Northwick Park ward candidate selections

Candidates for Northwick Park for May 2018 council elections were chosen last night. Margaret McLennan, currently deputy leader of Brent Council, was selected along with Keith Perrin and Robert Johnson.

The selection assumed greater importance in the light of the One Public Estate proposal for Northwick Park LINK and it is not clear that the trio will be able to agree a common approach.

LATEST: Labour selections for Brent Council elections 2018

Former councillor James Powney failed in his 'come back' selection bid for Harlesden ward last night. Joshua Mitchell Murry, claiming he'd 'put residents first' was selected along with Lloyd McLeish and Mili Patel. Fryent selected Shama Tatler, George Crane and Vincent Lo.

On Tuesday Kensal Green and Barn Hill will select. In Barn Hill it is a formality with Shafique Choudhary, Sarah Marquis and Michael Pavey re-selected without  opposition. Wednesday Update: Matt Kelcher and Jumbo Chan were re-selected in Kensal Green and Claudia Hector won the third position.

Welsh Harp (Amer Agha, Harbi Farah and Roxanne Mashari), Queens Park (James Denselow, Neil Nerva, Ella Southwood) and Tokyngton (Muhammed Butt, Orleen Hylton and Ketan Shah) will all confirm the re-selection of current councillors.

Thursday's meeting in Alperton will confirm the re-selection of James Allie and Bhagwani Chohan with a contest for third place between Nushan Nazemi and Trupti Sangani.

Meanwhile more is emerging about the de-selection of John Duffy in Kilburn which was a surprise to many of the public given his record of robustly challenging the Cabinet and officers.

In an email to Kilburn ward members, following up on an email he sent listing his achievements as a councillor, Duffy said:

Normally I would ignore stupidity like this, but I have had to sit in meetings where the tone has been unacceptable some member calling Hillary Benn “a Fascist”.

At the meetings members often wearing pictures of Jeremy Corbyn these members are normally in their 50’s and 60’s its very odd. If you dare raise the fact working people are turning their backs on the Labour Party they say its not important that the Labour Party win elections. Some times I feel I am at a Moonies convention, without the humour or big wedding at the end.

Like most Labour party members, I am dismayed at our electoral position. So I ignore them and push on trying to deliver socialist answers to problem facing the residents of Kilburn because of the unbalanced Tory austerity attack on hard working families and people who are need support.

These members have apparently decided at Wednesday night selection meeting that local issues and local residents will more or less be ignored and the main issue at the meeting will be about how much you support Jeremy Corbyn.

In an earlier email he accused Momentum members of using the 'pernicious Tory tactic of blacklisting' (regarding Brent Momentum's Facebook listing councillors who supported Owen Smith's leadership bid) and said that his wife would not attend the selection meeting for fear of intimidation.

 A Kilburn Labour Party member reacted with this statement:

This is John Duffy's version of alternative facts. Not a different interpretation of facts, but a "different truth". The idea that members are all in their 50s or 60s, sit around in Corbyn T-shirts and ignore local issues is about as far from the truth as you can get. That and the idea that the main issue at the selection meeting was Corbyn.

The member went on to say that despite Duffy not being at the selection meeting his candidature had been tabled and he did receive some votes. Duffy did not have an automatic right to be short-listed and this had also been the case with Cllr Rita Conneely. He rejected claims that local issues were not discussed citing a recent special meeting on South Kilburn Regeneration and said no one else had noticed an atmosphere of intimidation.

There was a recognition that Duffy had made life difficult for the Council leadership and forced them to retreat on a number of issues but it was also felt that he was not a team player able to work co-operatively with other councillors and campaigners.

Listing councillors who had supported Owen Smith's leadership bid was an attempt to provide political information for Labour Party members to consider when making their selections. In fact most of the councillors named had been re-selected.  It was not comparable to blacklisting by employers to stop militant trade unionists from gaining employment.

The Kilburn member denied that the de-selection of Duffy could be interpreted as a victory for Muhammed Butt and the Labour leadership but instead was about the above issues and a reaction to Duffy's email claims.

Dawn Butler's Article 50 residents' meeting tonight in Wembley Park - will she follow Tulip?

Dawn Butler, MP for Brent Central, is holding a meeting this evening on Article 50 at a restaurant and bar venue in a retail park near Wembley Stadium. The event is now fully booked.

On her Facebook she states:

I will be hosting a residents meeting on the Article 50 vote this evening. We are now at full capacity.

However to ensure I engage with as many residents as possible I will be livestreaming the meeting on this page from 8pm tonight. Do tune in, I will also be answering questions taken from the stream.

Her Facebook address is https://www.facebook.com/DawnButlerBrent

Butler's colleague, Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Kilburn) has resigned from the Labour front bench over the Labour three line whip on the issue.

What will Dawn do?

In a message Butler blamed the high cost of hiring meeting rooms at Brent Civic Centre for not holding this 'incredibly important' meeting at a larger venue.

If this is the case where does that leave any resident who wants to hire space?

