UPDATE: MEETING POSTPONED Another Harlesden gambling licence application goes to Brent Council Licensing Committee next week

 TODAY A NOTICE WENT UP ON THE BRENT COUNCIL CALENDAR TO SAY THAT THIS MEETING HAS BEEN POSTPONED. NO REASON WAS GIVEN.

 

 The Brent Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Sub-Committee, unlike other Brent committees, is busy meeting this month with two alcohol licence applications and another for a gambling licence. LINK

The latter, on Tuesday August 27th,  is interesting because the applicant, Merkul Slots, applying for a licence for 67 High Street, NW10 4NS, has been able to persuade the Brent Licensing Inspector and Brent Police to withdraw their initial opposition to the application. This has been done by their acceptance of a number of conditions. The conditions are listed here: Licensing Inspector LINK and Police LINK.

However, the Committee will also be considering objections from local councillors led by the Deputy Leader of the Council, Cllr Mili Patel, and residents:

Councillors' Objections

On behalf of the Harlesden and Kensal Green ward councillors, and also the Roundwood ward councillors, I am writing to lodge a joint objection to the application by Merkur Slots for a Bingo Club Premises Licence.

 

We object to this application because we believe it contravenes the Council’s four licencing objections:

 

1) Preventing crime and disorder

 

Harlesden is a location that is already saturated with betting shops, bingo halls and adult gaming centres. On a six-hundred-metre stretch from Craven Park Road to Harlesden High Street there is currently a total of six gambling premises, with potential for more to come. An additional adult gaming centre is not needed and would further cluster the high street.

 

Evidence has demonstrated that the public health and community safety impacts of gambling are often exacerbated in areas in which clusters of betting shops are located. This means that vulnerable residents are often targeted, anti-social behaviour is increased, and the high street is further impacted.

 

Increasing the density of Harlesden’s gambling cluster will only divert further resources from stretched policing budgets. This is why our dedicated Harlesden Police Force have objected to further gambling premises being opened whenever applications have come up.

 

2) Public Health

 

A stones-throw away from 67 High Street is a homeless shelter. The homeless charity, Crisis, have submitted objections against these types of applications. The negative social, economic, and public health impacts of gambling are well documented.

 

In the Council’s Statement of Principles for Gambling, section 4.5 outlines the importance of protecting vulnerable adults. Within the guidance a persons ‘situation’ is highlighted as needing to be considered, this includes if the individual ‘is experiencing financial difficulties, is homeless, is suffering from domestic or financial abuse, has caring responsibilities, experiences a life change or sudden change in circumstances.’

 

An additional adult gaming centre would, in our view as local representatives, put already vulnerable people at further risk. Moreover, in addition to the homeless shelter, Harlesden is an area with high levels of poverty and deprivation as identified by the Brent Poverty Commission. Granting this application would therefore undermine the Council’s efforts to safeguard vulnerable adults.

 

3) Public Safety

 

The saturation of betting shops and gambling premises also increases the likelihood of crime within the area. Harlesden High Street already has high levels of anti-social behaviour, and an additional adult gaming centre could increase this level and attract further illicit and anti-social activities.

 

A study from nearby Ealing Council explored crime and disorder in relation to gambling premises and found that: ‘as well as reported crime in betting premises being much higher than the controls, there was a clear and statistically significant increase in crime in the vicinity of betting shops, with the greatest correlations at the closest distances from the premises.’

 

We are clear that public safety in our two wards would be undermined if this application were to go through.

 

4) Protecting Children from Harm

 

Harlesden High Steet is a known area for young people to congregate, particularly after school. Whilst Merkur Slots outline that they operate a strict over-18 policy, the proliferation of gambling premises and the consistent visible exposure to them on the high street is likely to increase interest in them and potentially encourage young people to explore gambling opportunities either illegally or when they are of age.

 

We have a duty to ensure that young people are aware of the impacts of gambling. We should follow the principles of Brent’s groundbreaking policy which prevents new fast food outlets opening in close proximity to schools and also prevent gambling sites clustering in these areas.

 

We believe that, for all these reasons the application is in contravention of Brent’s licencing objectives and should be rejected by the committee.

 

Cllr Mili Patel

Deputy Leader of Brent Council

Labour Councillor for Harlesden and Kensal Green Ward

 

Residents' Objections  (There are 21 objections that can be read HERE. This is just one)

 

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to formally object to the application for a gambling licence for the premises located at 67 High Street, Harlesden on the grounds of public safety, health, and wellbeing concerns.

 

As a local resident, I have observed that our area already hosts several gambling

establishments. The saturation of such venues can contribute to several significant issues within our community. An increase in gambling establishments is often correlated with higher incidences of crime and anti-social behaviour. The concentration of such venues can attract criminal activities, including theft, fraud, and other related offenses. This increase in crime not only affects the immediate vicinity of the gambling establishments but can also extend to surrounding residential areas.

