Talk: Kingsbury's aircraft industry - Barham Community Library February 28th

Wonderful Flying Machines - free talk and exhibition at Kingsbury Library

Did you know that Kingsbury was one of the main centres of the aircraft industry 100 years ago? 

This is a subject that local historian and former Fryent Ward councillor, Jim Moher, has been researching since he stepped down from Brent Council in 2014. He will be sharing the story of the people who made some of the best known planes of the First World War, and after, in an illustrated talk. This free "coffee morning" event is taking place at Kingsbury Library on Friday 30 June, from 11am to 12noon, and anyone who would be interested is welcome to attend.

Jim has also worked with Brent Museum on a small exhibition, also called Wonderful Flying Machines, which can be seen at Kingsbury Library from now until November 2017. Even if you cannot make it to the talk, you will find plenty of interesting pictures and information about the Airco factory, which employed 4,400 people (many of them women) by 1918, and the company set up at Stag Lane after the war by its principal designer and test pilot, Geoffrey De Havilland.

Brent Labour in need of good political advice as spin doctor and organiser leave

Brent Labour Group is looking for a new Political Assistant following Richard Bell's departure. Richard Bell was the latest Political Assistant with a background in the Fabian Society. His predecessor Jack Stenner had been a Young Fabian. The two have published articles together LINK

If anyone out there fancies their chances (and there is an ex-councillor with time on his hands with very definite views on Brent Labour and democracy), I reproduce the application pack below:

Coincidentally (perhaps), Lee Skevington, Labour's borough organiser, has according to highly placed Labour sources, decided not to extend his contract. Skevington has been popular with rank and file Labour Party members.

The departures leave quite a gap ahead of the General Election in nine months time. However influential Jim Moher remains firmly in the driving seat of Dawn Butler's Brent Central  campaign following Labour's AGM.

Brent Labour's need for good political advice became clear this week when the 'poor doors' issue hit national as well as local headlines. This segregation of private and affordable home tenants in the same block was justified by Margaret McLennan, lead member for housing and regeneration, on the basis that separate access was required to keep the service charges of affordable tenants down, but attacked by former Council leader Ann John as 'utterly ridiculous and dreadful'. Pete Firmin, also a Labour Party member and chair of Brent Trades Council, as well as a committee member of a local residents' association, said, 'It is outrageous and basically saying we are the privileged, keep out of our area.'

This controversy follows the revelation that a one bedroomed flat in the Willesden Green Library development, advertised in Singapore as 'benefitting' from having no social or key worker homes, was selling at £450,000.

I have sympathy with McLennan's point on service charges but surely this goes back to the planning stages of mixed developments and their marketing, when the private service charges could be set to subsidise affordable housing service charges.

It is worth noting that Muhammed Butt has refrained from commenting to the Kilburn Times and has not responded to Twitter requests for his reaction.

Former Ann John supporter, James Powney, has continued to raise issues about democracy in Brent on his blog and the need for proper scrutiny. In a recent posting he was critical of the budget process by the current leadership LINK:

I fear that Brent Council is just going to float along without proper planning, until suddenly the money simply isn't there and panic cuts have to be implemented.  When that happens, councillors cease to exercise any sense of priorities and simply try to balance this year's books, until they go through an even more difficult exercise next year.

Not exactly a vote of confidence in his Labour colleagues.

Today  LINK  Powney commends the nine Labour councillors who called the £40 'Garden tax' in for scrutiny at Wednesday's Scrutiny Committee but contrasts the current changes with 'the thoroughness of the last major change in Brent's recycling arrangements four years ago'. He was, of course, lead member for the environment four years ago.

Elsewhere, on Twitter, James Powney has been involved in an exchange about the police investigation into fraudulent emails supporting the Kensal Rise Library development. Brent Council itself instigated the investigation with Muhammed Butt initially insisting that the issue should be thoroughly investigated. Lately the Council has granted planning permission and the council does not appear to be pursuing the matter. Powney, who still has the twitter handle @CllrPowney was accused of wanting to drop the investigation.

