Pavey challenges Butt for Brent Labour Group leadership

There has been little rest for Brent Labour councillors over the weekend following the news of likely contests for leadership at Saturday's Labour Group AGM.

Michael Pavey will be challenging Muhammed Butt for the leadership.  So far no job has emerged for Butt from Sadiq Khan, but intriguingly Butt's relatives seem to be pushing him as a possible successor in Khan's Tooting constituency.  George Galloway has hinted that he may stand in Tooting - what a combo!

Senior councillors rejected Butt's suggestion for deputy and I understand that a pliable pudding is standing.  Hopefully someone with more credibility will throw their hat into the ring

Sarah Marquis has been a well-informed and independent Chair of Planning, presiding over a committee of lesser talents. As Butt is a champion of Quintain and all its deeds he may push for someone more pliable in that role too.

Ruth Moher has been a low profile lead member for children and families and has frustrated many by her failure to take a firm position on forced academies.  Both Cllr Shama Tatler and Cllr 'Jumbo' Chan as teachers have a keen interest in education although there has been no confirmation either will challenge Moher for the role.

Cllr Eleanor Southwood has had to deal with Cllr Duffy's revelations over alleged Council incompetence at Environment and a contest between the two of them would be interesting.

Regeneration and housing are key areas,  particularly in the light of the GLA campaign and recent controversial regeneration projects, including South Kilburn, and there may be a challenge to Cllr Margaret McLennan based on a failure to stand up to developers on affordable housing provision.

There are a number of others who may come forward including the ambitious Cllr Roxanne Mashari and Cllr Sam Stopp. Stopp has recently made critical comments on the planning consultation procedures in the borough and called for more open and transparent dealings with residents. Matt Kelcher has probably been chair of Scrutiny for too short a period to face a challenge.

Overall however with 56 councillors, the majority of whom as far as the public are concerned are faceless, and because they don't speak at council meetings have little political form (apart from putting their hands up on command), it is hard to know how close Butt's critics are to garnering sufficient votes. 

Ex Cllr James Powney gives his account of the process on his blog LINK

Process in the Labour Group

It may be worth noting the due process in Group meetings, as they appear to have escaped Cllr Butt and possibly others.  Votes are held of all the paid up Labour councillors and no one else.  The vote is by secret ballot, and follows the rules known as "exhaustive ballot".  This means that where there are multiple candidates (as I imagine there would be if Cllr Pavey becomes leader as far as the Deputy Leader post goes), the candidate with the lowest number is elimated and a new vote taken, until somebody get 50% plus one of the votes.

The Group officers (such as Leader and Deputy Leader) are voted on by the whole group, as should other positions such as the Planning Chair and the members of the Executive.  This also applies to the new Deputy Mayor, but the Mayor post is normally taken by whoever was last year's deputy without an election. 

The Scrutiny positions are voted on by the non Executive members (i.e. excluding the Leader, Deputy Leader, Executive and (I think) the Mayor and Deputy Mayor.

Since all these votes are by secret ballot, they can be expected to take a long time and be unpredictable.  My past experience of such elections is that many councillors promise their votes to multiple candidates.  I take it from Cllr Butt's attempts to suspend one of his critics and other rumours I have heard, that he is far from confident of victory.

Democracy breaks out in Brent Labour as key positions contested

The Brent Labour Annual General Meeing  next Saturday will see elections for Leader, Deputy Leader and Cabinet positions I understand from well-informed sources.

This is part of the normal democratic process but takes place against the background of internal tensions that included Councillor Butt's attempt to select his own deputy.

Following the election the posts have to be confirmed by Full Council but that is usually certain given the Labour majority - unless the results are very close and susceptible to abstentions at Council.

These are the current positions and responsibilities:

Leader of the Council

Councillor Muhammed Butt

Responsible for:

• Community Planning and Partnership
• Strategic Regeneration
• Voluntary Sector
• West London Alliance
• Health and Wellbeing Board (chair)
• Mayor's Development Corporation
• Executive and Members Services
• Legal Services

Find out more about Cllr Muhammed Butt.

Deputy Leader

Councillor Michael Pavey

Responsible for:

• Finance
• Performance Management
• Complaints and FOI
• Council as Employer (HR)
• Equalities
• Procurement
• IT

Find out more about Cllr Michael Pavey.

Cabinet Member for Employment and Skills

Councillor Roxanne Mashari

Responsible for:

• Customer Access
• Skills
• Jobs and Employment
• Business and Enterprise
• Welfare
• Poverty
• London Living Wage Advocate

Find out more about Cllr Roxanne Mashari.

Cabinet Member for Environment

Councillor Eleanor Southwood

Responsible for:

• Environment
• Transport
• Public Realm
• Sustainability
• Highways
• Parking
• Transportation
• Street Lighting

Find out more about Cllr Eleanor Southwood.

