Guest post: 'We cannot rely on the private market to solve the housing crisis. We must think outside the box and demand more from central government'

The former Liberal Democrat councillor for Alperton, Anton Georgiou,  drew on his experience in Brent when he addressed the London Liberal Democrat Summer Forum as part of a panel on housing. His address is published here as a guest blog post.  Housing is a major national and local issues and other guest posts on the issue are welcomed.

 

I am a former Councillor in a part of London that has experienced its fair share of development and building. In my time as a Councillor, I was a vocal, often lone voice, on the need to prioritise the delivery of genuinely affordable family homes and for local authorities to focus on increasing their own Council stock to address ever growing house waiting lists. 

 

The key to tackling the housing crisis in London and nationwide must be to vastly increase the type of homes our communities require. There must be recognition that most people who are trapped without a decent home, on housing waiting lists cannot afford to privately rent and they are not able to buy their own home. Saturating the market with more of the same, mostly unaffordable, unattainable properties, is not the answer. I know from personal experience that taking this line, does put you in direct conflict with the ‘build, build, build’ brigade, but I strongly believe we must, as a party, develop an approach that both ensures the delivery of more homes and most importantly what Londoners actually need – far more genuinely affordable homes and social/ Council properties.

 

The problem in a nutshell is that ever since damaging policies like ‘Right to Buy’ were introduced, Council and social housing stock across London has significantly depleted. We having been knocking down and selling off annually more social homes than we have been building. All governments, political parties have failed to address the diminishing Council homes stock problem, which is why we are now in a situation where local authorities are frankly unable to even begin to reduce the number of people on housing waiting lists. Every week, thousands of Londoners present at Town Halls, Civic Centres, across the city, as homeless. They join tens of thousands of Londoners who sometimes wait upwards of a decade for a suitable Council home to be available for them to move into. The problem is much the same in other parts of the country, and whilst we feel it acutely here, given our population, I can tell you from my time working in temporary accommodation hostels in other parts of the country – the situation is dire nationwide.

 

Local authorities are currently spending huge amounts of money on temporary accommodation, in the case of Brent, BnB’s outside of London, simply to ensure individuals who have no where to go, do not end up on the street. If local authorities had been prioritising the building of social homes, as they should have been for the past 40 years, we may not be in as bad a situation as we are now. 

 

Some will lead you to believe, that this is a simple supply and demand problem. Increasing the supply of all tenure types, including leasehold properties, which should be banned, Shared Ownership units, which simply put are a scam that should never be classified as ‘affordable housing’, as well as unaffordable for most, private market tenures, will deal with our current crisis. This could not be further from the truth. 

 

We will not tackle the housing crisis by continuing the path that London, the country, has been on since the 1980’s. Things are not getting better – they are getting much, much worse.

 

What needs to happen now, is a revolution in Council home building, but also in ensuring maximum use of existing stock, including bringing empty properties back into use. It will require bold action, and frankly for us to think outside of the box and demand much more from national government to make it happen.

 

The Chancellors recent announcement of £39 billion to drive an increase in the number of affordable homes across the country over the next decade, should be welcomed, but as ever, the devil is in the detail. Detail that has not been very forthcoming to date. And I fear, like most of this Labour government’s announcements, when the detail is revealed, things will start to unravel.

 

Despite the £39 billion commitment, the government have not set a target for how many social and Council homes they will build with this money – nor have they been explicit about the tenure types, they will include as part of their affordable homes offer. I know from my time in Brent, that often a whole load of tenure types are lumped together within the ‘affordable offer’ to boost numbers and falsely project that those in power are meeting their housing targets. This must not be allowed to continue.

 

As Liberal Democrats we need to be clear in our resolve that we will only accept investment in high-quality, permanent Council homes, as the best use of this money from the Treasury, and indeed any further money that we must all hope will be identified to ensure the delivery of Council homes at scale.

 

I was pleased to see Liberal Democrat MPs push for a vote to force the government to set a far more ambitious target on increasing social homes – 150,000 in this Parliament alone. This is something we also need to be demanding of every single local authority in London too, as well as from City Hall.

 

However, when targets are in place, it is essential that we hold those in power to account, in delivering them. There is simply no point in having targets, as most local authorities do, often wedded into Local Plans, that state private developers must deliver 50% ‘affordable’, which is an ambiguous term that has never been universally defined, when in the end most Councils let developers off the hook because of ‘ever increasing costs’ and the ‘financial viability’ excuse.

