LETTER: Why I will stand against Barry Gardiner at the next General Election

 

Graham and Barry 

 

 Dear Editor,

 

On Saturday 6 September I was one of 890  people arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Act for holding a cardboard sign. I was held for 12 hours and released at 

4.30 am on Sunday morning from Ilford police station, 18 miles from my home in Brent.

Barry Gardiner MP or Brent West voted for the proscribing of the non-violent group Palestine Action under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and is therefore personally responsible for the arrests of peaceful protestors in Parliament Square including blind people,many very elderly people and many people there from religious groups like the Quakers. The police were rough with anyone who refused to give their names before seeing a solicitor - I am a 71 year old grandad and was double handcuffed and thrown on the floor of a police van for an hour.

Today I announce that I will be standing against Barry Gardiner at the next General Election as I hold him personally responsible for the arrests and police brutality, but mine is not a revenge mission.

Gardiner is now a media favourite and regular on the BBC and Nigel Farages GBNews. His role is to defend the Starmer government when they cut Winter Fuel payments, attack disabled people,privatise the  NHS, allow further fossil fuel drilling and above all continue to sell arms to the Israeli Defence Force which is committing genocide in Gaza.

This latter role is no surprise for Gardiner is a big supporter of Israel, a former vice -chair of Labour Friends of Israel, who fully supports Zionism and its horrors against defenceless Palestinians.

Gardiner is a rich man who has drawn a big salary for his 28 years in Parliament - he currently receives £94k a year. He has lost touch with the working people of Brent and  when I am elected I will only  accept an average workers wage.

I stand for a better public NHS, green energy, nationalisation of the water companies, expansion of rail travel, a wealth tax on the richest and much else. Above all I oppose the genocide in Gaza and the West Bank.

Contact me : grahamdurham@hotmail.com

Former Brent Councillor Graham Durham arrested at free speech on Palestine demonstration

 

Former Brent councillor, 71 year old grandfather Graham Durham was arrested by police at Saturday's demonstration for free speech on Palestine.

Durham told Wembley Matters, ' I was released at 4.45 am in Ilford after being held for 12 hours, double handcuffed, carried and dumped in a van and driven to Ilford cop shop .'

On Facebook Graham posted:

I just want to pay tribute to the magnificent organisers and volunteers of Defend Our Juries.

 

The support and guidance of the video briefings before yesterday’s Palestine Actiion event were fantastic. At 4am ( twelve hours after my arrest ) the police let me telephone the designated solicitor firm, there I received clear and helpful advice from a solicitor who could be at home in bed.

 

 Emerging from a police cell at 4.45am into a dark backstreet of Ilford ( 18 miles from home with no public transport), I and others were met with a group of DOJ volunteers with tea, coffee , food and offers of accommodation and help with taxis etc. This was repeated at 18 police stations and custody centres for many many hours.

 

To emerge bruised and for many brave arrestees frightened to see the Palestinian flag flying was magical.

 

Solidarity as it should be .. well done everyone

 

 

Former Brent Labour councillor lambasts Dawn Butler for her failure to oppose cut in Winter Fuel Allowance

 

Graham Durham publicly calling for Brent MPs, Dawn Butler, Barry Gardiner and Georgia Gould, to vote to keep pensioners' Winter Fuel Allowance

Former Brent Labour councillor, Graham Durham, now a local National Pensioner Convention activist, has attacked his MP Dawn Butler for failing to oppose the cutting of the Winter Fuel allowance by the Labour government, and failing to respond to her constituents' concerns.

 

 The cut has led to a storm of protests across the country. Many are predicting that the poorest  pensioners will struggle to heat their homes this winter and over  half a million people have signed an Age UK petition opposing the cut.

 

 

 Unite the Union October 7th Lobby of Parliament

Graham Durham, aged 70, said:

 

It is sadly inevitable that some old people in Brent will die as a result of this cut  if we have a cold winter. Over 3,000 poorer pensioners in Brent East are affected so it is very sad that Dawn Butler did not vote against the cut in Parliament.

 

To add insult to injury Dawn Butler has failed to respond to constituents who wrote to her expressing concern over many months and failed to meet constituents when they joined the national lobby at the House of Commons on 7 October.