The police investigation is not the only unfinished business carried forward from the last administration.

The previous Labour adminstration extended Christine Gilbert's contract as Interim Chief Executive until after the May elections. Fiona Ledden's report advocating this at the time cited a smooth transition to the Civic Centre, managing the local elections, and safeguarding of Brent's reputation, as well as prevailing market conditions for LA CEs as reasons for keeping Gilbert on.

Now, three months after the election, Gilbert is still in post, with no sign of any recruitment process. She is currently on holiday and Andy Donald is standing in as Acting Interim Chief Executive.

Ledden's report (with Cara Davani of HR fame as the other contact officer) adopted by the then Brent Executive stated:

.

-->

Taking these factors into account and taking a strategic view in relation to the optimum time to commence the permanent recruitment process, it is proposed that recruitment for a permanent Chief Executive commences after the May 2014 elections and that the current interim arrangements continue until a permanent appointment has been made and the individual is in post. This approach is fully supported by the Executive.

Unfortunately this (deliberate?) lose wording seems open to an interpretation  that the appointment can be made any time after May 2014. May 2020 perhaps?

Lastly, no independent investigation has yet been set up into the modus operandi of Brent's HR department.

The call-in of the 'Garden Tax' proposal is a welcome sign that some Labour councillors are prepared to question Cabinet decisions. I would hope that Labour councillors, committed to equality in housing, transparency in recruitment procedures, and good labour relations with employees, will also take up some of these other issues.

.

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.

Complaint lodged over councillor's alleged non-disclosure of interest in planning application

Local resident Roger Brown has lodged a Corporate Complaint with Fional Ledden, Brent Council's Legal Officer regarding Cllr Ruth Moher which may be on interest to readers aware of recent local planning controversies.

The complaint reads:

I am writing to you in line with your Corporate Complaints Policy regarding complaints about councillors.

The complaint is with regard to planning case 13/2961 (Wembley High Technology College) and her involvement with this together with her lack of disclosure with regard to being both a Governor and Company Director of W.H.T.C  - particularly with regard to the planning meeting of 12th February 2014. 

Both Mrs Moher and Mr Jim Moher are Directors and Governors of WHTC and I believe as such there was a clear breach of Brent's Constitution (and a clear conflict of interests) under the Planning Code of Practice. Their involvement in this particular case and the non disclosure of both of their interests in the register of councillors interests (Brent Council's web site shows there are no such disclosures with regard to this case). Both councillors were in fact listed as first alternates (as listed in the Public Information pack for the supplementary planning committee) and Mrs Moher was allowed to speak at length at the meeting after again failing to disclose her interests. It was pointed out by someone as she spoke that she was a Governor and should not be speaking but she was allowed to continue. In contrast Councillor Singh, a local resident, declared his interests at the start and left the room, taking no part in the meeting.

I have asked Brent Council for a copy of any recording or transcript of this meeting but was told that none existed and was sent the minutes for this meeting instead, which is a poor representation of the meeting itself. I cannot understand why you decide not to record these meeting for which the decisions play a vital part in the lives of the people they blight and affect.

If this situation had take place with an application of a private individual instead of a public body I'm sure, rightly, questions would surely be asked but because it is a council project I believe that all issues with regard to this contentious application appear to be attempted to be swept under the carpet. 

I will also be raising the matter of another WHTC planning application to the council (13/1775) for the failure to disclose information paramount to the case, therefore allowing it to pass unopposed. With this I refer to the reason for the MUGA being built being that of the subsequent planning application 13/2961 as this built upon land  occupied by the current MUGA and no residents were aware of it at this stage due to the council and schools lack of residents consultation in February 2013. The council abjectly still claims that residents were consulted but cannot state to which houses they delivered the notices to, which is frankly laughable.

I would ask to to look into this as a matter of urgency and I will also raise the matter with the Local Government Ombudsman and ask the DFE to conduct a thorough review of this case.