 

The presence of multiple gambling venues can compromise public safety. Frequenting these establishments, individuals might become targets of crime, or engage in behaviour that threatens the safety of others. Ensuring the well-being and security of residents should be a priority, and additional gambling venues would undermine these efforts. Moreover, gambling establishments can contribute to noise pollution, littering, and other forms of public nuisance, disrupting the peace and order of the community.

 

Gambling addiction is a serious public health issue that can have devastating effects on individuals and families. The proliferation of gambling venues exacerbates this problem, contributing to mental health issues, financial distress, and family breakdowns. Our community needs more support services and healthier recreational options, not additional gambling facilities.

 

There are several schools in our district, and the presence of a new gambling establishment poses a significant risk to young people. Exposure to gambling at a young age can lead to harmful behaviors and addiction. Ensuring that children and young persons are protected from such influences is paramount for their healthy development. With multiple schools in the vicinity, the establishment of another gambling venue is inappropriate and harmful.

 

Children should not be exposed to gambling-related activities or environments on their way to and from school, as this normalises gambling behaviour and poses a risk to their well- being.

 

In light of these points, I urge Brent Council to reject the application for a gambling licence. The potential negative impact on crime rates, public safety, health, and the welfare of young people far outweighs any benefits that such an establishment might bring.

 

Thank you for considering my objections. I trust that the council will act in the best interest of the community and its residents.

 Brent Council is currently consulting on revised guidelines for Gambling Licensing. This will be covered in a future article.

Cllr Tatler takes over as Deputy Leader of Brent Coucil while Cllr Mili Patel is on maternity leave

 

Cllr Tatler

 

 

Kingsbury councillor Shama Tatler has become Deputy Leader of Brent Council while Cllr Mili Patel is on maternity leave. Cllr Patel was congratulated on the birth of her baby at the Brent Cabinet meeting this morning. Cllr Tatler is now Deputy Leader, Cabinet Member for Finance, Resources & Reform and Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Planning & Growth.

 

At today's meeting Leader Cllr Muhammed Butt extolled the benefits of regeneration for Brent residents when the Cabinet approved Strategic CIL projects in Alperton, South Kilburn and Harlesden.

The Art of Campaigning: Furness schoolchildren say 'Time to Stop Air Pollution'

 Furness Primary children stand proudly in front of their sign (Credit: Amandine Alexandre)

 

Children at Furness Primary school had a point to make and, on Tuesday 26th April 2022, in front of a group of parents, teachers and candidates to the local elections, they made it very clearly and eloquently. 

 

The pupils of the school located in the Harlesden and Kensal Green ward unveiled the clean air artwork they have created as part of a joint Mums for Lungs and Lin Kam Art’ project. 

 

The message displayed on the artwork they created with Harlesden born artist Linett Kamala is an injunction rather than a plea : ‘Time to stop air pollution’ is the slogan Year 5 pupils chose to have across the 5 panels of their text-based artwork and is a powerful message to tackle air pollution. 

 

‘Less pollution, less driving, care for your health’, ‘Cars cause pollution, we need to find a solution', ‘We need to act now’ are some of the messages inscribed in red and black on the boards installed on Palermo road near Willesden Junction station that will get the attention of passers-by for the next weeks. 

 

The urgency to act on air pollution locally was also voiced by some of the Year 5 pupils. 

 

 

Photo: Amandine Alexandre

 

 

‘Some people such as myself suffer from asthma. (...) This can result in finding it difficult to breathe and suffering asthma attacks. We must act as a community now’, 9 year old Aya declared during the unveiling ceremony. 

 

Her fellow pupils Ahmed and Samuel also made the most of the opportunity to get their message across to Councillor Mili Patel, independent candidate Wassim Badru and Green candidate Eugenia Barnett all present at the event. ‘As our elected representatives, how do you seek to improve the quality of air in Brent?’, Ahmed enquired. 

 

Mili Patel, one of the outgoing councillors standing for re-election and a former pupil of Furness Primary, assured the children that she wanted to work with them on ways to reduce air pollution in the area. “As someone who grew up locally, now raising a family, I understand the need for better air quality in Harlesden (...)”, the Labour candidate later reiterated on Twitter. 

 

The artist Linett Kamala who led the workshops said “the project we carried out with Furness Primary school pupils made it clear that the pupils were eager to find out about the impact of air pollution on their health and make a call for action through their artwork”. Mums for Lungs clean air campaigner Amandine Alexandre commented. “They are also acutely aware that solutions exist that will reduce air pollution drastically for the sake of everyone”, the Harlesden resident and mum added. 

 

The Furness Primary school clean air art project is one of 4 school projects led by Mums for Lungs and Linett Kamala in Brent as a result of the first round of participatory budgeting, #YouDecide, organised by Brent council last January. It is one of 8 projects that Brent residents decided should benefit from the pot 2 of the Carbon Offset Fund. 

