Bobby Moore Bridge – formal complaint submitted over advertising lease award

 Guest post by Philip Grant in a personal capacity

 

The Question and Answer from the Full Council meeting agenda papers.

 

When I wrote my 10 July guest post “Bobby Moore Bridge murals – where will the advertising money be spent?” it was on the basis of a fairly vague answer given by Cllr. Muhammed Butt to a Full Council meeting question from a member of the public. It looked as if some or all of the rental income from the Bobby Moore Bridge advertising lease would be spent on Brent’s “communications”, which help to promote the Council Leader and his Cabinet. 

 

The Report to the 28 May Cabinet meeting, which recommended the award of a lease which provided slightly more income but left the tile murals in the subway covered up for at least another four years, had been written by Brent’s Head of Communications. That appeared to be a serious conflict of interests, but I did not think I had strong enough evidence of where the money would be spent to make a complaint.

 

I did not know the person who had asked the question, but did manage to make contact with him. As he was also keen to get a more specific answer, he agreed to ask a supplementary question, and at the Council meeting on 8 July the Mayor promised that he would receive a written answer to it. It took a few weeks, but this is the response, which he has shared with me:

 

So there it is, from the Leader of the Council himself (who is also the Cabinet Lead Member for Communications, so probably knew where the money was going when he announced, without a vote, that Option B had been accepted). ‘All of the income generated from the Bobby Moore Bridge advertising revenue is allocated to the communications service budget.’

 

Now that I had the evidence to back up the case set out in my 10 July guest post, I sent an open letter to Brent’s Chief Executive on 30 August, making a formal complaint about how the award of the advertising lease had been dealt with. I will ask Martin to include a copy of my open letter at the end of this post, for anyone who would like to read it in full, but this is the text of the email that I sent it with, which summarises the position. (I have already received an acknowledgement to it, and a promise that Kim Wright will respond to my complaint):

 

‘Dear Ms Wright,

 

I am attaching an open letter to you, making a formal complaint about bias and a conflict of interests by a Council Officer (or Officers) in the Report and Recommendations to the 28 May 2024 Cabinet meeting on the award of the Bobby Moore Bridge advertising lease.

 

I am also attaching, as it gives further background and detail on my complaint, a pdf document copy of an online article I had published on 10 July, in response to the answer given to a public question at the 8 July Full Council meeting. 

 

That answer gave an indication of where the rental income from the advertising lease would be spent, but as the Mayor said, at the meeting, that a supplementary question had been asked, to which a written reply would be provided, I have waited for further clarity on the facts before making this complaint.

 

Please see the suggested remedies section, on page 3 of my letter, as urgent action may be required if the new advertising lease from 31 August 2024 has not yet been signed and sealed by the Council. Thank you. Best wishes,

Philip Grant.’

 

As the Chief Executive is only responsible for the actions of Council staff, not councillors, I had to restrict my complaint to that side of the award. But I also wanted to publicly express my views over the actions of Cllr. Butt, and this letter from me was published in the “Brent & Kilburn Times” on 29 August. They published my letter in full, but did not use my suggested heading for it: “Leader abused his power”!

 

Philip Grant.

LETTER: Cllr Butt, this is no laughing matter. South Kilburn residents held in contempt

 

Alpha House, South Kilburn

Dear Editor,

The Brent and Kilburn Times recently splashed an article about conditions at Alpha House in South Kilburn LINK. I wrote a letter to them about the way Brent Council treats its residents but unfortunately it was not published.

This is what I wrote:

Thank you for highlighting the scandal of how Brent Council treats residents of our flats. The fact that Council leader Mohammed Butt can say that grass and bushes have now been - badly - cut does not alter the fact that residents were given several different dates when it would happen and it didn't. On other occasions we got no response at all to queries, as was the case when we asked about the scaffolding on Alpha House. Numerous enquiries by TRA officers and residents simply went unanswered. 

 

Councillor Butt's comment that we should make a complaint is ridiculous when we have already made known our concern to numerous council officers, councillors and our new MP with no substantive response. Indeed, when I saw Cllr Butt recently and raised the issue with him, he just laughed.

 

Such is the contempt with which Brent Council holds residents of its properties.

 

Pete Firmin, chair, Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenants and Residents Association.

Barnhill by-election result could be over-turned by Courts. Hearing starts tomorrow.

