Scrutiny decides NOT to refer Alternative Provision Free School proposal back to Cabinet

Cllr Jumbo Chan presents the reasons for the call-in

There were only two dissenting votes on Brent Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee this evening when the Committee decided not to refer the proposed Alternative Provision Free School back to Cabinet.  This means the Council will go ahead and seek sponsors for the school despite official opposition from the Labour Party to the creation of any more free schools or academies. There may be a little token consultation along the way but this will not be about the principle of free school provision.

It was always going to be a difficult case to argue because of the ramifications of government legislation that (absurdly) prevents local authorities setting up new schools when they are needed. New schools have to be either a free school or an academy - both outside local authority oversight.

There is a possibility of setting provision up as part of a local authority school - rather than a new school, rather as Leopold Primary opened another site in Harlesden. However all secondary schools in Brent are either academies or voluntary aided schools so the only local authority schools left are primary.  The Chair of the Committee, Cllr Ketan Sheth, raised doubts about whether a primary school could cater for older pupils, a point denounced as patronising by Jean Roberts of the NEU when she was eventually allowed to speak having had her hand up for a long time.

Strategic Director of Children and Young People, Gail Tolley, told Cllr Jumbo Chan that she had raised with secondary school heads the possibility of them taking on the alternative provision but they had not been interested. Those recognised by the DfE as able to set up a free school could still apply during the procurement process. Cllr Chan said that an informal discussion was not sufficient and requested evidence of a formal consultation.  Union representatives protested that they had not been consulted as educational professionals on the Council's proposal.

In answer to claims that the secondary schools would welcome such provision Jean Roberts said it was these very schools, academies and free schools in the borough, that were excluding the pupils who will end up in the alternative provision.  There was a discussion among educational professionals after the meeting about the danger that the provision may end up as a 'sin bin' with disproportionate numbers of black pupils as happened with Units for Disruptive Children in the 80s. 

Simone Aspis, (see separate post below) had argued that outcomes of Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) and Special Schools were poorer than for similar children integrated with support into mainstream.  There is a concern currently from Ofsted about the 'off-rolling' LINK of pupils by secondary schools. This is done so that the pupils are not counted in examination statistics thereby improving the school's league table position.

Will the existence of this provision mean that secondary schools will be tempted to off-roll or exclude even more children? (Recently a suggestion has been made that excluded pupils should be included in the excluding school's examination results to reduce the incentive to exclude.)

Will the unintended consequence of the Council decision be that a disproportionate number of black pupils will be sent to the provision - there is already a disproportion in those sent outside the borough to alternative provision? How does that sit with the principle of inclusion and Brent Council's current project to improve the educational attainment of Black Caribbean boys?

Cllr Mili Patel, argued that the Council has set out the condition that any provider would have to include a council representative and a secondary school representative on the trustees board.  She claimed it would be more accountable than academy boards who have no local authority representation. Furthermore Gail Tolley argued that because these were vulnerable pupils the authority did have powers to intervene as it had a safeguarding duty for all children in the borough regardless of the type of provision.

Asked what would happen if the authority was not satisfied with the performance of the provider Cllr Patel said that the contract could be terminated. One councillor rightly asked, 'what will happen to the children in the event of termination?'

One feature of the hearing was that three out of the six representations made at Committee were from the Young Brent Foundation, a registered charity LINK that claims to support 122 Brent young people's projects. They were led by their new CEO Chris Murray, who called on the committee to 'force through' the Cabinet's proposal.  The YBF was set up by Brent Council after they closed the Youth Service. They help voluntary organisation find funding as a replacement for council funded youth provision. It is largely funded itself through the John Lyon's Trust, the charity arm of Harrow public school. LINK

When it was set up it was emphasised that the Foundation itself would not directly provide youth services but would help others to do so.

Their contributions focused on the benefits of the wrap around youth provision proposed for Roundwood now that the free school will pick up the bill for the maintenance of the site itself via a separate funding stream. They  paid little attention to the reason for the call-in, which was not to oppose youth provision, but to ensure the quality and accountability of the alternative provision.

CONSULTATION

I submitted a Freedom of Information request to Brent Council regarding consultation on the proposal for Roundwood Centre and am still awaiting a response:

The Cabinet is making a decision on the future use of the Roundwood Centre at its meeting on April 15th including alternative provision via a free school sponsor and youth work.