 

After the event, Eugenia Barnett,  Green candidate for Harlesden and Kensal Green told Wembley Matters:

It was a pleasure to be invited by Furness Primary school to the unveiling of clean air art work created by pupils in collaboration with Lin Kim Art and Mums for Lungs. For decades, Harlesden air pollution has been in the top 10 highest in the UK.  Imperial College  published their air pollution level report in 2021 report which marked Harlesden as the town with the highest pollution levels in the country - the nitrogen dioxide here can reach  4 times the levels approved as appropriate by WHO. At the same time, Harlesden has quite a high concentration of schools, where children perform PE outdoors. For these valid reasons, air pollution must be tackled in Harlesden and Kensal Green. We know that solutions do exist. I will lobby personally with local community groups to pressure Brent and London councils to improve the situation to ensure that our children grow up in the healthier environment. Brent Greens have endorsed Mums for Lungs' 'Five Asks.'

 

Mili Patel, David Lammy's Head of Office steps down as Brent Cabinet Member.

 

Cllr Mili Patel

David Lammy MP, Shadow Foreign Secretary

It would have been Cllr Mili Patel's last Brent Cabinet meeting this morning as it was announced to the Labour Group tonight that she is stepping down as Cabinet Member for Children's Safeguarding, Early Help and Social Care.  In fact she sent her apologies for absence.

With the local council election only 6 months away I understand her responsibilities have been mainly taken over by  Cllr Thomas Stephens already responsible as Cabinet member for Schools, Employment  and Skills. Some of  responsibilities have been transferred to Cllr Harbi Farah,  Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care.

There is speculation that the stepping down may be due to the promotion of David Lammy MP to Shadow Foreign Secretary - she is Lammy's Head of Office. Patel previously served as Senior Party Researcher (2015-2016) to Keir Starmer  MP after nearly 7 years in the same role for Frank Dobson MP.

The changes considerably strengthens the position of Cllr Stephens who is regarded by Labour colleagues as in no way lacking in ambition.

Mili Patel's partner, Cllr Matt Kelcher, continues as Chair of Brent Planning Committee.

IMPORTANT NOTE

Since publication the Kilburn Times has followed up with a statement from the Council that contradicts the allocation of roles outlined above which came from a trusted Council source:

Cllr Mili Patel, who represents Harlesden, has departed the authority's top table and her 'safeguarding' portfolio will be filled by deputy leader Margaret McLennan.

A bounce back email from Cllr Patel states that she is taking maternity leave.

A Brent Council spokesman said: "Councillor Mili Patel has stepped down from her cabinet role to take time out. Deputy leader, Councillor Margaret McLennan, will take over the portfolio.”

Should Cllr Butt follow Haringey leader on school re-openings?

As a press campaign, led by the Daily Mail, builds against teacher unions it is time that we saw some leadership in Brent.

Brent has many similarities with Haringey and in particular faces the disproportionate impact on BAME communities of the coronavirus.

Headteachers, school staff and parents are naturally anxious so it is important that they hear from the leader of the Council, Muhammed Butt;  the lead member for Schools Employment & Skills, Amer Agha; and Mili Patel, lead member for Children's Safeguarding, Early Help and Social Care.

Schools are grappling with demands from the government that could go very wrong and cause unnecessary illness or death - they deserve more than silence.

Scrutiny decides NOT to refer Alternative Provision Free School proposal back to Cabinet

Cllr Jumbo Chan presents the reasons for the call-in

There were only two dissenting votes on Brent Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee this evening when the Committee decided not to refer the proposed Alternative Provision Free School back to Cabinet.  This means the Council will go ahead and seek sponsors for the school despite official opposition from the Labour Party to the creation of any more free schools or academies. There may be a little token consultation along the way but this will not be about the principle of free school provision.

It was always going to be a difficult case to argue because of the ramifications of government legislation that (absurdly) prevents local authorities setting up new schools when they are needed. New schools have to be either a free school or an academy - both outside local authority oversight.

There is a possibility of setting provision up as part of a local authority school - rather than a new school, rather as Leopold Primary opened another site in Harlesden. However all secondary schools in Brent are either academies or voluntary aided schools so the only local authority schools left are primary.  The Chair of the Committee, Cllr Ketan Sheth, raised doubts about whether a primary school could cater for older pupils, a point denounced as patronising by Jean Roberts of the NEU when she was eventually allowed to speak having had her hand up for a long time.

Strategic Director of Children and Young People, Gail Tolley, told Cllr Jumbo Chan that she had raised with secondary school heads the possibility of them taking on the alternative provision but they had not been interested. Those recognised by the DfE as able to set up a free school could still apply during the procurement process. Cllr Chan said that an informal discussion was not sufficient and requested evidence of a formal consultation.  Union representatives protested that they had not been consulted as educational professionals on the Council's proposal.