The two day recount hearing for the Barnhill by-election starts tomorrow and as a bombshell curtain raiser the Kilburn Times today LINK  reveals that sacks of votes went astray at Clock Cottage, Kenton, which is one of the Council's storage depot.

The Barnhill Conservatives launched a petition to the High Court alleging that 100 votes were moved from the Conservative pile and transferred to the Labour pile. These were double votes - votes for the two Tories. If the recount transfers 100 votes to the Conservative they will be declared winners.  However the Council confidently told the Kilburn Times that they think the result will be upheld by the courts.

The Count is taking place in Room 73 (largest room) at the Royal Courts of Justice on the Strand. 

The real issue has changed with the discovery of the missing sack which only emerged when the Court asked for the ballot forms.

As readers will know I hold no brief for the Conservative Party but I do believe that elections should be conducted fairly so welcome this hearing to clear up the matter. I was a Green Party candidate at this by-election along with my colleague Pete Murry.

This is the statement made to Wembley Matters by Stefan Voloseniuc who with Kanta Mistry was a Conservative candidate for the ward.

On 23 January this year, we had three by-elections in the London Borough of Brent and I was one of the Conservative candidates for Barnhill Ward, alongside my colleague Kanta Mistry. We worked extremely hard and managed to do well; however, on the evening of the elections during the count, a bundle of our 100 votes had been unduly moved to the Labour Party’s candidates votes, leading them to win by a small margin. Despite our persistent requests on that evening for a recount and a flick through the bundles the Returning Officer (RO) Chief Executive Officer Carolyne Downs rejected our requests entirely. 

After the election I spoke to the Electoral Commission about the RO’s behaviour at the count. I was informed that the RO ought to have allowed a recount and flick through of the bundles on the day. The sacks are supposed to be sealed as per the People’s Act 1983, which states that the RO has a duty to ensure that each sack containing the ballot papers must be sealed and stored securely, to avoid any interference with the ballot papers by any parties. As such, in order to have a recount, we needed to file a Petition at the High Court, asking for a recount. We followed this process and we managed to obtain a hearing to seek an Order for a recount to take place at Court with the Court giving permission for the seals to be removed and the recount to take place in the High Court itself.

To our surprise, a few days before the hearing the RO’s legal representatives informed us that the seals (of the Barnhill Ward alone, and not the other two wards) were found to be broken. We requested evidence in the form of pictures and witness statements. We were informed that further evidence will follow. Upon receiving this evidence in the form of witness statements on behalf of the RO, we discovered that they could not find the seals on the sacks You  will find upon reading the  statement made by the Head of Executive and Member Service, there has been serious breach in following the prescribed lawful procedure. 

Once we came to learn of this significant breach, we requested for the recount (which is listed to take place on 16 and 17 July 2020) to also include a count of all unused ballot papers in order to reconcile the total ballots printed (used and unused), particularly as the sacks were not sealed, open to interference by anyone. 

The RO refused our request for the recount and reconciliation of the unused ballot papers; however, the RO willingly agreed to a recount of the unused ballot papers ONLY IF the recount result went against the Labour Party candidates. I am sure you agree that this clearly points towards partiality in favour of the Labour Party, despite a duty by the RO to remain neutral.

The  witness statement made by Thomas Cattermole, Brent Council Head of Executive and Member Services to the Court sets out the events surrounding the seach for the missing Barnhill papers. 

The storage room at Clock Cottage was visited several times before they were found in a sack labelled "23/5/19 EU elections BP's' in pen. It had no seal and it was dirty on the outside.  It was upright and it was surmised that nothing had fallen out and nothing was found on the floor on checking. Cattermole said that he could only assume the papers were placed in a sack that already had the EU elections label on it. Photographs were taken in accordance with the Judge's Order.

The sack along with others from Barnhill ward is now secured in a locked, limited access area in Brent Civic Centre.

Some mistake, surely? Brent Council wins planning awards while complaints about housing escalate

Chase House, South Kilburn

Guest post by Pete Firmin, South Kilburn Estate resident

Legend has it that emperor Nero fiddled while Rome burned. Brent Council leadership seem to be staging a modern re-enactment when, while receiving baubles for its planning team, it turns a blind eye to reports of the poor standard of housing being built.

The Council website proudly proclaims LINK 

Brent scoops planning award 

A UK planning industry award was handed to Brent council's planning team yesterday (24 April) in recognition of the projects and plans and commitments made by the team to borough.