 

We cannot rely on developers alone to tackle this crisis. By their nature private developers are driven by profit, their interests are not often the interests of our communities. Therefore, local authorities need to have greater control when dealing with these profit minded organisations across the city. However, we can still make use of private developers. One thing I would want to explore is finding a way of negotiating with private developers to reduce Community Infrastructure Levy and Section 106 contributions, in exchange for them delivering additional genuinely affordable units, social homes, at or under the LHA rate. The concept of CIL is about offsetting the impact of development, well I see no greater way to payback to the community, than by potentially increasing the number of homes available in our communities – for people who desperately need them.

 

To add, Councils are always glad to collect CIL contributions, but what I have found from my time in Brent and in accessing the data from other London authorities, is that many tens of millions are hoarded rather than spent effectively quickly, as should be the case. I would much prefer to see developers guaranteeing the delivery of further genuinely affordable units, over allowing Labour Council’s to hoard money, because frankly, I do not trust Labour to spend money well.

 

The money that does currently exist, in Brent for example, over £100 million in the CIL pot, could and should be unlocked to assist the Council in ramping up its own Council homes building programme. Council’s need to be given greater tools and resource to build their own quality stock. The government and City Hall need to step in to realise this ambition. 

 

I will end by saying this. Every Londoner deserves a decent, safe, affordable place to call home. This after all is the foundation for all our lives. Without this foundation, people are massively impacted, one’s ability to work, to study, to feel secure, it robs our young people of the ability to not just get by but get on and take full advantage of living in the best city in the world. This is why we need to be bold and radical in our approach. There isn’t time to tinker around the edges, and place sticking plasters on this crisis. We cannot rely on the private market to solve this crisis. It will take an interventionist approach, and the Liberal Democrats in London must lead the way on this.

 

 

Extra Event Days petition to be presented to Brent Cabinet on September 9th

 

Summer 2025

 

The Liberal Democrat petition on additional Wembley Event Days will be presented to the next Brent Council Cabinet on Monday September 9th. This means that the petition will be heard before Wembley Stadium's planning application for extra events goes to Planning Committee.

The aim is to persuade the Council that this matter is so important  that they should hold consultation meetings with local residents and businesses so that they are fully aware of the impact of events now and the potential disruption of extra days. This was done when Tottenham Hotspur applied to use the stadium. A Planning Committee with limited time for residents to speak is not sufficient.

If residents wish make their own representations about the impact extra event days would have on them personally they could write to Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council, at: cllr.muhammed.butt@brent.gov.uk

 THE PETITION (Now closed):

We the undersigned petition the council to Consult and to Listen to concerns of local residents and businesses about the impact of increasing the number of "Large" Events at Wembley Stadium

Plans for the new Wembley Stadium were approved in 1999 with a limit of 37 Large Events per year. A few years later Brent Council allowed an increase to 46 Large Events per year. The Stadium owners have now applied for planning permission to increase this by another 8 to 54 Large Events per year.

 

Large Events at the Stadium have a major impact on the lives of local people and business - especially when as many as three events are held on 3 successive days.

 

We call on Brent Council (jointly with representatives of the FA) to carry out an extensive public consultation with Brent residents and local businesses on the social and economic impacts of Wembley Stadium Large scale events before the Planning Application is considered by the Brent Council's Planning Committee.

 

We believe that local people and businesses have the right to be properly consulted and informed about these possible changes and for their views to be assessed and documented before any decision is made.

The petition will also be referred to the relevant Director and Lead Members as well as the appropriate Scrutiny Committee.

Brent Lib Dem councillor puts forward alternative proposals before Monday's Budget setting meeting

It is some time since Brent Liberal Democrats have presented a formal alternative budget to that of the ruling Labour Party and even with a Liberal Democrat voted in at the Alperton by-election just over a year  ago this is still the case and his proposals will not be voted on. Cllr Anton Georgiou will have just 3 minutes to speak at the Council Tax and Budget Setting Meeting at 4pm tomorrow. LINK TO LIVE BROADCAST

 

Brent Labour has 59 councillors to the Conservative's 3 and the lone Liberal Democrat so approval of the budget is a formality. However, in the interests of democracy (not because I approve of the proposals) I think it is right that residents should be able to see and discuss the alternative proposals. I published the Conservative proposals last week HERE.

 

Labour’s budget includes a Council Tax hike of 6%, 4.99% from Brent Council and a further approximately 1% from Labour Mayor Sadiq Khan. Cllr Georgiou, in his proposals, argues that this can be and should be halved. 

