Former Brent Council Deputy Leader breaks cover on alleged lack of Black Caribbean political representation on the Council

 

 

Margaret McLennan

 

Former Brent Council Deputy Leader, Margaret McLennan, who did not stand for election in May, broke cover this afternoon in reaction to a newly elected councillor's tweet about Windrush Day celebrations in Brent.

She said:

Great Rita, but what about local councillor political representation in Brent for this community that built this borough. Without this it is all meaningless words. 

Everybody sees and everybody knows.

The dimishing role of the Black Caribbean community in local politics has been an issue lurking beneath the surface for some time and goes beyond the recent candidate selection process and Cabinet and Committee appointments.

A number of years ago I chatted to two Black Caribbean ex-councillors (both Labour) outside Harlesden Methodist Church where I was running a stall. They listed a number of issues that they felt meant that their community was no longer respected, including the closure of Stonebridge Advenure Playground, the council's takeover of the Bridge Park Centre and funding for the Sickle Cell Advice Centre.

An issue that has been raised with me recently is the claim that aspiring Black Caribbean candidates have been pushed out of many wards in the south of Brent.

 

Wilhelmina Mitchell-Murray

 

In February of this year Cllr Wilhelmina Mitchell-Murray resigned from the Labour Party, citing differences with both the local and national ladership, and joined the Conservatives. She unsuccesfully stood as a Conservative candidate in Wembley Central at the May election. Her son Joshua Murray, Labour councillor for Harlesden, did not stand for the May local election.

 

The current Brent Cabinet

 

Source: https://data.brent.gov.uk/dataset/vqkrd/community-profile-evidence-pack

A crude comparison might be made of the composition of the Cabinet and councillors and that of the local population but we would need to know the self-defined ethnicity of all councillors to make a legitimate comparison. I have not been able to find that recorded on the Brent website but a rough count  puts the number of Black Caribbean councillors at around six out of 57 councillors (approximately 10.5%)

Numbers alone of course does not indicate power as this depends on the position held within the council as well as their level of engagement with the community,

Divestment from fossil fuels - Cllr Matt Kelcher: 'We should do it NOW, when we can make the biggest impact'

 

 

The presentation and discussion of the Divest petition

Cllr Matt Kelcher today presented a petition of nearly 1,400 Brent residents calling for Brent Council to divest its pension fund from fossil fuels. In the video above you can see him outline why investing in fossil fuels is bad policy, bad economics and bad politics. He said local people feel strongly about the issue in the light of the climate emergency and Brent Council should follow the lead of 9 Labour boroughs with divestment policies,. 'Not to divest makes us part of the problem and not part of the solution...We should do it NOW, when we can make the biggest impact.' 

In her response Cllr McLennan (Deputy Leader and lead for resources) offered to  work with Divest Brent and Friends of the Earth on the issue.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Don't be fooled by Brent's claims on 'affordable' housing

Following Wednesday's Planning Committee Brent Council's communications (public relations) team were quick off the mark hailing the decisions as 'Hundreds of new homes given the go ahead by Brent Council' what they omitted was that these new homes are not ones that Brent residents can afford to buy.

The press release quoted Cllr Margaret McLennan

Cllr Margaret McLennan, Deputy Leader of Brent Council, said:

"We're serious about making this borough an amazing place to live and are working hard to build the homes that people need. We know that house prices are a massive issue and are pressing developers to deliver as many affordable units as possible.

"This is a huge development and we're proud that once completed, Wembley will have over 11,500 new homes, with around 32% affordable housing across the Wembley Masterplan area.

"The approval of these plans shows that we are serious about regenerating the area, creating the much-needed new homes, jobs, apprenticeships and economic opportunities for local people and demonstrates that Brent is very much open for business."

Monthly rents in Quintain development

The word 'affordable' is the misnomer here as affordable in this context means 'up to 80% of market rent including service charges'.  Landlords will go up to that maximum to get the highest return possible on their investment.  Developers in Wembley have time and again attempted to reduce the amount of affordable housing in their projects on grounds of financial viability so it is clear they will go for the maximum.