The RTPI [Royal Town Planning Institute] awards for planning excellence is the longest running and most high-profile awards in the industry and celebrates the teams and projects that transform economies, environments and communities all over the UK and internationally.

Brent scooped the Local Authority Planning Team of the Year award ahead of nine other shortlisted authorities.

The judges noted how Brent's planning team excelled in all areas of work. They were impressed with their desire to continually reflect on their performance and look for ways to develop and improve their service.

Cllr Tatler, Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Highways and Planning, said:

"This is a great achievement and one that we should be proud of. We were up against some of the best nationally to win Planning Team of the Year and it just shows that we are on the right path with what we are doing here in Brent for residents, creating new homes, opportunities and building a better borough.

In stark contrast, about the same time, Catalyst Housing announced that all residents would have to leave Merle Court in Carlton Vale within 18 months. Not only has the flammable cladding on the building to be removed, but Catalyst say that the need for major internal works mean residents have to move out.

In recent months local Councillors and the MP, Tulip Siddiq, have received many complaints from residents of Argo House in Kilburn Park road of major problems, including poor ventilation, internal mould, intermittent hot water and heating, loose cables and loose cladding. Residents also say they are getting little or now support from the property managers or Home Group Housing association.

A few weeks ago, residents of Chase House in Hansel Road tweeted photos of the state of their bloc, including mould. This week the Kilburn Times picks up on that LINK but with the additional facts this concerns not just Chase House, but also Franklin House (Carlton Vale) and Hollister House on Kilburn Park Road. The common factor to all three is that they are all managed by L & Q. Their common problems are like those of Argo House.

Such problems are not new. Like Merle Court, Swift House and George House (managed by L & Q) on Albert Road, have flammable cladding and have had 24-hour firewatch since shortly after the Grenfell tragedy. L & Q is currently in the process of removing the cladding on Swift House, which means residents are surrounded by ugly scaffold for an extended period.

George House also needed a new roof after the previous one leaked. It still has flat roofs which collect water.

Kilburn Quarter (Network Homes, Cambridge Road) had to have their balconies waterproofed after it was discovered they were leaking.

These problems come on top of a myriad of lesser issues (though not to the residents…) that have been reported for years, as well as issues of rocketing service charges imposed.

What all these properties have in common is that they have been built as part of Brent Council’s regeneration of South Kilburn. All are new, and the problems are common to both “social” and market-price residents.

Before this latest award, Brent won several plaudits for its “flagship” regeneration and refused to listen to those residents and community activists, including the local Kilburn branch of the Labour Party, who tried to raise these issues.

Clearly the problems are common to several different property developers and housing associations. Despite the awards (which never seem to involve local people among their judges), builders and housing associations have been taking advantage of Brent’s enthusiasm for regeneration to build sub-standard housing.

Brent appears to want to disclaim any responsibility for these problems, referring all enquiries from journalists about Merle Court to Catalyst without comment. However, not only was Merle Court built in partnership with Brent Council, but Brent gave panning permission for all these blocks (which replace previous Council housing). They are all part of the Council’s regeneration of South Kilburn, and social tenants in them were referred on by Brent after their Council housing was demolished. Brent shares some responsibility for this situation beyond simply being the Local Authority in which poor quality housing exists.

The concern is that, with South Kilburn regeneration to continue for many years, and Brent wanting to “regenerate” St Raphaels estate, we can see further similar problems.

South Kilburn residents and community activists are, however, getting organised. As well as calling for current faults to be rectified, we must call for a halt to regeneration until Brent and the community, are satisfied that housing is build to a decent standard and housing associations and property managers take real responsibility for their buildings.

-->

Cllr Butt's bad news week as he is accused of 'social cleansing' and Brent Central CLP swings left

Kilburn Times October 18th

With Cllr Abdirazak Abdi proving to be as courageous at revealing the short-comings of Brent Council as his Kilburn ward predecessor Cllr Duffy and Brent Central Constituency Labour Party swinging to the left, this has not been a good week for Muhammed Butt, leader of Brent Council.

The Kilburn Times LINK followed up my story of a week ago  LINK about South Kilburn residents being faced with eviction by the council, without their councillors being informed of a crucial  meeting about the issue. Cllr Abdi minced no words when he accused the Labour council of social cleansing.