 

Cllr Georgiou’s proposal also seeks to spend more money on the issues local people care about and invest in areas that will lessen the inequalities that have been exposed by the pandemic, particularly for Brent’s young people.  

 

Cllr Georgiou said:

 

I represent Alperton, a ward that has been hit very hard by the pandemic. Many residents are really struggling right now which is why I am alarmed that the Labour Council have proposed to hike Council Tax by so much.  

 

It is wrong to dump further financial burdens on local people, particularly when, as I outline in my proposals, money exists in the massive revenue reserves to halve the Council Tax rise. Brent residents have already paid for these reserves over the years, and it is impossible to justify asking them to pay even more when they don’t have to.

 

In addition to his plans to at least halve the Council Tax rise, Cllr Georgiou wants to see more money allocated to clean up Brent, to urgently repair pavements in small streets and overlooked areas and to make cycle routes safer.  

 

 Proposals in detail (click bottom right square for full page view)

 

 

 

VIDEO: Brent Central election candidates battle it out at hustings

These days there are relatively few opportunities for the public to attend a hustings where they can listen to parliamentary candidates, question them and perhaps indulge in the old fashion political art of heckling. In the Brent constituencies there are more opportunities in the mainly Camden Hampstead and Kilburn seat, a few in Brent Central and often none in Brent North.

So it was welcome that Brent Trades Council, recognising this democratic deficit, organised a hustings for Brent Central voters. Unfortunately the Conservative candidate did not turn up. Candidates who originally agreed to attend: David Brescia (Conservative), Dawn Butler (Labour Party),William Relton(Green Party), Deborah Unger (Lib Dem),Chair:Mary Adossides,Brent Trades Council

Below you can find videos of the hustings featuring all the candidates introductions and responses to questions. Many thanks to Peter Murry for filming the meeting and making the video widely available.

Brent Trades Council hustings of Brent Central Parliamentary candidates in the General Election. Saturday 7th December 2019 Introduction by Chair: Mary Adossides, Brent Trades Council Opening remarks Dawn Butler (Labour Party) William Relton (Green Party) Deborah Unger (Lib Dem) url:https://youtu.be/1l6ZbnArhUY

Brent Trades Council hustings of Brent Central Parliamentary candidates in the General Election. Saturday 7th December 2019 Introduction by Chair: Mary Adossides, Brent Trades Council Questions: Climate change and pollution Dawn Butler (Labour Party) William Relton (Green Party) url:https://youtu.be/rkYTc9-3Wjw

Brent Trades Council hustings of Brent Central Parliamentary candidates in the General Election. Saturday 7th December 2019 Introduction by Chair: Mary Adossides, Brent Trades Council Questions: Austerity, Poverty, Arms exports,crime Dawn Butler (Labour Party) William Relton (Green Party) Deborah Unger (Lib Dem) url:https://youtu.be/tcpe1hD_O5M

Brent Trades Council hustings of Brent Central Parliamentary candidates in the General Election. Saturday 7th December 2019 Introduction by Chair: Mary Adossides, Brent Trades Council Questions: racism, refugees, migration, economics, education Dawn Butler (Labour Party) William Relton (Green Party) Deborah Unger (Lib Dem) url: https://youtu.be/8Uh1NYkyr-w

Brent Trades Council hustings of Brent Central Parliamentary candidates in the General Election. Saturday 7th December 2019 Introduction by Chair: Mary Adossides, Brent Trades Council Questions: NHS, closing remarks Dawn Butler (Labour Party) William Relton (Green Party) Deborah Unger (Lib Dem) url:https://youtu.be/RAPLNN1TPLs

Lib Dems mash up the stats in Mapesbury & launch 'red scare' attack

Bar charts on election literature are notorious for beiing 'a but dodgy' to say the least and are usually accompanied by 'Only XParty can win here!' or 'XParty can't win here'. The above from the Liberal Democrats is a good example with the added spice of a bit of 'red scare' propagands citing a potential Momentum 'control of Brent'.  On my reckoning there are only at the most two true Momentum supporters in the 63 strong Labout list. Furthermore, in my personal opinion, they would add a coorrective to the managerialist approach of the majority of Labour candidates.

So anyway how did the Lib Dems arrive at their bar chart?

They have added up the total votes of each party in the 2014 council election in the ward. As Greens fielded only one candidate and the others three each this puts Greens at the bottom below the Tories.