Has Sam Stopp been shot down over Heathrow?

Cllr Sam Stopp announced a week or so ago that he was seeking the Labour nomination for Richmond on a pro-Heathrow, pro-growth, pro-jobs ticket.

More recently he announced that he had been long-listed for the nomination.  Today his Labour councillor colleague Cllr Neil Nerva posted the above tweet on Facebook.  It says:

@Cllr Stopp

I would've stood as a pro-Heathrow candidate for #RichmondPark NEC wants anti-Heathrow candidate, which makes me wonder why we're standing.

I can't see that tweet on Stopp's timeline now LINK  but that is not surprising. Stopp has deleted nearly all of his tweets many of which backed Owen Smith in the Labour leadership election and criticised Jeremy Corbyn.  One tweet stated he was ashamed that Brent Central CLP had backed Corbyn and another accused Labour colleagues of refusing to allow him into a meeting about the Labour leadership.

Stopp's twitter account now shows just 28 tweets akthough there are 1,970 'likes':

All rather strange.  It is not clear whether this marks the end of his Richmond Park bid or whether he is still in the race.

For the record this is what Stopp said previously about the Richmond Park by-election:

Cracks appear in Labour's approach to pavements as Barnet Labour calls for choice

 

Image from RAT - Resistance Against Tarmac

So, continuing to look at what our neighbouring boroughs are doing and saying, here is Barnet Labour Party (in opposition) taking a rather different approach  to Brent Labour (in power) on the tarmac versus paving debate.  LINK:
 

Tarmac v Paving: Labour call for residents to be given a choice over pavement resurfacing

Labour councillors are calling for residents to be given a choice between tarmac and paving slabs for pavement resurfacing after receiving complaints about newly completed tarmac treatments in Beresford Road, East Finchley, and a petition from residents living in Granville Road N12.

The Granville Road petition, which will be discussed at the Finchley & Golders Green Area Committee on 26 October, says: “The overwhelming majority of people we spoke to do not want a cheaper tarmac surface on the pavements if this is indeed the proposal. There are many concerns about how it will look, that it will bring down the appearance of the road, that it will be uneven, that it won't last and will crack, that it will become sticky in the summer, that it will encourage even more vehicle drivers to mount the pavement.”

The petition also states that residents are given only two weeks’ notice of pavement works with no real way to respond as the contact number given on the letters is not answered and messages left have not been returned by the Council.

Barnet Council has received seven separate complaints from residents in Beresford Road about the tarmac resurfacing recently completed there which has featured in the Evening Standard on 13 October.

The Conservative-run Council are planning to save £550,000 in reactive road and pavement maintenance by moving to different resurfacing methods. For pavements this means completely replacing paving with tarmac or using tarmac with some block paving for vehicle crossovers and margins. Only pavements in town centres and conservation areas will have paving slabs replaced.

The new tarmac pavement treatments form part of plans by the Council to spend £50m on road and pavement resurfacing across the borough between 2015-2020. However, the Council’s published news release on the issue (20 October) showed a picture of paving slabs being used rather than tarmac. Labour councillors believe this is misleading to the public. The letters sent to residents have also been totally misleading as they have stated "we will be laying paving in your road", despite the fact the Council intends to use tarmac.

Labour councillors have also highlighted complaints from residents about the cheaper road surface dressing that leaves loose chips on roads.

Repair of roads and quality of pavements are two of the lowest rated universal services in Barnet according to the Council’s most recent Residents’ Perception Survey.

Only 27% of residents responding to the Survey rated repair of roads highly – 14% points lower than London (41%), and down 8% points from autumn 2015 (35%); and only 33% of residents rated quality of pavements highly – 8% points lower than London (41%), and down 1% point on autumn 2015 (34%).

The Survey also showed that the state of roads and pavements is the second highest concern amongst residents.

Barnet Labour's Environment Spokesperson, Cllr Alan Schneiderman said:

The decision to use tarmac rather than paving stones has been imposed without residents being consulted. Residents have also been misled by being sent letters saying that paving will be laid in their road when in fact they have no choice but tarmac.

We need to do all we can to minimise trips and falls and repair footways, but I want to see residents given a choice between using paving stones or tarmac for their road.

Wembley Matters additional comment:

Just in case one of the Brent Conervatibe groups wants to take up the issue this is what Barnet Conservatives (in power) had to say LINK:

According to Cllr Dean Cohen, Conservative for Golders Green, asphalt is being used in “appropriate areas” because it is “safer, more durable and cheaper to maintain over their life”.

Cllr Cohen, who chairs the environment committee, said: “We know that the quality of pavements is a top priority for residents which is why we are investing £8m this year alone on footways.

“Asphalt surfaces enable a greater number of roads to benefit from the programme of investment – this was a committee decision which Labour members did not oppose.

“The council will continue to engage with residents as clearly as possible ahead of work taking place."