In answer to claims that the secondary schools would welcome such provision Jean Roberts said it was these very schools, academies and free schools in the borough, that were excluding the pupils who will end up in the alternative provision.  There was a discussion among educational professionals after the meeting about the danger that the provision may end up as a 'sin bin' with disproportionate numbers of black pupils as happened with Units for Disruptive Children in the 80s. 

Simone Aspis, (see separate post below) had argued that outcomes of Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) and Special Schools were poorer than for similar children integrated with support into mainstream.  There is a concern currently from Ofsted about the 'off-rolling' LINK of pupils by secondary schools. This is done so that the pupils are not counted in examination statistics thereby improving the school's league table position.

Will the existence of this provision mean that secondary schools will be tempted to off-roll or exclude even more children? (Recently a suggestion has been made that excluded pupils should be included in the excluding school's examination results to reduce the incentive to exclude.)

Will the unintended consequence of the Council decision be that a disproportionate number of black pupils will be sent to the provision - there is already a disproportion in those sent outside the borough to alternative provision? How does that sit with the principle of inclusion and Brent Council's current project to improve the educational attainment of Black Caribbean boys?

Cllr Mili Patel, argued that the Council has set out the condition that any provider would have to include a council representative and a secondary school representative on the trustees board.  She claimed it would be more accountable than academy boards who have no local authority representation. Furthermore Gail Tolley argued that because these were vulnerable pupils the authority did have powers to intervene as it had a safeguarding duty for all children in the borough regardless of the type of provision.

Asked what would happen if the authority was not satisfied with the performance of the provider Cllr Patel said that the contract could be terminated. One councillor rightly asked, 'what will happen to the children in the event of termination?'

One feature of the hearing was that three out of the six representations made at Committee were from the Young Brent Foundation, a registered charity LINK that claims to support 122 Brent young people's projects. They were led by their new CEO Chris Murray, who called on the committee to 'force through' the Cabinet's proposal.  The YBF was set up by Brent Council after they closed the Youth Service. They help voluntary organisation find funding as a replacement for council funded youth provision. It is largely funded itself through the John Lyon's Trust, the charity arm of Harrow public school. LINK

When it was set up it was emphasised that the Foundation itself would not directly provide youth services but would help others to do so.

Their contributions focused on the benefits of the wrap around youth provision proposed for Roundwood now that the free school will pick up the bill for the maintenance of the site itself via a separate funding stream. They  paid little attention to the reason for the call-in, which was not to oppose youth provision, but to ensure the quality and accountability of the alternative provision.

CONSULTATION

I submitted a Freedom of Information request to Brent Council regarding consultation on the proposal for Roundwood Centre and am still awaiting a response:

The Cabinet is making a decision on the future use of the Roundwood Centre at its meeting on April 15th including alternative provision via a free school sponsor and youth work.

The Cabinet paper lists the followign consultations:

"9.1 The council has consulted with young people at Roundwood Youth Centre (including young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities), council staff and other stakeholders on the proposed Alternative Provision schools and Youth Offer. See time-line below:
 Youth Offer consultation with Brent Youth Parliament, January 2018;
 Youth Offer consultation with Youth Offending Service, February 2018;
 Design of the Youth Offer site (Hackathon), March 2018;
 Consultation with Roundwood Youth Centre (RYC) staff about budget
proposals and changes to delivery at RYC, October 2018;
 Feedback on Youth Offer final design, October 2018;
 Children’s Commissioner takeover day (re Youth Offer), November 2018.
 Consultation with RYC service users, January 2019;
 Consultation with RYC service providers, January 2019;

Young people’s views have been sought from the Roundwood Youth Centre as well as from Brent Youth Parliament, Care in Action / Care Leavers in Action and other young people’s focus groups (as above). Young people were also previously consulted as part of the Council’s Outcome Based Reviews related to Gangs and Children on the Edge of Care, which have fed into proposals."

However there is no report on the outcomes of these consultations. Please supply all available reports/minutes on the above consultations before the Cabinet meeting.

SAFER KIDS: Brent parents launch petition to local politicans calling for immediate action on 'daily threats' their children face

Local people have launched a petition demanding that Brent's three MPs  and local councillors  act quickly to ensure that

We demand immediate solutions to the daily threat our children face through:

·      More police/security details patrolling the Kensal Green, Kensal Rise, Queens Park and Harlesden area, especially at key points in the day

·      More CCTV in key locations

·      The creation of a positive action network consisting of schools, residents and local businesses that raises awareness and encourages positive, social behaviour within the community.

We also demand long-term solutions such as investment in local youth centres and helping the youth committing these crimes to become part of the community, rather than fighting against it.

Why is this important?