Robust local press in Brent more important than ever

Hannah Bewley, Brent reporter for the Willesden and Wembley Observer, has filed her last reports fro that paper. During her time at the paper, which is an off-shoot of the Harrow Observer, despite having little space she published some great investigative journalism.  The paper was particularly vociferous in its support of the campaign against Brent library closures.

Her departure reflects a reduction in editorial staff of the Trinity South group and the closure of some titles. The WWO, expensive at 90p where sold, is likely to have fewer Brent stories in the future which is a pity.

Meanwhile the pressure which is exerted on the local press is evident in the adjudication published in last week's Brent and Kilburn Times.  The Press Complaints Commission upheld a complaint by former Labour councillor Jim Moher against Lorraine King, the BKT news editor but rejected two further complaints by him about accuracy and the opportunity to reply to stories.

The complaint that was upheld was about a comment that she made on Facebook about an unnamed individual Lorraine identified as a 'failed wannabe MP'. and in which she stated ''I plan to make his life a misery as much as possible' and  'Lord God forgive me if I bump into him before I get back to work, you will be visiting me in Holloway'.  The BKT argued that the comment was made on a personal Facebook account that could only be seen by 'friends'.  The comment had been made after she received an email from Moher which said:

Here you are again this week giving extensive coverage to the most scurrilous and unfounded attacks

and concluded:

PS By the way it was me who sorted your permit problem.

At the time that Moher's email, one of a series, was sent Lorraine King was on compassionate leave after the death of her mother. The PS  refers to a parking permit that Ms King needed for grieving relatives.  In the circumstances she found the email upsetting which led to the Facebook comments.

Although the Commission's remit does not cover social media content they ruled that as the comment related to the news editor's contact with Moher in her professional role, and could be viewed by individuals who she came into contact in that role, it could be considered under Clause 4 of the Code which states:

Journalists must not engage in intimidation, harassment or persistent pursuit.

The Commission considered that the implied threat of violence was not intended to be taken seriously but concluded:

...it had no hesitation in finding that this constituted intimidation withint the meaning of Clause 4, and a serious failure to uphold the highest professional standards required by the code.

The Huffington Post in covering this story said it was the first time the PCC, which is shortly to be ablosihed and replaced by several bodies, had decided it could rule on what journalsits said on 'private' social media accounts LINK:

Mike Jempson, Vice-chair of NUJ Ethics Council, told HuffPost UK it was an issue that the union had debated on several occasions. "Difficulties have arisen because some employers encourage reporters to express their opinions on blogs and to engage with their publics via social media, yet as reporters they are expected to retain a degree of impartiality," he said.

“Journalists share the right to freedom of expression with all members of the public, and should not feel constrained in how they express themselves. Indeed many journalists also write fiction, drama and poetry which is not a matter for the PCC."

While stressing it was important the journalists themselves made the distinction between personal and professional contributions on social media, it would be "a pity, and improper, if the PCC and its successor IPSO were to determine that all material by journalists published on non-commercial outlets that operate their own agreed contributors’ codes should be subject to the Editor’s Code.”

Readers will make up their own minds about this but I do hope that the BKT maintains its robust coverage of local issues, which has sometimes inevitably made it unpopular with local councillors. Lorraine King has been an excellent news editor and local press coverage is especially important now that we have a Council with a very large majority. The BKT must continue to be 'on the side of the people'.

Wembley Matters in the past has had its own dealings with Jim and Roth Moher LINK

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.

Disturbing characters feature in Brent Council horror movie

Pus is squeezed from Brent's democratic deficit boil

Democracy, or the lack of it, featured strongly at Monday's council meeting. At the beginning of the meeting Keirra Box,  who hit the local and national headlines by pursuing missing Lib Dem councillor Rev David Clues down to his home of six months in Brighton with a pile of e-mails and letters from constituents that he had not answered, turned up to take his seat in the council chamber. The argument was simple - someone had to represent the residents.  When she questioned Paul Lorber, Lib Dem leader, after the meeting about when Clues would resign  he accused her of 'writing disgusting articles in the press' rather that recognising she was an angry disenfranchised resident.

