Letter: Paddington Old Cemetery-why we think Brent is acting in an opaque and undemocratic manner

 Dear Editor

 

I writing to share our bitter disappointment in Brent Council’s decision to instruct dog owners to keep their dogs on a lead in Paddington Old Cemetery (POC) and our belief that Brent is acting in an opaque and undemocratic manner, justifying their decisions with 'fake news’.

The consultation was a fiasco from the outset, with biased questions including options like ‘do you agree/disagree that dogs should be allowed to defecate on graves?’

 

We engaged with the process and contributed to the consultation, but it has been ignored, and POC’s PSOP exemption allowing off lead walking has now been removed.  

 

Brent claim that:

- Complaints have increased to 74 last year but they refuse to tell us how many individuals this includes. For example, through an FOI request we know that when there were 65 complaints, in November 2024, 11 were individual complainants making multiple complaints

 

- They claim they are working for the community yet even in their own consultation, the majority of respondents wanted to keep off-lead walking (61% vs not 39% see chart below) and they have ignored the survey evidence that we make POC safer because of the daily, year-round, rain or shine, presence of dog walkers. We were supported by the local school (Salusbury Primary School whose green space is in POC) because a thriving dog walking community has made the space safer for children.  We have also shown that women walking alone feel safer because it’s alway busy with people enjoying the space  from the local community  (unlike all the other cemeteries in Brent where there are  hardly any people walking around).

 

 

- They are also ignoring the fact that people will be forced to drive to other places to exercise their dogs. Their two alternatives are not realistic - Tiverton Green is very small with multiple open gates, and Paddington Recreation Ground is already busy enough. 

- They have rejected the idea that the poo on graves could possibly be from foxes on the basis that there is ‘no evidence’ for that despite it being more in keeping with fox behaviour to poo on an actual grave.

 

Brent is offering to consult on a fenced off off-lead walking area, but this could cause more problems for the homeowners on Tennyson Road where they are thinking of doing this. And could have more negative impacts on dog behaviour. They are also offering to set up a 'Paddington Old Cemetery Liaison Committee' which will include DOPOC (Dogs of Paddington old Cemetery). We have been asking for engagement from the very beginning and they have ignored us. That’s why we think this might be performative.  

 

They are simply not being honest with the community. Peter Gadsdon (Head of Cemeteries) who has just retired took control of POC in 2022 when it was taken away from ‘Parks’ with a ‘dig baby dig’ plan agreed with Mo Butt. 

 

There is no more than c.125 available burial sites left at POC so the only way they can achieve this is by building multiple new mounds even though they have many other cemeteries in Brent which do not serve the wider community and the local school like POC. These are traditional cemeteries with few visitors beyond funerals and a handful of mourners a week. Is this  Brent's real pan for POC?

 

 In doing so they are taking away a valuable green community space in a very built-up area. They simply do not see the community and environmental value in all this. They have never understood POC or care that by destroying this precious green space it will have an enormous negative impact  on the whole community - not dogs.

 

Chair, DOPOC (Dogs of Paddington Old Cemetery)

 

Letter: Brent Council is using heavily biased language in its Paddington Old Cemetery dog PSPO consultation - what are their real plans?

 Dear Editor,

The leader of Brent Council Muhammed Butt and his Cabinet have been accused of “treating voters with contempt” and “turning neighbours against each other” in Kilburn, with a completely farcical ‘consultation’ aimed at banning dogs being walked off leash in one of the few green spaces in that part of Brent. 

Paddington Old Cemetery – a Grade II listed historic green space and graveyard - which was landscaped by Westminster Council in the 1980s – has been an increasingly popular location for dog owners (who make up nearly half of the local population based on London dog ownership figures) in recent years. The cemetery is a wonderful open space for local residents walking their dogs. There are large spaces with no graves where dogs can exercise without troubling anyone.

