First details of proposed Willesden Green Cultural Centre

...but will this shoe box be dwarfed by bloks of flats?

Galliford Try have delegated the designing of the new Willesden Cultural Centre to a Leeds based architects firm, removing the project even further from local people and designers who know the local area well. They have released the first images of the building which will replace the current library and bookshop. No space is allocated for the bookshop.

Allford Hall Monaghan Morris and Architecture 519 are pleased to announce they have been selected for the Willesden Green Cultural Centre Redevelopment in Brent with Galliford Try Regeneration. 

AHMM are leading the masterplan, which incorporates a new 4,000+ sq. m. library and cultural centre, with approximately 90 residential units by Architecture 519. A compact, atrium-centred scheme with a dramatic presence on the High Road will replace the existing 1980’s library, creating a community landmark in Brent. Activating the ground floor will be a café, children’s library and ‘creative cluster’ of large spaces tied into the masterplan through a significant new public space by Gillespies Landscape. 

The team, supported by URS Scott Wilson for structure and services, expect to submit a planning application in the spring, with completion in 2014 for the entire site."

Observers at last night's Council Meeting said that the council appeared confident that the project would go ahead with planning approveal by June/July 2012 with construction beginning in September 2012.

However a strong campaign is developing of those who are opposed the the redevelopment. They are joined by others with a particular interest in preserving the old Willesden Library.  Meanwhile Cllr James Powney, lead member for libraries, has intervened on the bookshop issue before the e-petition has closed and before it has been presented to the council.  As usual he appears to have made up his mind before hearing the arguments. This is what he posted on his BLOG:

Martin Francis of Brent Green Party has started a petition about the Willesden Bookshop.  Brent Council has given the bookshop notice to quit so that it can redevelop the Willesden Library Centre.  The petition appears to be arguing that the bookshop should be included as part of the new Willesden Library centre.  Presumably, Martin wants the Council to help the bookshop to temporary premises, and then to move back 18 months later.  Would any retailer really find it attractive to have two disruptive and expensive moves in a period of less than two years? Given that any retail space in the new library centre will be much higher quality than the current provision, the rent is likely to be much higher.  Would it not be more sensible to move to premises somewhere in the immediate area?

I have lodged the petition as a local resident rather than on behalf of the Green Party. As I write it has 278 signatures. Please encourage more people to sign so that Cllr Powney is forced to listen to us.

Here is another message from a concerned local resident:

I am also very unhappy about the proposed redevelopment of Willesden Library. Proper consultation has been distinctly lacking. 

We will be losing one of the more attractive corners of Willesden - currently providing much needed light and space in what is already a narrow and crowded high street; a much loved and well used book shop; a historic Willesden landmark in the old library building and a Library Centre which already houses an art gallery, museum, lots of space which has been allowed to deteriorate rather than be fully utilised as well as a decent sized library which the the south of the borough will now need following the closure of other local libraries.

The new plans seem to be far more about housing and council office space rather than a 'cultural hub'.

'Oh Lucky Jim, I don't envy him' - more cuts ahead

In the old days of the Soviet Union there were a select group of journalists called  Kremlinologists whose job it was to analyse Soviet journals, party statements and even the order in which the Kremlin leadership stood at military parades in order to understand the subtle power shifts and policy differences within the apparently monolithic leadership.

I feel sometimes that I am performing a similar role regarding the Brent Council Labour leadership. Ann John, although not a Stalin, does rule extremely firmly, can be fierce to colleagues as well as enemies and takes few prisoners: a cross between the Iron Lady herself and Ann Robinson in her Weakest Link role. Cllr James Powney plays the part of a humourless and insensitive apparatchik convincingly. Neither can be said to have been a great PR success.

On this blog and in the press I have argued that Labour does itself no favours by claiming that the cuts are terrible but they are managing to make them without hurting anyone. That line appears to be shifting and the 'revisionist' Executive member who is leading on this is Cllr Jim Moher. Representing 'Brent Council with a human face' he has been prepared to engage, appearing on the platform at the Brent People's Assembly to debate the Council's cuts and being ready to admit in the Council chamber that there are some streets that are suffering as the result of the street sweeping cuts. His letter on libraries and Sarah Teather in the Brent and Kilburn Times this week is in sharp contrast to the comments about library campaigners that James Powney makes on his blog LINK (can you imagine him being called Jim or even Jimmy?).