Abdi is strongly backed by Kilburn Labour Party which is still campaigning over his removal from the Planning Committee by Cllr Butt. Now the Brent Central Labour Party looks as if it too will be a thorn in Butt's side with the left winning all but one officer position in the CLP  LINK.  Significantly the left filled all 10 places on the Local Campaigns Forum (LCF) which organises councillor selections and election campaigns.  The CLP also nominated at 6 left slate candidates for the National Constitutional Committee elections.

The LCF result may be most significant in the long run as it sets priorities for campaigns over the coming period when Butt and his cabinet are putting forward a cuts budget LINK and continuing the council's unhealthy close relationship with developers.

Cllr Butt has been criticised for not doing more to fight the local government cuts and for not signing a key letter protesting against the cuts signed by other council leaders. However, he turned up this week at the Local Government's Association lobby of Downing Street over funding and managed a photo opportunity with Nick Forbes leader of Newcastle Council and the LGA Labour Group.

It will take more than the odd photo opportunity to persuade Butt's critics that he is responding to their concerns.

Hitherto, opposition to Cllr Butt's leadership has been more about his personal leadership style and controlling approach rather than policies. The relationship between Brent Council Labour Group and the three local CLPs (Hampstead & Kilburn, Brent Central and Brent North) in terms of the latters' ability to influence specific policy is ill-defined and the Council leadership have been able to shrug off or ignore critical motions.

The LCF may now become the forum for a battle over the future political direction of the council.

Why has Brent Council failed to protect the iconic view of Wembley Stadium?

'...The council will therefore protect a range of short, middle and long distance views of the National Stadium.' 2015

2018

 I reproduce below Philip Grant's recent letter to the Kilburn Times LINK

Your article “Wembley Arch Vanishing?” (23 August) LINK makes a very important point about Brent Council’s lack of compliance with its own planning policies.

In January 2015, a meeting of Brent’s Full Council adopted the Wembley Area Action Plan, drawn up after public consultation, to be part of the policies which were supposed to be applied in deciding whether planning applications should be accepted. The action plan included a section on “Protection of Stadium Views”, with policy statements such as:

‘Views of the Stadium contribute a significant amount to the perception of Wembley as a whole, performing a range of functions that add a layer of depth to the visual experience of the area.’ and
’The council will therefore protect a range of short, middle and long distance views of the National Stadium.’

In the related section of the action plan on “Protecting the Special Character of Olympic Way”, the protection to be given was spelled out with further policy statements, including:

‘In line with policies WEM5 and WEM6, proposals for tall buildings must demonstrate that they have no adverse visual impacts on views of the stadium from Olympic Way.’ and (in policy WEM7)
’Proposed Development on Olympic Way must be carefully designed and scaled to respect the predominance of Wembley Stadium and its arch.’

Picture 4.39 (above) is an illustration from the 2015 action plan, showing the main view that these policies were supposed to protect. Unfortunately, the reality of what has been allowed to happen can be seen in a photograph which I took, from the same spot, in July 2018. 

Brent has allowed many “minor” bites to be taken out of the view, by approving successive planning applications for tall buildings along Olympic Way over recent years, and there are more to come.

In June 2018, a report to Planning Committee, which approved changes to the plan for a tall block next to the Civic Centre, mentioned some of the earlier concessions made:

‘The top of the new tall building would obscure an additional small part of the stadium arch ....’ and
’Whilst the current proposals would slightly reduce the amount of the arch that is visible at present, this is not significantly more than the degree to which the Barratt and Unite housing schemes on the eastern side of Olympic Way infringe on the view of the arch from Olympic Way ....’

In July 2018, when recommending approval for a development by Network Homes of up to 21 stories, the planners said:

‘...  it is considered that the small reduction in the visibility of the eastern part of the arch is an acceptable consequence of this development and it is noted that the western part of the arch is already obscured to broadly the same extent, helping to bring symmetry to the view of the Stadium along the Olympic Way corridor.’ 


Brent Council should explain why it has allowed its own planning rules to be broken by its planners and Planning Committee, and why it has failed to protect the iconic view of Wembley Stadium, despite its promise to do so.

Philip Grant

Cllr Mashari launches Brent Council leadership bid as 'unity' candidate

Cllr Roxanne Mashari (Labour Welsh Harp) has announced that she will stand against Muhammed Butt for leadership of Brent Council at the Labour Group’s AGM on Saturday.

Mashari told the Kilburn Times LINK:

It’s a strictly positive campaign. I’m standing to try and be a unity candidate, build on the progress we’ve made since 2010 and take the council and the borough to the next level.
 