Pro-Heathrow Cllr Stopp throws his hat into Richmond by-election ring

Sam Stopp, the Labour councillor for Wembley Central, has signalled via Twitter, that he intends to put himself forward as the Labour candidate for Richmond in the wake of Zac Goldsmith's resignation over Heathrow.

The Liberal Democrats are the second party in Richmond and Labour MP Clive Lewis has urged Labour to stand down to enable a Tory defeat.

Stopp is adamant that Labour should stand and has said he will stand on a pro-Heathrow third runway ticket advocating growth and job creation.

Stopp was a supporter of Yvette Cooper's leadership bid and this time round supported Owen Smith, declaring that he was embarrassed by Brent Central's support for Corbyn.

He rejects any notion of a progressive alliance whilst we still have a first past the post elelction system.

Cllr Stopp is Chair of the Labour Campaign to End Homelessness.

Brent SOS Libraries urge Cabinet to keep their pre-election promise on Preston Library

This letter has been sent to Brent Cabinet members prior to tonight's meeting.

 

Re: Preston Community Library

Report for consideration at Cabinet meeting on Tuesday 13^th September 2016

I write as chair of Brent SOS Libraries, an umbrella group supporting library campaigns and community libraries across Brent. The contents of this email have been approved by the four community library groups at Kensal Rise, Cricklewood, Barham and Preston. I have been made aware of the report relating to redevelopment of the Preston Library site, which I understand you are due to consider at the cabinet meeting tomorrow, Tuesday 13^th September 2016.

It is well known that a clear pre-election promise was made at a public meeting on 7^th May 2014, when the Brent Labour Party promised to “offer the building at a peppercorn rent to any local community group who can provide a sustainable community library... that is our pledge. We will not open to competitive tender in order to give preference to local groups.” You were present at that meeting and supported that pledge.

Since then, volunteers in Preston have worked extremely hard to set up and sustain a community library in the building. Despite the constraints placed on them by sharing the library building with local schools using it for overflow classrooms, library volunteers in Preston have developed an amazing local resource, which is providing valuable services to the community. As you probably know, Preston Community Library is a registered charity. In addition to providing books, study space, and computers with internet access (vital for people who have no or limited computer or internet access at home), they also run, among other things, ESOL classes, a film club, and writing projects for children and young people.

Representatives from Preston Community Library meet regularly with those from the other community libraries setting up across Brent (Barham, Kensal Rise and Cricklewood), as part of the umbrella group Brent SOS Libraries. In recognition of the importance of our work, we have recently received a grant of £45,000 over two years from the Council’s Voluntary Sector Initiative Fund for support and development of services across the four libraries. We were one of eleven bids from a total of 43 applications to be successful.

The four community libraries have also started to work with the Brent Library Service and we have met with them on several occasions this year. In July we were very pleased to participate in the Culture Open Day at Willesden Green Library, an event which we planned jointly with the Library Service. We look forward to working more closely with the Library Service in the future.

In the circumstances, I was most surprised to read the report prepared for the Cabinet, which makes no reference to the pre-election promise. The proposals contained in the report breach that promise by proposing open market tender and a significant annual rent for community space. A community library is not going to be able to pay the sorts of sums proposed. Libraries are not designed to be profit making, they are providing a free service to the community. This is understood at Kensal Rise and Cricklewood, where the libraries will only pay a peppercorn rent. The hard work and goodwill of the many volunteers supporting Preston Community Library, and the benefit that it provides, should not be disregarded in this way.

Any proposal for future use of the Preston Library site should honour your pre-election promise and should recognise the value, including the social value, of the work done by Preston Community Library. PCL should not be subjected to an open market tender process and should not be required to pay more than a peppercorn rent. If the site is to be redeveloped in some form, PCL should be provided with space in the new development on the same basis, and you should provide them with alternative accommodation whilst the site is being redeveloped.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Laura Collignon 

Chair, Brent SOS Libraries

Chair of Operations Group, Friends of Kensal Rise Library

Brent Central and Hampstead and Kilburn Labour Parties nominate Corbyn for Labour leadership

Queueing at the Kingsgate Centre tonight (photo ex-Twitter @inductivestep)

Brent Central CLP nominated Jeremy Corbyn for the Labour leadership by 69 votes to 24 tonight. Hampstead and Kilburn nominated Corbyn by 96 to 54.   Brent North does not vote until August 9th.

Brent Central nominated Corbyn in 2015 and Hampstead and Kilburn nominated Yvette Cooper.

Lucas: Progressive should unite against prospect of a Tory-UKIP-DUP Brexit government

From Caroline Lucas' blog LINK

Caroline Lucas has reacted to the current crisis in both the Labour and Conservative parties with the following comment:

"Britain is in crisis and people are scared about the future. Never have we had a greater need for calm leadership to be shown by politicians - yet instead both the Tories and Labour are engaging in civil wars. At such a key moment for this country the political establishment is utterly failing the British people.  

"We have a Government in chaos, an economy facing a crisis and people up and down the country facing serious hardship - yet the Labour Party is in utter turmoil, thanks mostly to some Shadow Cabinet Ministers trying to take their party back to 1997 but also partly because Jeremy Corbyn did fail to show the passion needed in the EU referendum.