Cllr McLennan heralds 32% affordable housing (80% market rent) but Brent's Core Strategy CP2 states that 50% of new homes in the borough should be 'affordable':

'the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing will be sought when negotiating on individual private residential and mixed use schemes, with due regard to a number of factors, including development viability'

The key is in the last three words, each of the schemes have external viability studies that claim to show that they will not be viable without a reduced proportion of 'affordable' housing.  Viability studies are controversial and in the past Cllr Marquis, chair of the Planning Committee, has attempted to challenge them.They were labelled a 'dark art' by the former Mayor of London. LINK

There is an additional 'intermediate category' that is often added to the 'affordable' category for public relations purposes.  The definition is vague:

'intermediate houses for sale and rent provided at a cost above social rent but below market level'

Even 'social rent' is problematic with housing associations becoming developers in their own right and adopting the 'up to 80% of market rent' policy.

Having established the context does the detail suggest that the press release is no more than Brent Council doing Quintain's public relations for them?

Planning officers argue that there is no necessity to provide affordable housing on the Arena Square/Powerleague site because affordable housing to meet requirements is provided elsewhere in Quintain's development. Whether this is achieving the 'maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing' is a matter for debate.

Bedrooms	Private	Up to 80% market rent	Intermediate	Social
APEX HOUSE
1	56	11	12	0
2	77	9	4	0
3	18	4	4	0
ARENA SQ
Studio	36	0	0	0
1	138	0	0	0
2	157	0	0	0
3	9	0	0	0
COTTRELL HOUSE			Shared ownership
Studio	6	0	0	0
1	13	2	1	0
2	15	4	3	0
3	8	3	0	0

It is worth noting that all of these developments are in Tokyngton ward where Cllr Butt, leader of Brent Council, is a councillor along with Cllrs Ketan Sheth and Hylton.  None of them made any representations at the Planning Committee  or submitted comments on the applications.

FURTHER NOTE

A point made on Facebook discussions of this posting is that the 'up to  80%' definition of affordable is the former London Mayor, Boris Johnson's fault and not that of Brent Council.  My gripe is that the Council's press release and Margaret McLennan's flag waving, perpetuates the myth that this is genuinely affordable by residents and therefore good news.  Cllr Mashari does recognise the reality.

Former councillor James Powney has posted this on his blog LINK:

A lot of controversy is generated by the term "affordable housing", since in London especially, it is often far from affordable.  Here is a quick summary of the main types of housing sent to me by a senior housing officer:

Affordable Rent- for family units are usually 60-65% of market rents or the LHA (whichever is the lower), whereas 1-2 bed units are up to 80% of market rent or LHA (whichever is the lower).

 

Social Rent - averages out at 50% of market rent, may be slightly higher (usually 5%) above Social Rent target rents.

 

Intermediate Rent- above both Affordable or Social Rent, but will be below the market value, approx. 90% of market rent.

Cllr Mashari resigns from Brent Cabinet

I understand that Cllr Roxanne Mashari has resigned from the Brent Cabinet.  The resignation follows the controversy over the Granville South Kilburn development when she appeared to have been made the scapegoat for lack of consultation when the actual decisions had been made by Cllr Butt who holds the property portfolio. LINK

Neither Butt nor Cllr McLennan, deputy leader, were at the Scrutiny Committee where Cllr Mashari had to answer critics, including Cllrs John Duffy and John Warren.

Cllr Butt, in addition to his own duties as leader, is currently temporarily holding the Children and Families portfolio.

After rancorous Scrutiny Committee a chance to move forward on Granville?

Cllr Roxanne Mashari's scalp was still intact at the end of yesterday's Scrutiny meeting on the Carlton/Granville redevelopment despite the best efforts of the cross-party combo,  'The Two Johnnies', Cllrs Warren and Duffy.

Cllr Warren had proposed that Cllr Mashari, lead member for Regeneration be stood down from the South Kilburn part of her portfolio because of 'her failure to reply to several important e-mails or to visit the Granville Centre or the school during the period July-October 2016 causing the local community to believe Brent Council was intending to demolish a community asset without consultation.'

Instead he proposed that a Task Force be set up led by the council leader and include the three Kilburn ward councillors and one or two members of the local community. The  Task Force 'should review and ensure that there is a balance (of) private sector housing, social sector housing and community services, such as Health centres, Schools, Employment Hubs and Community Centres.