The scale of the challenges we face, we are going to have to be more transformative in our approach.
There are huge levels of destitution and poverty in the borough which are already too high, consistent in areas like South Kilburn, Stonebridge and Harlesden for decades. We have to change the story of this borough in fundamental areas.

I’m not talking about tinkering around the edges – I’m talking about a real shift in terms of how we operate and how we focus. 

This is not about disparaging anyone. It’s not to say we haven’t made progress or Cllr Butt hasn’t done good things. We are in a critical point in time for Brent with service savings to make, the universal credit roll-out, and foodbanks at capacity – now it’s time to take things up a step and be transformative. I want to see Brent be a flagship Labour council in the UK and that’s where I want to take us.

Kishan Parshotam, who co-chaired Brent Youth parliament with Cllr Mashari said:

Roxanne has always been a champion for equal rights. She was a fantastic Co-Chair of BYP and helped it go from strength to strength. She would be an admirable, and tenacious, leader of the Council during the next difficult chapter for our borough.

Cllr Mashari resigned from the Brent Cabinet in December 2016 LINK

Previous leadership bids by Cllr Nerva and Cllr Pavey have failed to remove Cllr Butt but there is increased disquiet now over his leadership particularly regarding the issues outlined in the article below and decisions such as that regarding the Wembley Stadium steps and meetings with developers.

The Kilburn Times asks Cllr Butt a vital question - Brent residents are waiting for an answer

Kilburn Times Front Page November 23rd 2017

Brent Cabinet 'thrilled' by land deal with off-shore companies

A Cabinet meeting tonight, which devoted about 3 minutes to each item on the agenda, approved the Council's controversial Stonebridge-Bridge Park land deal with off-shore companies.  The Lead Member for the issue is Muhammed Butt, Leader of the Council, who now appears to be leading on Regeneration, and he spoke glowingly of the project, the removal of the 'eye sore' Unisys and the opportunities it offered to the Council.

In a rushed but stumbling speech Cllr Butt claimed that the off-shore risk was mitigated by  the creation of a UK subsidiary company by the off-shore GMH with off-shore Harborough Invest acting as the second guarantor.

The issue was covered by the Kilburn Times LINK today as well as by Wembley Matters LINK a week ago but this stimulated no questionning by any members of the Cabinet and Deputy Leader Margaret McLennan outdid her leader in euphoria declaring that she was 'thrilled' by the deal. No questions were asked and no discussion took place before the proposal was rubber-stamped.

For 'those who have eyes to see' there were plenty of between the lines reservations in the report from Officers and I have heard the Cabinet's decision described as 'ill-advised rather than illegal'.

All other business went through without any discussion apart from expressions of mutual admiration from  Cabinet members.

The Scrutiny recommendations on the controversial Sustainability and Transformation Plan (a cover for cuts or a brave new integrated world) were about process rather than content and were approved:

1. An update be provided to the committee on the OnePublic Estate, including an update on the Central Middlesex and Willesden Hubs.

2. Efforts be made to engage with health scrutiny across north-west London with regard to the Sustainability and Transformation Plan.

3. Consideration be given to collaborative work with Healthwatch groups to support engagement around the Sustainability and Transformation Plan.

4. A regular progress report on the Sustainability and Transformation Plan be provided to the committee, the first of these to be provided six months from the date of the current meeting.

There was no discussion on the One Public Estate Plan where the position of voluntary organisations being charged market rents for use of NHS Estate's property has caused much consternation in the sector. Muhammed Butt is also the Lead Member on this issue.

The Budget Task Group's recommendations would be 'taken into consideration' and Cllr Southwood promised dialogue but made no promise on the Task Group's opposition to bulk collection charges.

Cllr Mitchell-Murray, lead member for Children and Families sent her apologies to the meeting LINK. Muhammed Butt took over her role in December with the Council stating that she hoped to retrun in January 2017.

New lead member for Regeneration, Cllr Shama Tatler was present and seemed extremely happy to be at the top table but made only a very minor contribution. The demarcation between her role and that of Muhammed Butt, which led to the conflict between Butt and Cllr Mashari, still seems unclear.

Archant redundancies likely to hit Kilburn Times

Norwich based Archant, publishers of the Brent and Kilburn Times, and many other local papers, has announced a new 'audience led' strategy which will see News Editors replaced by 'content editors; who will oversee a system in which digital content will feed straight into the printed paper.

