Millions unspent on retrofitting London’s homes

 This story from Green Party Asssemby Member Zack Polanski, puts today's retrofit announcement from Brent Council in perspective. Brent was awarded the second lowest amount of the successsful London boroughs:

Green London Assembly Member Zack Polanski today revealed to the Mayor that just 45 homes had been retrofitted across London under the Government’s Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund, despite £18 million being made available to London councils over a year ago.

The measures to improve the energy efficiency of London’s homes were supposed to be completed by the end of March 2023, but a shortage of skilled workers has delayed delivery.

Green London Assembly Member Zack Polanski said:

The Mayor is still sitting on his hands despite declaring a ‘retrofit revolution’ two years ago.

His failure to get a handle on the retrofit skills gap is preventing London benefitting from available Government funds.

The Mayor needs to get his retrofit revolution on the right track, support the upgrading of homes and protect Londoners from sky-high energy bills.

Nine of the 11 London boroughs awarded funds have failed to deliver any retrofitting works at all. This represents over £13 million of available government funding not being put to use.

 
Across the country, just 14% of the planned 20,000 homes expected to be upgraded have had works completed. As a result, the deadline for local authorities to spend the first wave of funding has been extended to June.

Housing experts, including representatives from the Chartered Institute of Housing, say the slow rollout of retrofit upgrades stems from a national skills shortage in the retrofit sector.[5] London Councils have said that London needs 110,000 people working in retrofit by 2030. Currently, there are only 4,000

The publication of this data comes after the Mayor of London showed hesitance to ramp-up his retrofit skills training offer using his £320 million Adult Education Budget. Speaking to the London Assembly in November, the Mayor said, “what we need is some certainty there are [retrofit] jobs to go to.”

With Londoners facing rising bills during the cost of living crisis, retrofitting homes to improve their energy efficiency is a way to reduce energy bills and household costs – while reducing emissions.

 
The second wave of funding, being made available to local authorities and housing associations later this year, is around four times the budget of the first wave, at almost £800 million.

 

London boroughs in 2023-24 will face the most challenging financial outlook they have experienced since 2010. Tough choices ahead.

A Parliamentary Briefing by London Councils ('The Voice of London Local Government') sets out in stark terms the choices (or lack of them) that local council, including Brent, will be facing next financial year:

London boroughs have suffered from chronic underfunding for far too long. Boroughs’ overall resources are now 22% lower in real terms than in 2010 – even though there are now 10% more Londoners (almost 800,000) to serve.

The Covid-19 pandemic added £3 billion of financial pressures to London boroughs in 2020-21 and 2021-22 but these were largely funded by national government. However, the high demand pressures in many services haven’t subsided, especially within homelessness, services for children with special educational needs and disabilities, children’s social care, and – most significantly – in adult social care. The impact of long covid, interaction with the huge NHS backlog, and increasing delayed transfers into adult social care, is leading to overspending.

Outer London boroughs, as the lowest funded authorities per capita in the country, have particularly few resources to alleviate these growing pressures.

Rising inflation and cost-of-living pressures

The energy crisis, soaring inflation, the increase in the National Living Wage and cost-of-living pressures on residents have added huge additional financial pressures to London boroughs’ budgets.

Despite the 7% increase in core spending power from the 2022-23 local government finance settlement, London boroughs need to make up to £400 million of savings this year.

That funding gap will almost double to more than £700 million next year (2023-24), based on the plans set out by the government’s most recent Spending Review. The scale of the challenge is colossal.

For context, £700 million is equivalent to:

• What London boroughs spend in total on public health each year (£703m)
• More than London boroughs spend on homelessness and housing services (£615m)
• Retrofitting 27,000 homes to help achieve London’s net zero goal
• Delivering 46,000 apprenticeships to boost young Londoners’ skills and employment opportunities
• A year of care for 64,000 Londoners in nursing homes.

Local authorities are highly dependent on central government funding. There is no realistic way that boroughs could currently raise the £700 million through other means. If boroughs were to try raising the £700 million from London’s council taxpayers, council tax bills would need to rise by around 18%. Without a significant increase in funding, a further £700 million will be required in 2024-25 and 2025-26.