The Committee Chair, Cllr Kelcher, attempted to prevent what he deemed personal attacks  on Cllr Mashari from both Cllr Warren and Duffy.

Much of the controversy hinged on the July Cabinet's approval of Option 2 on the redevelopment of Carlton-Granville which residents and users saw as approving complete demolition of the site. This is the actual record on the Cabinet decision:

-->

(i)        that approval be given to Option 2 for redeveloping the Carlton & Granville Centres, Granville Road, London, NW6 5RA (the subject site) to deliver 95 new homes, an Enterprise Hub and 3274sqm of additional community use space;

(ii)       that a further update be provided to formally approve final scheme plans and the required capital investment to bring forward the phased redevelopment of the Carlton and Granville Centres and ensure continuity of occupation for the Enterprise Hub within the site;

(iii)      that the site be included within the scope of the South Kilburn Masterplan review to ensure wider place making considerations are incorporated;

(iv)      that the Strategic Director for Resources in consultation with the Strategic Director for Regeneration and Environment, Chief Legal Officer and Chief Finance Officer enter into a legal agreement with the South Kilburn Trust and the GLA to secure their funding contributions in return for project delivery of the Enterprise Hub by March 2018, and setting out Council commitment to underwrite the shortfall in project funds;

(v)       that authority be delegated to the Strategic Director for Resources in consultation with the Strategic Director for Regeneration and Environment, Chief Legal Officer and Chief Finance Officer to oversee scheme development through further viability testing, local consultation, and planning consent;

(vi)      that authority be delegated to the Strategic Director for Resources in consultation with the Strategic Director for Regeneration and Environment, Chief Legal Officer and Chief Finance Officer in respect to any works and/or professional services contracts for scheme development to agree pre-tender considerations, invite tenders and thereafter award the contract.

Reason Key: Significant expenditure/savings > 30% of budget for the function in question

Cllr Mashari pointed out that she was not the lead on the July report and admitted that consultation on it had been poor. In his contribution Cllr Nerva said that it was a pity that the councillors responsible (Ed: Cllr Butt (Property and Cllr McLennan) were not present. Certainly I got the distinct impression that Cllr Mashari had been hung out to dry by her colleagues so the proposal to make Cllr Butt the lead was a little strange to say the least.

Cllr Mashari said:

I'll be as transparent and clear and collaborative as possible going forward (on the project). We can't go back in time. I can only guarantee clarity in the future.

Away from the Warren/Duffy-Mashari battle the actual local users of the Centre made passionate speeches about the essential services they provided for the local community. Responding to officer claims that the facilities were under-used  Leslie Barson said that the Council itself had acted to limit its use leading to the run-down. The headteacher and Chair of Governors spoke about the many services offered by Granville Nursery Plus and the £800k extension that had been built for the school.

In the course of the discussion Richard Barrett, Director of Regeneration, seemed to suggest that this building would go when said that the headteacher and her team would be asked to put forward ideas for the nursery school provision and that his team would then turn it into building plans. However, during interchanges it became clear that the South Kilburn Trust would be the senior partner in the redevelopment. Cllr Mashari said that the regeneration of South Kilburn should take into account the need for 'social' regeneration.

Cllr Rita Conneely said that it was important to be clear whether the November report, which was actually the subject of the call-in, was an extension of the July report or an over-turning of that report. In response Cllr Mashari said that 'we have more or less said that complete demolition is not now an option. There is a step change from the July report and that will be shown in the coming months.'

Cllr Pitruzella called for involvement of ward councillors in proposals that affected their ward well in advance of any proposals going to Cabinet. Cllr Duffy said that the council would get more value from developers if they involved people who actually know the local area. Cllr Nerva claimed that one of the reasons for the confusion was the lack of detail of each lead member's portfolio responsibilities.

Towards the end of the meeting during tense exchanges with Cllr Duffy, Cllr Mashari stating that this was not the only occasion there had been conflict with her Labour colleague, revealed that she was asking for disciplinary action against him. She did not specify the form of disciplinary action but this could be through the Labour Party's own procedures or the Council's Code of Conduct for Members.