Moher says: '... I accept that a lot of people have been upset by this particular cut' but qualifies this by going on to say, '(less so it seems, about the other £41m [cuts] to our services imposed  by Mrs Teather's government)'. Later he states, 'If however, the campaigners get leave to appeal and the Supreme Court overturn those other judgements, the council will have to change the decisions. That is our system of democracy. ' He says he understands why campaigners would want to appeal to the government 'to overturn an unpopular local council decision' but asks the legitimate question whether 'a cabal of ministers can interfere in decisions lawfully and democratically taken, when they are mainly responsible for the expenditure cuts which required the decision?'

My answer to his question would be 'Yes, if the cuts mean that the council is not meeting the requirement of national legislation to provide an adequate library service.'

Moher's change of tone, if it represents internal shifts of emphasis, or even power, within the Labour administration, does lead on to other questions. If the cuts in Brent's budget are so large (and they are enormous) does it mean that the Council is faced with an impossible task to maintain services at an adequate level? One example is that the number of park wardens has been cut from 17 to 5, with only 3 on duty at weekends. The number of park vehicles has been cut in line with staff reductions. Is it possible to lock and unlock parks and cemeteries, provide security, enforce the new Dog Orders, and deal with emergencies with that number of staff. What will be the impact on parks in terms of fly-tipping, anti-social behaviour, rough sleeping and public use if people no longer feel safe? Across the council fewer staff are doing more work and morale is often poor.

If it is an impossible task, what should the Council do about it? Well before the ACF budget presentations they have already ruled out an increase in Council Tax, so that option which would be unpopular but might save some services has gone. They have rejected not setting a budget on the grounds that cuts made by the Chief Executive Gareth Daniel and his team would be worse - although senior officers and the Labour leadership are so much in cahoots there probably wouldn't be any difference. That leaves the option of working with local people on a 'needs led' budget, working out exactly what would need to be spent to ensure quality local services, and campaigning with local residents and organisations for that budget - uniting with other Councils to take on the Coalition government.

Putting to one side the issue of whether the Council could have made different cuts and the particular issue of the new Civic Centre, which now looks rather redundant if the Council shrinks as much as forecast, Labour is faced with the problem that they are getting kicked in the teeth by the public because they are doing the Coalition's dirty work for them.

Cuts get passed down the line and this Spring we are going to see them arrive in the laps of school governing bodies. The Lib Dem PR machine has been busy suggesting that Sarah Teather is giving extra money to Brent schools via the Pupil Premium. It is true that the amount across the country has been increased and that entitlement has been widened, but the problem is that other parts of the education budget have been cut and ring-fencing removed. Brent will be particularly affected because two more secondary schools became academies last year, and there is a possibility that more will go before the financial year end. This will top-slice the education budget. Cuts will hit special educational needs funding, the music service, arts projects and other projects which add the real 'buzz' and creativity to pupils' learning,

Governors will be in a similar position to councillors: under pressure to make cuts to balance the budget but recognising that the cuts will damage the quality of children's education. In addition the staffing cuts will fall on teaching assistants and other support staff, the number of which expanded under the Labour government. They have been trained in special 'intervention projects' for group and 1 to 1 teaching of children who have fallen behind and have done much to raise standards in Brent schools, which are now above the national average in many areas despite the disadvantaged nature of much of the population.

These staff are paid low wages on a term-time only basis, often on short-term or agency contracts,and are mainly women, working class and members of an ethnic minority. They contribute enormously to schools as positive role models from the local community.

Tough times and decisions are ahead.

The range of education services provided by the Brent School Improvement Service and an account of their impact on raising standards can be seen HERE

Brent Council calls for Government leadership on climate change

There were a number of motions before Brent Council on Monday night. Thnere is a certain ritual about this as, because of Labour's large majority,  their motions are always approved and those of the opposition routinely defeated. Often Labour's motions congratulate themselves on their administration's achievements.

Cllr James Powney moved a motion on Climate Change on Monday which combined huge global issues and the move to Brent's new Civic Centre. It reflected the concerns raised by Brent Campaign Against Climate Change at their recent public meeting addressed by Jonathan Essex of the Green Party and Barry Gardiner MP:

Council notes that climate change is the greatest threat to the future of our planet and that urgent action is needed if we are to reverse its effects.

Council also notes that there are alarming signs that the effects of global warming are already underway, with storms, floods and droughts happening more often around the world.

Council notes the measures being undertaken by Brent Council to reduce our impact on climate change, including the move to the Civic Centre, the introduction of emissions based parking permits, the setting of a carbon emissions targets target and reducing emissions from landfill.