In total, the forecast funding gap is £2.4 billion over the next four years – which is almost £1 billion higher than London boroughs were planning for a year ago. This is the most challenging outlook boroughs have faced since 2010. Any further cuts to council funding will make the situation even tougher.

Difficult decisions for London boroughs

There is no painless way for London boroughs to make savings on the scale required. Any low hanging fruit and basic efficiencies are long gone. Staff numbers have been reduced by a third (80,000) since 2010. Many boroughs have delivered significant transformational programmes, which can only be done once.

London boroughs have worked hard to protect their budgets, but many now face the prospect of having to make severe cutbacks to vital services including bin collections and filling potholes, social care for adults and children, support for low-income households and preventing homelessness.

To deal with this challenge, boroughs are now starting to discuss some incredibly tough choices which they haven’t had to do before. These include:

• Cutting back adults and children’s social care packages to the statutory minimum 
• Cutting back community safety and domestic violence to the statutory minimum 
• Cutting back homelessness services to the statutory minimum 
• Cutting voluntary sector funding 
• Cutting back youth services 
• Withdrawal from the delivery of adult social care day services  
• Withdrawal from the delivery of leisure services  
• Reductions in Home to School transport 
• Turning off street lighting 
• Less frequent waste collection
• Less frequent street cleansing
• Reducing public health support on obesity, and smoking cessation
• Increasing parking charges
• Significant asset rationalisation

How the government can help to protect local services

Cuts to council services will damage our communities. However, they will also undermine the government’s ambitions to boost economic growth, level up the country, and help residents through the cost-of-living crisis.

The pandemic showed what London boroughs could do when adequately funded and given the powers to deliver more for our residents. We need the same partnership approach between central and local government for tackling cost-of-living pressures.

We’re therefore asking for local government to be protected from further cuts by increasing business rates and grant funding in line with inflation next year. The government must stick to the funding plans set out in the Spending Review at the very least, rather than make any further reductions to council budgets.

Boroughs desperately need more certainty over longer-term funding to ensure public money is spent well. Despite the three-year Spending Review, local government only had a one-year settlement (effectively for the fourth year in succession), and there continues to be no clarity about plans for wider reforms to local government funding.

We’re asking for the government to confirm a two-year local government finance settlement and publish it as soon as possible.

Amy Leppänen, Parliamentary Officer

amy.leppanen@londoncouncils.gov.uk

St Raphael's Edible Garden - the transformative power of community gardening revealed

The site May 2015

August 2015

Pride after planting seeds September 2015

Constructing the pond September 2015

It was lovely to visit the St Raphael's Edible Garden, one of Sufra NW London's amazing projects today. The garden not only provides vegetables and fruits for the food bank and Sufra's cooking activities, but is itself a therapeutic oasis for the local community.

I have included the images above  that I took on a visit early in the projectso you can judge what has been achieved in just four years by the workers, hundreds of volunteers and local community.  This is how the Edible Garden looked today - from a piece of derelict land to this!

The teaching tipi

Inside the polytunnel

Social Space The garden is open to the public Wednesday to Friday 10am to 4pm where you can go and relax and have a free cup of tea.

There is a Growing Club  taster-session every Wednesday from 10am-4pm where you can try your hand at a range of gardening activities.

Regular Gardening Volunteering takes place Monday to Friday with morning and afternoon sessions. Free but registration required,

Artisanal Workshops are held on the first Thursday of every month during term time and run from 4.30pm to 6.30pm - creative projects for all the family. Registration required,

Growing Academy - various dates. Accredited horticultural course that teaches young people about plants, soil, flowers, vegetables and growing. Free but registration required.

Corporate Volunteering and Team Building  Companies/organisations can come and volunteer for the day helping to maintain  the garden through DIY projects. Enquiry for details and fees.

More information on these activities:

admin@sufra-nwlondon.org.uk
020 3441 1335
160 Pitfield Way NW10 0PW


EDITOR'S NOTE: The St Raphael's Estate is due to be either refurbished or demolished and re-developed with some private housing. I hope Brent Council will recognise the need to preserve the Edible Garden whatever the eventual decision on the future of the estate.