The Committee decided not to refer back the November decision and instead made the following recommendations:

1) Continuation of Granville Nursery Plus was paramount and the school to be involved in the full design process.
2) Mechanisms need to be adopted to fully involve ward councillors before such reports go to Cabinet (this would be referred to the Constitution Working Group)
3) A full 12 month timetable for the collaborative work on the redevelopment proposals should be constructed as soon as possible and brought back to the Scrutiny Committee
4) Scrutiny should received a full report in six month's  time from lead members and officers on moving the project forward with details of consultations and the progress of collaborative work on the project.

This morning Cllr Duffy wrote to his Labour colleagues giving his take on last night's meeting: (typos corrected)

Dear All,

Went to the Scrutiny Committee last night, to raised the issue of why the Cabinet agreed a report to demolish a thriving community centre and a local school to maximise investment from the private sector and devastate community assets.This was not a mistake this was done by the Cabinet (Neil Kinnock accent) a Labour Cabinet, knowing they had not consulted the school or community centre or local councillors.

The report was agreed in July, but because I highlighted it saying "I would not give it political cover "and a strong community campaign.They were force to reverse it in November.   

At the meeting usual stuff happen. I had put a lot of effort into highlighting the cabinet attempt to demolish the school and centre.However the Chair of the meeting ruled because the first person to call in the report was Cllr Warren he was allowed introduce it that I could only ask 2 questions, not bother I am used of it.

Cllr Warren introduce the item and questioned whether Cllr Mashari was hindering the project by her lack of action and her failure to engage with residents and local councillors, between July and November. The Chair ruled him out of order and said we can only talk about the November meeting ,the fact the November meeting was a result of the failure of the July meeting seemed to escape the Chair. .

A number of residents spoke The Granville centre,The Head of the School, The Chair of Governors, The South Kilburn Trust and both Cllr Connelly and  Cllr Pitruzzella spoke .

Cllr Mashari replied saying she was sorry about the lack of consultation and it was not her fault its was Cllr Butt's fault and various officers, one of whom had nothing to do with the July report. Neil Nevra also spoke saying it was Cllr Butt's fault and he should be called to the meeting.

As I say I was limited to 2 questions which were (1) Why did she vote to demolish the Granville Centre knowing no consultation had taken place?  (2) Why did you not answer any emails or attend any meeting or visit Kilburn between July and November to assure the local community? Cllr Mashari refused to answer the questions as she said she had referred me for disciplinary action which is news to me? The Chair said she did not have to answer the questions so we will never know why she voted to demolish the Granville centre and why she went AWOL between July and November.

The outcome was OK, I think Cllr Mashari was force to make concessions like real consultation and that consultation to be recorded before she makes a decision. Cllr Butt was found guilty in his absence so Cllr Mashari and Cllr Nerva are happy .

I am still a little bemused by the fact the person who voted to demolish Granville centre is now in charge of saving it and the same person who ignored the fact no consultation had taken place is in charge of consultation, but you can't have everything.

So on the night the Kilburn councillors and community seem to have saved the Granville centre from the clutches of the cabinet and Cllr Mashari's wings have been clipped, but did not get a Task- Force to deliver the regeneration of Kilburn ,which is unfortunate but all in all I'm happy.

 Perhaps now South Kilburn residents will be treated with due respect.

Cllr Mashari rejects call for her resignation over Granville redevelopment

Kilburn Times story

Cllr John Duffy (Labour, Kilburn) took the unusual step yesterday of circulating an email to all councillors calling for the resignation of Cllr Roxanne Mashari (Labour, Welsh Harp) who is the Cabinet member leading on Regeneration and Employment.

Cllr Mashari promptly rejected the call which was based on alleged incompetence over the redevelopment of the Granville and Carlton Centres in South Kilburn.  After a campaign by residents and users new proposals are to be put to the Cabinet on Tuesday November 15th which include, in Phase 2, proposals for the Granville Kitchen, Granville Nursery Plus and Otherwise Club. These were covered in an earlier post on Wembley Matters LINK.

Duffy wrote after coverage of the issue in the Kilburn Times which reported Zadie Smith's support for campaigners LINK: (Duffy's email appear to have been written in some haste and I have corrected typos)

All Councillors, 

This scandal attached came about because the cabinet agree to knock down a school  in Kilburn  they did not know was there . I know that is hard to believe particularly because it is a Brent school. How could anybody miss a school is beyond me.