If, however, you list the candidates' individual results it gives a different picture  (from Brent Council website election results page):

The Green candidate vote was well above that of each of the three Conservative candidates and only 3% behind the lowest Liberal Democrat candidate.

This time round there are three Green candidates so a more representative bar chart could be made from May 3rd's results.

Meanwhile, as I said to a woman outside Willesden Green Sainsbury's yesterday, 'Yes, the Greens can win in Mapesbury.'

I should have added that the former Lib Dem councillor, turned Independent, for Mapesbury has said that she wants to see Greens on Brent Council.

Let the battle contine - on even ground...

Helen Carr: Thank you and Goodnight Mapesbury

Cllr Helen Carr has requested that Wembley Matters publishes this farewell statement. Publication does not indicate agreement with the views expressed but given the lack of other public platforms in Brent I have agreed to publication.
 

As you know, I was elected in 2014 under exceptional circumstances and in an extraordinary situation and am now standing down. Thank you everyone – residents, the staff at Brent and political veterans on all sides of the spectrum for their unfailing advice, support and good humour. The indefatigable Martin Frances’ ‘Wembley Matters’ is the go to place for matters of Brent, even for someone like me who avoids social media. I look forward to seeing the Green’s Scott Bartle, who stood against me in 2014, at his first Council meeting in May. Every Council needs a Green.    

What you may not be aware of is my work on the Council of Europe Congress – I was appointed a UK Delegate and last year elected by my European peers Vice President of the Independent, Liberal and Democrat Group. I was asked recently what I was most proud of achieving and I would say without doubt, being elected Councillor of Mapesbury allowed me to defend human rights at a time when certainties such as freedom of speech and association, freedom of the press, the right to freedom from torture – all rights bitterly fought for but taken for granted – are being insidiously eroded in the name of safety, security and stability. History is now being reconstructed to support the arguments and agendas of today’s fascists, idealists, ideologists, politicians et al. Motives and conspiracy theories vary – Germany and Austria have introduced ‘Holocaust Denial’ laws. France’s Sarkozy was accused of trying to attract the Christian Armenian vote when attempting to criminalise denial of the Armenian genocide. Turkey too – with wars within and on its borders - stifles debate not just about its role in the elimination of one and a half Armenians in the period at the end of World War 1, but its treatment and continued suppression of its Kurdish populations, as well as the recent imprisonment of elected politicians, journalists and educators. Russia criminalizes those who discredit the name of the Red Army and Poland has introduced measures imposing a fine or up to three years in prison for anyone found guilty of blaming the ‘Polish nation’ for the Holocaust. The murder of journalists in Malta and Slovakia. In the UK, Max Mosley - youngest son of wartime leader of the British Union of Fascists Oswold Mosley – is accused of trying to use data protection laws to gag the press. And so on.

Churchill said it is not for those of us who have not been occupied to condemn and judge those who have. But facts do exist and do matter. It is better to methodically and painstakingly disprove with fact and reason, than fines, force or imprisonment. Ostentatious gestures and actions might seem to make a difference, but quiet conviction in the rule of law have greater pervasive, persuasive and profound influence.  January 27 is Holocaust Memorial Day – the day in 1945 the Soviets liberated Auschwitz. ‘Genocide’ was first used in 1933 in a paper presented to the League of Nations by Polish lawyer, Raphael Lemkin, in response to the murder of the Armenian population by the Ottoman Empire between 1915 and 1918. The term was then adopted by the UN convention in 1948, but continues to be controversial – what constitutes a Genocide and who are victims has become a numbers game and a semantic quagmire. Congesting various issues to an existing memorial day undermines the initial intent. Political interests sully the dignity of the event. In 1946, the term ‘Crimes Against Humanity’ was introduced by Lauterpacht, at the time, resident of 104 Walm Lane, Mapesbury. What would he make of us now that Holocaust Memorial Day also includes other ‘Genocides?’ Will Jews stand alongside survivors of the Israeli campaign in Gaza if claims of the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas that Israel has committed Genocide are upheld at the International Criminal Court? What of the Poles or the Kurds? The Irish Famine? Or indeed the Nazis and German minority speakers murdered or transported to Siberia by the vengeful Soviets? January 27 is also the day in 1944 identified as the end of the siege of Leningrad where it is estimated more than one million died. What of those victims? And of course, the most recent Genocides in Europe that took place in the Former Yugoslavia. The twentieth century seems to have ended as it began. What have we practically done to prevent atrocity and protect human rights and the rule of law? Concentration camps were not liberated with daisies. 