It is also a vital source of bio-diversity, with many rare species living there as well as thriving bee hives. Growing visitor numbers have driven away the drug dealers who used to plague the cemetery, and residents living nearby say that dog walkers have made their homes safer.  

Things changed when management of the cemetery passed from Brent’s Parks Department to the Cemeteries team, who seem determined to extract as much money from the site as they can, regardless of the consequences to the community. Getting rid of dogs completely is being seen as the first step in that process. 

Brent has amended its borough-wide Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) to force dogs to be on the leash in the cemetery without discussing it with community groups, and without telling anyone until two weeks before it was due to take effect on 1 October. Following a strong push-back from local residents, Cllr Butt announced an eleventh-hour u-turn and paused the implementation of the new regulations pending a consultation. Nearly 450 residents have signed an ePetition calling on Brent to ensure that this consultation is “fair, open, transparent and balanced”.

However, those hopes were dashed when the Brent Council’s survey went live last Friday. Marketing expert, dog owner and founder of the group Dogs of Paddington Old Cemetery (DoPOC) Eleni Chalmers described it as “one of the worst surveys I have ever seen in my life”. 

Chalmers said: “The questions are leading and designed to gather evidence to support removing the freedom of off-lead dog walking in the cemetery, rather than being an authentic request for community input. The survey options are unbalanced and the language is loaded, such as options to ‘agree' with ‘dogs urinating and defecating on graves’. Most questions have a simple default option of ‘I don’t agree with dogs in the cemetery’. Further outrage has been caused by Brent’s edict that only one person in a household can fill in the survey and barring anyone who responded to the first after it was amended in the middle of the consultation. It simply breaks all rules of effective research.  It’s clearly designed to get the outcome Brent wants - which is to remove all access to this rare community green space to dog owners.” 

Brent has now taken the unprecedented step of sending letters by first-class post to residents in Kilburn and Queen’s Park to publicise the survey. This letter again uses loaded, heavily biased language, talking about increasing complaints about dogs “causing distress to visitors” and “causing disturbance to burial services” without providing any evidence to support this. 

Residents have been left wondering what the cost of this exercise has been to a borough that consistently pleads poverty and has cut street cleaning in Kilburn to the minimum.

“This was a missed opportunity to have a genuine dialogue with all cemetery users about how to manage the increasing popularity of the cemetery,” said Cordelia Uys, a local dog owner and DPOC member. 

“Responsible dog owners recognise that there are things we need to do to ensure that dogs and people visiting graves can co-exist, like reducing the number of dogs professional walkers can bring in and stopping people driving long distances to the cemetery to exercise dogs. This is what the consultation should have explored. Instead, they are using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.”

Chris Maggs walks her dog daily in the cemetery and also visits the graves of her great-grandparents there.

Maggs said: “It’s also important to remember that nearly half of the people who visit graves own dogs themselves and they often want to bring their pets with them. It’s simply false to try to pretend that dog owners and grave visitors are two completely different sets of people”

Brent’s Cemeteries team hit the headlines a few years ago when they dumped asbestos-ridden waste in the cemetery in a bid to create an artificial-raised section in which to dig new graves. [Editor: See LINK] As a result of the delays to that project they allowed the use of destroyed historic paths, and other unused areas in the cemetery, for burials. Michael Bond, the creator of Paddington Bear, is buried in one such pathway area and his tombstone is already leaning. After heavy rainfall his grave is often left temporarily underwater. 

Why are Brent pursuing this path for a green space that is full to capacity with an estimated 200,000 bodies in marked and unmarked graves? Residents and visitors to the cemetery strongly suspect that once dogs are banned, the Council’s next step will be to investigate whether it can dig-up old graves and re-sell the plots. 

Local residents including the Friends of Paddington Old Cemetery (FoPOC) and its dog loving counterpart DoPOC, want a permanent joint consultation committee with Brent on the future of POC in order to save it - for all members of the community.