Cllr Mashari in true cabinet style, failed to consult the school , the local community centres or local Kilburn Councillors. Her incompetency  put £2million investment in local employment from the  Soth Kilburn Trust and £750k from the GLA at risk. The incompetency also put the school and community  through unnecessary anguish . During the cabinet meeting to knock down the school not one question was raised by the cabinet about the lack of communication and consultation with users of the community centres and Kilburn Councillors.

It was only after the intervention of the local Councillors Rita Conneely, Barbara (Pitruzzella) and myself , where we demanded  a meeting  with the Leader and the CEO, did the leader agree to reconsider change the decision and consider options to ensure the future of the user groups and school.

This is not the first time the cabinet have have put funding at risk , due to their previous incompetence  , they previous nearly gave the street cleansing contractor up to £400k by failing to notice the report said all extra revenue from the green bins should go to the contractor (Veolia) and not the Brent council.

I believe Cllr Mashari should apologies  to the residents of Kilburn for  her breathtaking incompetence and resign  from the regelation portfolio .

Cllr Mashari replied:

Thank you for your email.

The decision on the future use of Granville that went through cabinet earlier this year did not come from Regeneration, but rather through property, which now sits under the Leader's portfolio. I understand that this may be confusing, but I have taken the time to sit down with Cllr Conneely to explain the division of responsibility here.

I understand that the leader has met and spoken about this matter with you on a number of occasions.

As far as the future of the building is concerned, I am now taking forward a paper through regeneration which outlines the next phase of the project in the context of the South Kilburn Regeneration scheme and I assure you that the process will be collaborative going forward.  I am happy to further discuss the upcoming cabinet paper with you and your ward colleagues.

I had also asked that Richard Barrett from our Regeneration team meet individually with each of the tenants and local stakeholders to capture their feedback and concerns. This has been done in addition to several other consultative meetings and exercises.

While I agree that the original decision could have been undertaken more collaboratively with councillors and community stakeholders, you will appreciate that I was not the lead member on this and that myself and Regeneration staff are working hard to establish a more consultative approach to make this project a success now it has passed from Property to Regeneration.

With regards to your assertion that I should resign, I feel this is a wholly inappropriate response on the back of a Kilburn Times article and clearly before you had taken the trouble to check which cabinet member led on the original decision.  

Nonetheless, I am determined to find a way forward for Granville that means all local stakeholders are at the heart of the design and function of the new enterprise hub and I hope that you will continue to work closely with Richard Barrett and myself to ensure that happens.

Cllr Duffy responded thanking Cllr Mashari for her clarification but went on to list the reasons she should resign: (typos and minor corrections)

There are four reasons I think you should  resign and apologise.

(1) It is not about the issue of who made original decision, it's the fact you left the parents and governors of the school  and users of the community centre in limbo , not knowing if the school and community centre would  close.They were left not knowing for over 3 months.During that time  there were many meetings  concerning  the centres both in Kilburn and the CC  (Civic Centre) since the July 25th meeting. You have not even attempted  to visit the school you have not visited the community centre you have not attended SKT or to my knowledge you have not even set foot in Kilburn since you were elected or since the meeting of the 25 July.

(2)Your action to ignore my plea to start consultation put £2.75 million much needed  investment in Kilburn at risk and it was only the actions and pressure of the local community and Rita, Barbara and myself that secured the funding.

(3) You say you have asked officers from the generation team to meet with local stake holders,this is true. Unfortunately you only asked officers to meet with stakeholder this week which is 105 Days after the meeting of the July 25th and 115 Days after I sent you the email outlining the lack of consultation.I find it quite disingenuous for you to  pretend  you have taken actions , when you ignored Kilburn residents for over 3 months. 

(4) I do believe you even bother to read the reports (sic) on the demolition of the Granville and Carlton on the 25th May This is borne out  by your confusion with the dates and believing you were not the lead member at the time.

Cllr Mashari you can try and blame Cllr Butt and Cllr McLennan (Deputy Leader) , but both of those along with Cllr W. Mitchell- Murray  have come to Kilburn to reassure residents while you have ignored them.

I  say again you should resign  as I believe  the residents of Kilburn will not have any confidence in you to deliver regeneration which reflects the needs of their community. 

Brent Council budget 'coup' an affront to democracy?