"Instead of indulging in months of introspection and infighting, this is an opportunity to recognise that a more plural politics is in both the left’s electoral and political interests.  And with the growing likelihood of an early General Election, the importance of progressive parties working together to prevent the formation of a Tory-UKIP-DUP government that would seek to enact an ultra-right Brexit scenario is ever more pressing.

"This crisis also exposes the absurdity of our first past the post electoral system. The Labour Party is no longer one natural entity and, without doubt, it would have split by now if we had a fair voting system. The only fair way to proceed is to have a proportional voting system where people can back the politicians who they believe in, rather than taking a gamble and not knowing which Labour Party they’ll end up with.

"While the other parties fight among themselves, the Green Party, and our many new members who have joined in the last few days, will take a stand against any austerity or slashing of environmental legislation that may come with Brexit. In the coming weeks we will also be holding the Establishment to account as the Chilcot inquiry is published and mounting a campaign against Trident renewal as the vote approaches.”

See also lucas' Guardian article LINK :

I know that many people who voted remain will be angry with those who opted to leave, but such feelings are misplaced. To dismiss them as bigots or racists would be a serious mistake. Instead what we should recognise from these results is a profound rage at a political and economic elite who have held power and wealth close to their chests for far too long

A small victory for democracy in the Brent Labour Group?

In an exclusive story today the Brent and Kilburn times LINK reports that an attempt by Muhammed Butt to give the leader of the Labour group the power to appoint his/her own deputy, rather than have an open election for the post by the whole group of councillor, has been thwarted.

The regional London Labour Party has ruled that there should be a contest after protests from senior Labour councillors.

The current deputy is Cllr Michael Pavey.

The Labour Group's Annual General Meeting is on May 14th where constitutionally Muhammed Butt could be challenged for the leadership.

Jewish Socialists' Group on the anti-semitism furore

Amidst the furore over allegations of anti-semitism this statement was issued by the Jewish Socialists' Group. I have known comrades in the JSG since cooperating in  the 70s and 80s over racism in schools and opposition to the activities of the National Front and other right-wing groups. I think their statement worth reproducing here as a calm and rational response as some of the backwash hits Brent:

Antisemitism exists and must be exposed and fought against in the same way as other forms of racism by all who are concerned with combating racism and fascism.

Antisemitism and anti-Zionism are not the same. Zionism is a political ideology which has always been contested within Jewish life since it emerged in 1897, and it is entirely legitimate for non-Jews as well as Jews to express opinions about it, whether positive or negative. Not all Jews are Zionists. Not all Zionists are Jews.

Criticism of Israeli government policy and Israeli state actions against the Palestinians is not antisemitism. Those who conflate criticism of Israeli policy with antisemitism, whether they are supporters or opponents of Israeli policy, are actually helping the antisemites. We reject any attempt, from whichever quarter, to place legitimate criticism of Israeli policy out of bounds.

Accusations of antisemitism are currently being weaponised to attack the Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour party with claims that Labour has a “problem” of antisemitism. This is despite Corbyn’s longstanding record of actively opposing fascism and all forms of racism, and being a firm a supporter of the rights of refugees and of human rights globally.

A very small number of such cases seem to be real instances of antisemitism. Others represent genuine criticism of Israeli policy and support for Palestinian rights, but expressed in clumsy and ambiguous language, which may unknowingly cross a line into antisemitism. Further cases are simply forthright expressions of support for Palestinian rights, which condemn Israeli government policy and aspects of Zionist ideology, and have nothing whatsoever to do with antisemitism.

The accusations do not refer to antisemitic actions but usually to comments, often made on social media, long before Jeremy Corbyn won the Labour leadership. Those making the charges now, did not see fit to bring them up at the time, under previous Labour leaders, but are using them now, just before mayoral and local elections, when they believe they can inflict most damage on the Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn.

The attack is coming from four main sources, who share agendas: to undermine Jeremy Corbyn as leader of Labour; to defend Israeli government policy from attack, however unjust, racist and harmful towards the Palestinian people; and to discredit those who make legitimate criticisms of Israeli policy or Zionism as a political ideology. As anti-racist and anti-fascist Jews who are also campaigning for peace with justice between Israelis and Palestinians, we entirely reject these cynical agendas that are being expressed by:

• The Conservative Party
• Conservative-supporting media in Britain and pro-Zionist Israeli media sources
• Right-wing and pro-Zionist elements claiming to speak on behalf of the Jewish community
• Opponents of Jeremy Corbyn within the Labour party.

The Jewish Socialists’ Group recognises that ordinary Jewish people are rightly concerned and fearful about instances of antisemitism. We share their concerns and a have a proud and consistent record of challenging and campaigning against antisemitism. But we will not support those making false accusations for cynical political motives, including the Conservative Party, who are running a racist campaign against Sadiq Khan, and whose leader David Cameron has referred to desperate refugees, as “a swarm” and “a bunch of migrants”. The Conservative Party demonstrated their contempt for Lord Dubs, a Jewish refugee from Nazism, when they voted down en masse an amendment a few days ago to allow 3,000 child refugees into Britain while Labour, led by Jeremy Corbyn, gave total support to Lord Dubs and his amendment.