Consultation opens on new ward boundaries for Brent with 6 fewer councillors

From the Local Government Boundary Commission

LINK TO CONSULTATION PORTAL

Today is the start of a 10-week public consultation on proposals for new council wards and ward boundaries for Brent Council. 

Our consultation will close on 5 November 2018. 

After we have considered all representations made to us during this consultation, we intend to publish draft recommendations in January 2019. 

We will then hold a further period of consultation on our draft recommendations. Our final recommendations are expected to be published in May 2019. 

The new electoral arrangements will come into effect at the local elections in May 2022.

If you represent a local organisation or community group in Brent, please pass this message on to your members or anyone who you think might be interested in the review. You can share the message by email or through social media by using the buttons at the bottom right of the page.

What is an electoral review?

Our electoral review will recommend new electoral arrangements for Brent Council. We will propose:

• the total number of councillors elected to the council in the future;
• the number of wards;
• the number of councillors representing each ward;
• ward boundaries; and
• the names of wards.

How to get involved

This is a public consultation and we welcome views from individuals and organisations across Brent on where they think new ward boundaries should be drawn.

We are minded to recommend that 57 councillors should be elected to Brent Council in the future. 

This is 6 fewer than the current number of councillors. 

We are now inviting proposals to help us draw up a pattern of wards to accommodate 57 councillors.

In drawing up new electoral wards, we must balance three legal criteria, namely:

• to deliver electoral equality: where each councillor represents roughly the same number of electors as others across the borough;
• that the pattern of wards should, as far as possible, reflect the interests and identities of local communities;
• that the electoral arrangements should provide for effective and convenient local government.

We will treat all submissions equally, and judge each case on its merits and against the legal criteria. 

If you wish to put forward a view, we would also urge you to ensure that evidence supports your submission. 

For example, if you wish to argue that two areas should be included in the same electoral ward, make sure you tell us why they should be together, providing evidence about community facilities, ties, organisations, and amenities, rather than simply asserting that they belong together.

There is more advice on our website about how you can get involved in the consultation. 

Our website features technical guidance that explains the process and our policies, as well as guidance on how to take part in each part of the process. 

We have also set up a webpage dedicated to the review of Brent Council, where you can find all the relevant information.

You can also access interactive maps of the current ward boundaries across Brent on our specialist consultation portal. The portal also allows you to draw your own boundaries, mark areas of interest on the map and upload documents directly to the site. 

In drawing up new boundaries, the Commission aims to deliver electoral equality for voters in council elections so that each councillor represents roughly the same number of voters. The review also aims to ensure that the new council wards reflect, as far as possible, the interests and identities of communities across Brent.

Professor Colin Mellors, Chair of the Commission, said: “We are asking local people and organisations to help us draw up new wards for Brent. As we develop the recommendations, we will take into account local community identities as well as ensuring electoral equality for voters.

“If you have a view about which communities or neighbourhoods should be part of the same council ward, then we want to hear from you. And if you think a road, river or railway makes for a strong boundary between communities in your part off Brent, then this consultation is for you.

“If you’re interested in the way the borough is run, just log on to our website to explore our interactive maps and have your say.

“Your views will make a difference. 

“We will carefully consider all evidence that is provided during this phase of the review, whoever it is from and whether it applies to the whole of Brent or just a small part of the borough.

“Residents will then have a further chance to have their say after we publish our draft recommendations in January 2019.”

Local people have until 5 November 2018 to submit their views.

Promote the review in your area with our promotional poster

Brent Green Party launches its Manifesto for the Council Elections

Some of the eighteen Green Party candidates standing for election in Brent

Brent Green Party launched its comprehensive manifesto for the Council elections at the weekend. Candidates are standing on a platform of challenging the 'One Party' Brent Council pledging to hold the Council to account for its decisions, ensuring that its policies and decisions are robustly scrutinised, extending democracy so that all councillors have a share in decision making and putting forward imaginative and radical new ideas to improve the quality of life and life chances of Brent residents.