We the undersigned residents of Brent demand our streets be made safe for our children. We are writing to you to demand you immediately address the radical increase in muggings and assaults on children in our local area. Lawlessness is rampant and impunity is now rife in our neighbourhood. Our streets feel like the Wild West - anything goes, and no one can do a thing about it.

Muggings and assaults on children are now occurring daily, often between 2pm and 7pm on the peripheries of schools, in parks and around the Chamberlayne Rd area. These crimes are committed by youth, at times in balaclavas, often using knives, sometimes using steel bars as a threat, other times using direct violent assault - and all this in broad daylight.

In the cases where adults have tried to intervene, they too have been violently assaulted. One parent was recently punched in the head in Roundwood Park numerous times in front of his son, and another parent had a plank of wood smashed into his face, loosing several teeth in the Queens Park area - also in front of his children.

Sadly, many cases go unreported as the victims are fearful if they tell, they could be putting themselves in more danger. Moreover, parents at times fear nothing will be done as the police rarely turn up, or if they do it’s 30 minutes late, when the perpetrators are long gone.

At an age when our children should be cherishing a newfound independence, they now have to fear for their safety. They must ask themselves: Will I be attacked on the way home from school today? Is it safe to take my phone? Do I have to walk in a big group to be safe? What should I do if I get assaulted? Will they knife me?

No child should have to ask him or herself these questions. We want our children to:

- be able to walk to school and home from it
- go the the park/skatepark
- walk to a friend’s house
- go to the corner shop
- catch a bus/ the tube etc...

without having to worry that they will be assaulted or mugged.

The effect of daily fear in these young minds, if not addressed, is likely to lead to a dramatic increase in anxiety, depression and isolation in our local community.

May we remind you, in 1991 the UK signed the Convention on the Rights of the Child, one of the nine core UN human rights treaties. The CRC protects the rights of children in all areas of their life, including their rights to “freedom from violence, abuse and neglect”.

It is tragic that almost three decades later, in this supposedly civilised society, our children are not protected from violence or abuse in their very own neighbourhood.

It is tragic, that due to austerity, our society is now one in which crime is rampant, impunity rife and our children - our future - are the ones having to suffer the devastating consequences.

It is tragic that they must now live in fear in their own community.

We demand you make our streets safe for our children. We demand action and we demand it now.

Yours sincerely,
AC Collet on behalf of Safer Kids

LINK TO PETITION

UPDATE: Responding to a request for a comment by Wembley Matters, Cllr Tom Miller, lead member for community safety said:

We are broadly sympathetic to the aims of the petition and I've offered to meet with the organisers and anybody they would like to join with them.

VIDEO: Butt lashed over Brent Labour Council's decision to set up a Free School

Brent Cabinet faced angry criticism tonight when it approved the setting up of a Free School offering 'alternative provision' for children rejected by local secondary schools.

Local Labour Party member Graham Durham lambasted Cllr Muhammed Butt, Labour leader of Brent Council, for not following Labour Party policy which he claimed is against the creation of any more free schools.

Cllr Mili Patel read a statement in a barely audible voice about the proposal but rather than focusing on the creation of a free school focused on the youth provision that would be offered outside of school hours by the voluntary sector.  There will be no directly employed Brent Council youth workers but building maintance costs and school hours running  costs will be paid by the Free School.

Durham said that rather than a Free School the Council could have asked a local mainstream secondary school to run the facility for out of school children. All Brent former local authority secondary schools are now academies as are all but one special school. The majority of Brent's academies are stand-alone rather than part of a chain.

Guardian on Labour Party education policy LINK

Later Graham Durham claimed on Facebook that the Brent CEO left the meeting to accost him after the item was discussed:

What made the event unusual was that as I was outside and walking away from the meeting outside in a corridor,  I was cornered by the Chief Executive ( supposedly non-political) who called me ‘ a vile little man’. I had never met her before but she clearly does not like ‘her’ councillors receiving independent socialist advice. Odd.

Mili Patel accuses Cllr Warren of abusing his position, fueling fear and intimidating nursery

If the last Full Brent Council meeting was a curtain raiser was the May local elections it looks as if things are likely to get pretty nasty.

Cllr Mili Patel, lead member for children and families, is not well known for speaking at council meetings, but used the presentation of a petition about the College Green open space to launch an excoriating attack on Cllr John Warren, leader of the Conservative group.

College Green is, after all,  in Warren's ward and he had made a speech in support of residents after Jim Hogan had spoken to the petition. Cllr Warren said that residents felt they had welcomed the College Green Nursery School into the open space but it now seemed to them that the nursery was stabbing them in the back by wanting to erect a  screen around the open space. He said residents hadn't wanted to set up a petition but the nursery had refused to engage with them about the issue. The petition had been a last resort. In a conciliatory tone he asked for Mili Patel to agree to a meeting between the scouts who use the open space, the nursery and the College Green Preservation Society to resolve the issue as residents felt that this was a potential land grab. Residents didn't want a 'Berlin Wall' around the space. He asked that in her response Cllr Patel constructively engage so that residents fears could be put to rest.