In a posting prior to Monday's Cabinet meeting LINK I drew attaention to the possible decision by the Cabinet to freeze the Council's Revenue Support Grant (RSG) until 2019/20 which would mean setting out an 'efficiency' plan for Council expenditure over the next four years to be submitted to the Department for Communities and Local Government. Due to the timing of Cabinet and Council and government deadlines the Officers' report recommended that these decisions, as well as one on Council borrowing, would not be made by Cabinet or Full Council but by one councillor and one officer in each case.

I wrote:

It is not only the decision in principle that has to be made by Butt and Downs but an 'efficiency plan' submitted that will dictate the level of savings (cuts, 'efficiencies' and income generation) over the next four years.

These are major decisions and I do not understand why the Cabinet cannot convene a special meeting before the deadline to consider Downs' proposal and efficiency plan. The wider Labour Group as well as the opposition seem to have been left out of the process completely but their hands will be tied for the next four years by these decisions.

Put simply the main parameters of the Council's budget decisions will not be made by the Cabinet, Labour Group or Full Council - and certainly not discussed by Labour Party members.  Within that of course there is also the setting of the level of Council Tax.

When these matters come up for debate over the next four years any decisions will have to conform to the efficiency plan.

Given the clear difficulty the Council is already having in delivering 'efficient' services as a result of funding cuts the 'efficiency' plan needs intense scrutiny.

Instead it will be compiled by  Carolyn Downs, Brent Council CEO and Muhammed Butt, Leader o the Coucnil,  and submitted by them before the government deadline. Additionally the Cabinet agreed to delegate the appointment of specialist fianncial advisers to Conrad Hall, the Brent Chief Finance Officer and Cllr Margaret McLennan, Deputy Leader.

The Cabinet Decision sheet records:

-->

RESOLVED: 2019/20 and option to fix RSG settlements

Cabinet noted the overall financial position and the risks inherent in it.

Cabinet noted the overall arguments for and against accepting a fixed settlement of its RSG until 2019/20, and that on balance the advice is in favour of accepting it.

Cabinet delegated to the Chief Executive and Leader authority to decide whether or not to accept the fixed RSG settlement.

Cabinet delegated to the Chief Executive and Leader authority to submit an efficiency plan to DCLG as part of any decision to accept a fixed RSG settlement.

Cabinet noted the position in particular in respect of business rates devolution and how this might progress, and that the chief finance officer will continue to respond to technical consultations as necessary.

Cabinet noted the progress in developing a financing programme for the investment strategy. 


Cabinet agreed to delegate procurement and appointment of specialist financial advisers to assist in the financing of the investment strategy to the Chief Finance Officer, in consultation with the Deputy Leader

In the light of these issues Cllr John Warren (Leader of Brent Conservative Group) has submitted a request calling for an Extraordinary Full Council meeting to discuss the Efficiency Plan before its submission.

Although his motivation may be to achieve further 'efficiencies' (cuts) and I would strongly disagree with that, the need for democratic decision making and accountability is essential and I think should be shared by Labour backbenchers.

This is Warren's  request:

Mr.Mayor,

I ask that the following item be included as " Any Other Urgent Business " at the meeting on Monday September 19th 2016


Full Council is asked to consider the Cabinet recommendations, noted below made at its meeting on 13 September 2016 in the report " Financial Position 2017/18- 2019/20 and option to fix RSG settlement " by holding an Extraordinary Council Meeting on Thursday 13 October 2016.

       2.3. That Cabinet delegates to the Chief Executive and Leader authority to decide whether or not to accept the fixed RSG settlement.

       2.4.That Cabinet delegates to the Chief Executive and Leader authority to submit an efficiency plan to DCLG as part of any decision to accept a fixed RSG settlement.

REASON FOR REQUEST.....

Every year Full Council considers the annual budget, in detail ,at a special meeting called for  that purpose.

I believe that the Cabinet recommendations, detailed above, are an important part of this budget process .

I believe that Full Council should consider the issue of fixing RSG up until 2019/20,along with consideration of the efficiency plan attached to this deal.

The deadline for submission to DCLG is 14 October 2016  - hence the meeting on the 13 October 2016 will enable Full Council to debate fully these issues with up - to - date information.
      

 
-->