You can read more about Green candidiates for Brent Council HERE

The full Manifesto is available here and can be downloaded (page symbol menu bottom left):

Save the Brent Sickle Cell Project

Personal guest blog by Nan Tewari

CVS Training Room, Ground Floor
5 Rutherford Way, Wembley, HA9 0BP
Thurs 15 Sept, 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.

If you are a sickle cell patient, Brent CCG cordially invites you to trek to Wembley Park for a meeting to deliver personally, the news that it is about to close the BSCASS (Brent Sickle Cell Advisory Support Service) project 2 days after the meeting.

Brent CCG regrets it has no money (or thought) to schedule the meeting in Stonebridge or Harlesden for the convenience of a vulnerable group of patients.

Brent CCG further regrets it sees no need to include people who are at high risk of developing sickle cell either.

Brent CCG is pleased however that it does have the money to spend on expensive solicitors to fend off attempts by Brent Patient Voice to ensure the CCG complies with proper contract termination processes;  to explain why it had not undertaken an Equality Impact Assessment before making the decision to cease funding;  to give an undertaking that it would put an alternative support service in place to patients who have already seen their service relocated to Northwick Park, a mere 2 bus rides away, and so on and so forth.

The CCG recognises the project has been effective in reducing hospital out-patient and in-patient admissions.  The Sickle Cell Society has the provider contract for the BSCASS project.  The annual cost is £70,000 which pays for 2 workers.  The project was originally planned (and costed) for 3 years having started in May 2015.  

Part of the contract included an agreed joint governance structure through a steering group.  The CCG senior rep only ever attended one meeting.  The CCG had voiced no dissatisfaction with performance yet suddenly now, it is concerned that the service is not reaching enough patients.  All voluntary sector projects take time to ramp up having first to recruit staff then to set the service up.  The CCG however, seems to believe that setting up a community project just requires the handing out of money with no follow-up responsibility for any of the community development or capacity building activity necessary to get the new service going.  

Contrast this with the help and support the CCG gives to the Royal Free Hospital as provider of the outpatient cardiology service to help the RF meet its KPIs (key performance indicators) and the RF’s continued failure to fully deliver.  Better still, more than a year after the CCG was set up it was still using it’s newness as an excuse for poor performance in several areas!  Different rules for them it seems.

Re the 15 Sept meeting (no consultation from the CCG on date and time, surprise, surprise) I expect Brent CCG would appreciate some help on how a parent is meant to leave Wembley Park at 3 p.m. to get to Harlesden in time to pick children up from school.  Contributions can be e-mailed to: breccg.brentenquiries@nhs.net
 
Not sure whether the CCG will listen to sense re the meeting date/time, participation, or anything else, so do watch this space for any updates

Brent's housing crisis in figures

Shelter has issued the latest figures on housing need which are for the third quarter of 2013. Full data is available HERE

I have made a table for the main figures for Brent below:

London Borough of Brent	Quarter 3 2013	Quarter 2 2013
Families with children accepted as homeless	72	40
Households accepted as homeless	155	113
Households found to be homeless but not in priority need	63	33
Households found to be ‘intentionally homeless’	12	18
Households in temporary accommodation	3,410	3,484
Number of children in temporary accommodation	5,729	5,837
Households with dependent children in temporary accommodation	2,640	2,692
Possession claims issued by landlords	655	535
Possession claims by mortgage lenders	83	59

Gilbert to hang on to Brent Chief Executive job despite second job in Haringey

 The next full meeting of Brent Council is to consider a recommendation that Chief Executive, Christine Gilbert, retain her position as interim Brent Council Chief Executive. Gilbert, whose salary arrangements have already been a source  of controversy, was last week appointed to a second job in Haringey.

The report says that the recruitment process for a new permanent  Chief Executive should be delayed because the current recruitment process for  three other CEs in London boroughs would limit the quality of candidates, to allow the restructuring of council senior management to go ahead smoothly, and  to ensure continuity and reputation management over the move to the Civic Centre and the 2014 local elections.