Council calls on the Government to show real leadership at the forthcoming UN climate change conference in Durban by pushing the EU to commit to a second period of the Kyoto Protocol, as a route towards a global deal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and delivering on climate finance to help poorer countries deal with the effects of global warming.

March on Saturday to the Democracy Wall and Kingsbury Library

Preston Library Campaigners will be calling in at the Democracy Wall (also known as the Wall of Shame) when they march on Saturday from South Kenton Station to Kingsbury Library. They will leave South Kenton at 1.30pm and will call in at the Democracy Wall about 1.50pm.

You are invited to join in and dress up as your favourite story character.

Veolia concerns should be taken seriously - Lib Dem councillor

Cllr Ann Hunter (Lib Dem) brought up the issue of the West London Waste contract at the Council meeting on July 11th with a question to Cllr James Powney. The minutes of the meeting have just been published and the exchange is set out below:

Councillor Hunter stated that she understood lead members had received representations from residents asking that Veolia be excluded from the current procurement exercise for waste disposal because they felt the company had demonstrated racist recruitment practices with reference to its activities in the West Bank and Israel. Councillor Powney replied that West London Waste was embarking on a waste procurement exercise and it could not jeopardise this by not following the proper processes. Councillor Hunter responded by saying that she would like to see West London Waste take the concerns of local residents seriously and that she had been shocked to see the advertisement for jobs on the Jerusalem Light Railway which effectively prevented the majority of local Palestinian citizens from applying. She asked how it could be allowed that Veolia was treated as a suitable contractor and felt that the matter needed to be given serious consideration.

 Residents who share the concerns should see the letter Human Right campaigners are sending to the Council HERE and if they wish to sign it send their name. e-mail and postcode to:nernier@gmail.com

Waste Strategy Crisis: street sweeping cut as Veolia extracts more profit from Brent Council

Brent Council's negotiations with Veolia over the new waste strategy seem to be in trouble and have resulted in proposals for even more drastic reductions in street cleaning services than first expected. Officers say these have to be rushed in time for the October implementation of the new waste strategy despite negotiations with Veolia not being completed.

It is now proposed that in addition to the reduction in Zone 5 sweeping to one per week  that:

• Sweeping in industrial areas (Zone 7) reduced from 7 per week to 2
• Cease afternoon sweeping at weekends
• Reduce mechanical sweeping on weekday mornings
• Reduce weekend day service moving to a skeleton service with mobile teams
• Reduction in frequency in secondary shopping areas (Zone 2) to twice a day
• Stopping the seasonal leaf fall  service

Welcome to Brent - the Dirtier Olympic Borough

Clearly these reductions are going to make an impact on the appearance of the borough as well as making 50 street sweepers redundant. Probing a little deeper it is clear the the Council has not fared well in its negotiations with Veolia. The report to the Executive states:

In outline, it has not been possible to agree the reductions sought by the Council in respect of the waste collection arrangements partly because Veolia are seeking, through this significant change to the contract, the opportunity to try and improve profitability for the remainder of the contract which has, in their view, been eroded by a number of factors since the original start of the contract. Similarly, they are seeking to ensure through the negotiation of the changes to the street cleaning element of the contract, that they have a higher level of profitability for the remainder of the contract than they have recently been enjoying. In consequence, the reductions to the street cleaning regime recommended to meet the 2011-12 and 2012-13 budget requirements, are larger than might have been expected.

This is an understatement. The report reveals that as well as Veolia adding back into the contract indexation, costs that they claim to have been bearing in previous years, an inflation increase of 1% to which they were previously not entitle, there are additional costs of hiring vehicles rather than purchasing them (see my previous blog) and what the report calls 'other refinement by Veolia of figures'. All this added £362k to the budget gap. The report considers various ways of closing the gap but admits that if the savings are not made they will have to be found elsewhere in Environment and Neighbourhood Services. Cllr Powney will be responsible for finding these savings - or more bluntly, making these cuts. The proposals will go to Monday's Executive. The agenda and documents can be found HERE

One controversial element of the savings is Veolia's offer of  reduction in 'gate fee' for dry recyclables from £30 to £22 but this is contingent on less than 5% contamination which will be difficult to achieve with co-mingled collections.

The Brent waste contract comes up for renewal in 2014 and Veolia are also a likely bidder for the huge West London Waste Authority contract LINK The report notes that Veolia are seeking 'through the negotiation of the street cleaning element of the contract, that they have a higher level of profitability for the remainder of the contract than they have recently been enjoying'. Officers recommend that negotiations continue and are escalated to a higher level.