Cabinet Member for Children and Young People

Councillor Ruth Moher

Responsible for:

• Early Years
• Schools
• Special Education Needs
• Early Help
• Children's Social Care
• Youth Services
• Troubled Families

Find out more about Cllr Ruth Moher.

Cabinet Member for Adults, Health and Wellbeing

Councillor Krupesh Hirani

Responsible for:

• Adult Social Care
• Health and Wellbeing
• Public Health
• CCG

Find out more about Cllr Krupesh Hirani.

Cabinet Member for Housing and Development

Councillor Margaret McLennan

Responsible for:

• Housing
• Private Sector Housing
• Landlord licensing
• Planning
• Building Control
• Property and Asset Management
• Facilities Management
• Brent Housing Partnership (BHP)

Find out more about Cllr Margaret McLennan.

Cabinet member for Stronger Communities

Councillor James Denselow

Responsible for:

• Community Cohesion
• Community Safety
• Community Resilience
• Arts, Leisure and Sports
• Trading Standards
• Licensing
• Libraries
• Communications
• Registration and Nationality

Find out more about Cllr James Denselow.

Will Brent Council make a stand on forced academisation?

On March 26th the statement below was sent to Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council and  Cllr Ruth Moher, Lead Cabinet member for Children and Families. I have had no response although other signatories may have done. 

 Statement by Chairs of Governors of Brent Primary Schools

We the under-signed are opposed to Government proposals to force all LA primary schools to convert to academy status because:

There is no evidence that this would improve the quality of teaching and learning in our school

It would remove local democratic accountability of schools through the local authority

It would further destabilise schools already affected by new curriculum and assessment demands and problems of recruitment and retention

The statement was also sent to our three local MPs, Dawn Butler, Tulip Siddiq and Barry Gardiner.

Dawn Butler wrote to Cllr Butt on March 29th: 

Dear Cllr Butt, 

I am writing to you in regards to my concerns about the Government’s proposals, announced in the Budget, to reform England’s schools system by instituting the forced academisation of all schools by 2020. 

The Government are claiming that the academies programme will transform education by helping to turn around struggling schools while providing the freedom for successful schools to build on their achievements even further. 

In practice, however, it seems that there is little substantive evidence to show that turning a school into an academy will automatically raise standards. Ofsted chair, Sir Michael Wilshaw recently criticised seven sizeable academy chains for failing to improve the results of too many pupils in their schools. 

I am concerned forced academisation will bypass consultation amongst parents, schools and communities particularly in local areas like Brent where vital ground-level knowledge is needed.

The Tories obsession with changing the school structure will do nothing to tackle the real problems facing our education system. A flawed teacher recruitment programme and retention crisis added to the widening attainment gap between poor pupils and their peers. Furthermore, I believe forced academisation will cause utter chaos for successful local schools, such as Wykeham Primary, who prove the very point that you do not need to be an academy to be a successful school. 

I want us in Brent to lead a fight back and bring schools back in to local authority control. I will fight the government and ask for money to make this happen. It is important that our schools work together.

Today I have also received letters from the Secretary of State for Education Nicky Morgan MP confirming that two further Brent schools, Oakington Manor Primary and Furness Primary, will be converted into academies, please see enclosed a copy of the letters. I hope you will share my concerns of this continued assault towards taking Brent schools out of Brent control.

Academies do not automatically equate to good schools.

I hope we can discuss this matter further, and I look forward to your reply. 

Yours sincerely, 

Dawn Butler MP

 Tulip Siddiq wrote back:

Many thanks for passing the below email to me.

Needless to say, I entirely agree with the three bullet points and I’ll keep you updated on Parliamentary work I do on this.

 As yet Barry Gardiner MP for Brent North has not replied.

Since then of course there has been a national petition against the forced academisation plans, statements of opposition from many councils, including Conservative shire councils and this weekend the unprecedented threat of industrial action by the National Association of Headteachers.

The Labour Group on the Local Government Association has published the following model resolution for councils that may help Brent coucnil make a stand:

 

Model Motion Opposing Forced Academisation
This council meeting notes with great concern the proposal in the recently published education White Paper, Educational Excellence Everywhere, which will force all schools to become academies, irrespective of each school's wishes.

This council meeting notes that the White Paper’s proposals –

-       would remove the requirement for schools to elect parent governors.

-       would require the transfer of land and buildings of such schools to central ownership by the Secretary of State.

-       do not include any say for parents and local communities over the future status of local schools.

-       would require over 17,000 schools to conduct costly and lengthy conversion exercises at an estimated national cost of over £1billion.

 *OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL COMMENT* In [NAME OF TOWN], the cost of converting the [INSERT NUMBER OF NON-ACADEMY SCHOOLS] non-academy schools would be £[INSERT RESULT OF CALCULATION – NUMBER OF NON-ACADEMY SCHOOLS x £66,000]. 