 

Brent resident and dog owner

 

 

Brent Council consultation on varying the PSPO regarding dogs in Paddingon Old Cemetery following complaints

 

From Brent Council

Dogs in Paddington Old Cemetery Consultation

Have your say – dogs in Paddington Old Cemetery

The Consultation

Brent Council has received complaints relating to dog behaviour in Paddington Old Cemetery, located in Willesden Lane NW6 and we are seeking your views on the rules that currently apply under our Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO).

Paddington Old Cemetery is one of four Brent cemeteries and the only one that allows dogs. The cemetery itself is a working cemetery with a number of burials taking place every year.

What is a PSPO

Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPOs) are a legal measure aimed at preventing nuisance in public areas, with the aim of maintaining public safety and improving the quality of life for residents and visitors. They work by imposing conditions on the use of that area that apply to everyone.

Have your say

We are now consulting on varying the PSPO to address the complaints we are receiving about the behaviour of dogs in Paddington Old Cemetery. We are keen to hear from the local community to help us understand what rules should apply.

Please submit one questionnaire per household. If more than one response is received from the same household, only the first response will be considered as part of the consultation.

This consultation will open from Friday 18th October 2024 to Tuesday 10th December.

For further information on the consultation and FAQs please click here

You can email the Cemeteries team for more information cemeteries@brent.gov.uk

 

The consultation opened onf Friday 18th October and closes on Tursday 10th December 2024. Link to consultation survey  HERE

Brent Council Cabinet confirms megaphone protection order will not limit/affect protests

 

Jonathan Fluxman spoke at today's Cabinet Meeting about Brent Trades Council's concerns  LINK that proposed Brent-wide Public Space Protection Orders (PSPO ) prohibitions on the use of megaphones and amplified microphones would curb the free speech rights of political campaigners and protestors.

 

Fluxman said that in the present form in which the prohibition was framed there was no exemption for such protests, He went on to criticise what he termed a 'flawed consultation and said that Brent Trades Council should have been directly consulted on this aspect of the PSPO proposal.

 

Commenting on the meeting he said:

 

We were pleased to hear several reassurances from Cllr Butt that the PSPO is not intended to limit protest.  My comments are now on record.   I said in its present form there is no exemption, and we would like to see the wording of the exemption to ensure our rights to protest are protected.  Cllr Butt said everything would be minuted and the right to protest would not be restricted: the right to protest is protected in law.

 

He also said we would be added as stakeholders in future, and indicated to the officers  that they should do so.

 

We do need to ensure that the wording of the PSPO is clear when it is published, but it is all minuted, and the Cabinet were clear that the our fundamental rights to demonstrate will not be limited. 

 

 

UPDATE: Brent megaphone ban could undermine the right to free speech and protest

 

Megaphones in use at Saturday's Renters Protest and yesterday's Living Wage action by Brent Citizens

 

There have rightly been concerns expressed in the labour movement and amongst campaign groups about Conservative government plans to restrict public protests, including provisions around noise nuisance LINK.

Unfortunately proposals by Brent's Labour Council, perhaps inadvertently, could potentially impose limits on protest by prohibiting the use of megaphones or amplified microphones across the borough.

The Cabinet on Monday will be considering a long list of prohibitions under Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs) that includes the following:

Prohibition 8: Use of megaphone or microphone with speaker

It is an offence to use loudspeakers for any purpose in the street at night between 9pm and 8am under S62 of The Control of Pollution Act 1974. Further, it is an offence to use loudspeakers at any time for advertising any entertainment, trade or business.

Exceptions when a loud speaker can be used are in emergencies, as a public address system or if Council gives consent. In an emergency loud speakers can be used by the police, fire brigade, ambulance service, environment agency, water and sewage companies or public transport companies.

However, there have been several instances when individuals come to Brent with their loudspeakers to preach sermons and advertise their services. This is common in High Road, Wembley, Wembley Park on event days and Kilburn High Road. This causes significant distress to local residents when this practice continues for hours on end and prevents them from enjoying the use of their own communities/homes. It also causes a nuisance to those that are using the same public space, as they can feel harassed by the noise. Therefore, a prohibition is sought to address the nuisance in the use of loudspeakers.