We need our local MP to stand up for us and oppose this cruel cut.

 

 

Graham Durham will be speaking about his recently published novel, A Peal of Socialism, at Kilburn Library, Salusbury Road, NW6,  tomorrow 11am-12. The novel is set in Kilburn, Cricklewood and Willesden.

Graham Durham speaks abut his first novel, 'A Peal of Socialism' Kilburn Library, October 9th 11am-12 noon

 Wednesday October 9th Kilburn Library 11am-12 noon TICKETS

Coffee Morning: A Pearl of Socialism with author Graham Durham - October 9th 11am

 

EVENTBRITE LINK

BRENT SOS: Tribute to Brent library campaigners 10 years after Brent Council closed half our libraries

 In the guest post below Paul Lorber, volunteer at Barham Library reflects on the battle against the closure of six Brent libraries, at the time half of the total libraries in the borough.  There were debates within SOS Brent Libraries over the issue - some wanted to concentrate on maintaining the provision of a locally accessible, properly funded professionally staffed library while others, although agreeing with that as a long-term aim, wanted to safeguard the actual buildings and stocks with  short-term volunteer led provision. Taking the legal route was an option undertaken only after considerable debate and produced national headlines. LINK

Four of the six were 'saved' one way or another but Neasden, despite being in one of the poorest areas in the borough had no high profile backing it and is now a church. Tokyngton Library, across the River Brent from St Raphaels Estate, was sold off to an Islamic Association in which  Muhammed Butt  was alleged to have an interest. LINK On the other hand Kensal Rise campaigners had access to a long list of celebrity authors to back their campaign.

The closures led evetually to the demise of   Council Leader Ann John, and her replacement by Muhammed Butt.  It is interesting to revisit the Open Letter that former Brent Labour councillor Graham Durham wrote to him at the time. LINK 

Brent Council began to give some tentative assistance to the volunteer libraries but with no commitment to full reinstatement of the services, signing a Memorandum of Understanding with them in 2017.  LINK

 Recently Preston Community Library after some internal disagreements, has moved to temporary premises while a block of flats is being built on the  redeveloped site with space for a volunteer library on the ground floor.

 

Guest post by Paul Lorber, library volunteer, Friends of Barham Library

 

he second week of October marks 10 years since Labour Councillors in Brent put the final nail in and closed 6 public libraries in Brent. Libraries in Barham Park, Cricklewood, Kensal Rise, Neasden, Preston and Tokyngton were closed after a long battle to save them.

 

There was massive opposition to the closures proposed by the Labour run Brent Council with large petitions, protests and well attended meetings. Local Campaigners raised over £30,000 and took the Council to Court and it was only after they lost their case and the Judge denied them the right to appeal that Brent Council was finally able to close the 6 public libraries for ever.

 

What Labour Councillors did not expect was the determination of dedicated local people to fight on and establish their own Community Libraries to continue the provision of service to the public.

 

They decided to close 6 local libraries (half the total) to save around £1 million. Around 80% of that cost related to staff costs. Local people asked the Council to hand over the Library buildings so that volunteers could run the Libraries instead. This offer was refused despite the fact that 3 of the Library buildings were gifts to local people - Cricklewood and Kensal Rise from All Souls College Oxford and Barham Park from Titus Barham of Express Dairies.

 

For 10 years dozens of local volunteers have kept the dream of local libraries alive and 4 have survived - Barham Community Library has moved around between Barham Primary School, High Road Wembley and finally Barham Park itself and has been actively providing a service for 10 years. Preston Community Library eventually fought its way back into its own building and while Kensal Rise and Cricklewood Community Libraries had their old buildings sold to developers All Souls College, to their credit, insisted that space was made available to the reborn Community Libraries. Kensal Rise has been operating for some time and Cricklewood is hoping to open soon.

 

While the Community Libraries cannot compete for money and resources with Brent Council funded libraries they compensate for this with the dedication of their volunteers and their ingenuity in providing a wide range of local services. Barham Community Library has put on live theatre, Preston has a Film Club while Kensal Rise has put on Author and Comedy events. They all provide the usual book lending services and a wide range of activities for people of all ages.

 

Some of us have been around right from the outset. Over the past 10 years hundreds of people have helped and volunteered to keep the Community Libraries and the spirit of community service alive.