Redundancy notices were being issued today by email and are likely to include Lorraine King, veteran news editor of the Brent and Kilburn Times.   King's strength has been the fact that she is firmly part of the local community and has been unafraid to campaign on issues such as retention of local libraries, saving Stonebridge Adventure Playground and the future of Central Middlesex Hospital.

Importantly King has not given in to pressure from Brent Council's political leadership to adopt a more friendly approach to the Council. LINK

Staff will be only offered statutory redundancy pay.

There was a wave of redundancies in 2011-12 at Archant which eventually left the Kilburn Times with the equivalent of 1-1/2 reporters, now the combined role will be equivalent to one person running the newspaper AND website.

Readers will have noticed how the number of pages of the BKT has shrunk in the past few years which means that many stories that are published on the web do not make it into the print edition. This can be frustrating for local people who want to see their cause given publicity.

Archant seems determined that they will not suffer the fate of the Wembley/Harrow Observer which switched to 'digital only' and in the guise of Get West London LINK has all but disappeared.

Matt Kelly, Archant's chief 'contents officer' said LINK :

Our strategy to be more relevant than ever before is not dependent on platform.

Our strategy begins and ends with our audience. That’s why we describe our approach, quite simply, as audience-first.

Editing the newspaper will be done with a very light touch from title editors – I do not want editors spending hours deciding between the page 9 and page 15 leads, or coping with the perennial last minute need for dozens of fillers to complete news pages.”

I think the results are stunning, and that both you and – even more importantly – our readers will love them.

Senior reporters and specialists will be encouraged to publish direct to digital and – liberated from the domineering task of filling the newspaper – I expect to see us create even more content than we do today.

To facilitate the easy production of the newspaper, we will create content in pre-ordained styles that will both look great online and in print. But the practice of holding content back for print will end, with very few exceptions.

In a nutshell, I am asking us to stop editing a newspaper, and instead edit the community we serve.

This sounds remarkably like a print edition of the web-pages and with the accompanying centralisation perhaps less sensitive to local issues.

A spokesperson for the NUJ told me this afternoon that they were still in meetings about the changes but stated that they were very concerned about the impact on the quality of journalism and the service local newspapers give their readers.  In particular they had had nothing from Archant on how the remaining staff would cope with the new workload and were concerned about their members' well-being.

I hope the NUJ, as they did in 2011, will put up a fight for their journalists, but meanwhile I salute Lorraine King and her other news editor colleagues for the job they have done in maintaining a robust scrutiny of local democracy and publicising and often backing local campaigns.

Our democracy cannot afford to lose this essential service, unfortunately with one person being left to cover the whole borough and the inevitable impact on the quality of the newspaper, I can see the eventual demise of the Brent and Kilburn Times.

Reprieve for Brent sickle cell project

Photo: Kilburn Times

Previous articles on Wembley Matters drew attention to the possible closure of the Brent Sickle Cell project LINK LINK.  The Brent Clinical Commissioning Group met yesterday and heard representaions on the issue. In this guest blog, written in a personal capacity, Nan Tewari reports on the outcome.

An Appeal - There is long-term condition called ‘failure to listen to the public’ that has infected the statutory sector. This long-term condition needs a long-term view and massive reserves of determination to overcome its more deleterious effects. Your time and your determination will help find a cure. Please (continue to) give generously…...

In a real instance of ‘you said, we did’, Brent CCG (clinical commissioning group) listened to patient and public representations and granted a short reprieve for the BSCASS (Brent Sickle Cell Advisory Support Service) project hosted by the Sickle Cell Society.

Brent Patient Voice (bpv.org.uk) has been very concerned about the real danger of existing users and those in the pipeline being left ‘high and dry’ if the CCG were to have gone ahead and closed the BSCASS project without an adequate, culturally specific, alternative being put in place. BPV has been in extended correspondence with the CCG solicitors DAC Beachcroft in the matter.

Brent CVS will be hosting a focus group on Thursday 15 September from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. at their offices in Wembley Park (no change of heart on time or venue, unfortunately!). I would encourage anyone with the sickle cell condition or with experience of the condition or in a risk category, to attend and contribute to the discussion.

This will be followed by a meeting between Brent CCG and Brent council’s chair of Health and Well-Being, Cllr Krupesh Hirani on 20^th September.

Brent CCG has pledged to continue the existing BSCASS project until the outcome of the two meetings. The CCG has also said it will give 3 months’ notice of decommissioning to the project which had previously been lacking.