Cllr Patel responded by justifying the fence on safeguarding grounds  and claiming that the council had engaged with residents but they and the Preservation Society had not attended the last meeting about the positioning of the fence. The issue was now that of the screening off of the area.

She then went on:

However the agenda for Cllr Warren was to bring it full Council rather than having a meeting outside. Brent Labour takes its responsibility for safeguarding very seriously. We know from previous comments that you see safeguarding as 'crumbs'. You are taking the opportunity to take advantage of the impending local elections, perhaps you're running scared. I ask you to stop abusing your position and fuelling the residents with fear and also the College Green Nursery with intimidation and actually working with your community and get the group together.

More calmly she agreed with Warren that they could get the group together and organise a meeting.

A somewhat stunned Cllr Warren pointed out that he had never said he regarded safeguarding as 'crumbs.'

Cllr Patel by concentrating her attack on Cllr Warren failed to address the issues that Jim Hogan of College Green Preservation Society had made in a cogent speech. He said the open space had been there for more than 100 years and enjoyed by the scouts for 50 years. In 1995 they had supported a nursery (now College Green Nursery School) moving on to the open space to preserve it. A 6ft 8inch fence had been erected around the open space by the nursery and they then fixed a screen around the perimeter of the fence - residents had got them to remove the screen.

Hogan said residents were vehemently opposed to any attempt to screen off the space and wanted the council to make an agreement that this would not be done. Hogan said that a screen would run counter to the council's own guidelines and cited:

• reduction of the sight lines of pedestrians crossing the busy junction
• impact of the loss of outlook by residents
• traffic safety
• effect on pedestrians
• effect on the character of a protected area
• effect on open spaces and nature conservation

The 1913 legal Covenant  made by All Souls college should be respected.  In the past there were real greens at Willesden Green, Kensal green and even Harlesden Green, that had been fenced, screened off and built on.  He went on:

Let's not let that happen at College Green.  The nursery refused to meet residents to discuss their concerns. Let College Green Nursery School show some respect for their neighbours. Let us enjoy the view of the open space which has never been part of their property. Let's get an agreement signed by Brent Council preventing the screening of the open space. It won;t cost the council a penny. We don't want to have to start another petition after waking up to find a screen has been put up around the open space.

There are very few open spaces left in Brent and they are constantly under attack. Most of our front gardens have disappeared as a result of off-street parking. Our open space contributes to the well-being of local residents.

We want to walk around College Green to enjoy looking at the sun going down behind the magnificent oak tree planted by the scouts in 1967. We want to watch the crows, foxes etc.

What is the meaning of community? We don't want College Green hidden from our view or stolen from us. We want to enjoy it. A simple agreement between the scouts, the nursery school and Brent Council.

 Let's hope that the upcoming election does not stop this issue being resolved.

Cllr Mili Patel breaks silence on The Village School academisation

Cllr Mili Patel

Cllr Mili Patel, Brent Cabinet member for Children and Young People, yesterday broke her silence regarding the proposed academisation, via a Multi-Academy Trust, of The Village School. The MAT would consist of The Village and Woodfield School, which is already an academy. The other Brent special school, Manor, is also an academy. The three schools are involved in a project to set up a free school together.

If academisation were to go ahead it would mean special education in Brent was outside local authority oversight.

In a statement to the Morning Star yesterday she said:

The Village School and Woodfield School have worked in partnership for some time.

The education policies of the Tory government - including a 2.7billion cut to the schools budget and barriers to schools partnering up in any way that doesn't involve them becoming academies - have led to the Village School governors considering joining the same multi-academy trust as Woodfield. This is something most of the governors themselves would tell you they never thought they would be considering.

As a Labour Council we do not want them to take this step and I have been working hard to demonstrate the advantages of staying within the Brent school of families [sic 'family of schools'] to its governors.

It is encouraging the governors have taken this important decision out to consultation which will give local people the chance to demonstrate the strength of feeling there is in Brent against these plans.

Butt backs out of Village School consultation meeting and asks for strike action to be called off

There was disappointment and anger last night at The Village School when Brent Council leader did not show up for the consultation meeting about proposals that the school academise in order to become a Multi Academy Trust with Woodfield School.

At the lobby earlier this year Cllr Butt and lead member for children and families, Cllr Mili Patel, had been asked to make a strong and clear statement of opposition to the proposal. Both Brent Central and Brent North CLPs have passed unananimous motions against academisation.

Instead of appearing at the meeting and taking questions, Cllr Butt instead chose to write today to all members of staff about the issue. The position he takes on academisation is weaker than that requested by his own Labour Party members.  He expresses a preference for local authority oversight of schools but appears to believe that The Village has no choice. He also takes a traditional right-wing position on teacher strikes claiming that they 'punish' families and children for government policies and calling for next week's three day strike to be called off.