The following is feedback from the evidence gathering exercise and consultation:

In the proposed PSPO Order this is reduced to (they appear to have megaphone and microphone round the wrong way):

8. Use of megaphone or microphone with speaker

Any persons that uses a microphone or megaphone with a speakers without the written authorisation from the landowner and/or the London Borough of Brent

 

In previous versions of PSPOs regarding distribution of literature we have sought exemptions for political literature protecting the democratic right to free speech. This is recognised in the Order:

10.  Distribution of free literature

Any person who distributes free literature which includes leaflets, the giveaway of free items/samples etc. without authorisation from the London Borough of Brent. The following are exempt;

a. Political, charitable and religious purposes but must not obstruct the public highway

The right to protest and make our voices heard as campaigners, trade unionists or other activists using a megaphone should be similarly protected. In the current political situation with action by many trade unionists it is essential that our right to protest, including the use of megaphones is not restricted.

As a footnote is is worth noting that Quintain have agreed that Brent will be able to enforce prohibitions on its private estate around Wembley Stadium, including Olympic Way.  I have asked Brent Council officers whether this means that political literature can now be distributed. Hithertoo we have been stopped by Quintain security who say written permisison from the owners is required.

UPDATE December 7th. Brent Council has confirmed that Quintain at Wembley Park and Talisker at Central Square, Wembley, could still stop the distribution of exempt literature on their land.

The full list of prohibitions is below. As often stated  they mean little without the resources to enforce them.

 

Brent Council consultation on wide-ranging prohibitions in public spaces and Quintain estate

 A Brent Council consultation is is progress on the merger of Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) across the borough which will include the private, Quintain owned, Wembley Park, the continuation of some prohibitions and the introduction of some new ones. 

Some prohibitions are straight-forward but others raise questions. The ban on leafleting or leafleting only with permission or licence, came up as an issue 10 years ago when concerns were raised about the freedom of political groups and campaigns to leaflet the public. There was a full discussion at Brent Council Scrutiny Committee. Cultural groups and charities were concerned about the controls limiting their ability to inform the public of events and small businesses in marketing start-up ventures.

Leafleting is a key civic freedom, with a long tradition in this country, and should not be restricted without good reason. Litter can be dealt with through the proper provision of litter bins and other common-sense measures, rather than restrictions on people’s rights to use public space. (Manifesto Club)

The ban on model aircraft and drones in parks calls into question a long tradition of model aircraft flying from Gotfordes Hill in Fryent Country Park.

The Council claims that their list of issues was informed by 550 members of the public and 40 plus 'professionals' but do not elaborate how they were chosen and their demography. 

Brent Council does supply a Q&A which I publish below but this does not explain some proposals such as banning ebikes in parks that already allow push bikes and have a speed limit.  The proposals to end some prohibitions in Wembley Park seem bizarre, especially those that harm the public such as idling car engines or present a danger such as sky lanterns. 

The elephant in the room is of course, eforcement. We know that there is a lack of enforcement of current prohibitions, neither the council or police have the resources to enforce such a large number of prohibitions so prosecutions or Fixed Penalty Notices when applied will be fairly random.

Responses to Council consultations are often very low, and may not exceed the 550 who infomed the council of issues, so I hope readers will take the trouble to respond. 

LINK TO CONSULTATION

Brent Council commentary:

 

Why are we consulting?

In accordance with the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, Brent Council is conducting a consultation over the proposed merger of three existing Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPO). The current PSPOs include:-

• A Borough-wide PSPO to tackle street drinking
• Brent parks, open spaces, cemeteries and graveyards
• Wembley Park

As part of the merge, the PSPOs are being reviewed to agree whether additional prohibitions are required and whether some prohibitions may be removed altogether.