Earlier Cllr  Lorber had attacked the Labour group for their failure to ensure proportionate representation on committees (membership being allocated according to each party's proportion of council seats) and also for the Council Leader's power to decide which opposition councillor to put on some committees.

On Monday the Labour voted for statutory members of the Brent Health and Wellbeing Board to consist of:

Five elected councillors, with voting rights, to be nominated by the Leader of the Council. Four councillors will be Executive members from the majority party. The fifth member will be from a opposition party. 

I am sympathetic with Lorber's criticism. This not only gives Labour a huge majority but excludes non Executive Labour councillors AND enables the Council Leader to nominate the opposition councillor. Similar issues occur with the Brent Housing Partnership, Brent Council's rather less than arm's length social housing provider.

All councillors need to be involved in policy making and there are some positive precedents for joint work on drugs, gangs, prostitution, domestic violence and female genital mutilation. Surely democratic principles should recognise that the ruling party or the Executive is not the source of all wisdom and that other members have much to contribute?

Substantial inbuilt majorities on committees where the real decisions have been made behind closed doors in the ruling group's pre-meetings means that real debate takes place outside the public arena and that the committees function as rubber stamping machines. Opposition members are powerless and backbench Labour  members do their lobbying in private.

There have been some changes at the Brent Connects local forum level (but only in some areas of Brent) which through Any Questions? style panels have brought about some more debate and today at the Brent Governors' Conference Cllr Pavey had a refreshingly open Q&A session with delegates, asking at one point, 'Tell me what Brent Council does badly, what are we doing wrong?'

However we need action at the Council decision making level to increase accountability and transparency and provide real participation.

Cllr Jim Moher on Monday, in putting forward a constitutional change, said that in the past Chief Executives and Senior Officers had too much power and had swept aside objections from members. However at the same time he supported the Council's decision to employ Christine Gilbert for an additional year when she had not been appointed by councillors and Muhammed Butt refused to give any information on the pay-offs to the previous Chief Executive and Finance Director. 

In addition of course Monday saw the barring of discussion on the Lib Dem's motion the issue of human rights in Palestine and Veolia's complicity in supporting illegal settlements in the occupied territories.  Veolia is in line for a 16 year £250m public realm contract in Brent - of course the motion should have been debated.

There is much that is wrong and if it is not put right many able people will decide that they can make a real contribution and create real change elsewhere and public cynicism about politics will deepen.

Monday's meeting was not a good advertisement for democracy or for local government.

 

Slippery statement from Brent on leaf clearance

Last autumn Brent Fightback launched a campaign to reverse street cleaning cuts.  Amongst the concerns was the ending of the seasonal autumn leaf clearance. Instead, responsibility for cleaning leaves this was to be combined with normal street cleaning of litter with street sweepers now cleaning streets less regularly.

A section of the petition to the council stated:

The ending of the seasonal leaf service will result in hazardous conditions for pedestrians as leaves rot and will open the council to compensation claims for injuries. (September 2011)

The impact depends a lot on conditions - dry weather results in crisp and crunchy leaves but wet conditions and frost result in slimy, slippery leaves that rot on the street. Last year conditions favoured the council but this year there has been wet weather which has produced complaints from residents and criticism from Cllr Daniel Brown at the council meeting earlier this week. In response Cllr Jim Moher seemed to imply that residents should clean up their own leaves.

Brent Council issued this statement:

We are operating a reduced leaf clearance programme in 2012. In previous years we deployed extra, seasonal resource to clear leaves. That resource was removed this year.

The onus is now firmly on street sweepers to clear leaves as they go about their normal duties.

Dealing with this extra workload is obviously more difficult, especially as litter clearance remains our firm priority.

We must reasonably expect that leaves will take longer to remove this year and full clearance will only be done over a number of weeks.