I am sure we are all familiar with journalist, author and intellectual, George Orwell. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but his was an informed opinion – he fought against Franco’s Fascists in the Spanish Civil War. His statue stands in the BBC’s New Broadcasting House accompanied by one of his many famous quotes ‘If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear’

But are we listening? In 1986, the Romanian born Holocaust survivor and campaigner, Elie Weisel, asked the Gypsies for forgiveness for “not listening to your story.” Are we too focused on the minutiae and the quotidian? Founded in the aftermath of the Second World War, the Council of Europe aims to prevent a return to totalitarian regimes and defend fundamental freedoms: human rights, democracy and the rule of law. But have we? Can we? Will we?  

Thank you and Goodnight Mapesbury

Dr Helen Carr is Vice President of the Independent Liberal and Democrat Group of the Council of Europe’s Congress of Local and Regional Authorities. She is Leader of the Independent Group of the London Borough of Brent and Councillor for Mapesbury. Fellow of the Royal Anthropological Institute, she is a Freeman of the City of a London.  

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 candidates' views on the Israel-Palestine conflict

Following last week's hustings on War, Peace and the Middle East readers may be interested in their Brent candidates views on the Israel-Palestine situation.

This is the up to date information received so far from the Palestine Solidarity Campaign's questionnaire to candidates. It is long so I have split the page.

BRENT CENTRAL

Shahrar Ali of the Green Party has responded.

They agree the UK Government should uphold the principles of equality, human rights and international law in all its relations and dealings with Israel.

They agree that the construction of Israeli settlements construction of Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is illegal and unjustifiable.

They agree that one of the first acts of the next UK Government should be the recognition of Palestine.

They agree that the blockade of Gaza should be lifted immediately.

They agree that we should stop trade with Israel’s settlements on Palestinian land and stop settlement goods being sold in Britain.

They agree that the EU Israel Association should be suspended until Israel meets its human rights obligations.

They agree that the UK Government should stop supplying arms to Israel until it complies with international law.

 

The Green Party believes that the Arab-Israeli conflict persists owingto the failure to find a fair and humane solution to the problems of thePalestinian people; and at the same time offer appropriate guarantees ofsecurity for Israel.

We condemned Israel's ground invasion and bombardment of Gaza in 2014,and continue to call on the UN, the EU and the US to ensure that Israel complies with international law.

We also call on Israel to evacuate illegal settlements within the occupied territories of Palestine. In addition, we call on the government of Israel to dismantle the 'West Bank Barrier' which divides
Palestinian territories, depriving Palestinians of land, water, and employment.

The Green Party supports active participation in the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign which aims to put pressure on the government of Israel to end the Occupation and to give equal rights to Palestinians.

We believe that in the present situation neither the UK government nor UK companies should be selling arms to Israel.

The Green Party is committed to principles of equality, human rights and international law. There can be no lasting peace without justice.'

Barry Gardiner vows to defy Brent Labour Council on Byron Court expansion

Asked by parents at last night's Sudbiry Hustings about the proposed  Byron Court Primary School expansion, Barry Gardiner, Labour candidate for Brent North, reiterated his opposition.  He said that a primary school of more than 1,000 pupils was unacceptable and said that if Brent Council granted planning permission, he would appeal against it to the Labour Secretary of State (if Labour won the election).

The other candidates at the hustings Scott Bartle (Green), Paul Lorber (Liberal Democrat) and Luke Parker (Conservative) also opposed the expansion on varying grounds.

Scott Bartle emphasised the Green's commitment to human sized schools and support for local authorities to be given back the power to plan and build new schools. The Green Party would bring academies and free schools back into the local autoirty family of schools to bring order back to the system. He said that the way Gladstone Free School had failed to open leaving pupils adrift was a scandal.

Barry Gardiner also referred to the 'free school' disaster and criticised the Tory approach to academies which had turned on its head Labour's original concept of a fresh start for failing schools.

Paul Lorber opposed the expansion on grounds of size but said that the real issue was the lack of any land for new schools of any kind in the borough. He mentioned the three form entry primary that Quintain were due to build near the stadium but said that he had no idea when that woudl be built.

Luke Parker wanted more free schools in the borough and claimed that Brent Council were opposed to them on ideological grounds and because they were under pressure from teaching unions.