The Jewish Socialists’ Group sees the current fearmongering about antisemitism in the Labour Party for what it is – a conscious and concerted effort by right-wing political forces to undermine the growing support among Jews and non-Jews alike for the Labour Party leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, and a measure of the desperation of his opponents.

We stand against antisemitism, against racism and fascism and in support of refugees. We stand for free speech and open debate on Israel, Palestine and Zionism.

Video: Brent & Harrow GLA candidates make their pitch at Mapesbury Hustings

As I am the Green Party election agent for Jafar Hassan I will let the video speak for itself. The six Brent and Harrow GLA candidates were granted roughly equal time at the beginning and end of the Mapra hustings.

The Q&A went a little awry in terms of fairness as the candidates were asked to answer each question in the same speaking order.  This meant that the first candidates to answer had little thinking time for often quite complex questions that were displayed to them on a laptop screen.

In the summing up period Shahrar Ali, Green Party list candidate, intervened when Tories began a concerted and crude chant of 'Who are you?' during Navin Shah's  contribution.

Ali, to applause, called for respect for Shah.

Brent FoE meeting on air pollution - its impact and solutions

 From Brent Friends of the Earth

A panel of politicians and campaigners will be discussing air quality at Brent Friends of the Earth's (Brent FoE) monthly meeting at Watling Gardens Community Meeting Room in Kilburn on Tuesday April 12th at 7.30pm.

Brent FoE's meeting will discuss the situation with air pollution - which is a serious health threat for Londoners and is a major problem in Brent. It will be a chance to learn about how air pollution is affecting us and to discuss what we need to do to get cleaner air to breathe. The speakers will be: Cllr Eleanor Southwood - Lead member for the Environment at Brent Council, Navin Shah - Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow, Dawn Butler - MP for Brent Central (to be confirmed), Juhaina Junaid from the Pollution Control Services at Brent Council and Ollie Hayes - Campaigner from Friends of the Earth.

Pam Laurance, a Co-ordinator of Brent Friends of the Earth says, “Poor air quality in London has a significant effect in shortening the lives of many people. In 2010 almost 9,500 Londoners died prematurely from causes linked to air pollution. The main pollutant is nitrogen dioxide, plus in some areas it is particulate matter, particularly from diesel vehicles, that do most of the damage. The principal source of air pollution in Brent is road traffic emissions, though emissions from residential and commercial heating systems also contribute.”

The discussion will start at at 7.30pm till approximately 9pm, and will be followed by Brent FoE's AGM. Everyone is welcome to attend this free event, and stay for the rest of the group meeting. Light refreshments will be available.

The meeting will be at Watling Gardens Community Meeting Room, 97/135 Watling Gardens, Shoot Up Hill, NW2 3UB (5 mins. from Kilburn tube/buses on Shoot up Hill). For more information see http://www.brentfoe.com or email info@brentfoe.com.

NOTE FROM MARTIN

As the only political party represented at this meeting is Labour  you may want to read what the Green Mayoral candidate, Sian Berry, has to say about clean air for London HERE

Brent and Harrow GLA Candidates named

The £1,000 deposit appears to have kept out any minor independent candidates in the Brent and Harrow GLA Constituency. The candidates announced today (in alphabetical order) are:

Rathy Alagaratnam UK - Independence Party UKIP
Joel Davison Conservative- The Conservative Party Candidate
Anton Georgiou - London Liberal Democrats
Jafar Hassan -  Green Party
Mahmood Akib - Respect (George Galloway)
Navin Shah - Labour Party

Rebel Tulip Siddiq vows to keep fighting on HS2

The first stage of the HS2 route was approved by the House of Commons yesterday in just 37 minutes. Keir Starmer (Holborn and St Pancras) and Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Kilburn) rebelled against Labour's three line whip  and voted against the £56bn project.

In a message to constituents yesterday Tulip Siddiq said:

Today in Parliament, I voted against the High Speed Rail 2 (HS2) Bill that will devastate areas of Camden and Brent.

I have campaigned against HS2 for the past seven years as I believe it is an ill-thought out scheme that will lead to bedlam on our roads, disruption to the education of school children and a compromised local environment.

Further, these plans will cost taxpayers billions of pounds. I believe this money could instead be spent on projects that will actually bring real improvements to living standards across the country.

Having spoken against this Bill at the Select Committee, and again in today’s debate, I’d like to take this opportunity to thank residents who engaged with the lengthy and costly petition process. Though the Bill received support from across Parliament, it is your voice that will force HS2 to fulfil its assurances to compensate and mitigate the worst of the impacts.

My first priority as the MP for Hampstead and Kilburn is to protect residents in Camden and Brent. Therefore, I am proud to have voted against High Speed Rail 2 today in Parliament.