This council meeting further notes – 

-       over 80 per cent of maintained schools have been rated good or excellent by Ofsted, while three times as many councils perform above the national average in terms of progress made by students than the largest academy chains.

-       the invaluable role of parent governors and the local authority in acting as ‘critical friends’ to both support and hold to account head teachers and schools.

-       the comments of The National Association of Head Teachers that plans to force every school to become an academy presented “a particularly high risk to the future viability and identity of small, rural, schools.”

This council meeting believes – 

-       no single system of school organisation has a monopoly on success, and that a one size fits all model as proposed by the White Paper would not deliver the improvement in school standards and outcomes that this council wishes to see. 

This council meeting therefore resolves to – 

-       ask the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State for Education expressing the concerns of the council as set out in this motion about the proposals to force all schools to become academies, asking her to demonstrate how the proposals will improve educational outcomes in [NAME OF TOWN].

-       ask the Leader of the Council to write to our local MPs expressing the council’s concerns and to seek their views on the proposal. 

-       engage with head teachers, school governors, professional representatives, parents, and the wider local community to raise awareness of the Government’s proposals.

Dawn Butler MP calls on Brent to lead fight to bring schools back under local authority control

I was one of 10 Chairs of Governing Bodies in Brent to send a letter to Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt and Lead Member for Children and Families Ruth Moher (copied to our three MPs) opposing the government's new policy of forcing local authority primary schools to become academies.

As well as oppositon from Labour, Greens and Lib Dems, lead members for education in the Tory Shires, the local Government Association and the Conservative Bow Group have also made public statements of opposition.

Dawn Butler, Labour MP for Brent Central has sent me copies of letters she has written to Muhammed Butt amd Carolyn Downs, Brent's Chief Executive Officer calling for the Council to lead a fight to bring schools back under local authoriy control. (I would prefer 'oversight' rather than control as governing bodies are responsible for the strategic leadership of schools).

Brent Council failed to support parents and teachers challenging the forced academisation of Gradstone Park Primary School and Copland High School. In the latter case Muhammed Butt supported the forced academisation claiming that the Council did not have the resources to support the school. He now sits on the governing body of the school which was renamed Ark Elvin when Ark took it over.

Click image to enlarge

Cllr Moher at a loss over Oakington Manor/Furness academisation

At last night's Council Meeting Cllr Kelcher,  speaking on behalf of  Furness Primary School parents, asked Cllr Moher, Lead Member for Children and Families, what the Council had offered parents as they battled the headteacher's plans to turn Furness into an academy. Furness is in a federation with Oakington Manor Primary School with one headteacher and one governing body.

Kelcher said he had been approached by Furness parents  who could see no compelling reason for it to become an academy and could not see why the great progress the school has made should be put at risk.

They wanted to know if the Council would stand by them in their fight.

Ruth Moher said that it was difficult to know what the Council could do other than what they had done already. They had indicated to the governors that they would prefer the schools to remain community schools within the family of Brent schools.

Moher said she was happy to talk to parents to give them information about what was happening and how it had come about. However, the difficulty was that there had been consultation meetings which had not been particularly well attended and no alternative views were given.

Cllr Moher said that she understood the academy application from the governors had gone to the  government. Once that was done the school would become an academy unless the governors could be persuaded to withdraw the application.

She finished:

I don't actually know if there is anything that could be done unless there is a real groundswell of opinion from parents to make the governors think and change their mind but I've had no sense of that happening.

She offered to talk to Cllr Kelcher about the issue.

I would suggest that if the consultation meetings were small and alternative views were not given that the ward councillors, or the Council itself,  should hold a well publicised community meeting for parents and prospective parents to give information and debate the case for and against academisation. This would be followed by an independently administered ballot of parents.

Brent Labour urges school governing bodies not to convert to academy status

Cllr Muhammed Butt, leader of Brent Council and Cllr Ruth Moher, lead member for Children and Families have written to Brent primary school governing bodies, on behalf of the Labour Group,  putting the case against academisation. This is at a time when Sudbury Primary School Academy is experiencing difficulties and the  Oakington Manor Primary/Furness Primary Federation governing body is moving to convert to an academy.  At the same time in policy adopted last year the Council is looking to academies and free schools to provide additional secondary school places.

Dear Governors,

We are writing to you on behalf of Brent Labour's leadership, following the announcement on the future of schooling by the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Without any regard to the wishes of local parents and communities,m the government has announced that it intends to see an end to schools operating within local authorities and become academies.

We urge you to ensure your school remains part of the local council.

While it is critical that schools teach the academic basics to our children, we know that they do so much more.

They are places where young people learn the meaning of being a friend, a team-mate and a citizen; where they find out more about their fellow pupils and themselves than they ever realised there was to know; where they discover the interests and develop the skills that will make them happy, well-rounded an, fulfilled human beings. In short, they prepare our young people for life in the broadest sense,

Such a broad preparation for life requires not a business, but a community. A community of teachers, parents and pupils can go beyond their contractual commitments, to provide the activities that help broaden our children's horizons: After school activities, appropriate extra support for some pupils and teaching beyond the test.

