Is the Old Oak Common project in jeopardy?

 The vision in 2016

The Evening Standard reported yesterday LINK that the biggest landowner of London's largest regeneration project at Old Oak Common, Cargiant, has axed the £5bn proposal to develop its site.

The Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation (OPDC) was set up by Boris Johnson when London Mayor and Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt is a member of the board. LINK

Tony Mendes, managing director of Cargiant said the project had been made unviable by the actions of the OPDC:

Old Oak Common is fast becoming known as Old Oak Cock-up. The area was supposed to hep meet the housing crisis in London with 25,000 new homes, but it is going to fail to deliver all but a fraction of that number, at an outrageously high cost to the public purse.

Mendes called for the OPDC bid for £250m government funding for infrastructure to be  'paused' while the Government investigates the £30m of government money already spent and the bid to be properly scrutinised by the London Assembly and MPs.

A commenter on the Evening Standard website  says:

This is a reaction from Cargiant to the Compulsory Purchase Order for their land that the OPDC wants to obtain. Under a CPO, Cargiant will receive just the value of the current undeveloped land, plus the standard sweetener, which means Cargiant makes much less money from the site. On the other hand, the OPDC wants to build at a super-high density of 600 homes per hectare. Cargiant probably thinks that is far too high to sell the homes on the open market. At that density, the danger is that they might be bought just as investments largely from abroad, often with no one living in them.

A spokesperson for current London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, expressed disappointment that Mendes was 'looking to frustrate the project' and said that the OPDC had made a business case to the Government  for Housing Infrastructure Funding that would 'unlock the scheme' with a decision to be made in due course.

We are bound to hear more on this and I hope Brent councillors will play their part in scrutinising the project as one of the interested parties.

Future safety concerns overshadow today's Wembley Cup Final

Impression of Wembley Stadium surrounded by flats

As fans pour into Wembley for today's Cup Final Greg Dyke, FA Chairman, has warned of the dangers posed by Quintain's plans for new tower blocks close to the stadium. The £2.5bn scheme was approved by Brent Planning Committee in  controversial circumstances. LINK

The Standard LINK said:

FA  chairman Greg Dyke has warned that a planned £2.5 billion development around Wembley Stadium will have “terrible consequences” for the safety of fans on match days.

The former Manchester United director said the attack on the team’s bus by West Ham fans was “an important reminder that ensuring public order and safety in and around football stadia requires careful planning, good preparation and partnership working between all concerned

Mr Dyke, who steps down as FA chairman this summer, said Quintain’s proposals “as currently planned ... will have some terrible consequences for the public safety and traffic management around the stadium on event days. 

“We will continue to work with Brent, the Greater London Authority and the developer to ensure the problems are addressed, but fan management should not be an afterthought.

We will not drop our responsibility for ensuring that Wembley’s ability to inspire generations with its magical moments is not damaged by a lack of care for our visiting fans and local residents. We hope others will make the same commitment.”

Previously the Standard had reported on the FA's presentation to the Planning Committee:

Julie Harrington, operations director at the FA, told the council’s planning committee the location of the car parks off South Way “created genuine public order and safety concerns which would serve as a retrograde step for the stadium.”

She said: “Tuesday night’s disturbing scenes at West Ham’s Boleyn Ground only go to show that we absolutely cannot be complacent when it comes to fan management around the stadium.”

She said developer Quintain was ”working from a position to maximise profits” rather than to “protect fan safety”.

She said: “The holding of fans, the kettling of fans, that’s a return to the 1970s in my view.

“Even a short amount of time holding people, irate fans from teams that have lost, or rival fans mixing together is too much.”

Transport consultants working for the FA presented analysis showing fans could have to wait for up to three hours to board coaches under the new layout.

Ms Harrington warned that the FA “would not be able to attract major events to Wembley if fan’s can’t leave the car park.”

She said: “If fans can’t get to their coaches and can’t get to their vehicles, if up to 9,000 fans are pooled behind the stadium with nowhere to go, if 15,000 fans are pushed down back streets to their coaches, it’s a recipe for disaster, a public order disaster, and the FA will not stand by and see fans treated in this way.

“We cannot be complacent about the huge steps forward made in stadium safety in the past two decades. No-one should believe that its acceptable to herd fans like cattle. We must learn from past mistakes.”

The FA are in the difficult position of seeking to protect both fans and the Stadium's status  and maintaining a positive long-term working relationship with Quintain and Brent Council. 