The scheme have now been granted permission by parliament, but I will keep fighting for mitigation for constituents.

This is what Keir Starmer had to say in the debate:

New clause 22 deals with Euston, which is in the middle of my constituency. It is not easy to convey to the House the devastating impact that HS2 will have on my constituency, but let me try. HS2 will come into Primrose Hill and crash through to Euston, destroying everything in its path.

Let me give the House the sheer numbers affecting my constituency: 2,986 people live within 60 metres of the construction site, a further 3,186 live within 120 metres, and 11,414 within 300 metres. That is 17,568 people in my constituency within 300 metres of the construction site. Some 220 family houses will be demolished, and up 1,000 people will lose their homes. Unless there is a plan for an integrated station at Euston, there is the risk that another 150 family homes will be lost, affecting another 600 people—1,600 people are at risk of losing their home.

Many of the family homes that are not destroyed will be affected by noise, and according to HS2’s own figures, 1,025 family homes—that is 4,000 people—will be affected by noise that requires mitigating measures. Measures are already in place to consider up to another 850 homes and another 3,400 people. Some 7,000 people in my constituency could need noise mitigation measures because of what will happen with HS2 at Euston.

That is not the end of it. If Euston is redeveloped, 3.5 million tonnes of spoil will need to be removed from the site, which is the equivalent of 26 miles of tunnelling for Crossrail. All that must come out of Euston, and there is no guarantee or assurance that that will be done by rail. The net effect for my constituents is the risk of 800 two-way lorry movements a day to remove that spoil, and 90% of those lorries will be HGVs.

That brings me on to air quality, which is notoriously bad in London. It is particularly bad in the Euston area, and the HS2 environmental statement indicates that HS2 will have a substantial impact on nitrogen dioxide levels in a third of locations in the Euston area. If that was not enough on its own—it will have a devastating impact on the constituency—let me throw in two further factors.

The first factor is time. The original HS2 Bill was premised on the completion of a new HS2 station at Euston by 2026. For my constituents, that seemed like a long time. In September 2015, the Government lodged “Additional Provisions 3”, their current plans for Euston. A new station is now to be developed in three phases. Stage A, to the west of the existing station, involves the construction between 2017 and 2026 of six platforms needed for phase 1. Stage B2, the construction in the second phase of further platforms within the existing station but not all of it, is intended to be completed by 2033. The redevelopment of the existing station, stage B2, is unfunded and unplanned, and may begin before or after 2033—half a station in twice the time.

Another factor—there are more I could add to this litany of devastation in Holborn and St Pancras—is that even in 2033, having endured a construction site for the best part of 20 years, my constituents will not see a complete and integrated station in their constituency. On 1 December 2015, Tim Mould QC, HS2’s counsel, outlined to the Select Committee that a new integrated station at Euston is:

“not deliverable within appropriate funding constraints” and that this is the assessment of

“the government, the Chancellor, the Prime Minister”.

There is no timetable for Government funding to complete the final phase. As a result of the lack of planning and integration, Crossrail 2, which hopes to have an integrated station, is now planning on the basis that it may have to build part of its station in Somers Town, removing 150 buildings and displacing another 600 people—half a station in twice the time, with twice the damage.

A child born next year in my constituency will grow up and leave home knowing nothing but construction work. A pensioner beginning retirement at 70 next year will live out their entire retirement knowing nothing but construction work around them. It is no wonder that at every meeting and everywhere I go in my constituency, anxiety is etched on the faces of everybody who talks to me about HS2. It is an appalling situation, one that is wholly unacceptable on any basis.

I was elected to represent the people of Holborn and St Pancras. It is my privilege to do so; it is also my duty. I speak to each and every one of my constituents when I say that I will stand with them and fight with them to resist the wholly unacceptable damage that HS2 will bring to our communities.

London housing crisis worsens teacher retention and recruitment difficulties

 The London housing crisis and its impact on young public services workers including teachers and nurses took centre stage at the London Mayoral election hustings last night.

The London Teachers Housing Campaign is opposing the selling off of social social housing and requirements for social housing to move to market rents and calling for rent controls and opposition to the Housing Bill.

Esther Obiri-Darko, Green candidate and teacher

The Green Party GLA candidate for Merton and Wandsworth, Esther Oberi-Darko, backed the NUT's Manifesto call for rent controls and more affordable housing in London through investment by Councils to build homes. This is an issue that teachers' organisations in Brent have recently raised with Muhammed Butt.

Recruitment and retention of teachers has already been hit by the government's education policies, particularly the recent changes in curriculum and assessment, but housing presents a major practical headache for teachers who now face being priced out of the market long with the families of the children they teach.

An NUT Young Teachers' Housing Survey at the end of 2015 found that 60% of young teachers surveyed said that they could not see themselves still teaching in London in five years' time, although in that period 100,000 new school places will be required in London.  These are the stark facts that point to a growing crisis that will put at risk all the gains made in London schools in the last decade.