But a community cannot be run for profit. Hours of volunteering can not be given, if they will be exploited for the bottom lines. Currently academies in the borough are not for profit, and collaborate well within the Brent Schools Partnership. They work hard to give their pupils the roundest possible education.

But once out of local authority control there is no guarantee that a school will not eventually become for profit. Michael Gove, the former Education Secretary who promoted much of the academy agenda, has gone on record as saying that he is 'open' to businesses running schools. This Conservative majority government is at liberty to make that happen. A current academy headteacher can be against a school being run for profit, but there is no guarantee what the stance of their successor will be.

The only way to ensure that our schools remain communities, and do not becomes businesses, is for them to remain under the control of Brent Council. On behalf of Brent Labour's leadership, I urge you to do all you can to ensure that they do.

Cllr Muhammed Butt
Cllr Ruth Moher

Note: I have not edited this letter (MF)

Charity to take over management of Brent's Children's Centres to save £0.75m

Cllr Michael Pavey and the then Shadow Chamcellor Ed Balls and Shadow Children's Minister Sharon Hodgson in February 2013 at the launch of Labour Friends of Sure Start (FOSS)

This is a Press Release from Brent Council and I invite comments and views from readers. 
 

Leading children’s charity Barnardo’s will manage children’s centres across the borough as part of a new partnership model with Brent Council which will keep open the highly valued centres.

Brent Council’s Cabinet has agreed to award a four-year contract for managing the operations of 14 children’s centres to Barnardo’s, which already runs more than 170 children’s centres in the UK. Its centres aim to promote the inclusion of all children, their families and carers in a safe and nurturing environment.

Barnardo’s will work in partnership with Brent Council to manage the transfer of children’s centre staff to the charity, and the council will retain an oversight of the centres’ performance and Ofsted inspections.

The four-year contract will save Brent Council around £750,000. Brent Council has experienced significant reductions in central government funding, which contributes to running services such as children’s centres, and must save around £54million over the next two years.

The decision by the Cabinet was made after a significant consultation with parents, community groups, voluntary sector, staff and schools about the future of children’s centres in the borough.

Councillor Ruth Moher, Lead Member for Children and Young People, said:

“We are in an era of unprecedented cuts to local authority finances which means it is becoming harder than ever to protect the front-line services so prized by our residents.

“That’s why I’m pleased we have been able to agree to award a contract to Barnardo’s which will keep open these 14 children’s centres in Brent so they can continue to provide such fantastic support to many children and families.”

Lynn Gradwell, Director of Barnardo’s in London, said:

“We are thrilled to have been awarded this contract and excited to start working with the many thousands of Brent families who use these 14 children’s centres.

“Barnardo’s is committed to providing the very best service to children and young people in Brent, to their parents and carers, to the council and to the dedicated staff members who will transfer over to Barnardo’s. We are working hard to make the transition as seamless as possible and are looking forward to getting started.”

The 14 children’s centres which will transfer to Barnardo’s are: Treetops, Wykeham Primary; Wembley Children’s Centre, Alperton Children’s Centre, Preston Park Children’s Centre; The Welcome Children’s Centre, Granville Plus Children’s Centre, Three Trees Children’s Centre, Hope Children’s Centre, Harmony Children’s Centre, St Raphael’s Children’s Centre; Church Lane Children’s Centre, Mount Stewart Children’s Centre; Willow Children’s Centre.

Three other children’s centres - Fawood, Curzon Crescent and Challenge House - are excluded from the partnership agreement and will continue as present.

The new model for the children’s centres will be implemented from autumn 2015.

A 'mumble for Mo' as assault on children and young people is approved by Brent Cabinet

It is customary in government, when spending priorities are being decided,  for each departmental minister to make the case for his or her department to the Treasury and to the Cabinet. Their effectiveness can be gauged by their success,

Transferring that to Brent Council level it was clear at tonight's Cabinet meeting that Ruth Moher, lead member for children and families appeared to have been particularly ineffective. Putting aside Children's Centres, which are Michael Pavey's passion, the main losers were children and young people.

December 15th Brent Cabinet likely to produce a gloomy Christmas

The December 15th Cabinet meeting is shaping up to be the most controversial of the year and unfortunately is likely to produce some bad news just ahead of the Christmas holiday.

Among the items on the agenda LINK will be the restructuring of the council's senior management which will see some lose their jobs while other jobs will be created. This is currently tabled as 'open' so the public should get sight of the proposals a week before the meeting.


More importantly in the long run are two budget items.

One is the two year budget for 2015-2017 which will set out draft 'savings' to produce a reduction in expenditure of more than 30%.