Two more secondary free schools in Brent approved by Gove

Michael Gove today approved two secondary free schools to open in Brent in September 2014.  This is in addition to Michaela Academy which was approved in the last wave.

The Gateway Academy will be in the Wembley Central area, possibly in Madison House in London Road, off Wembley High Road. This is a close to Copland High School which is going through a difficult period at the moment and thought likely to be subjected to a forced academy. My previous posting on Gateway can be found HERE

The rather meagre details about the new school can be found HERE

Gladstone School does not yet appear to have found premises in the Gladstone Park/Cricklewood area. Crest Boys and Crest Girls Academies presently serve that community. The sponsors answered my questions about the proposed free school HERE

Details can be found on the school's website HERE 

Both sets of proposers are thought to have been in talks with Brent Council officers. The issue of free schools has been controversial within Brent Labour Party and concern about it is said to have been a factor in Cllr Michael Pavey replacing Mary Arnold as lead member for children and families in the recent Executive elections.

 Meanwhile the Mayor of London has admitted that he supports the funding of free schools even in areas where there is “not necessarily a shortage of places”. London Councils are lobbying the Government for funding to cope with the estimated 118,000 extra school places in London by 2014/15.

Darren Johnson, Green Assembly Member for London said:

We will have new schools funded in areas of London which don’t need them and no new schools built in areas of high demand. The policy is irrational and based upon the principle of the parents who shout loudest getting their own way. With a dire shortage of funds for new schools, the Mayor is effectively saying that a new free school has priority over a child in another part of London who has no school.

The Mayor can’t say that he is simply following Government policy on this, as his deputy Mayor for culture also admitted that properties belonging to the fire or police authorities may be sold to free schools at ‘red book’ prices, rather than through competitive tendering. The looming shortfall of 118,000 school places in the capital would be far better addressed through the Mayor's co-operation with local authorities in a properly planned programme of school building rather than the hit and miss approach of Free Schools.

 

Brent Cyclists propose an achievable cycling revolution in the borough

Crossing the Welsh Harp

Brent Cyclists have issued an incredibly  thorough and imaginative 'Draft Cycling Plan for Brent' which aims to improve cycling across the borough and cycling links with central London, as well as tackle the major barriers to cycling in Central and North Brent. If their vision is realised it would not just be a cycling 'improvement' but a cycling revolution.

They argue that a 'mini Holland' is required in Central Brent:

The plan required to tackle these barriers to link the communities of mid-Brent with practical cycling and walking routes will be a major piece of work in itself. Brent Cyclists’ suggestions for priority changes needed for the mini-Holland in Wembley and Neasden are as follows:

A)

Alterations to the Neasden north and south roundabouts, to the cycle / pedestrian underpass at Neasden (or complete replacement) and to Dudden Hill Lane, Neasden Lane North and Blackbird Hill to create a viable cycle route to Wembley Park and the north of the borough, from the south and from central London. This will be discussed later under the heading “Jubilee Line Quietway”. This will be a completion of a Quietway using main roads and needs to be entirely segregated. This is a very large scheme in itself.

B)

A new link between Wembley park and Neasden spanning, or going under, the Metropolitan Line to fill in the long gap between the North Circular Road and Bridge Road crossings. This already features in the Wembley area Masterplan, but needs to be a priority step, before extensive redevelopment.

C)

A new link across the Chiltern Line between Wembley Park and the Harrow Road area, at Sherrans Farm Open Space

D)

Extension and improvement of the cycle route on the Brent River Path in both directions. At the north end, quality links to both new crossing A) above and to Bridge Road via North Road. At the south end, an improved, more efficient crossing of Harrow Road and an improved, safer linkage to the Stonebridge/ Abbey Road cycle bridge.

E)

Segregated cycle tracks along Forty Avenue and East Lane, or, where there is insufficient width, mandatory cycle lanes with removal of all parking.

F)

Prioritisation of cycling, walking and buses on Ealing road by removing the north-south through route for cars, forcing them to use Bridgewater Road instead, which is a more suitable route.