Of the teachers survey 59% were having to rent privately and 18% were living at home with their parents, more than were buying a property.  The NUT said:

Just like the families of too many of the children that they teach, young teachers are being forced into unsuitable housing, facing high rents and sometimes unscrupulous landlords.

Housing conditions are revealed by individual comments from teachers:

'We are five people sharing a three bedroom flat. This is the only way we can keep costs down.'

'Landlords frequently increase rent, forcing us to move or they sell property and force eviction.'

'It's noisy, horrible and with holes i the walls but it's all that I can afford.'

'We live in a tiny two-bedroom flat with three children. We can't even fit a second bed in the second bedroom. The property has damp and my daughter has asthma.'

'I work in the same borough that I grew up in. I don't want to move away from my life, my roots, just because of ridiculous housing prices.'

At yesterday's election meeting Shaun Bailey,  London List candidate for the Conservatives, seemed confused about policy, at one time seeming to support rent controls and advocating 'controlling landlords'. John Howson for the Lib Dem's was wedded to the market and Labour's Jeanette Arnold didn't bother to turn up. All the candidates supported raising Council Tax on empty properties. None mentioned the recent proposal from a GLA Committee to pilot a Land Value Tax in London LINK . Esther Oberi-Darko spoke about Sian Berry's proposal for a London Renters Union to help exploited private tenants challenge landlords.

On Sunday, March 13th, there is a National Demonstration against the Housing Bill. The Bill includes proposals to  off existing council homes to the highest bidder, removes secure tenancies and imposes 'pay to stay' market-linked rent rises for council and housing association tenants and reduces rights for private renters.

Marchers will meet at 12 noon at Lincoln's Inn Fields, London, WC2A 3TL (Holborn tube)

More information HERE

South Kilburn Masterplan review ordered as project falls 12 months behind schedule and viability questioned

"The South Kilburn Regeneration programme has slipped behind schedule in 2015/16. There is a masterplan review of South Kilburn Regeneration; this means it is being fundamentally reviewed to determine how best to deliver the programme and realise benefits of regeneration for South Kilburn and for its businesses and residents. This review will reconsider the fundamental approach, including whether it is better for the council to retain the South Kilburn Housing Assets, or continue to dispose of them."

The above statement was included in the papers for the Full Council meeting last month and was a surprise for South Kilburn residents causing cconsiderable disquiet. 

As a result an information request was made to Brent Council to try and find out exactly what was going on. I would welcome comments from SK residents  on whether they feel any the wiser as a consequence of Richard Barrett's response. It would be interesting to know the additional costs that will be incurred by the review.

I am writing on behalf of the Kilburn branch of the Labour Party to request information relating to the regeneration programme in South Kilburn. Last year, I put in an FoI request about other aspects of the programme, and you kindly provided me with useful responses. I hope you will be able to do so on this occasion too.

The basis for my questions is a point in the budget report that was discussed at the full Council meeting on Monday. This is covered in section 14.5 (first bullet) of the report, as follows:

“The South Kilburn Regeneration programme has slipped behind schedule in 2015/16. There is a masterplan review of South Kilburn Regeneration; this means it is being fundamentally reviewed to determine how best to deliver the programme and realise benefits of regeneration for South Kilburn and for its businesses and residents. This review will reconsider the fundamental approach, including whether it is better for the council to retain the South Kilburn Housing Assets, or continue to dispose of them.”

I have searched through the Brent website, and have not found the information that I am seeking. I should therefore appreciate responses to the following:

·         What are the terms of reference of the masterplan review referred to in the above extract?

The intention is to appoint a Design Team to assist the Council review the adopted Master-plan and the current proposals for the remainder of the programme. It will seek to understand whether the principles established in the original Master-plan need to be altered or not given the passage of time and taking into account the schemes already delivered. The review will also look at the scope of the Master-plan and factoring in any relevant new legislation and guidance ensure the programme remains viable; as such it will also look at all sites within the South Kilburn area to consider inclusion or exclusion within the overall Master-Plan. The brief is currently being worked up by officers but when it is ready to go out to market it will be made available to the public via the London Tender Portal 

·         What is the timescale of the review?

It is hoped to go out to market to seek expressions of interest from Architectural Practices in March, appoint, subject to Cabinet approval, by May with a likely consultation process and report back to Cabinet toward the end of 2016 or early 2017 at the latest. This indicative timescale is subject to Cabinet Timetable availability and it is also likely that the Master-Plan will be placed before Planning Committee alongside a proposed SPD for the area.

·         Will there be a consultation of local residents and other interested parties as part of the review? If so, what form will this take?

Absolutely. It is intended there will be a series of consultation events/workshops with local residents, tenants and stakeholders. The most likely format will be drop-in meetings but may also include questionnaires. The final form of consultations will be agreed with the appointed Practice but it will be a specific requirement of any bid to conduct consultation.

·         How far behind schedule has the regeneration programme slipped? What are the implications for the remaining phases of the programme?