The budget is outlined below but other information in appendices to the report have been declared 'confidential' and not published: (click on image to enlarge)

June 4th - challenge councillors on library closures

A message from Save Kensal Rise Library Campaign:


Regular monthly surgery with Councillor James Powney who made the decision to close Kensal Rise library and has been vigorously attacking our campaign in his blog, Council Executive member Bobby Thomas who voted for the closure, and Councillor Claudia Hector who voted for the cuts but has pledged to pay for a lift in the library out of her own pocket.

Saturday 4th June, 10.30 until noon,
St Mark’s Church Hall, All Souls’ Avenue, London, NW10 5HX (5 mins walk from Kensal Rise library)

Brent Library Closures - the final act?

There were gasps from the public gallery at last night's Scrutiny Committee last night when Cllr James Powney strode into the Council Chamber in what appeared to be an early 20th century beige Amazonian rain forest exploration costume. The gasps (of admiration or incredulity?) soon turned into gasps of shock at the man's sheer audacity when he responded to objector's representations on the closure of half of Brent's libraries.

He accused the chair of Brent Youth Parliament (see below) of not having read the hefty document on the Libraries Transformation Project and described their request as 'superfluous'. Cllr Helga Gladbaum drew mutters from the public when she said she liked the way students used tables and chairs in the Town Hall for studying. Kishan Parshotam had pointed out that during the Easter holiday there had been over-flow from the Town Hall library because of the number of students and asked what the impact would be on these numbers if six libraries closed. The BYP's request that the Executive ensure suitable study facilities be available during the 2011 examination period was reworded into a recommendation that they consider what provision could be made during the current examination period and was approved with three votes for, 1 Labour against and three Labour abstentions. There were four Labour councillors on the committee, 2 Lib Dems - including the chair, and one Conservative. Labour voted down the other two recommendations as a block and did the same for all subsequent recommendations.

The criteria for alternative business plans were the subject of a long debate when the Preston Community Volunteer Library proposer spoke of the difficulty of getting financial information from the Council in order to formulate plans. Her request for details had been treated by officers as a Freedom of Information request with a timeline that meant the data was not available before the submission deadline. A legal investigation as promised on whether that was lawful.

The council was also criticised for not making the criteria on which the plans would be judged public before the campaigns worked on them. Instead the plans were submitted before the criteria were published and it was therefore no surprise that they did not meet them. As if this was not enough Cllr Powney said they would all have failed anyway because proposals had to all to be at no cost to the council and that any handover of council buildings would be at an 'exorbitant' cost to the council. In other words the volunteer proposers would have to purchase the buildings. A recommendation that the Preston Community Library proposal be reconsidered after the proposers had time to reformulate it was rejected. A similar request from Kensal Rise Library campaigners was rejected as were requests that the timescales should be clarified in order to ensure there was no gap in service (the six libraries will close imminently but extended hours and other changes will take a long time to implement) and that school staff and students should be consulted further as so few has responded to the original consultation.

This latter caused a further debate. Only 8 of 79 schools had responded to an e-mailed survey. Preston Library campaigners over the last 24 hours had found that at least 10 schools had said they had not been consulted. Cllr Powney insisted that they had all been consulted and that in addition a meeting had been held with school literacy coordinators. He claimed that they may not have responded because they were happy that the Transformation Project would be an improvement but also that  'administration in the schools may not be effective'.  Cllr Lorber retorted that the likelihood of a response would have been reduced  if the e-mail did not make clear that the proposals were about the closure of six libraries. Sarah Tannburn, in the absence of library officers who were on holiday,  confirmed that the title of the e-mail referred to 'Transformation' but 'as I recall' some of the 15 questions referred to closures. Lorber said if the the letter had been explicit about closures, schools would have responded.

A final recommendation from Paul Lorber that the Neasden library closure be reconsidered as the library's profile did not fit with the closure criteria and that Dollis Hill residents were faced with closures at both Neasden and Cricklewood, was rejected.

Cllr Powney concluded by saying that consultation respondents were not representative of either library users in particular or residents in general, consultations were not referendums and that the council could not merely comply with consultation outcomes as they would be in breach of regulations about council efficiency, securing best value, and other legislation. He was sure that the proposals would result long-term in an increase in library usage, study space and IT provision.

Brent Allotment Revolt - savour the speeches and oppose Coalition's threat to allotments

In an earlier blog LINK I reported on the extremely lively Allotments Forum where allottees took Cllr Powney to task over allotment rent increases and other issues.  The meeting was notable for its wide range of contributions ranging from dry detailed legal challenge to passionate speeches about the plight of pensioners.