Ibrahim Taguri confirms he will not stand as an Independent in Brent Central

As Brent Green Party was meeting across the road, the signage at Ibrahim Taguri's temporary campaign office in Walm Lane was being taken down last night. Earlier Ibrahim had confirmed to me that he would not be standing as an Independent in the General Election. He had anticipated a quick resolution of the allegations about donations made in the Daily Telegraph but this has not happened.

Lauren Keith was last week selected as the Liberal Democrat candidiate for Brent Central.

On March 26th the Electoral Commission made the following statement:

The Electoral Commission has today (26 March 2015) provided an update on its consideration of two separate allegations regarding donations to the Liberal Democrat Party.

Daily Telegraph allegations

Following the allegations that appeared recently on The Telegraph online (11 March) and subsequently in the newspaper regarding Ibrahim Taguri and donations to the Liberal Democrats, the Electoral Commission requested information from the newspaper, the party and Mr Taguri to help it establish the facts in the case.

Based on the information that the Commission has seen, one alleged offence centres on the potential evasion of restrictions on donations in contravention of section 61 of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (PPERA). Offences under this part of PPERA are ultimately a criminal matter and fall outside of the Commission’s civil sanctioning powers.

The Electoral Commission has therefore passed the information that it has received to the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The MPS have confirmed to the Commission that they are also aware of the allegations and that they are considering them.

Channel 4’s ‘Dispatches’ 

Following the allegations that appeared as part of Channel 4’s Dispatches programme (23 March), the Electoral Commission requested further information from the programme to help it establish the facts in the case.

Based on the information that the Commission has seen, the alleged offence in this case centres on the potential evasion of restrictions on donations in contravention of section 61 of PPERA and is ultimately a criminal matter. As a result, the Commission has also passed the information that it has received to MPS who are aware of the allegations and are considering them.

Donations received in the course of both cases

In both of these cases, the Liberal Democrat Party received a number of donations.

One donation in the Telegraph case, a cheque for £7,650 was delivered to the party. However, it had not been banked and the funds had not cleared and as a result no offence was committed under the donation rules set out in PPERA.

The other donations included one of £1,450 made by the undercover reporter in the Telegraph case that was received and accepted by the party; and another of £10,000 received from the ‘step father’ of the undercover donor in the Dispatches case, Mr Paul Wilmott. The Commission is in contact with the Liberal Democrats about the actual source of these donations and will provide a separate statement about this matter once these further facts have been established.

Next steps

Any decisions about what further steps to take at this stage in relation to potential evasion of restrictions on donations in either case rest with the Metropolitan Police Service.

Should further facts emerge in relation to The Telegraph allegations or Channel 4’s Dispatches, which could lead the Electoral Commission to consider any other potential breaches of PPERA, the Commission will do so in line with its enforcement policy.

Lib Dems select Lauren Keith to fight Brent Central

The website YourNextMP LINK has made some rapid changes today following the announcement that Lauren Keith will be the new Liberal Democrat candidate for Brent Central, she was previously listed as the 2015 candidate for Barking. She tweets at @laurenpk

Her selection as candidate follows Ibrahim Tuguri's stepping down as Liberal Democrat candidate over donation allegations. LINK  It is not clear whether Taguri will stand as an Independent.

Lauren Keith stood in the Brent local elections in May 2015 in Mapesbury ward. Result below:

Lia Colacicco	Labour	1402	15%	Elected
Ahmad Shahzad	Labour	1278	13%	Elected
Helen Ginette Carr	Liberal Democrats	1257	13%	Elected
Columbus Moloney	Labour	1241	13%	Not elected
Paul John Edgeworth	Liberal Democrats	1179	12%	Not elected
Lauren Keith	Liberal Democrats	1067	11%	Not elected
Scott Bartle	Green Party	776	8%	Not elected
Bertha Joan Joseph	Conservative	445	5%	Not elected
William Bernard McGowan	Conservative	416	4%	Not elected
Samer Ahmedali	Conservative	408	4%	Not elected

Taguri may face 'official' Liberal Democrat candidate in Brent Central following donation allegations

Taguri emphasised his 'independent' credential and distanced himself from some Lib Dem policies before the allegations broke - the sign on his  campaign office has no prominent Lib Dem 'brand'

Few would have thought from Ibrahim Taguri's confident and articulate performance at last night's Sufra election hustings that he was about to be engulfed in a media storm over allegations LINK that he had offered a fake businessman a way around declaring donations to the party.