The Cabinet paper lists the followign consultations:

"9.1 The council has consulted with young people at Roundwood Youth Centre (including young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities), council staff and other stakeholders on the proposed Alternative Provision schools and Youth Offer. See time-line below:
 Youth Offer consultation with Brent Youth Parliament, January 2018;
 Youth Offer consultation with Youth Offending Service, February 2018;
 Design of the Youth Offer site (Hackathon), March 2018;
 Consultation with Roundwood Youth Centre (RYC) staff about budget
proposals and changes to delivery at RYC, October 2018;
 Feedback on Youth Offer final design, October 2018;
 Children’s Commissioner takeover day (re Youth Offer), November 2018.
 Consultation with RYC service users, January 2019;
 Consultation with RYC service providers, January 2019;

Young people’s views have been sought from the Roundwood Youth Centre as well as from Brent Youth Parliament, Care in Action / Care Leavers in Action and other young people’s focus groups (as above). Young people were also previously consulted as part of the Council’s Outcome Based Reviews related to Gangs and Children on the Edge of Care, which have fed into proposals."

However there is no report on the outcomes of these consultations. Please supply all available reports/minutes on the above consultations before the Cabinet meeting.

Will voluntary groups at the Willesden Centre get a lifeline tonight?

Tonight's Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee has an item on the use of space by voluntary organisations at the Willesden Centre for Health and Care. I hope councillors will take the opportunity to try and get a positive outcome for organisations that contribute a great deal to provision but cannot afford market rents, such as Brent Advocacy Concerns LINK.

This letter  to Cllr Sheth, from Sheik Auladin, Interim Chief Operating Officer of the Brent Clinical Commissioning Group could enable the Committee to focus on some possible solutions and give voluntary organisations some reassurance regarding costs and space ahead of the end of March deadline.

-->

Thank you for your letter dated 6 th November 2017 regarding the progress the CCG has made in respect of supporting voluntary sector organisations, working within the NHS estate in Brent and specifically at the Willesden Centre for Health and Care. 

The CCG has continued to work to identify tenants for the void space across the Brent sites in line with its commissioning intentions . As you will appreciate our priority has to be ensuring the statutory services we commission can access fit for purpose and appropriate accommodation; however, where voluntary services are already in occupation at such sites, or where voluntary organisat ions express an interest for space, we will proactively work to establish requirements and where possible accommodate. 

There has been a long standing need to provide the Burnley Practice - at the Willesden Centre for Health and Care - with an appropriately sized and located space within the building. The practice has been successful in securing NHS England funding to support its relocation within the building to space previously occupied by the Brent Association for Disabled People. The CCG is aware that some voluntary services previously operating under the auspices of BADP continue in occupation of part of this space, albeit they are not being charged. 

The CCG has met with each of these organisations over the past few weeks to explain the plans, establish their ongoing space requirements and reassure the services it will seek to secure an alternative arrangement for them within the building. As you acknowledge, charging market rent is the policy of NHS PS over which we have no jurisdiction; but we will draw on this relationship and try and ensure the organisations can meet rental costs through the same or favourable terms. 

Brent CCG is committed to supporting the valuable work of the voluntary sector in Brent. It is not possible to develop a formal policy for the use of NHS estate by the voluntary sector, due to the CCG having no direct property interest; however we do commit to the principles set out by Sarah Mansuralli previously, and will continue to support the occupation of void space by voluntary organisations where this space is not required for the delivery of statutory or directly commissioned services. 

Yours sincerely,
Sheik Auladin
Interim Chief Operating Officer
Brent Clinical Commissioning Group

UPDATE; Newly elected Chairs of Brent Council committees and an audacious nomination for Standards Chair

Cllr Allie at Full Council  February 22nd

More appointments will be made this evening but I now have fuller information for readers on appointments to positions on Brent Council committees etc.

One nomination, if true,  is particularly audacious - that of Cllr James Allie who sat reading the Catholic Herald through much of the budget setting meeting on February 22nd, which included discussion of the impact of  cuts to services.

A complaint was made to Fiona Alderman who replied:

I have considered the complaint under the Members’ Code of Conduct complaints procedure and have consulted the Independent Person, the Chief Whip and the Chief Executive. In all the circumstances, I have decided that on this occasion your complaint does not warrant any further action under the Code of Conduct. I have, however, reported your complaint to the Chief Whip for the Labour Group and written to Councillor Allie to advise him that the conduct you complained of must not be repeated.

Cllr Butt has apparently nominated Cllr Allie to be chair of the Standards Committee which may well be charged with responding to complaints about Cllr Butt's conduct over the Tayo Oladapo case as well as the  double Planning Committee shenanigans. Sandra Kabir, the Chief Whip who managed the Cllr John Duffy case, is nominated as Vice Chair. Other members are Cllr Krupa Sheth and Cllr Tatler.