 Quintain while retaining its name has been taken over by Lone Star, a Texas based company, and has  adopted a more aggressive approach to Wembley regeneration  as a result, building  higher and more closely packed blocks to maximise profits. Eventually they will complete the development and move on, leaving the FA, football fans, Brent Council and local people to cope with the consequences.

The FA could ask Sadiq Khan, the new London mayor, to call in the plans but there may be opportunities to have further talks about their concerns with the new Brent Cabinet.

What Brent's Chief Executive said about the death of Cllr Oladapo

Following a series of comments on the blog on the situation regarding the death of Cllr Tayo Oladapo  I reprint below an article I posted on April 28th  LINK which first made public the doubts about the Council's announcement.  After publication I was contacted by insiders alleging that the delay was an attempt to put off the by-election.  I could not find any evidence for this and at the same time could not see how a by-election delay would be of political benefit to Muhammed Butt. I also thought that such an action would have been so beyond the pale as to be unbelievable.

This is what I wrote to Carolyn Downs, Brent CEO:

I have been contacted by a number of people who expressed concern that the true picture regarding the death of Cllr Oladapo has not been given by Brent Council.

The claims are:

1. Cllr Oladapo actually died in January 2016 (January 29th has been given as the date).
2. That almost a month later Full Council on 22nd February agreed to approve his continued absence from meetings on the grounds of ill health.
3. That his death was not publicly announced  by the Council until March 11th
4. That his body is still in a morgue.

2 and 3 are a matter of public record.

Could you confirm the facts and explain the misinformation of February 22nd and the delay in the death announcement. In particular what checks had been carried out by officers/Brent Council with the hospital or Cllr Oladapo's family before seeking approval for continued absence on 22nd February?

 I recognise that there may be family reasons for 4.

Many thanks,

Martin Francis, Wembley Matters

This is Ms Down's response:

 Dear Mr Francis,

Thank you for your email.

In response to the point you have raised:

1. I have not received any formal documentation to confirm the death of Cllr Oladapo but understand that he died in late January.

2. The report which went to the Full Council meeting on 22nd February was drafted as the Full Council report which went in January 2016 stated that Councillor Oladapo's absence would be reviewed at Full Council in February if required. We believed Councillor Oladapo to be alive as we had not been informed of his death and therefore required a further exemption on this basis.

3.  I can confirm that Cllr Oladapo's death was announced by the council on 11th March which was as soon as I had been able to obtain certainty as to Councillor Oladapo's state of health.

4. The arrangements in relation to Cllr Oladapo's remains are a matter for his family as you suggest and I don't think it would be appropriate for me to comment on this.

Kind regards,

Carolyn Downs

Parents 'want councils to have powers to act on failing free schools'

With Michaela  Free School due to open on September 15th and Brent Council committed to talks with free schools providers to create  extra school places in Brent, parents may be interested in this report from today's Evening Standard:

Report by Anna Davis

Growing numbers of London parents want local authorities to step in if standards drop in free schools, new research reveals.
There is confusion among parents with children at free schools about who exactly is responsible for intervening if there are problems, according to a poll carried out by YouGov.

More than half of parents with a child at a free school in London said they believe local authorities have the power to intervene if it is underperforming.

But in fact local authorities have no powers over free schools, which are independently run and accountable to the Department for Education 

Parents were then asked which schools local authorities should have powers over — and 68 per cent said free schools. This is six percentage points higher than when the same survey was carried out last year. Sixty three per cent of parents said councils should have control over academies, which are also independent.

It is the first survey of London parents since the so-called “Trojan Horse” takeover plot in Birmingham schools and was carried out by London Councils, which represents all local authorities in the capital.

Peter John, London Councils’ Executive member for children and young people, said: “If you are a parent and you are worried about leadership or staff issues at your local school, it’s only natural you’d turn to your local council. Of course head teachers should run schools day-to-day, but it’s clear that on the wider issues, parents want a council role.”

The survey found that 81 per cent of parents want councils to be able to ask free schools and academies to expand to fit more pupils in. This has increased from 76 per cent last year. Councils are responsible for providing a school place for every child, but cannot open schools themselves or direct academies to expand.

London Councils predicts that 133,000 new primary and secondary school places are needed by 2018 to cope with growing demand.