We are coming to end of the period of 'leaf fall' so things should start to improve.

For a reminder of last year's campaign watch this video: (apologies for the horrible pic of me on screen - can't get rid of it!)

'They're out to get you,' Butt warned

'Your main opposition comes from within the Labour Council Executive, the Labour Group on the council and some senior council officers,' opposition leader Paul Lorber told Labour Council leader Muhammed Butt last night. Butt's wry grin seemed to indicate that he recognised a grain of truth in the statement.

Lorber's comment came in response to Butt's speech for the Budget First Reading Debate where he lambasted the vindictiveness of the Government's welfare cuts predicting that their policies would lead to the wiping out of the advances made by 13 years of Labour government:

This is the deliberate effect of an ideological experiment designed by  (the Conservatives) and shamefully supported by the Liberal Democrats. It is a social experiment based on the Conservative belief that the rich should have no responsibility for the poor.

 Butt outlined  a package of 'reforms'  that would provide resilience and protection for the community:

• Support for local business and their growth through working with them for shared objectives
• Paying the London Living Wage to direct council employees and encouraging contractors to do the same
• Create an energy cooperative to bulk purchase energy for residents
• Investment in an innovative employment support package
• A new deal for the voluntary and community sector helping troubled families and tackling health inequality

Butt said that the council would shift council resources from the 'treatment of problems to the prevention of problems'  and would 'squeeze contractors and providers' and get rid of 'inefficiewncy, duplication and waste'. He said that the council couldn't fight the residents' battles for them any more but could provide a 'dented shield'.

Cllr Butt said that the council budget had been reduced by 28% between 2010 and 2014 and that the failure of the government's policies had led to forecasts of a 7% reduction every year until 2020 at least. 

There was a conspicuous lack of detail on what that would mean in terms of cuts to council services except for a passing reference to looking at charges for services.

If there is to be any proper consultation on the budget, and particularly if there is to be any effective campaign  based on a needs budget, the specific cuts to services need to be spelled out as quickly as possible. Residents need to have a realistic view of what they face in the immediate future. Apart from the Living Wage and Energy Cooperative proposals the other 'reforms' are vague. It would be an insult to residents if the consultation just sought endorsement for the reforms and the gloss involved in 'community, fairness and growth'.

There was little evidence in Paul Lorber's speech that he had burned the midnight oil preparing a comprehensive alternative approach. He criticised the lack of substance in Butt's presentation but his own was a knockabout speech piling blame for the economic crisis on the Labour Government and more tellingly  emphasising Ed Balls' statement that Labour are 'going to be ruthless about public spending'. He ridiculed Butt's claim about strengthening communities when the council had cut grants to the voluntary sector, and supporting businesses when they had increased parking charges hitting reducing the trade of local businesses.  Conservative leader Cllr Kansagra  said little apart from drawing attention to the cost of legal action over the libraries and parking charges.

I thought there might have been more attention given to Sarah Teather's Observer interview about the welfare benefit cap. Cllr Jim Moher, in response to Lorber's quote from Ed Balls said it was not a question of 'whether we would make cuts but whether we would have made this scale of cuts' and went on to say there was no hint in Lorber's speech of the disquiet in Lib Dem ranks and amongst many Lib Dem councillors. The Sarah Teather 'elephant in the room' had been reduced to a hamster.

So what about the rest of the meeting?   I left before the motions but questions to the Executive included some effective ones from Cllr Alison Hopkins in libraries and Cllr Carol Shaw on the Willesden Green Redevelopment and a less effective one from Cllr Daniel Brown on the dangers of the failure to clear fallen leaves after the cuts in street cleaning.  Cllr Shaw criticised the cost of the Civic Centre perhaps forgetting that this was the brain child of the Lib Dem led previous administration - fully supported by Labour of course.

Cllr Hunter extolled the virtues of making 'evidence based' recommendations on health and not 'political ones' thus not opposing the closure of Central Middlesex A&E. She quoted Boris Johnson approvingly on the virtues of cross-party support for the Olympics.