G)

Closing the through-route via St Johns Road and Llanover Road to cars to create a bike priority route parallel to the West Coast Main Line and opening up a route through the North Wembley Industrial Estate from there to Windermere Avenue, with appropriate crossing facilities at East Lane, to extend this route northwards.

H)

Linking Neasden Recreation Ground with Welsh Harp Open Space with a new path built in collaboration with the Canal and River Trust (who control the reservoir) which would either use the dam or a new bridge across the Brent. This should also, with the cooperation in addition of Barnet council, become part of a circular leisure cycling and walking route all round the reservoir. Brent Cyclists have already suggested several detailed options for this scheme.

I)

Replacing one or both of the spiral pedestrian footbridges across the North Circular Road at Kenwyn Avenue and the St Raphaels Estate with wide cycling and walking bridges with long, straight ramps. There is enough space in both these locations for this. These bridges must be connected with good, wide paths to the minor roads at either end.

Extensive proposals are also made for North Brent:

A)
A N-S route from Blackbird Cross on the A4140 via Salmon Street, Fryent Way, and
Honeypot Lane. Segregated cycle tracks or mandatory cycle lanes with no parking all the way are needed. On Fryent Way where there is the obvious opportunity to create cycle paths between the existing road and footpaths, and this could be the first part of the scheme. This route requires the collaboration of Harrow in Honeypot Lane, and it should be taken by Harrow all the way to Stanmore. Kingsbury Circle is currently a dangerous interruption on this route and needs either signalising or replacing with a Dutch-style roundabout (which TfL is currently experimenting with at the Transport Research laboratory in Berkshire).
B)
An E-W route on the A4006 (Kingsbury road and Kenton Road). These roads are wide enough for general segregation if the whole width of the road is redesigned. This requires the co-operation of Harrow on Kenton Road, and the route should link to Harrow town centre. Radical changes to the very dangerous Northwick Park roundabout (shared with Harrow) would be necessary, with cycle tracks on the roundabout, and signalisation.
C)
A new cycle path through West Hendon Playing Fields, N-S, along the Brent-Barnet boundary (to link with B) above) and with the existing path through Welsh Harp Open Space and to Birchen Grove, linking with the Jubilee Line route (see later).
D)
The LCN route on Draycott Avenue, Windermere Avenue and Grasmere Avenue needs cutting as a through-route for cars.
E)
A N-S route from Burnt Oak to Wembley is needed. Slough Lane /Salmon Street is already low-traffic due to aggressive traffic-calming, it being easier for cars to use Church Lane for that stretch, but the northern continuation in Roe Green and Stag Lane is too busy. The Stag Lane / Roe Green route needs cutting for motor through-traffic (buses could be allowed). The general traffic on this route should be on the A5 and A4006
F)
An route E-W route from Colindale to Queensbury via Holmstall Avenue and Beverley Drive is needed. Beverley Drive is wide enough for segregated cycle tracks,
G)
Cycling in Roe Green Park needs regularising, with widened paths and a proper link to the road at the Roe Green / Kingsbury Road junction.
H)
Church Lane (B454) is an important link road between Kingsbury and Neasden, but is  hostile to cycling because of high vehicle speeds combined with chicaines created by traffic islands and intermittent parking. The islands and hatching should be removed and replaced by zebra crossings, and on-street parking should be removed and replaced with cycle lanes or tracks.
I)
Old Church Lane (which has one of the better cycle facilities in Brent, a two-way track at its western end already) serves no function in the traffic system and should be closed to motor traffic. It is a cut-through for traffic turning left on to Blackbird Hill, but traffic can make that turn from Tudor Gardens 

These proposals merit serious consideration and would contribute enormously to Brent's Climate Change Strategy by encouraging more people to leave their cars behind and take to their bikes, secure in the knowledge that safe and secure routes are in place. As well as making commuting cycling more attractive it would also increase leisure cycling improving health and tackling obesity.

Brent Cyclists deserve congratulation and thanks for this far-sighted and thorough report which must have required an enormous amount of work by a small voluntary organisation.

It has not been possible to do the full 25 page report full justice in this summary. The full report can be found HERE