Cllr Michael Pavey is the Lead Member for both these items.

The other is the schools budget for 2015-2016. Cllr Ruth Moher is the lead member for this item. Although reductions are unlikely to be headline grabbing there may well be changes in charges for services to schools which will affect their overall budgets.

Complaint lodged over councillor's alleged non-disclosure of interest in planning application

Local resident Roger Brown has lodged a Corporate Complaint with Fional Ledden, Brent Council's Legal Officer regarding Cllr Ruth Moher which may be on interest to readers aware of recent local planning controversies.

The complaint reads:

I am writing to you in line with your Corporate Complaints Policy regarding complaints about councillors.

The complaint is with regard to planning case 13/2961 (Wembley High Technology College) and her involvement with this together with her lack of disclosure with regard to being both a Governor and Company Director of W.H.T.C  - particularly with regard to the planning meeting of 12th February 2014. 

Both Mrs Moher and Mr Jim Moher are Directors and Governors of WHTC and I believe as such there was a clear breach of Brent's Constitution (and a clear conflict of interests) under the Planning Code of Practice. Their involvement in this particular case and the non disclosure of both of their interests in the register of councillors interests (Brent Council's web site shows there are no such disclosures with regard to this case). Both councillors were in fact listed as first alternates (as listed in the Public Information pack for the supplementary planning committee) and Mrs Moher was allowed to speak at length at the meeting after again failing to disclose her interests. It was pointed out by someone as she spoke that she was a Governor and should not be speaking but she was allowed to continue. In contrast Councillor Singh, a local resident, declared his interests at the start and left the room, taking no part in the meeting.

I have asked Brent Council for a copy of any recording or transcript of this meeting but was told that none existed and was sent the minutes for this meeting instead, which is a poor representation of the meeting itself. I cannot understand why you decide not to record these meeting for which the decisions play a vital part in the lives of the people they blight and affect.

If this situation had take place with an application of a private individual instead of a public body I'm sure, rightly, questions would surely be asked but because it is a council project I believe that all issues with regard to this contentious application appear to be attempted to be swept under the carpet. 

I will also be raising the matter of another WHTC planning application to the council (13/1775) for the failure to disclose information paramount to the case, therefore allowing it to pass unopposed. With this I refer to the reason for the MUGA being built being that of the subsequent planning application 13/2961 as this built upon land  occupied by the current MUGA and no residents were aware of it at this stage due to the council and schools lack of residents consultation in February 2013. The council abjectly still claims that residents were consulted but cannot state to which houses they delivered the notices to, which is frankly laughable.

I would ask to to look into this as a matter of urgency and I will also raise the matter with the Local Government Ombudsman and ask the DFE to conduct a thorough review of this case.

Disturbing characters feature in Brent Council horror movie

Councillors belatedly realise they can have a role in director apppintments

Brent's Labour Councillors seem to be arising from their slumber, albeit rather late in the day. Standing in for Muhammed Butt on April 18th, Ruth Moher gave the Leaders' report.  She is alleged  to have admitted,  when speaking about the proposed restructuring LINK , that councillors had only recently realised they should get involved in the appointment of Directors. I can only assume, although that seems rather incredible, that appointments have previously been made by officers themselves.
 
This adds a different perspective to my call at the General Purposes Committee  LINK that they appoint a strong director for education who will champion the local authority's role in education. Perhaps they hadn't realised they could do that?

Brent Executive approves budget and Tokyngton Library sale

The Brent Council Executive tonight passed the 2013/14 budget, which involve cuts in services, frozen Council Tax and increased charges,  without discussion. It also approved rent increases in Brent Housing Partnership and Stonebridge properties and substantial rises in service charges. The Budget which also includes a free on Council Tax will now go before the full Council Meeting where it will rubber-stamped unless there is a (very unlikely) revolt by non-Executive Labour councillors.

A Local Welfare Assistance Scheme was approved which due to government cuts of 13% reduces the amount of emergency payments available to the vulnerable.

Labour Leader Muhammed Butt declared an interest in the sale of the former Tokynton Library to the Islamic Cultural Association (see LINK) and vacated the chair and left the room for the discussion of this item. Cllr Ruth Moher, taking the chair,  told the meeting that the sell-off did not involve councillors and had been carried out according to Council standing orders.

The background to Brent's 2013-14 budget

Mike Bowden. Assistant Director of Finance for Brent Council, gave a PowerPoint presentation to the Budget and Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee on Thursday setting out the background to Brent's 2013-14 Budget. This does not appear to be available on the council website so I have extracted some of the key points below.

For clarity any explanations or comments from me are in italics (ie words in italics are not Mike Bowden's responsibility).