 

I still think that Labour councillors made a big mistake in closing the public libraries and refusing to work in partnership with local people. It is for Labour Councillors to look in the mirror and admit that they made a big mistake.

 

Today, while remembering the battles of 2010 and 2011, I just want to pay a Tribute to all those dozens of dedicated people who recognised the importance of local libraries and would not allow them to die. And of course the best way of recognising this achievement is by paying a visit and supporting your local Community Library in Barham Park, Cricklewood, Kensal Rise and Preston is by paying a visit and borrowing a book or two.

 

 

Brent campaigners at a national demonstration

 

EDITOR'S NOTE

I would be interested in other campaigners' comments on the campaign and what has eventually transpired. 

 

 

Brent Central Labour Party GC: Labour suspensions 'smack of totalitarian regimes'

Graham Durham speaking at a joint Brent Solidarity Campaign-Brent Trades Council meeting on Palestine - September 2018
 

Local Labour pro-Palestine activist and former Brent Labour councillor Graham Durham last night received support from the GC of Brent Central Constituency Labour Party followed his ‘administrative suspension’ from the Labour Party after he pointed out that the Chief Rabbi was a Conservative in the context of the Board of Deputies ’10 Commandments’ put to Labour leadership candidates.

Durham had received enough support inside the Labour Party to be on the current ballot for the NEC but has now been removed.  There had been rumours about the suspension over the weekend, which initially he denied, only to receive the notification late as it had gone astray in the post.

This is the motion:

"This GC has been concerned at the recent spate of administrative suspensions from the Labour Party.

Candidates for the forthcoming NEC elections and parliamentary selections seemed to have been targeted which has meant that CLPs and unions who nominated these candidates were de facto disenfranchised. We were however pleased that Jo Bird, for example was "reinstated" and is back on the ballot paper.

Now it seems the same method of administrative suspension has been used again, this time against Brent Central member, Graham Durham, who was also on the ballot for NEC. This means he can no longer be on the ballot.

It seems to happen to members once they have achieved enough support to be on the ballot. Labour Party elections should be as democratic as possible. Removing candidates in this way smacks of totalitarian regimes who deal with "opponents" in this way rather than letting the electorate decide.

This GC wants there to be a fair and transparent election of NEC members and parliamentary candidates. The timing of these suspensions gives us cause for concern. We ask the NEC to address these issues as quickly as possible and call for NEC elections should to be halted until all candidates under suspension have been investigated or had their suspensions lifted. "

Brent to devise a strategy for universal free school meals for primary pupils

Free school meals for all primary pupils in Islington - so why not in Brent?

Leader of Brent Council, Muhammed Butt, told a recent meeting of Brent Central Constituency Labour Party that council officers have been instructed to prepare a comprehensive strategy to provide free school meals for the 13,000 Brent primary pupils who do not currently receive them.

The strategy will draw on the experience of four London boroughs who already provide  free school meals to all primary children and will investigate a number of possible funding streams.

Graham Durham, a Brent CLP supporter of the proposal, has requested that the strategy and implementation dates be set out before the November CLP meetings.

Universal Free School Meals directly address issues of hunger and poor nutrition in children of low income families but also serve to remove any lingering social stigma associated with 'free dinners.' They ensure a steady income stream for school caterers and remove the school's administrative burden of collecting 'dinner money' and chasing up debts. The provision of a hot nutritious daily meal also aids a pupil's concentration in class contributing to closing the gap between the educational attainment of poor and better off pupils.

An  Islington Council paper setting out the issues can be found HERE

UPDATE: PROPOSED ‘FREE’ SCHOOL CALLED IN BY BRENT COUNCILLORS - BRENT NEU 'APPALLED BY PROPOSED PRIVATISATION'

From the Brent branch of the National Education Union (NEU)

UPDATE: The Call-In will be heard by the Scrutiny Committee on Thursday May 9th 

Brent NEU Officers have written in the strongest terms to Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of the Council, after the Labour Cabinet voted to support a ‘Free’ School on the Roundwood Youth Centre site. ‘Free’ schools are academies and part of this Government’s privatisation of state education programme.