The new unified PSPO if granted, will continue to be split into the three sections as above with varying prohibitions as determined by the evidence gathering and this consultation.

The PSPO would apply to any area within the London Borough of Brent, including, Cemeteries, Graveyards, Parks and Open Spaces maintainable at the public expense or managed by the Local Authority and which is adjacent to the carriageway or footway of a highway, including adjoining footpaths. The proposed duration is 3 years.

This order has been informed by evidence from over 550 members of the public and in excess of 40 professionals, which demonstrates the scale of the issues for the local community.

The main issues in the responses to date are:-

 

1. Across the entire Borough in our streets

• Street drinking (drinking alcohol)
• Psychoactive substances (formerly known as legal highs or balloons)
• Cannabis smoking
• Littering (urination or defecating)
• Littering (cigarettes)
• Littering (spitting)
• Use of megaphone or microphone with speaker
• Illegal trading (food or other items on the street)
• Leaflet distribution including the giveaway of free samples
• Dog fouling
• Aggressive begging
• Busking without prior consent
• Illegal trading (food or other items on the street)
• Charity collecting
• Leaflet distribution

2. Issues specific to Brent Parks, Open Spaces, Cemeteries and Graveyards (POsC&G)

• Park drinking (drinking alcohol)
• Psychoactive substances (formerly known as legal highs or balloons)
• Cannabis smoking
• Littering (urination or defecating)
• Littering (cigarettes)
• Littering (spitting)
• Littering (bottles, cans, packets, food)
• Use of motor vehicles including e-scooters and electric bikes
• Dog fouling
• Loss of control of dogs (dog not within eyesight of owner and/or do not respond to recall)
• Dogs that are in a banned area
• More than four dogs being walked at the same time
• Flying drones and other model aircrafts
• The lighting of fires or use of BBQs
• The use of fireworks in a banned area
• Defacing or damaging fixtures, furniture or other items
• Wild animal feeding inclusive of birds
• Unauthorised sporting activities

3. Wembley Park (particularly issues surrounding Wembley National Stadium events)

• Street drinking (drinking alcohol)
• Psychoactive substances (formerly known as legal highs or balloons)
• Cannabis smoking
• Littering (urination or defecating)
• Littering (cigarettes)
• Littering (spitting)
• Use of motor vehicles including e-scooters and electric bikes
• Dog fouling
• Use of megaphone or microphone with speaker
• Illegal trading of merchandise
• Illegal trading of tickets (ticket touting)
• Illegal trading (food or other items on the street)
• Ambush Marketing (where an event is used to promote another business)
• Leaflet distribution including the giveaway of free samples
• Fireworks, including flares and smoke emitters
• Busking and use of loudspeakers causing a nuisance without authorisation from the landowner and/or the London Borough of Brent.
• Charity Collections
• Obstruction of the public highway which prevents a free flow of a person’s movement
• Climbing of street furniture

The PSPO, if granted would include all of the prohibitions mentioned in 3. above in relation to open spaces owned by Quintain, particularly the area surrounding Wembley National Stadium.

Proposal to remove the following current prohibitions:-

• To play games or competitions which may cause an obstruction or nuisance to members of the public (Wembley Park PSPO)
• To fly drone(s) without written consent from the land owner and/or the London Borough of Brent (Wembley Park PSPO)
• Launching sky lanterns that rely on an open flame to heat the air inside the lantern (POsC&G PSPO)
• To leave the engine of a vehicle idling without reasonable excuse, which is continued when asked to be stopped by an authorised Council officer (Wembley Park PSPO) 

Please note: The evidence gathering was based on the wards prior to the name changes made in June 2022. The proposed prohibitions will be based on the new wards.