The letter requires close textual analysis to establish Butt's exact position and even then...

-->

POTENTIAL TO ESTABLISH A MULTI ACADEMY TRUST

I know there’s some concern and uncertainty about what’s going on so I thought it might help if I set out my position . First of all, I am opposed to the forced academisation of schools and find it deeply regrettable that TVS has been put in a situation with such limited options. 

Responsibility for this rests with government and government alone. That said, circumstances being what they are, I recognise why a formal relationship with Woodfield is a positive thing . I see why, in the present legislative context and financial climate, both schools feel that an official partnership would be in their best interests. And, while forming a MAT may well produce tangible education al benefits, as well as economies of scale, its main purpose will be increasing the likelihood of sustaining both schools’ outstanding status. 

TVS is a fantastic school, there’s no doubt about that – in fact, I’m not sure ‘outstanding’ does it justice. As I see it, its success is a product of all involved being so dedicated to what they do and so determined to ensure every student has every opportunity to realise their fullest potential. My belief is that the school’s greatest asset is this collective strength and I have no reason to suspect this will change as a result of formalising the partnership. 

As Leader of the Council in a time of austerity I know only too well the essential nature of closer collaboration. As a proud trade unionist , I will always champion the enormous value of collective bargaining . Being able to speak with a single, unified voice is a powerful thing and one of the many reasons I welcomed the NUT and ATL teachers ’ unions’ decision to join forces and create the NEU. And, as a member of the Labour Party, I hold on to the central tenet that , by the strength of our common endeavour , we achieve more than we achieve alone. On that basis, I cannot in good conscience seek to deny TVS and Woodfield the same opportunity for sustainable partnership. 

 Of course, I’d much prefer that responsibility for overseeing our schools remain devolved to local government. I think local people are best placed to understand local needs. Equally , I’m not sure that the Secretary of State , the Department for Education , or the Regional School Commissioner have the capacity for nuanced management of what, as a result of this government’s actions , is an unhelpfully centralised and drastically underfunded education system. 

I have said previously that my priority is the best possible educational outcomes for children and young people . What I should have also said is that those outcomes are best served, and can only be assured, by retaining a happy, motivated, stable workforce. I know that TVS is ordinarily a very happy, very special place to work. I also know there are genuinely held concerns that becoming an academy will mean that’s no longer the case. With that in mind, I think it necessary to challenge the suggestion that these proposals will have a detrimental impact . I also need to address claims that, even if a suitable deal can be agreed, any such agreement cannot be guaranteed in perpetuity 

-->

On the first point, I welcome the school’s pledge to ‘embed core principles’ in a legally binding agreement. This includes an explicit public commitment to abide by national terms and conditions for all existing and future teaching staff and local terms and conditions for all existing and future support staff. This process has the added advantage of being based on an existing Trustees Agreement – drafted in concert with NUT reps – that enabled Manor to convert to academy status and join BSAT without objection last year. On the second, to provide maximum possible certainty, a range of protections will be built into the agreement. This has been described as a ‘triple lock’ but may actually include as many as five provisions designed to make it impossible for fundamental changes to be made in the future by Trustees or Governors without undergoing rigorous public scrutiny or a substantial majority on any relevant vote. 

I’m aware that the NEU have requested a temporary halt to the consultation to try and find an alternative solution . Given how long this matter has been under discussion, and given how closely involved union reps have been throughout , were there another way forward, it surely would have presented itself by now. Again, I wish there was a way for TVS and Woodfield to protect their relationship without having to academise . But , as things stand, there isn’t. With that in mind, the responsible thing to do now is work together and ensure as robust and informed a decision as possible is made.

Furthermore, I think it would be a grave mistake to punish these children and their families for government policies to which we are ideologically opposed. Similarly, I know how hard a personal decision it is to take industrial action, especially when it disrupts the lives of people we care about. And I doubt anyone relishes the prospect of three days’ without pay. I ask then that any further strike action be called off and that those involved instead continue to engage fully in the consultation, ensuring that everyone’s views are made clear. 

As I’ve said, the Labour Party, the Council, and the teachers unions all recognise, value, and benefit from the enormous power of formal partnerships. On that basis , whatever our views on the mechanism, we should all be able to understand and accept the rationale for these outstanding schools doing the same. 

Thank you for taking the time to consider my thoughts – do please get in touch and let me know what you think.

Brent Labour Group fail to make clear stand against academisation of The Village School

Forty or so people turned up this evening at Brent Civic Centre to lobby the Labour Group regarding the governing body of The Village School  move to convert to academy status.

The school's Chair of Governors is Sandra Kabir a senior Labour councillor and chief whip of the group.