The full flavour of the meeting can now be savoured through reading the official notes of the meeting HERE

Meanwhile the Coalition Government is threatened the future of allotments. Its 'Review of Statutory Duties' aimed at removing duties which are seen as a 'burden' on local authorities inccludes the duty to provide sufficient allotments for people who want them in an area. This would not only threaten future allotments, but present ones, and could make allotments susceptible for closure and redevelopment for housing.

A campaign is developing against these proposals. Follow this LINK to go to the National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners for further information and links to the response form. Deadline is April 25th 2011.  Chris Wells has suggested responses to questions 6 and 9 HERE

Improving Our Local Democracy

Cllr James Powney, the lead member for libraries, points out on his blog that the Extraordinary Council Meeting on library closures to be held on April 13th will make no difference because under the present Constitution full council now has no power to overturn decisions made by the Council Executive. He says it is just a 'talking shop'. In another posting he laments the 'partisan' atmosphere of the Scrutiny Committee which he suggests if used properly could have a role in improving council decision making.

The whole issue of council democracy could do with a fresh look.  Recently I have talked to Labour and Liberal Democrat backbench councillors who feel that under the present system they have very little voice in their own party's policy and little chance to contribute. Some are quite depressed by the experience and not likely to stand for election again.

On a wider level there is a danger that citizens who engage with the council will become disaffected by what some see as a disdainful rejection of the representations and proposals  they have made on issues such as library closures, Charteris Sports Centre and day centres.  Surely with the Coalition undermining local government through cuts and very low voter turn-out in local elections, the Council should be promoting active citizenship rather than dismissing it?

Gardiner's attack on Brewnt library closures

Full story on Barry Gardiner's attack on Brent's library closures HERE. This is a key extract from his speech:

“But I remember Nye Bevan said that priorities are the song of socialism. These libraries are our priorities, and they should not be taken away. They should be expanded."

Speaking about the ‘genteel decline’ of the nation’s reading rooms, the former junior Northern Ireland minister added:

“It is a trick councils do up and down the country. They look at resources like libraries and they find that they are not as well used as they used to be.

“But instead of thinking they can improve the resources, they say ‘OK, let’s run it down’. They use it as a justification for taking that resource away."

Libraries, Civic Centre, Wembley Youth Club, Waste, Allotments, Rats - all discussed but anything gained?

The Wembley Area Consultation Forum was considerably enlivened last night when 20 or so members of the Wembley Youth Club turned up.  They had heard rumours that their club may be closed as a result of cuts and wanted the council to know how important it was to them, and what a positive contribution it made to the lives of youth in the area. They told the audience about the sports available at the club and how taking part enabled them to focus and achieve, with those attitudes transferring into other aspects of their lives.

Cllr Ann John, leader of Brent Council, said that indeed there was a review of the youth service under way and she could give no promises. During the interval Youth Centre supporters crowded round councillors making their case, exchanging contact details and arranging further meetings.  Another battle is on its way!

Their presence was a refreshing change from the usual fairly stodgy (but often valuable) meetings with a cast of regular speakers, mainly of my generation or older. It was good to see a 13 year old stand up and speak his mind directly to councillors and the public.

A member of the Brent Youth Parliament later spoke about the increased  importance of libraries as a place for young people to congregate, borrow books and study,  now that the Education Maintenance Allowance is due to be abolished.

Cllr Ann John made a presentation on the difficulties that the Council had in implementing the 28% expenditure reduction required by the Government. This amounted to £100m over four years, front-loaded so that £37m of that must be cut in the first year. This was on top of the £85m capital grant lost from the scrapping of the Building Schools for the Future programme. Since the election other grants amounting to £6 had been lost.  She said that 350 council posts, mainly in management, had already been cut through voluntary redundancies, non-filling of vacant posts and retirement. A further 350 posts would now have to go and the process of compulsory redundancy had begun. Further savings would be made by making procurement more efficient but all these measures only amounted to £21m. This left £16m still to be found and the council was looking at reducing some services and stopping others: "There is nothing we are not looking at."

With income streams from Central Government reduced and the Council Tax frozen the Council  had to look at cuts in services and increased fees and charges for services in order to balance the budget.