Brent NEU had been repeatedly assured that there were no plans for any more ‘Free’ Schools. Cllr Butt had also publicly assured the local Labour Party of this when the idea was first mooted. Yet that is exactly what is happening – with Brent actually being the ‘sponsor’. It is to be run by Brent Special Academies Trust. 

Now the decision has been called in by a group of councillors led by Cllr Jumbo Chan stating that the Cabinet has not fully explored options for a Local Authority controlled school to provide alternative provision at the site of the Roundwood Centre or other potential school sites in the borough such as the Roe Green Strathcona site.

Brent NEU understands that local Headteachers are opposed to a ‘Free’ School, and that some of them had initially been approached to take on Roundwood as an extension of their own school. We have been told that these approaches had not been taken up. We have formally requested, under FoI, copies of any correspondence relating to this as we do not believe this was fully pursued by the Local Authority.

Brent NEU fully understand and support the need for more provision for students who are temporarily excluded from school, but strongly maintain that such provision should be under LA control and not as a ‘Free’ School run by a Labour council and an academy trust. 
It has been national Labour Party policy since last year not to support any new academies or ‘Free’ Schools and, when in power, to allow academies to return to the Local Authority. Jeremy Corbyn, Leader of the Labour Party, reinforced this message when he spoke to the NEU annual conference in Liverpool on 16^th April. A motion was also passed at the Brent 
Central Labour Party meeting on 18^tht April condemning this latest move by Brent Council. 

Hank Roberts, Brent NEU President and National Executive member said:

Has no-one at the top of the Council watched the Panorama programmes exposing the iniquitous practices of academies? I am sure they have, yet Cllr Butt and Cllr Sandra Kabir, who led the privatisation of The Village school, continue to support the privatisation of our schools supported by Gail Tolley, Strategic Director, Children and Young People. Instead they should follow the lead of other Labour Councils who are promoting the party line such as Newham, Barking and Dagenham, Camden and Redbridge to name but a few.

Editor’s Note: At the last Cabinet meeting when the free school proposal was approved local Labour Party member Graham Durham interrupted the proceedings to condemn the Labour Council’s move to invite potential sponsors to set up an alternative provision free school at the Roundwood Centre:

-->

VIDEO: Butt lashed over Brent Labour Council's decision to set up a Free School

Brent Cabinet faced angry criticism tonight when it approved the setting up of a Free School offering 'alternative provision' for children rejected by local secondary schools.

Local Labour Party member Graham Durham lambasted Cllr Muhammed Butt, Labour leader of Brent Council, for not following Labour Party policy which he claimed is against the creation of any more free schools.

Cllr Mili Patel read a statement in a barely audible voice about the proposal but rather than focusing on the creation of a free school focused on the youth provision that would be offered outside of school hours by the voluntary sector.  There will be no directly employed Brent Council youth workers but building maintance costs and school hours running  costs will be paid by the Free School.

Durham said that rather than a Free School the Council could have asked a local mainstream secondary school to run the facility for out of school children. All Brent former local authority secondary schools are now academies as are all but one special school. The majority of Brent's academies are stand-alone rather than part of a chain.

Guardian on Labour Party education policy LINK

Later Graham Durham claimed on Facebook that the Brent CEO left the meeting to accost him after the item was discussed:

What made the event unusual was that as I was outside and walking away from the meeting outside in a corridor,  I was cornered by the Chief Executive ( supposedly non-political) who called me ‘ a vile little man’. I had never met her before but she clearly does not like ‘her’ councillors receiving independent socialist advice. Odd.

UPDATE Brent Labour MPs 2-1 against Welfare Reform Bill

Dawn Butler (Brent Central) and Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead & Kilburn) defied the Labour whip last night and joined 46 other Labour MPs in voting against the Welfare Reform Bill. Liberal Democrat MPs also voted against.

Tulip Siddiq had signalled her intention in a Channel 4 News interview earlier that evening.  Renowned local Tweeter Pukkah Punjabi revised her Storify posting in  the light of Siddiq's stance. LINK

As far as I know ultra loyalist Barry Gardiner (Brent North) obeyed the whip. Gardiner's one attempt at rebellion was against Gordon Brown and unfortunately was ill-timed - just a few days before Big G 'Saved the World' during the economic crisis.