BUDGET MONITORING 2012/13

• Quarter 1 forecast was overspend of £2m
• Latest forecast is small underspend of £0.1m
• Departments are on track to deliver within budgets
• Need strong foundations to manage risks from 2013/14 onwards (this implies radical actions including cuts and possibly council tax rise)

 NON-EARMARKED RESERVES

Target for 2013/14 of £12m

• Reserves at 31/3/12                £10.3m
• Budgeted increase 12/13           £1.0m
• Projected increase in 13/.14       £0.7m

External audit - acknowledged improved financial resilience and recommended that we should should continue to build level of reserves (It was revealed more than a year ago that Brent had some of the lowest reserves in London and Audit Commission followed this up with recommendation for increase)

BUDGET GAP:

Medium Term Financial Projections:

• 2013/14      (£0.2m)
• 2014/15        £2.5m
• 2015/16        £7.5m

BUDGET GAP - July 2012

Assumptions for 2013/14 included

• Council tax increase 3.5% (it now looks as if Eric Pickles will trigger local referenda for any increase over 2%. Any rise will impact on the poor as well as meaning more people default on payment)
• Existing planned savings of £7m are delivered
• Cost avoidance included through one council projects
• New Council Tax Support Scheme would meet shortfall in Council Tax Benefit Funding (scheme going before Special Council Meeting on December 10th)

UPDATE ON 2013/14 BUDGET

• Government Autumn Statement will not now  be delivered until 5th December 2012
• Provision Local Government Settlement will not be known until 20th December 2012 ?? (subject to confirmation)
• Impact on council's  decision making timetable
• Government's regular announcements - uncertainty over true impacts

Developments

• Council tax free - New one off grant offered by Government
• Top -slicing - EIG (Early Intervention Grant) £4m (includes provision for 2 year olds but see Muhammed Butt's statement LINK) Academies£7m (partly to council and partly to schools)
• Census - £4m (due to increase in Brent's population but it is not certain we will get it)
• Council Tax Surplus - £1.8m (one-off) (Council more successful in collection this year - uncertainty that will continue after council tax benefit changes and increasing economic pressure on families).

Uncertainties and risks

• Further changes by central government
• Housing Benefit subsidy regime/Temporary Accommodation (shift of costs of housing crisis to local government)
• One Council Savings (presumably whether they are successful)
• Review of pressures (housing, adult and children's social care)
• Opportunities for additional savings  (I interpret this as 'What's left to cut without causing damage or merely shifting pressures within the council's budget)

COUNCIL TAX

Temporary council tax freeze spending:
2011/12   £2.6m for 4 years
2012/13   £2.6m for 1 year
2013/14   £0.8m for 2 years

Ongoing income foregone of 3 year tax freeze = c£7m per annum (what will lost if council puts up Council Tax. Previous reports by Clive Deaphy (ex Director of Finance) referred to the need to strengthen the council's Council Tax base)

KEY ISSUES FOR 2013-14

• Late settlement = decision making later than usual
• Need to maintian focus on long-term position > Recognise that funding will continue to diminish > Fundamental change to Council's approach and services required (this again implies cuts, decision to no longer deliver some services, more out-sourcing etc. Bowden commented that a 'resilience budget' was required and the council needed to ensure that short-term decision did not affect long-term prospects)
• Flexible approach to ensure capability to withstand risks
• Opportunities for tactical savings that do not undemine future prospects
• New commitments to be funded by offsetting savings

______________________________

Readers will see that there are plenty of issues to raise questions about here and hence the public's disappointment at the Scrutiny Committee that councillors failed to ask searching questions. Labour councillors had probably been briefed already so thought it unnecessary to question in public. Conservative councillors did attend and Lib Dem Alison Hopkins was in the chair.  However Cllr Brown did not attend and nor did his Lib Dem alternates Cllr Green or Lorber. There were no questions about how the compressed timetable would now include consultation with the public, community organisations and trades unions. Councillors asked only one question of Muhammed Butt who, along with Cllr Ruth Moker, specifically attended to answer questions after Bowden's presentation.

BUDGET DECISION MAKING TIMETABLE

Before funding announcement:

19th November - Full Council - first reading debate

10th December  - Executive - council tax surplus

10th December -  Special Council - council tax support scheme

After funding announcement

22nd January 2013 - General Purposes Committee - Council tax base - business rate base
5th February - Budget and Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee

11th February 2013 - Executive - council tax level recommendation
25th February 2013 - Full Council

'Transformational thinking' response to unfair Coalition budget cuts

In his speech to the Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee last night, Graham Durham drew attention to the unfairness of the central government cuts imposed on Labour local authorities compared with those run by other political groups.

Over the last 3 years Labour councils have lost an average of £107 per head, Lib Dems £38 and Conservative £36. The highest loss is the London borough of Hackney at £266 and the lowest North Dorset at £2.70.

The figures for Brent was £120.21 per person.

Durham, stating that this was a concerted attack on Labour councils asked councillors , "What job are we doing?"  and answered himself, "We should not be carrying out cuts on behalf of the Coalition posh boys!"