Taguri has now resigned from the party and therefore as an official Liberal Democrat candidate while investigations take place.

In a statement to the BBC he said he would continue campaigning as an independent until his name is cleared and he is readmitted to the party. Lord Ashdown on BBC Radio 4's today programme this morning suggested that he might be opposed by an official Liberal Democrat candidate.

Clearly this would throw the Brent Central campaign wide open with the potential for a split Liberal Democrat vote producing a primary battle between Dawn Butler and the Green Party candidate Shahrar Ali.

Shahrar Ali  commenting this morning said:

This election is now even more widely open than ever imagined. At a meeting last night Dawn Butler spoke of the 'elephant in the room' which was the 'clearing of her name' regarding expenses.

Today we learn  Ibrahim Taguri is under investigation for potential impropriety over advice on electoral donations.

Standing as an independent will not help him. The people of Brent demand nothing less than confidence that their politicians know right from wrong before presuming to serve them.

We need politicians we can trust.

Conservatives hold Kenton, Greens beat Liberals into 4th place

The Conservatives held their seat in the Kenton by-election which was mired in controversy following a scurrilous Labour leaflet about the Tory candidate for which they had to apologise.

The Liberal Democrats did little campaigning in the by-election and came fourth after Michaela Lichten, the Green Candidate, who increased the Green share of the vote.

Brent Council: Communicating Rubbish

I was incensed yesterday when I saw the leaflet about Brent Council's waste collection that had been pushed through my door.  It put such a gloss on the £40 annual  'garden tax' charge for green bin collection that many people must have thought that it was almost as good as winning the lottery!

It advertised a free bulky waste collection despite the fact that proposals are going before the Council to introduce a charge of £15 for such collections.

The bulky waste collection charge has long been an issue between Labour and the Lib Dems. The Lib Dem-Conservative administration  introduced a charge of £25 and the incoming Labour adminstration in 2010 abolished the charge.

The arguments the then councillor James Powney made against the charge still stand.  LINK

Now Paul Lorber, Liberal Democrat Brent Council leader at the time of the £25 charge, has made a formal complaint to Council officers about the current leaflet. He suggests that the £15 charge was put into the proposals merely so that it could be withdrawn and show that the Council had listened to residents:

I have expressed my concerns as to how the scrapping of the weekly service and the proposed £40 charge for a reduced service has been presented. The latest leaflet delivered to residents continues to provide misleading and incomplete information.

I am disappointed that the misleading information produced by the Council and Veolia has continued. Please treat this email as a formal complaint on the following grounds:

I object to a reduced and chargeable service to be described as 'New' as if it was something positive when in fact residents are being asked to pay £40 for a substantially reduced service with collections just fortnightly during the summer and just monthly during the winter months.

On a separate issue I note that the leaflet is also advertising the 'Free' collection of bulky household items. This confirms the sham of the current budget consultation as the item to charge £15 for this service in the hope of a massive reduction in take up is just a 'sham' as this was put on the list simply to enable the Leader to claim later that this is one service "I have managed to save".

I think that the Council (officers and councillors) are showing a great deal of disrespect to Brent residents in the misleading way you are communicating with them. The leaflets are paid for from taxpayers money and should therefore provide honest information and not to reflect misleading information from the Labour Administration.
 

Three Brent Central General Election candidates united in support of Stonebridge Adventure Playground

A child left this message for staff at Stonebridge Adventure Playground

 
The three candidates General Election candidates so far selected for Brent Central have all pledged support for Stonebridge Adventure Playground which is threatened with closure.

Dawn Butler,  the Labour candidate,  spoke to the local press soon after the plans were announced and has been photographed wearing the Save Stonebridge red t-shirt when she visited the site to give her support to parents and children fighting for the playground;s survival

On November 25th Green Party candidate Shahrar Ali made this statement:

The Stonebridge Adventure Playground is a shining example of what the Green Party means by the common good. For 42 years this facility has been serving three generations of residents in one of Brent's most disadvantaged areas. It is a safe place for children to play and for parents to socialise; encourages outdoor play and exercise rather than leaving children indoors hunched over a screen; and allows for creativity and risk-taking under experienced supervision. The playground is at the heart of the community and helps to keep it stable.

It appears that Brent Council is failing to acknowledge all these positives but instead is making decisions based on narrow short-termism based on accountancy rather than people.