UPDATE Barry Gardiner has told the KILBURN TIMES that Tulip Siddiq and Dawn Butler fell into a Government trap by voting against the Bill:

He explained: “Either we voted for the bill because we supported those of our policies that they’d incorporated into it but in so doing we voted for unacceptable changes to the benefits system such as three million families that are going to lose £1000 or impact on carers from the benefit cap. Or we voted against those regressive policies in the bill but in so doing voted against our own on apprenticeships.

“It was meant to trap us. It was a false choice designed to force us into either opposing our own policies or supporting the evil policies they were putting forward. I’ve always considered that if you’re asked to choose two unacceptable positions the sensible position is to refuse both. That is why I abstained."

The revolt perhaps gives some indication of the core support Jeremy Corbyn may command in the Parliamentary Labour Party. Labour Mayoral candidates Diane Abbot, Sadiq Khan and David Lammy also voted against the Bill.

Ahead of the vote Green MP, Caroline Lucas, said: 

“The Tories are attempting to dismantle our welfare state, and cut back on support given to those who need it the most.

“The bill will slash support for people with ill health including many with mental health problems – new claimants of Employment Support Allowance in the Work Related Activity Group, will see payments cut by almost £30 a week. This is very harmful for people with long-term fluctuating mental ill-health.  It will lock in child poverty for those born into larger families and it will leave Ministers significantly less accountable for their policies by scrapping the current legally binding child poverty targets.  

“It’s also deeply concerning that the bill includes a clause which would allow the Government to further lower the cap on benefits without properly consulting Parliament - thus potentially plunging more children into poverty without MPs even having a debate on the issue.

“It's now down to MPs from all parties to look beyond the politics of today’s debate and focus instead on the devastating impact that this piece of legislation will have on people up and down the country. 
"Our crumbling social security system is on the brink – now is the time to take a stand.

“George Osborne is playing politics with poverty. Failing to stand up to this regressive Welfare Bill would be an utter betrayal of the principle which says that those in need deserve support.  I’ll be joining many MPs from across the parties in voting against the Government’s Bill and making a stand for our welfare state.”

Lucas has spoken of the need for a 'Progressive Alliance' to challenge neoliberalism and austerity and yesterday's vote  gives some indication of the potential extent of that alliance in Parliament. 

Before the vote Owen Jones released a video making the case for voting against the Bill.

Brent Labour's choice: Resist or Rat on the Poor

from @MapesburyGreen

Saturday was a busy day for Brent Labour Party members with the opening of offices for the parliamentary candidates and a big push on Dawn Butler's campaign for Brent Central.

Down at the Methodist Hall on the Neasden roundabout members were subjected to 'Death by Powerpoint' style presentations and separate cafe style discussions on different services and the cuts proposed. A familiar process for those who have experienced 'Shaping a Healthier Future' or Brent Plan consultations.  It is a method that seems to dilute opposition and impose the control of the organisers.

I expected little from this 'Shaping a Broken Borough' consultation and that was confirmed by Graham Durham's posting on the Brent Fightback page on Sunday:

-->

Well what a poor turnout at the All Brent Labour Party meeting yesterday on the £54million cuts proposed by the Labour leader, Cllr Butt. By the time votes were taken only 12 ordinary Party members were present - the rest were councillors. Reasons for this poor attendance vary - obviously considering how to destroy services to the poorest and most vulnerable in Brent is not everyones cup of tea as a priority for 10 am on a Saturday morning. There is also a democratic deficit in the Labour Party as ordinary members know that whatever they say the Labour councillors will ignore it.

This cynicism grew when Labour councillors awarded themselves a 25% pay award this year - so councillors now have an interest in turning up to ensure their huge allowances are protected. As usual the trick of proposing slightly more cuts ( £60m) was used so Butt and co can claim later they saved this or that ...but otherwise there were the usual crocodile tears from Cllrs Butt and Pavey that Labour councillors do not want to attack the most vulnerable at all but feel obliged to do so. 

The cuts themselves were set out in a series of PowerPoints prepared by Council officers - and sadly most of the justifications were read by Cabinet members from scripts prepared by Council officers -as ever it was clear Labour councillors were doing what they were told by officers and exerted no control over Council decisions at all. When the detail of the cuts were revealed there was much unhappiness- in the children's service for example over the £8.4 million cuts. 