In the question and answer session my suggestion that the Labour Council was finding itself in the unpleasant role of bailiffs, for the Coalition rogue landlords, wasn't well received by the platform. I noted the coincidence of £100m cuts needed and the £100m cost of the new Civic Centre. I recognised building had already started on the Centre but suggested that it had been designed in better times and should now be scaled back. My suggestion that it resembled Brent's own version of Stalin's Palace of Culture also was even less well received.

In response Ann John said that the Civic Centre had been agreed by all parties on the Council, that it would make savings in the long term and that the People of Wembley deserved something back for the inconvenience of  the regeneration of the Wembley Stadium area (if they has asked us we might have asked for something else!) She said that the cost would be recovered over a 25 year period by disposal of other buildings, reduced outgoings and increased efficiency. She claimed that projected revenue savings had increased to an estimate of £4m annually. She emphasised the green credentials of the building.

On the 127% increased allotment fees and the introduced of a £95 fee for rat infestation treatment she said that allotment fees had been very low and were still affordable. She claimed that the previously free rat infestation service had been misused with residents calling that service for other infestations (which they would have paid for) because the rat service was free. The new charges had been introduced as a result of comparison with other 'benchmark' boroughs and private providers. There was support from the audience for my claim that this would worsen the borough's rat problems particularly for multi-occupied houses and flats above shops. One resident called for reduce charges for pensioners who may otherwise be reluctant to call pest control.

Other residents suggested that the new waste strategy was an area where savings could be made - particularly on the cost of new bins. There was also claims that the salaries paid to the top executives of the Council were excessive in the present climate. Cllr John denied that they were out of line with other public sector salaries.

In response to a question from the floor Ann John pledged to continue to fund the Freedom Pass.

Cllr Powney's session on the Libraries Transformation Project was a slow simmer, boiling up at the end in comparison with the roasting he had at the Town Hall. Members of the audience stood up with a Save Our Library banner and there was close questioning of the figures behind the closure plans as well as declarations of the importance of libraries as centres for the community to mingle, as well as for reading, learning and other activities including classes, courses and homework clubs.Speakers emphasised the importance of having a library within walking distance for children, young mothers and the elderly. Cllr Powney got into a spat challenging one young mother who spoke about the difficulties of transporting several children on a bus, including a very young one. He said that loads of people used buses everyday to go to shopping centres as well as libraries and that wasn't a problem - he did it with children himself. Cllr John intervened to say that people who had a library near them should count themselves lucky and very few people had that luck. She said books were much cheaper now than previously and available at more outlets including supermarkets like ASDA.

More hackles rose when James Powney said that there was evidence that many people preferred to go to a bigger library with a 'better offer' and ignored their small local libraries. He rejected suggestions that the proposed Civic Centre mega-library could be scaled down to make money available for local libraries.  He also dismissed suggestions that all libraries could have reduced hours. He said this would mean more librarian redundancies and wouldn't release capital to invest in the service, and having a library open only two days a week wouldn't really amount to keeping it open in most people's eyes.

Asked about what would happen with closed buildings he said that two would revert to their Oxford Colleges; Barham would revert to the Barham Trust, Neasden could be leased to new users, which left Tokyngton and Preston to be sold. He said that without the revenue from the sales money would not be available to invest in an 'improved offer', including e-books. That got a response from a publisher in the audience who said that book sales were on the increase and that traditional books were not on their way out. Other residents questioned whether the service should get into the e-book business at all.

Cllr John, sounding rather more like David Cameron, expressed interest in groups and organisations of volunteers, particularly in trust and covenanted buildings, running the libraries themselves. She said she wanted to hear from them and meet to discuss options.

Sometimes the bailiff's find themselves in such a difficult position that they begin to sound like the landlords. 

Brent's Cuts and Library Closures Face Public Scrutiny Tonight

Cllr Ann John, leader of Brent Council, will face an audience of residents tonight to answer questions on the Council's cuts strategy which includes the loss of another 300 jobs, closure of day centres for people with learning disabilities and for those with mental health problems as well as increased charges for allotments and pest control.

Cllr James Powney, AKA Flakman, will again present the 'Library Transformation Project' which will close six libraries. This includes three libraries in the Wembley area: Preston, Barham and Tokyngton.


The meeting begins at 7pm at the Patidar Centre, London Road, Wembley (off Wembley High Road), just round the corner from Wembley Central Station. 


Residents who want to speak in a 'soapbox' to air local issues that they are concerned about should arrive a little early to complete a 'Soapbox' form which should be handed to an officer. Soapboxes are held at the beginning of the meeting. Ann John's session will run from 7.15pm until 8pm and the library presentation will be from 8.15pm until 9pm.