by Brent Council.  The plans which were due to go before the Executive on Monday had encountered opposition from Labour councillors on the Brent Health Partnerships Overview and Scrutiny Committee. They had passed a resolution expressing concern over the plans. LINK

However a far reaching plan for a four borough out-sourcing of waste management, recycling, street cleaning and parks maintenance was approved by Brent Executive. The notorious  right-wing, privatising,  Barnet Council will become Labour Brent's partner in a move that will lead to job losses. The Barnet Chief Executive recently left the council apparently unable to stomach their policies any longer.

The Executive's decisions can be found HERE

Lorber calls for end to Brent Council infighting

Cllr Paul Lorber, Liberal Democrat and former leader of Brent Council has made the following statement on the current situation on the Council:

This is an extraordinary breakdown in relationships and poses a real risk to the effective running of Brent Council. I have had my differences with Gareth Daniel over the years but have always found it possible to maintain a professional relationship.

If Labour councillors are clumsily trying to ease Mr Daniel out of his position they are risking very large sums of public cash on redundancy and compensation payments, not to mention the damage to their and the council’s reputation.

It’s clear that the Labour group is split down the middle and Cllr Butt is being undermined even by his own Executive members. For the sake of Brent’s residents this infighting needs to end.

More very large primary schools on their way in Brent

Map of phased developments

Apart from the decision to seek partnerships with free schools and academies (below), another controversial but undebated consequence of the School Review going before the Brent Executive REPORT is to increase the average size of Brent primary schools with some having more than 1,000 pupils (excluding nursery).

I continue with the view that 4-11 year olds need educating in a small and manageable learning community where staff are well-known to them and the geography of the building negotiable.  Such provision will now be rare in Brent with faith schools generally smaller than local authority schools.

There are plans to utilise closed down libraries to form annexes to existing schools, at some distance from the parent school. The Preston Library building will be removed from the Council disposal list to provide extra classes for Preston Park Primary and Kensal Rise Library will be reviewed for additional classes for Princess Frederica Primary.

Following the all-through schools at Ark and Preston Manor primary provision is being considered at Wembley High and Newman College.There is a proposal to co-locate Manor school for special needs pupils on the Braintcroft site where the Braintcroft building would be rebuilt.

The Report does not go into detail about the impact on playground and playing field space available to pupils when the schools are expanded but my Freedom of Information request earlier this year showed a reduction in space per pupil in the recent expansions LINK 

The following details are extracted from the report which includes notes and caveats on each proposal. My capacity figures do not include any temporary bulge classes or nursery classes.

 

Phase 1 by Sept 2013	Current capacity	Future capacity
Barham	630	840
Fryent	420	840
Mitchell Brook	420	630
St Robert Southwell	315	420
Phase 2 by Sept 2014
Wykeham	420	630
Uxendon	420	840
Preston Park	630	1050
Wembley High (new primary on site)	0	840
Vicar’s Green (Ealing)	315	420
Chalkhill	420	840
Harlesden	420	630
St Joseph Primary	420	630
Leopold	420	630
Northview	210	420
Princess Frederica	420	630
Phase 3 by September 2015
Mount Stewart Inf nd Jnr	630	840
Elsley	420	840
Stonebridge	420	630
Malorees Inf and Jnr	420	840
Braintcroft	630	1,050
Carlton Vale Inf and Kilburn Park Jnr	420	630
Oriental City (new primary school)	0	420
Kingsbury Green	630	1,050
Phase 4 between Sept 2016 and Sep 2018
St Joseph Inf and Jnr	420	630
Quintain site-Wembley new primary school	0	420
Our Lady of Lourdes RC	420	630
John Keble C of E	420	630
St Andrew and St Francis	520	630
Newman College (Sec) – new primary school on site	0	420

The report forecasts  a 'significant' shortage of secondary school places by September 2014 and a report on this sector will be tabled in December. This seems rather last minute as the number of pupils in our primary schools has obviously been known for some time.