Cllr Ruth Moher tried to present £2.3milion of these cuts as 'uncontentious'-as they represent a £700k loss of residential placements for the most needy children in care ,cuts of £650k in spending on quality remand placements . They were, of course, deeply contentious. Worse was to come as £900k was to be lopped off what is left of the Youth Service, carers and study advice to the most vulnerable young people was to be slashed by £500k, Stonebridge Adventure Playground was to be slashed by £118K, up to ten Children’s Centres closed etc etc. 

When it was pointed out that there is an epidemic of child abuse in Brent and everywhere else and all these proposals and more put children more at risk of abuse it suddenly dawned on some councillors that they were attacking the very children they had been assured would be protected. One new Brent North councillor declared she spent her working life working for vulnerable children and became quite upset when she realised she was required to vote to damage these very children. 

When a vote was taken on a Kilburn ward motion to refuse to make the cuts and to campaign against them Party members were tied in the vote - but twelve highly paid Labour councillors were allowed to vote to rule this out (only one Cllr Rita Conneely abstained). There will be sleepless nights counting those allowances between now and March 2nd when the Council budget is set.

There are consultations with residents tomorrow (see image above) where there will be a temptation to argue for specific services in the £6m cap between the cuts set out in the draft budget and the total actually required.  However Brent Fightback wants a much more militant approach by the Council"

Fightback believes the Council should resist the cuts, tell the government that they are totally unacceptable and refuse to implement them, that they should organise a march to Eric Pickles' office or Parliament and ask the people of Brent and all the other Labour Councils and the people of other boroughs to come with them. It would be good if Fightback supporters could go to these meetings and make these points

A well placed senior source reckons that Muhammed Butt currently has the support of about three quarters of the Labour Group so a revolt seems unlikely at present, although those who are disaffected are VERY disaffected.

Brent Labour Councillors must act on racism and bullying tomorrow

Former Brent Council Executive member James Powney returned to the subject of the current race discrimination and bullying scandal at Brent Council on his blog yesterday. LINK

This is what he had to say:

I notice that in a debate on Martin Francis blog some of the commentators appear to be confusing his position and mine.  My original post is here, and Martin has paraphrased it accurately, whilst adding his own view.  Hence the understandable confusion.

My view is that Brent Council had strong rules and procedures before 2012, including appropriate relationships between members and officers.  These were built up over many years since the nadir of the Tory administration in the 1990s, as explained here.  Since 2012, there has been a steady decline in the application of appropriate standards, leading to a situation where accusations of various forms of abuse, including racism and misuse of public money, are flying about.  This is, in my view, the result of the past couple of years where patronage and irrational decision making have increased, scrutiny has declined, and certain individuals appear to have been allowed to believe that they enjoy impunity from accountability.

My view is that it is up to elected councillors to step in and sort this out, whether the abuses are being committed by over mighty officers or whether they are being committed by elected members who are out of control (or indeed whether they are being influenced by people who fit in neither category). Given the composition of Brent Council, that primarily means the Labour Group.

The debate on Martin's blog can be found here. 

It would be a pity if Labour councillors meeting tomorrow as the Labour Group let personal antipathy towards James Powney (as a member of the old regime), myself (as a member of a rival political party or Graham Durham (well, as Graham Durham) get in the way of recognising the need to deal with this issue.

Up to this point the scandal has not hit national media but any risk assessment of the potential damage to the Council and perhaps the Labour Party's reputation would recognise that the matters needs to be dealt with decisively and action taken.

In the last fortnight I have received emails and phone calls from former and current Brent Council workers about working conditions at the Council, some of whom work at a senior level. They have been told they will be disciplined if they approach Councillors directly and those that have left have had gagging clauses imposed as part of the settlement.

I have inadvertently found myself in the position of being their only outlet because of the Council's actions.  Several have wept on the phone as they recall the effect on their health and emotional well-being as well as the impact on their families.

Councillors should recognise that it is their responsibility to ensure that their employees are treated fairly in an atmosphere free from harassment, bullying and fear.

It is as simple as that.

It is not something they can ignore.