Mr John said: “Parents increasingly support a council role in influencing schools to expand, if there is clear local need. This isn’t surprising given the shortage in London.”

A Department for Education spokesman said: “We have consistently demonstrated that we are tough on underperformance in all types of school. When we have concerns about academies or free schools, we act quickly. The introduction of Regional schools Commissioners and Head Teacher Boards will further ensure swift action in the small number of cases where academies struggle

Greens surge in Ipso MORI poll

Hot on the heels of the Greens surge in the polls ahead of the May 22nd European Elections, polling out today shows the Greens have jumped five points and are polling at 8% in non-European polling  ahead of next summer’s General Election.

Reacting to the Ipsos MORI polling, a Green Party spokesperson said:

“The Greens have not polled this strongly in non-European polling ahead of a General Election since 1989, the year the Green Party secured 15% of the vote. Our message of real change for the common good is clearly striking a chord.”

Reacting to the Ipsos MORI poll, The London Evening Standard  reported that, “today’s big winners are the Greens, whose support has shot up from three to eight points on the back of higher exposure in the campaign period.”

Green leader Natalie Bennett attributed the strong polling to the popularity of Green Party policies when given more media exposure and to voters’ disenchantment with the big parties. Speaking from Leeds, she said the polls “chime with what I am hearing around the country”.

According to ICM’s European Elections polling released on May 12th, the Green Party is polling at 10% ahead of the May 22 European Elections, putting it firmly in fourth place and three percentage points ahead of the ailing Liberal Democrats (7%).

The Greens are within touching distance of meeting their target of trebling their number of MEPs from two (Jean Lambert, London, and Keith Taylor, South-East) to six. Based on a national swing the latest poll would give the Greens five seats in England plus one in Scotland. The Lib Dems would have zero seats. Among 18-24 year-olds the Greens are the second most popular political party.

Police may look again at email fraud evidence in Kensal Rise development

The Evening Standard LINK  is reporting tonight that the police are set to launch an inquiry into the fraudulent emails that supported developer Andrew Gillick's planning application for the Kensal Rise Library building.

Hannah Bewley, who reports on Brent for the Harrow Observer, however has uploaded a story LINK that states:

A spokesman for Kensington and Chelsea police, which is dealing with the investigation, said: “Police have been informed that there is further evidence to support the allegation of fraud and are awaiting receipt thereof. A decision whether to progress the allegation will be made after all the evidence has been scrutinised.”

Clearly that raises the question of whether all the information was handed over by Brent Council  or perhaps the 'further evidence' is from individuals whose names and addresses were used without their consent. 

Whatever the case news that the police are now taking the issue seriously after their earlier dismissive attitude is welcome.

Butt 'bitterly disappointed' over dropping of police fraud email investigation

Reporter Hannah Bewley of the Wembley and Willesden Observer has been busy following up the Kensal Rise Pop Up library demolition story. Her report LINK contains the following statements from the Council and Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt:

A spokesman for Brent Council said:

The council undertook its own detailed enquiries before referring the matter to the police and provided the police with a summary of the outcome as part of the agreed referral process through the National Fraud Reporting Centre. The council remains very concerned about the way that the planning portal was used on this occasion and has subsequently made changes to forestall future problems arising. The council wants to continue to maintain the highest level of integrity with its planning process, since the authority continues to have statutory responsibilities to consider planning applications that are submitted.

Labour leader of the council Muhammed Butt said:

It is bitterly disappointing that the police have chosen to ignore the evidence found in the council’s own inquiries and drop their investigation. When the future of the building affects hundreds of Brent residents and the entire Kensal Rise community, any issue of alleged fraud must surely be a priority in order to maintain the trust of local people. Whilst I know that this Conservative-Liberal Democrat Government has cut the police force by a fifth in the last three years, I am troubled that this investigation has not been carried out as a matter of urgency. Brent Council will be writing to demand that the police review their original decision and launch an appropriate investigation.

Pressure mounted further following an Evening Standard report  LINK on the demolition and Hannah Bewley hinted on Twitter that the police may change their stance and expects a statement tomorrow morning. Cllr James Denselow tweeted back saying that he had 'seen the emails'  (presumably those between the council and police - not the fake ones) and that he had his fingers crossed.

I understand that  Kirsty Slattery, of Gracelands Yard, whose address was falsely used to support Andrew Gillick's planning application is taking up the issue directly with the police, having had no response to her emails to Brent Council.