The PSPO will give the Police and Council officers greater flexibility in dealing with this problem borough wide.
These issues affect your community, and we want to involve you in tackling them. With this consultation, we hope to:-

• Make you aware of the reasons for making an application for a PSPO
• Allow you to make any comments on the proposal
• Support local residents in improving their quality of life
• Prevent further anti-social behaviour, crime and disorder

The consultation period will run for just under six weeks from 11 July 2022 until 18 August 2022 and if successful will be implemented by January 2023.

Brent Council's Q&A

PSPO - Frequently Asked Questions 

Why do we need a PSPO for drinking? 

Excessive drinking can lead to behaviours that make people feel intimidated and unsafe; rowdy behaviour, noise nuisance, public urination and littering. When these behaviours arise, authorities need to be able to respond swiftly and prevent them escalating. Being able to prevent continued drinking is an effective, low level intervention. 

What about drinking alcohol outside pubs and bars? 

The order is not designed to interfere with the conditions that apply to licensed premises. However, drinking beyond the legal boundary of the premises would mean that the order applies and an authorised officer would have the power to issue a requirement under the order. 

Why do we need a PSPO for charity collecting? 

Before a charity collector can collect in any London Borough, they must first seek approval from the Police and the local authority. This gives Brent the ability to check that a charity is collecting for genuine purposes and not obstructing the public highway when they interact with members of the public. 

Why do we need a PSPO for psychoactive substances (nitrous oxide formerly known as legal highs or balloons)? 

These drugs are designed to replicate the effects of other illegal drugs, and have the capacity to stimulate or depress the central nervous system. This is due to one or more chemical substances used in the manufacturing process, and the effects of taking them can cause erratic behaviour which can be anti-social. 

The sale of nitrous oxide for its psychoactive effects was made illegal after the Psychoactive Substances Act in 2016, but it is not currently a crime to be caught in possession of the drug. The government has concerns that this could be a significant factor resulting in the increasing consumption of the substance. 

The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) had previously provided advice on nitrous oxide in 2015 and concluded that it did not seem to warrant control under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. However, given the increase in use among young people and concern over potential long-term effects, the Home Secretary has requested an updated assessment. Being able to prevent the use of nitrous oxide is an effective, low level intervention.  

Why do we need a PSPO for smoking cannabis? 

It is illegal to smoke cannabis anywhere in the United Kingdom. The smell of cannabis and the anti-social behaviour related to smoking can be seen as a nuisance to members of the public. 

Why do we need a PSPO for leaflet distribution? 

In order to distribute free matter including sampling, prior consent must be sought. The consent includes a fee to clean up matter that is littered in the streets. The cost of cleaning up this type of matter where consent has not been given, can be costly to local authorities.  

Why do we need a PSPO for aggressive begging? 

Members of the public can find aggressive begging intimidating. Where persons are vulnerable and/or homeless, the intention is not to fine them, but to refer them to appropriate services. However, where persons refuse assistance, further action can then be undertaken. 

Why do we need a PSPO for busking? 

Busking is not a licensable activity. However, a minority of members of the public who carry out busking do not take into consideration that they are obstructing the public highway or causing a noise nuisance to local residents and businesses. 

Why do we need a PSPO for the illegal trading of goods (including food items)? 

In order to trade on the public highway or in parks and open spaces, you must first apply for consent. Unfortunately, there a minority that choose to set up the sale of items, which are often of substandard quality, not fit for purpose and there is no opportunity for recourse. In relation to the sale of food items, there may be no food hygiene preparation in place or labelling with a risk of allergies being present. 

Why do we need a PSPO for the use of megaphones or microphones with speakers? 

Members of the public are free to speak in public (with a few exceptions). However, the use of a megaphone or microphone with a speaker can cause a nuisance to members of the public using the same space or neighbouring residents and businesses particularly when this can go on for prolonged periods of time. 

Why do we need a PSPO for littering (urination & defecating)? 

Persons who are relieving themselves at will in public do so in close proximity to restaurants, fast food outlets and coffee shops. It also takes place on the public highway at entrances to resident’s homes and in parks and open spaces where members of the public often sit. The smell of such littering can be overwhelming, not to mention the alarm it can cause to those passers-by that witness such activity. The removal of urinating and defection is costly to the Council, businesses and residents. 