I am hoping the outcome will be one that establishes a sensible, alternative plan. This will need to satisfy the CCG’s concerns over duplication of spending whilst equally satisfying the need for a culturally sensitive support service that can raise awareness in the wider health and care sectors, e.g. GPs, social services and voluntary sector providers, of how people can be assisted to minimise sickle cell crises and avoid hospital admissions.

The huge effort put in by Brent Patient Voice and the weight of public opinion on this blog in the Brent and Kilburn Times on Facebook and on Twitter, has paid off.

Notably, Barry Gardiner, MP for Brent North and Dawn Butler, MP for Brent Central each made strong, written representations to Brent CCG on the matter when BPV raised it with them.

My personal thanks to Martin Francis, Philip Grant, Ann O’Neill (Brent Mencap) Lorraine King (Brent and Kilburn Times) Harlesden Methodist Church and not least, to my colleagues in Brent Patient Voice.

Barry Gardiner's letter is HERE

UPDATE: Butt resigns from London Councils equalities post

Muhammed Butt, leader of Brent Council has resigned from his post as Equalities lead at the 32 borough cross-party London Councils.

Although Jewish News and Brent and Kilburn Times have attributed this to the Facebook controversy there has been no official confirmation that this was the case and there may well be another reason.

I have put in a request to London Councils and Brent Council asking for a statement about the reasons for the resignation.

UPDATE - I have received this from the London Councils Media Officer:

A London Councils' spokesperson said: "We can confirm that Cllr Muhammed Butt has resigned as equalities lead for London Councils. A new equalities lead will be appointed by our Leaders' Committee in due course. I can also confirm that his resignation is linked to the post that was shared on Facebook."

Time to ask if Butt is fit to hold office?

The Kilburn Times has published an article LINK on the out of court settlement by Brent Council in the Rosemarie Clarke racial discrimination casewhcih was reported on Wembley Matters last Friday. LINK

Deciding to challenge an employer on such issues is always stressful but Brent Council's stance on the matter has added to the stress as Nan Tewari pointed out in her statement to the Kilburn Times:

Rosemarie is relieved that the original employment tribunal case is over. Her priority now is to try to recover her health, which has hit rock bottom as a result of Brent’s ill-treatment of her throughout the period from her submitted resignation in 2013 right up until the 11th hour of the case being settled out of court. 

The tribunal went through everything in great detail. It went through all so-called disciplinary charges and it was very clear they were made up and supported by documents that weren’t accurate.”

Unfortunately this is not the end and Rosemarie’s recovery will inevitably be hampered by the council leader having effectively caused damage to her reputation by the imputation in a public statement, of a justified finding of gross misconduct against her by the council. She is worried about what the future holds for her and this will inevitably impact on her recovery.

The role of Muhammed Butt, the Brent Council leader in the case is deeply disturbing. He sought to undermine Philip Grant when he tried to raise this matter at Scrutiny LINK , heckled him at an earlier Council meeting and after the last Council meeting interupted me when I was speaking to Helen Carr about her disgraceful attack on Philip. Despite other Labour councillors being aghast at Carr's conduct, Butt gleefully congratulated her on her attack and asked for a copy of the statement she had read out. 

Helen Carr has been made to apologise to Philip Grant and other councillors.

Muhammed Butt has not.

It is surely time for Labour Party Region, the Labour Group and Labour Party members to ask if Muhammed Butt is fit to hold his current office.

Brent Council willing to take in at least 50 Syrian families 'if necessary'

Leader of Brent Council Muhammed Butt has told the Kilburn Times that the Council is willing to take at least 50 Syrian families into the borough LINK

However his comments were short on detail of how this would be done.

He told the Times:

It’s incumbent upon us to make sure that we do help the people who are in need.
I’m looking to take in 50 families if necessary, I have no problem with that and if we need to increase it we’ll wait for the announcement from the government about the resources open to us.

He said it was too early to say how the refugees would be settled in and housed.

What we need to do first is make a plan, we need to get our partners on board and that the council and the departments are working together so that we can identify the areas of need.

I‘ve had conversations with officers about starting to take the appropriate measures to support people coming in.

He went on to say that there was some time as “people will not be coming in tomorrow.”

At the time of writing 351 residents had signed an on-line petition calling for Brent to admit 50 families LINK

The petition was publicised on Wembley Matters and social media over the weekend. LINK