Phil Pardoe, NEU Regional Official, said the pre-lobby meeting with Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of the Council and Cllr Mili Patel, lead member for children and families had been positive. They had said they could tell parents at consultation meetings that the Council would prefer the school not to academise. Pardoe said that the impact of this was unclear but that pressure needed to be exerted on chair of Governors Cllr Sandra Kabir, a key proponent of the academy bid.

Cllr Jumbo Chan reiterated his opposition to what he called Tory policy on academies and free schools and said that he would try and persuade the Labour Group to express their outright opposition to academisation in line with Labour Party policy.

At the Group meeting  that followed Cllr Kabir adopted a contorted position of supporting and promoting academisation while at the same time claiming she did not want that outcome.  Cllr Butt claimed his first preference was to keep local control of the school and academisation was a last resort but he stopped short of saying the Council would oppose The Village School academisation.

Cllrs Mashari, Miller and Long asked sceptical questions about academisation and Cllr Jumbo Chan and observer Michael Calderbank  opposed.

Cllrs Mili Patel, Shama Tatler andAslam Choudry adopted the position of not liking academisation but said the Council had no choice.

The upshot, rather than a firm decision to state Labour Group opposition, was that the matter would be referred to Scrutiny Committee and that Butt would write to The Village School governors asking them to explore the viability of staying in the 'Brent family of schools'.

Brent Council urges parents to respond to government consultation on school funding

From Brent Council today

Parents, schools and Brent Council are uniting to defend local school children following Government plans to cut funding to local schools by £2.2 million.

The proposed cuts - which would see local schools lose two per cent of their budgets overall and equate to £105 per pupil - are a result of the government's National Funding Formula. Overall, schools in London are set to lose £19million.

As around 80 per cent of a school's budget is spent on staff salaries, funding reductions are likely to result in fewer teachers and support staff posts in schools, as well as increased class sizes. This is significant because top quality teachers who are motivated and highly skilled are the main reason that children make progress and achieve good results in their education.

Cllr Mili Patel, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, said:

In recent years, schools in Brent have made great strides. We have gone from 78 per cent of schools in the Borough rated as 'Good' or 'Outstanding' by Ofsted, to 96 per cent currently. Our primary school, GCSE and A Level results are all above the national averages and we are in the middle of an ambitious school build programme to ensure that every child in Brent has access to a good local school place.

All of these things are absolutely fantastic and a result of the tireless hard work and dedication that our senior leaders, teachers, support staff and governors in Brent put in every single day. But we need the teachers and schools' staff in the first place and this is only possible thanks to the sustained investment over many years.

Fewer teachers and bigger class sizes will do nothing to help our school children thrive - especially in a hugely diverse borough like Brent where pupils come from a huge range of different backgrounds. This is why we, at Brent Council, will do everything we can to support our schools.

 If you are a parent of a school age child, the Government's current plans will see nearly £105 a year taken away from your child's education. I would urge all of our parents and carers in Brent to respond to the Department for Education's consultation and let them know what you think.

ENDS
 

What to do if you would like to know more or share your views

Have your say: You can submit your views to the government consultation about the NFF online at: https://consult.education.gov.uk/funding-policy-unit/schools-national-funding-formula2/which is open until 22 March 2017.

These are  suggested responses to certain questons as set out below. 

·       Q1: In designing our national funding formula, we have taken careful steps to balance the principles of fairness and stability. Do you think we have struck the right balance?

·         The proposals do not provide enough financial stability for schools. All Primary schools in Brent stand to lose significant amounts of funding, and all schools are experiencing rising costs.

·         There is no evidence that schools can manage the funding reductions whilst maintaining or improving performance levels.

·         Additional funding should be allocated to prevent cash losses to individual schools.

·       Q2: Do you support our proposal to set the primary to secondary ratio in line with the current national average of 1:1.29, which means that pupils in the secondary phase are funded overall 29% higher than pupils in the primary phase?

·         Locally in Brent the proposals mean moving away from this national average resulting in primary schools losing funding.

·         The Department for Education should look again at the impact of the national formula on London primary schools.

·       Q7. Do you agree with the proposed lump sum amount of £110,000 for all schools?

·         Small school funding is not just a rural issue.  Smaller primary schools, including faith schools, serve their community but can not always expand as physical space is an issue in London.  Smaller primary schools should receive additional funding.

·       Q14. Are there further considerations we should be taking into account about the proposed schools national funding formula?

·         The school national funding formula should be considered alongside the Pupil Premium funding.  We believe that an area cost adjustment should also be applied to the Pupil Premium to reflect higher costs in London.

·         Many of the cost pressures facing schools are the direct result of government policy, such as changes to national insurance and pension contributions, and the introduction of the Apprenticehip Levy. Any action the government can take to ease these cost pressures would make the introduction of a fair funding formula less challenging.