Condemning the council for complying with Coalition policies by sending families to Hastings he reminded Cllr Helga Gladbaum that she was once one of the councillors who alongside him had fought against making cuts.

He concluded by arguing that a Labour Council should not do this to the people of Brent and instead should set a needs budget.

Isabel Counihan was given her first opportunity to address councillors about the light of her family. She described the background to her family losing their housing in Brent and the impact of localised payments of Housing Benefit.  The family had launched a campaign which had received widespread community support.

She said that her family were one of thousands of homeless families in the borough and asked how the council could justify spending £102m on a Civic Centre in these circumstances. Isabel described how there had been another attempt to evict the family from their temporary accommodation where they could not afford the rent. At the same time she claimed that social services had threatened to take her five children into care. She had told them how expensive that would be, particularly a some would need special needs support,  compared with helping them with their rent.

Isabel Counihan concluded by saying that Brent had got its priorities wrong and backed calls for them to set a needs budget.  She invited councillors to join the Counihan Family March on December 1st.

After the deputations there was a presentation by Allison Elliott on the Adult Social Care budget. She claimed that the council, through a West London Alliance procurement had not 'reduced the service but had reduced the costs'. However she said that the reduction in costs could not be sustained and that there would be a budget gap of £6.87m in 2014/15 if nothing was done.  She said that the council would have to think differently in order to reduce the budget and that this would require 'transformational thinking' - which drew 'You mean cuts!'  and 'What's going to happen to the old people' from the audience.

There were sharp exchanges between Graham Durham and the chair of the committee, Alison Hopkins (Lib Dem) over the availability of committee documents for the public. At one point the police were called into to remove Durham when he protested  but Hopkins managed to procure some copies of the documents for the public.  However police were called again when Graham Durham asked questions from the floor about the council budget, claiming that councillors were failing to ask challenging questions of Mick Bowden, or the council leader or deputy who were present. He demanded, 'You are here to scrutinise - do your job!'. Five police officers and CPOs remained in the public seats for the rest of the meeting which worked out at about one for each member of the public present,

The case for refusing to make 'impossible choices' in Brent budget

This is the speech I made at this evening's Budget and Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee. Brent Council Leader Muhammed Butt and Deputy, Ruth Moher, attended but were asked only one question. Muhammed Butt confirmed that carers working for the private companies provided adult social care for Brent would not necessarily get the London Living Wage. All other questions on the Budget were addressed to Mick Bowden, Deputy Director of Finance.

I paraphrased towards the end of my speech when my 5  minutes deputation time began to run out.

I start with the assumption that none of the present administration stood for election in order to make cuts that would be to the detriment of the quality of life and the life chances of Brent residents.

I also accept that the Coalition Government’s increasingly discredited approach to austerity is the motor for local authority cuts. I would further argue that this is an ideological attack on local government and local democracy which leaves councils with the job of local implementation of the Coalition agenda.

Under Ann John’s leadership it seemed that the Council was seeing itself in the role of ‘managing’ these cuts with the argument that they could do this without harming services. After the leadership change there has been a slight change of emphasis but there appears to be a contradiction in the stance of Muhammed Butt, the new leader.

In his Priorities statement for the Full Council, Cllr Butt says:

The first priority must remain protecting the integrity of the Budget and making savings.

 But in his blog, he likens the Council’s task to the ‘impossible decisions’ that would have to be made in cutting a third from a household budget.

Again in his press release on the Early Intervention Grant Cllr Butt said that he is dedicated to making sure that no child in the Borough is left behind at a time when' impossible choices' have to be made due to the highly punitive cuts imposed on local authorities by the Coalition.

The issue is clear: maintaining the integrity of the budget and making cuts will mean making ‘impossible choices’ that will inevitably, whatever the council does in mitigation, damage the most vulnerable.

Of course Council officers will stress the legal requirements during the budget process but councillors are not just ‘managers’, they are also politicans and need to adopt a political response both to protect local government as a democratioc entity and to protect local people.

I have likened their position to that of the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail who, despite having his limbs cut off one by one and left (‘Tis but a scratch’ ‘Your arm’s off’ ) as just a bloodied torso, remains defiant and totally unware of the impossibility of his plight. The cruel twist is that the Coalition gives the Council the job of cutting off its own limbs!

The question for this year’s budget making is should the Labour Council continue to make ‘impossible choices’ and continue to cut off its own limbs.

My answer to that quuestion is ‘No’. Doing the ‘impossible’ is also doing the morally unjustifiable.

The impossible is compounded by the constant moving of goalposts by the Coalition, the Council Tax Benefit changes which will not only put more families into poverty and increase the number of defaults, the increased temporary housing costs caused by homelesslessness after the Housing Benefit cap, increased costs for Adult Social care, the permitted (but not encouraged)  increase in Council Tax without a local referendum now established at 2% (3.5% envisaged in forward planning) and anyway such an increase would again hit the poorest in the borough. Only yesterday I heard that in one month 63 children, affected by the housing benefit cap, have moved from a local primary school.