We cannot risk the value of the Adventure Playground being recognised only when it is too late, as happened with the closure of half the borough's libraries. Brent Council must go back to the drawing board and find a way to keep the playground open and staffed, whilst also providing the extra school places and affordable housing that is needed. Any developer contributions should be earmarked for the benefit of existing Stonebridge residents and that includes the Adventure Playground.

Ibrahim Talguri wrote to the playground on December 5th:

Thank you for welcoming me to the Playground. While it was a cold, wet December night, the warmth inside the centre was immediate the moment I stepped inside.

I could instantly feel the sense of home and belonging that you have given to so many children over the last 40 years. For men and women who came here as youngsters to now bring their own children and grandchildren means that you have touched upon something truly special.

A home from home, that provides safety, kindness, and joy. I told you that I could feel the spirit of the place as being alive and vibrant with the happiness of several generations of children. 

To put it simply. Stonebridge Adventure Playground has soul. Real soul that money can’t buy or replace. That’s why I will give you my complete support in keeping this at the heart of the community for Stonebridge and for many years to come.

It is all to rare to find such treasures within London today. It is a city that change beyond recognition and at an unbelievable pace. It is so important to hold close and tight, the things that make our communities what they are.

Stonebridge Adventure Playground is a family home for a big family. Where the children play and the adults take comfort in their company together. This magic place must be protected for the generations to come.

A Conservative candidate has not yet been selected.

 During his budget speech at Full Council on Monday, Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt said:

I respect those for whom the adventure playground remains a key part of their community. I admire how people have stepped forward to say ‘this matters to me, this matters to my family.’ The reality is that we cannot continue to fund projects like this in the way we once did.

Over the last few months, we have asked those who run the adventure playground to work with us to see whether supervised play can continue on that site or be relocated. And so, we hope the adventure playground will respond to our call, to work with us for the good of the people of Stonebridge and Brent.

Cheese defection to Labour no surprise

Barry Cheese (blue lapels) with Lib Dem comrades

I am not surprised by former Lib Dem councillor Barry Cheese's defection to Labour.

He was one of those, who also included former councillor Ann Hunter, who joined the Lib Dems in disgust at Blair's war-mongering and was impressed by the Lib Dem, and particularly Sarah Teather's opposition.

He still had many 'Old Labour' and trade unionist views and was vociferous on the closure of Central Middlesex A&E and the impact of the bedroom tax. He loudly applauded the SWP's Sarah Cox on the former and spoke out on the bedroom tax when speaking with a visiting group of Swedish councillors.

In June 2013 he surprised many by voting with Labour to give Christine Gilbert an extension as Chief Executive until after the May 2014 local elections, despite the opposition of the then Liberal Democrat leader. Paul Lorber's opposition to the extension. LINK

He was defeated in his ward in the May election and told me a few months ago he had left the Lib Dems.

I think he will find himself on the left of Brent Labour Party on many issues and I hope he will galvanise his new comrades to act on the current Human Resources scandal at Brent Council.

Brent Labour backbenchers vote to reduce their own powers and Tories split

 

It was a sad day for democracy at the Brent Council AGM yesterday when not one of the 56 Labour councillors questioned the constitutional changes that will see the level of scrutiny in the Council reduced and limitations on questioning of Cabinet members by backbenchers and the opposition.

At the same time the opposition was weakened by a split in the Conservatives which saw them form an Official Group of three councillors and the 'Brondesbury Park Group' of three.

Cllr John Warren (Brondesbury Park Conservative) opposed the constitutional changes urging Labour backbenchers to 'look at your rights and how they are being lost' pointing to reduced scrutiny, restrictions on questions, removal of 'Key issues' debates, removal of rights to requisition meetings and the guillotine on Council meetings reducing them by 30 minutes.

Dr Helen Carr, (Liberal Democrat, Mapesbury) in her first intervention as a lone Liberal Democrat, said that she did not doubt Muhammed Butt's integrity, but had concerns about the constitutional changes and potential corruption. She appeared to nod in agreement when he reassured her that all was well and all councillors adhered to the highest of standards.

Butt's defence of the changes appeared to be based on their election mandate: 'The people of Brent have spoken'. He argued that the changes would increase participation pointing to the new right of individuals and community organisations to address meetings of the Council. He said that headteachers and doctors would be involved in the new Scrutiny Committee but failed to make a case for the reduction in the overall number of scrutiny committees and restrictions on questions.

All the Labour councillors voted for the changes, Brondesbury Park Conservatives voted against, and the Official Conservatives abstained.