 Labour backbenchers asked questions that enabled Muhammed Butt to make attacks on various government policies including the cutting of the Early Intervention Grant. Cllr Krupesh Hirani drew approval from across the chamber when he spoke about the hard work of carers and even more when he took a swipe at adult care provision in Brighton and Hove where there is a Green led minority administration.(Background HERE)

Entertainment was provided by spotting the councillors and officers who had fallen asleep, those that were tweeting and texting surreptitiously under desks or cardies on their laps, and of course seeing Cllr Zaffar Van Kalwala once again achieve a multiple orgasm just by listening to the sound of his own voice.

We were engaged in a democratic process - not a conspiracy

Ruth Moher

Jim Moher

GUEST BLOG FROM COUNCILLOR RUTH MOHER AND COUNCILLOR JIM MOHER

Muhammed Butt

The majority Brent Labour Group on Brent Council have recently had  their annual  elections for Leader, Deputy Leader and Executive. As usual,  this involved a range of contests for different positions. This democratic  process resulted in some significant changes at the top, with Cllr Muhammed Butt replacing Cllr Ann John as Leader. 

Suitable tributes were paid to Cllr John for the long and sterling service which she has given to the Labour Party and Council, which we endorsed.


As long-serving activists in the Labour Party and as senior front bench councillors, we favoured the change and indeed Ruth stood for and was elected as Deputy Leader, without challenge. Jim was returned as
Executive Member for Highways and Transportation, again without challenge.

 In the circumstances, we entirely refute the gossip which  you retailed from a BNCTV item which was based on an anonymous and mischievous source. It implied that we may have been involved in a conspiracy to bring about the change of Leader, an innuendo which your headline circulated widely.


The truth is that we took an active and open part in a democratic process, that is all. As elected public representatives we take exception to such 'sour grapes' gossip being given credibility by your blog. This leak is only an attempt to deflect from the fact that a majority of Labour councillors thought it was time for a change.

BNCTV names the Mohers as possible conspirators behind John's ousting

BNCTV has published the following article speculating on the reasons behind Ann John's demise: LINK

Although Ann John has been losing on popularity greatly in recent times, this change has taken most people by surprise. A source within Brent Council has told BNCTV that Councillors Jim and Ruth Moher could be the people who played major part in this selection process. Is it a conspiracy theory? That is what people are now beginning to talk about. 

Ann John is a person respected by many, equally, a lot of people have been showing contempt towards Brent Council following their experiences dealing with its former Leader. Cllr John has received a huge amount of criticism regarding her handling of the process closing 6 of Brent’s 12 libraries and following that, she has not been seen as a constructive ‘player’ who would win votes for the Labour Party at the next elections in Brent.

Things were not looking good for Ann John after a complaint made by Councillor Paul Lorber and his request to investigate Cllr John and her ‘alleged interference with the planning process by seeking to influence a planning decision.’ This information was picked up in an e-mail sent by Labour Councillor Dhiraj Kataria to Councillor John and others. Although Ann John has been ‘fully exonerated’, many see it as a blemish on her reputation.

One of Labour Councillors in Brent has told BNCTV that he particularly did not like the process she [Cllr John] has been following in regards to the consultations with Willesden Green Library campaigners and her adamant stance to carry out the development of the new Cultural Centre as planned, and that is including the demolition of the Old Willesden Library.

So why would Councillors Jim and Ruth Moher be involved in this process? They simply could not see Labour Losing at the next elections. Ann John ‘has accumulated too much negativity’ around her handling of the issues and it would lead to Labour being ‘torn to pieces’ as put by our source who wished to remain anonymous.

By John Dempsey

Labour Litter Double Think

 I had a chat with a street sweeper over the weekend who told me that no way could Brent maintain the quality of service with the reduced numbers of sweeps in residential areas and the cuts in weekend work. He said that sweepers used to have the flexibility to deal with any extra littering and that would no longer be the case: "If we sweep on Monday and it is littered on Tuesday it will stay there until next Monday.