Dawnites strengthen position in Brent Central CLP

Michael Calderbank

Supporters of Dawn Butler, made an almost clean sweep in elections to Brent Central Constituency Labour Party  General Committee last night.

Michael Calderbank, who was banned by Brent officers from the local election count in May, becomes Secretary. Terry Hoad was elected Chair but Cllr Janice Long survived as Vice Chair and Membership Secretary. Ivor Etienne was elected Vice Chair, Campaigns.

Cllr Ketan Sheth, former chair of Brent Planning Committee had already resigned. Karin Barrett, a powerful figure in Brent Central did not stand again  and Graham Barrett was ruled out for Treasurer by the GC gender balance rule.

Cllr Tom Miller defeated Graham Durham for the Trade Union Liaison post. Araz Moiz is the new Treasurer.

I understand that former councillor James Powney, who has been very concerned about leaks from the Labour Party to Wembley Matters, was rather perplexed by the rules, but all was sorted out eventually.

Former councillor Jim Moher, who recently had a  run in with the news editor of the Kilburn Times, will be Dawn Butler's election agent for the 2015 General Election.

Protesters take over Brent Civic Centre Grand Hall for impromptu People's Assembly

Demonstrators took over the Grand Hall at Brent Civic Centre tonight for an impromptu 'People's Assembly' after the Mayor, Bobby Thomas, adjourned the full Council meeting to another room.

The adjournment took place as a result of disruption when angry campaigners protested at the failure of the Council to allow discussion of the Council Tax Support scheme which this year resulted in more than 3,000 poor people being summonsed by the Council for non-payment of Council Tax bills. Many had to pay court costs on top of the tax they owed.

Campaigners from Brent Housing Action had asked to speak at the meeting about their concerns but were refused by Democratic Services on the grounds that there was 'no provision' for speakers in the Council Constitution, When they discovered that speaking rights could be granted if the three Council party leaders agreed, they wrote to all three, but the Conservative leader reported that Council, officers said that this could only be done well in advance as it had to appear on the meeting agenda.  A last ditch appeal to Muhammed Butt to move suspension of  Standing Orders so that a speaker could be heard was turned down.

When  the Council Tax Support Scheme was reached on the agenda, Liberal Democrat leader, Paul Lorber moved suspension of Standing Orders so that the item could be discussed fully. His request was refused by the Mayor, Bobby Thomas, but eventually he was forced to put it to the vote. The Labour group voted it down but the public gallery showed their view by voting, tongue in cheek, for the suspension.

An exchange then took place between former Labour Councillor Graham Durham and the Mayor in which Durham accused Thomas of reneging on a promise made at a Trades Council Meeting to give campaigners against cuts a voice.

Thomas ordered the self-employed security guards to remove Graham Durham and during the confusion Robin Sivapalan stood in front of the councillors and made a speech about how having to pay Council Tax was causing suffering for Brent's poorest residents already hit by benefit cuts and the hosing benefit cap.

Sivalapan was then man-handled out of the room by the security guards with Graham Durham remaining in his seat. The live feed had been turned off by this point and after hurried consultation Mayor Thomas announced that the meeting was going to reassemble in another room and that the public would not be admitted.

Demonstrators tried to gain entry, expressing the view that the public had a right in the interests of democratic transparency to see Council business being done. Security would not let them enter although at least one of the press was allowed through.

As councillors left the Grand Hall, a red faced Executive member, Cllr Jim Moher, in front of shocked public, launched a tirade against a burly security guard telling him 'it's your fault' for not removing Graham Durham when instructed.

The evening had begun with a peaceful demonstration outside the Civic Centre and if the Labour Group had sensibly allowed the public a chance to speak for 5 minutes all the disruption could have been avoided.

Ironically the Conservative group had tabled a motion which pointed out that unemployed and disabled people in Brent were being asked to pay £5 a week in Council Tax from their JSA/ESA of £71.70 a week and that the figure is the second highest in London. Their motion called on Brent council to 'reduce these charges on its poorest residents' but went on to say that this should be done by eliminating waste and identifying 'alternative financial savings'.

After a discussion in the Grand Hall, which continued even when officers turned off microphones and lights, the campaigners left peacefully escorted by security.

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.