This has historically been seen as something that only the homeless do but this is not the case.  

Why do we need a PSPO for littering (spitting)? 

Members of the public report spitting as anti-social. It also has the ability to spread disease. 

In Brent the level of paan-spitting in some locations is high and causes staining to the public highway. The effects of this can cause permanent damage to the public highway’s pavements and is costly when attempting to remove the stains. 

Why do we need a PSPO for littering (cigarettes, bottles, cans, packets, food)? 

Littering of the public highway, parks and open spaces is unsightly and attracts vermin. Members of the public should take any litter home or to a nearest receptacle where a bin is not available in the immediate area. The culture surrounding littering needs to change so that all members of the public take responsibility for their own waste in order to keep the streets clean and our parks and open spaces maintained. 

Why do we need a PSPO for bird feeding? 

Bird feeding is unsightly and attracts vermin. It also prevents other members of the public from using parks and open spaces for their intended use. 

Why do we need a PSPO for unauthorised sporting activities? 

Use of areas specified for sports often require booking. When a member of the public turns up for their booking and someone is already using the space and refuses to leave, this can be frustrating. 

In other areas in parks and open spaces, members of the public set up sporting activities without taking into consideration others that may be using the same space. 

Why do we need a PSPO in relation to dogs? 

Those who use the Council’s parks and open spaces to exercise their dogs, need to do this in a responsible manner. As a dog owner, you may understand your dog’s behaviour but not all members of the public feel the same about this. It is therefore a matter of balancing the need of exercising dogs without having a negative impact on others using the same space.  

It is therefore important to keep dogs under control, on leads where required and prevented from entering areas where they are banned. You also told us that dog fouling is a big issue across Brent where owners are not picking up after their dogs. 

Why do we need a PSPO for the lighting of fires or use of BBQs ? 

The cost of replacing furniture is costly; a new picnic table is over £650 to replace. The use of BBQs in our parks and open spaces also pose the risk of causing a fire.

 

 

Why do we need a PSPO for the use of fireworks in a banned area?

 

Anti-social behaviour involving fireworks ranges from them being set off late at night, in areas where they are banned, to deliberate physical harm or threat of harm caused to people, animals and property. Not only is there a danger from fireworks exploding, they can also pose a serious fire risk as well.

 

Firework displays when carried out correctly can be enjoyable. Unfortunately a small minority of people are using them irresponsibly.

 

It is an offence to throw or set off any firework (including sparklers and category 1 fireworks) in or into any highway, street, thoroughfare or public space.

How would the PSPO be enforced?

·       Breach of a PSPO occurs when a person does not comply with the requirement made under the order

·       Breach of a PSPO is a criminal offence subject to, up to a level three fine on prosecution (up to £1,000)

·       A Fixed Penalty Notice can be issued for £100 for failing to comply with an officer's request. This fine is payable within 14 days.

·       If paid within ten days, a discounted charge of £75 is applied

·       Payment of the FPN discharges liability to conviction for the offence

·       The police will work in partnership with the council to ensure the effective enforcement of these new regulations.

A by-product of the consultation is a reminder of how much former public space around Wembley Stadium  is now private space owned and policed by Quaintain. I have been moved on from Olympic Way and Wembley Boulevard by private security when leafleting about climate change. See LINK.

The following are the proposed locations owned by Quintain to be included in the Public Space Protection Order:- 

·       Pocket Square  

·       Elvin Gardens lawns (not including the dog run) 

·       Samovar Space 

·       Market Square 

·       Arena Square 

·       Event Pad 

·       White Horse Square 

·       The Meadows 

·       The Lawns  

·       Union Park 

·       Southern Terrace 

·       Olympic Way (pedestrian area) 

·       Wembley Boulevard (pedestrian area)