He also mentioned that Veolia had offered sweepers redeployment to Haringey and the difficulties involved travelling there. Veolia had said those redeploying would get an extra 30 pence an hour, only for the sweepers to discover that this increase was also due in Brent.

I am sure some of you noticed the interesting juxtaposition of letters in the Willesden and Kilburn Times this week. In the first letter Labour Councillor Jim Moher, responsible for the cuts in street sweeping, attacked me ands the Green Party for opposing them.  In the second letter, Labour Councillor  and Group Leader in Westminster, Paul Dimoldenberg, denounced his Conservative Council for....cuts in the weekend street sweeping service. He asks if the Council is not spending Council Tax on this 'primary duty' where on earth is our money going?

Waste Strategy Challenged

Elaine Henderson of Friends of the Earth made a well researched and cogent critique of some aspects of the Council's new Waste Strategy at last night's Scrutiny Committee.  The Lib Dems had called-in both the Street Cleansing and Recycling proposals.

Elaine made the case for making reducing landfill  costs the main focus of the strategy. She said that adopting co-mingled (mixed) collection of recyclables in place of kerbside collection and sorting, would mean that the material would be contaminated and less acceptable to UK based processing companies.  She had talked to Aylesford, Brent's current buyers of paper waste, who had said they did not knowingly buy paper from co-mingled collections. She said that co-mingling would make it more likely that Brent's waste would be sent abroad for processing. This would reduce the price paid by processing companies for Brent's recycled waste.  In answer to a claim that it would be too costly to extend kerbside collection at the price offered by Veolia,  she said that another waste management company, May-Gurney. could offer a kerbside service at the same process as co-mingled.

She criticised the Council's Brent Magazine and on-line consultation as not making it clear that residual waste would now only be collected fortnightly and that residents would  have to have  another large wheelie bin for dry recyclables rather than the green box. The new containers will cost the Council £1.7m.  She suggested that the council should consider the use of large reusable bags for paper as used by other boroughs. She cited the ambiguous language of the survey and its inaccessibility to residents not fluent in English. Elaine made it clear that comment about the possibility of a Judicial Review on the issue that she had made at an earlier meeting, was raised as a member of a Residents' Association, and was not the policy of Brent Friends of the Earth.  She presented the committee with a two page alternative Friends of the Earth Waste Strategy.

A rather irked Cllr Powney was caustic in his response and claimed that it had been a 'good consultation' and compared well with similar Brent consultations. He said that he had personally appeared at all the Area Forums to explain the strategy and that there had been articles in the local press about it. He claimed that the new strategy was not a reduction in service but an enhancement as it would now extend to 28,000 more households. He said that the waste once collected by Veolia was their property and where it was processed was no concern of the council.

Cllr Lorber (Lib Dem) who was chairing the committee said that he agreed with Brent FoE that the consultation was not fair or reasonable and suggested referral to the Local Government Ombudsman. In the debate there was much discussion of numbers and recycling rates as well as practical issues about how people with small gardens would cope with three bins. Cllr Moher tried several times to get further discussion on the co-mingling verus kerbside sorting issue, rather than the consultation, but had little success. Cllr Lorber said he did not want to see at some future date a TV documentary showing Brent's waste being sorted by child labour abroad.

Earlier the committee had discussed a reduction of in the sweeping of residential streets from three times a week to twice a week. Officers claimed that there would be no reduction in standards because Veolia would still be held to a Grade a or B standard of cleanliness. Independent surveys had shown public satisfaction with the standard of street cleanliness and these surveys plus increased monitoring should maintain standards.

At the conclusion of the meeting Paul Lorber used his chair's casting vote to put forward recommendations to the Executive to reconsider key aspects of the Waste Strategy, in the light of projected savings being over and above those required. However, Cllr Powney's vociferous defence of the strategy seemed to indicate that the recommendations would be rejected.