The programme has slipped due to external factors such as the safeguarding of Salusbury Road site by HS2 since 2012 and other factors, such as specific project delays on site. This, in turn, has pushed the programme out of kilter by having a knock-on effect on future phases. Some individual projects remain on target but overall the programme has extended by at least twelve months. The intention is that the Master-plan Review will seek to see whether there is any ability to recover this time by reconfiguring the remaining programme. The Master-Plan review will also incorporate a refresh of the financial viability of the scheme. No implications have been identified apart from the obvious prolongation of the programme and the resultant delay in tenants moving into new accommodation.

·         What criteria and methodology will the review use to decide whether to retain the South Kilburn Housing assets?

I note the extract provided by this FoI from the Budget Report but would advise that the Master-Plan Review will not be the vehicle for determining whether the Council disposes or retains assets as they are developed. I am sure the Review will be used to assist in the consideration of this query but it is more likely something that will be considered by the Council’s Investment Board and reported back to Cabinet for decision as appropriate.

·         Whether and how does the review relate to the information that the Council will provide following the Scrutiny Committee’s consideration of its report on South Kilburn regeneration, at its meeting of 2 December 2015 (see LINK)  

The Master-Plan review and the questions arising from the Scrutiny Committee consideration are separate matters. The points made by the Scrutiny Committee will and has assisted in the development of the Brief..
 

Could Brent Labour follow Newcastle's lead on ethical procurement?

Brent Council during the apartheid era took action over severing links with companies that benefited from South African contracts.  More recently they declined to take similar action regarding the Public Realm contract with Veolia which at the time was providing infrastructure support to illegal settlements in Palestine.

Now the government is seeking to curtail the powers of local councils to have an ethical pesnions and procurement policy.

Newcastle City Labour Party has passed the following motion unanimously and expect to get it through Full Council.

I hope that Brent Labour group will take a similar stand.

Here is the motion which could easily be adapted for Brent:

Response to Government’s attack on a Councils’ right to follow an ethical policy in relation to procurement and Pensions Fund investments

Council notes with alarm the recent statement from the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) confirming that new guidelines will be introduced early in the New Year which will curb councils’ powers to divest from or stop trading with organisations or countries they regard as unethical.

Council further notes that the new guidelines, which will amend Pensions and Procurement law, follow on from the government’s announcement made at the beginning of October 2015 that it was planning to introduce new rules to stop “politically motivated boycott and divestment campaigns” (Greg Clarke, Secretary of State for the Department of Communities and Local Government).

Council recognises that the focus of these new measures may be on procurement and investment policies and that they may have profound implications for Councils’ ethical investment policies more generally.

Newcastle City Council is proud of its’ commitment to human rights and to putting this into practice through such measures as an ethical approach to its relationship with business as outlined under  Newcastle’s Social Value Commitment.

Council believes that the proposed measures now being outlined by the DCLG will seriously undermine the Council’s ability to implement its commitment to ethical procurement and pensions investments.

Council also notes that the new guidelines represent a further, serious attack on local democracy and decision-making through a further restriction on councils’ powers. This is directly contrary to the government’s own stated commitment to the principle of localism, given a statutory basis by the Localism Act of 2011, which holds that local authorities are best able to do their job when they have genuine freedom to respond to what local people want, not what they are told to do by government.

Newcastle City Council therefore resolves to take all legal measures possible to oppose these new measures, including:

·      Writing to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to express Council’s unequivocal opposition to the proposed changes as part of the consultation

·      Working with any other local authority, the NECA, the LGA or other appropriate forums as well other partner organisations (such as local trade unions and community groups) who share these concerns to raise awareness of the implications of the proposed measures and to campaign against their introduction

Newcastle City Council reaffirms its commitment to an ethical basis to its procurement and pensions investment policy.

Green MEP to join Shadow Chancellor addressing ‘alternatives to austerity’ conference

Molly Scott Cato MEP will join Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell at a conference in Manchester tomorrow exploring how to build an economy to serve people not profit. Molly and John McDonnell will be two of the keynote speakers and will be joined by Matt Wrack, General Secretary of the Fire Brigades Union, and writer Frances Coppola.

Molly, who is a member of the European Parliament’s Economics Committee and Green Party speaker on finance, said:

Greens have always advocated co-operative alternatives to austerity and rampant free market capitalism. I’m delighted that Labour now seem genuinely to be engaged in a debate on how we can build an economy that will be more jointly and justly owned. We need to see all progressives unite behind policies such as fair taxation, regulation of banking and Green Quantitative Easing.

We must also ensure that this new economy operates within environmental limits. This means phasing out fossil fuels, opposing expensive and dangerous nuclear and actively supporting the rise of community owned renewables.

Kensal Green By-election Result

Chris Alley Conservative 255
Jumbo Chan Labour 931
Sarah Dickson Lib Dem 417
Jafar Hassan Green Party 102
Juliette Nibbs UKIP 38

Labour achieved 53% of the vote.
Turnout 20.3%

FULL RESULT