To truly represent local people the Council needs to devise a ‘needs budget’ which reflects the true cost of services that the people of Brent need to maintain their quality of life, consult on this in imaginative ways including going to the community in schools, community centres, places of worship and publicise it, and make sure that people understand who is responsible for the cuts being imposed and the implications of more cuts. Gathering mass support in this way through local action, and working with other councils, especially London ones, for a common approach, could begin a concerted campaign against Coalition policies.

Ken Livingstone, back in the days of the GLC, mounted a fierce challenge against Margaret Thatcher from his County Hal base.  Yes, it didn’t succeed in its immediate aims but did help undermine her in the long-term with an alternative popular agenda.  Brent Council could be in the forefront of such a campaign.

First public discussion of Brent's 2013-14 budget on November 15th

Brent Council  will be holding its first reading debate for the 2013/14 budget at its  meeting on 19th November 2012.

The Deputy Director of Finance will set out the budget and finance issues that will form the background to the debate at the Budget and Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee on Thursday November 15th 7.30pm at Brent Town Hall. This will give residents some idea of the extent of cuts to be expected in the budget and whether a rise in Council Tax is on the cards. The impact of changes in Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit and the rise in demand for Adult Social Care are likely to be major issues.

Muhammed Butt, Brent Council leader and Ruth Moher, Lead Member for Finance and Corporate Resources will attend the meeting to answer questions from Members

The meeting is open to the public and there is space on the agenda for delegations to be heard.

Contact: Lisa Weaver, Democratic Services Officer  020 8937 1358, Email: lisa.weaver@brent.gov.uk

LINK: http://democracy.brent.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=1794&x=1&

We were engaged in a democratic process - not a conspiracy

Ruth Moher

Jim Moher

GUEST BLOG FROM COUNCILLOR RUTH MOHER AND COUNCILLOR JIM MOHER

Muhammed Butt

The majority Brent Labour Group on Brent Council have recently had  their annual  elections for Leader, Deputy Leader and Executive. As usual,  this involved a range of contests for different positions. This democratic  process resulted in some significant changes at the top, with Cllr Muhammed Butt replacing Cllr Ann John as Leader. 

Suitable tributes were paid to Cllr John for the long and sterling service which she has given to the Labour Party and Council, which we endorsed.


As long-serving activists in the Labour Party and as senior front bench councillors, we favoured the change and indeed Ruth stood for and was elected as Deputy Leader, without challenge. Jim was returned as
Executive Member for Highways and Transportation, again without challenge.

 In the circumstances, we entirely refute the gossip which  you retailed from a BNCTV item which was based on an anonymous and mischievous source. It implied that we may have been involved in a conspiracy to bring about the change of Leader, an innuendo which your headline circulated widely.


The truth is that we took an active and open part in a democratic process, that is all. As elected public representatives we take exception to such 'sour grapes' gossip being given credibility by your blog. This leak is only an attempt to deflect from the fact that a majority of Labour councillors thought it was time for a change.

BNCTV names the Mohers as possible conspirators behind John's ousting

BNCTV has published the following article speculating on the reasons behind Ann John's demise: LINK

Although Ann John has been losing on popularity greatly in recent times, this change has taken most people by surprise. A source within Brent Council has told BNCTV that Councillors Jim and Ruth Moher could be the people who played major part in this selection process. Is it a conspiracy theory? That is what people are now beginning to talk about. 

Ann John is a person respected by many, equally, a lot of people have been showing contempt towards Brent Council following their experiences dealing with its former Leader. Cllr John has received a huge amount of criticism regarding her handling of the process closing 6 of Brent’s 12 libraries and following that, she has not been seen as a constructive ‘player’ who would win votes for the Labour Party at the next elections in Brent.

Things were not looking good for Ann John after a complaint made by Councillor Paul Lorber and his request to investigate Cllr John and her ‘alleged interference with the planning process by seeking to influence a planning decision.’ This information was picked up in an e-mail sent by Labour Councillor Dhiraj Kataria to Councillor John and others. Although Ann John has been ‘fully exonerated’, many see it as a blemish on her reputation.

One of Labour Councillors in Brent has told BNCTV that he particularly did not like the process she [Cllr John] has been following in regards to the consultations with Willesden Green Library campaigners and her adamant stance to carry out the development of the new Cultural Centre as planned, and that is including the demolition of the Old Willesden Library.

So why would Councillors Jim and Ruth Moher be involved in this process? They simply could not see Labour Losing at the next elections. Ann John ‘has accumulated too much negativity’ around her handling of the issues and it would lead to Labour being ‘torn to pieces’ as put by our source who wished to remain anonymous.

By John Dempsey