Cllr Allie has been a staunch Butt supporter following his defection from the Lib Dems and was one of the few to support Butt's bid to end elelctions for Deputy Leader.

Although Allie was never charged with any offence in a 2011 fraud case, he was referred to the borough solicitor for not declaring an interest by the then Labour leader Ann John. At the time Allie was a Lib Dem councillor for Alperton and chaired the budget scrutiny committee. LINK

Krupa Sheth is a close relative of Cllr Ketan Sheth and replaces Bernard Collier who one councillor said was known to 'ask tough questions'.

Many observers thought Cllr Liz Dixon, a woman of principle, would have been a more independent occupant of the position.

The chairs of the  two Scrutiny Committees elected on Saturday are Matt Kelcher and Ketan Sheth. Kelcher is the chair of the present single Scrutiny Committee and Sheth previously chaired Planning.

Sarah Marquis was elected as Chair of the Planning Committee.  She was interrupted mid-speech  on Saturday by applause when she promised that she would be politically independent in the role. Cllr Agha was challenged to distance himself from Cabinet pressure if he got the role but replied that it was important that all members contribute to the Planning Committee, including the Council leader.

The leadership are claimed to have ignored Marquis' plea that the process of appointing members to the Planning Committee should be opened up to reassure the public that there was not a lack of independence from councillors which would open up claims of political interference in the Committee's work.

I understand that one Cabinet candidate, who was not elected to a position, when asked which other council they admired, replied 'Tower Hamlets.'

Given Cllr Butt's narrow majority for leader and the tied vote for deputy it is not certain that his nominations will get through this evening  but doubtless considerable pressure will be applied on individual councillors.

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.

What do Brent councillors think about deferral of Kensal Rise planning application?

A lively and at times passionate debate is taking place on these pages over the redevelopment of the Kensal Rise building.

The article has attracted more comments than  almost any other on this blog and I am posting this to invite readers who may have missed it to join in.

In particular I am inviting councillors and council election candidates to respond to what is clearly an important local matter.

One major theme is whether the planning application should be deferred until after police have completed their investigation into the alleged fraudulent emails submitted in support of the developer Andrew Gillick's previous planning application. LINK

Other matters include whether the space offered to the trustees of Friends of Kensal Rise Library for a community library is sufficient, and how robust that agreement is.

The original article by the trustees of the Friends of Kensal Rise Library and subsequent comments can be seen HERE

Since this was written responses have started coming in via Twitter. I will update here:

1. Martin Francis ‏@WembleyMatters 1h

   .@CllrButt What do you think? http://www.wembleymatters.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/what-do-brent-councillors-think-about.html …
2. Cllr. Muhammed Butt ‏@CllrButt 1h

   .@WembleyMatters we have a statutory responsibility to look at application. 1000's apps in Brent. Do we check the person or application

   
   

    Vicky Zentner ‏@vickyzentner 56m

   @WembleyMatters @CllrButt isn't ignoring the suspicion over fraudulent emails at very least morally wrong and at worst, collusion?
3. Meg Howarth ‏@howarthm 47m

   @CllrButt Both person& app.need flagging up.Planning cmtee statutorily independent&can vote to defer hearing>
4. Alex Colas ‏@AlexWG2014 18m
   

   .@WembleyMatters Planning cmtee should defer decision on this application until investigation into fraud allegations are completed.

@WembleyMatters 1/2 Strongly agree planning app should be deferred until outcome of investigation. Result might invalidate, for example. Alison Hopkins  @Hopkins_Alison   @WembleyMatters 2/2 FKRL know if space enough. I want VERY watertight legal guarantees. I've bad experiences with developers (Brent X!

CID investigation of email fraud should delay Kensal Rise planning hearing

Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt this afternoon tweeted 'Glad to hear Kensal Rise Library consultation fraud case is being taken forward by Met police CID'.

This confirmation arrives after substantial pressure from residents that the case should not be dropped, despite Andrew Gillick, the Kensal Rise developer, reaching an agreement with the Friends of Kensal Rise Library over community space in the building.

As argued previously on this blog, in the light of the investigation and possible prosecution, the planning hearing for Mr Gillick's development should be postponed until the outcome is known. A statement from Christine Gilbert, Brent Council's Acting Chief Executive, is awaited following consultations with Andrew Donald, head of Regeneration and Planning and Cllr Ketan Sheth, chair of the planning committee.