Has Sam Stopp been shot down over Heathrow?

Cllr Sam Stopp announced a week or so ago that he was seeking the Labour nomination for Richmond on a pro-Heathrow, pro-growth, pro-jobs ticket.

More recently he announced that he had been long-listed for the nomination.  Today his Labour councillor colleague Cllr Neil Nerva posted the above tweet on Facebook.  It says:

@Cllr Stopp

I would've stood as a pro-Heathrow candidate for #RichmondPark NEC wants anti-Heathrow candidate, which makes me wonder why we're standing.

I can't see that tweet on Stopp's timeline now LINK  but that is not surprising. Stopp has deleted nearly all of his tweets many of which backed Owen Smith in the Labour leadership election and criticised Jeremy Corbyn.  One tweet stated he was ashamed that Brent Central CLP had backed Corbyn and another accused Labour colleagues of refusing to allow him into a meeting about the Labour leadership.

Stopp's twitter account now shows just 28 tweets akthough there are 1,970 'likes':

All rather strange.  It is not clear whether this marks the end of his Richmond Park bid or whether he is still in the race.

For the record this is what Stopp said previously about the Richmond Park by-election:

Pro-Heathrow Cllr Stopp throws his hat into Richmond by-election ring

Sam Stopp, the Labour councillor for Wembley Central, has signalled via Twitter, that he intends to put himself forward as the Labour candidate for Richmond in the wake of Zac Goldsmith's resignation over Heathrow.

The Liberal Democrats are the second party in Richmond and Labour MP Clive Lewis has urged Labour to stand down to enable a Tory defeat.

Stopp is adamant that Labour should stand and has said he will stand on a pro-Heathrow third runway ticket advocating growth and job creation.

Stopp was a supporter of Yvette Cooper's leadership bid and this time round supported Owen Smith, declaring that he was embarrassed by Brent Central's support for Corbyn.

He rejects any notion of a progressive alliance whilst we still have a first past the post elelction system.

Cllr Stopp is Chair of the Labour Campaign to End Homelessness.

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.

Further concern that Brent Planning Department is not fit for purpose

Further to the concerns expressed by the Queen's Park Area Residents Association about the efficient running of Brent Council's Planning Department LINK in the wake of the departure of Andy Bates and Stephen Weeks, residents in Roe Green are also feeling frustrated as they challenge Powerleague Lucuzade's bid to build a facility on Kingsbury High School playing fields. LINK

Residents last Wednesday sent a 40 page document over apparent 'errors and omissions' in the Powerleague planning application to the Planning Department asking for urgent clarification. No response so far and the statutory consultation period is due to end on April 28th.

The planning office for the application is on leave until early May which makes it unlikely that the 501 consultees will get a considered response.

A further issue is that residents complain that their comments are not being registered on the Department's Planning Portal, even when they get over the initial hurdle of the website stating, 'Comments may not be submitted at this time.'   Email request for this to be removed have been ignored.

Those who did manage have received messages that their comments have been cut sort or timed out. A resident following up the problem was told that officers may not read comments thought to be too long.

It is alleged that residents telephoning Brent Council about the application have been discouraged from making a comment on the basis that the schools needs the money and therefore the application will probably go through.

Residents are also concerned that the Statutory Notice of 19th April  may be invalid as it was signed off by Stephen Weeks who left the Council some time ago.

Meanwhile Cllr Sam Stopp has met with residents over the 'Twin Towers' proposal for Wembley central that was approved by the Planning Committee.

Stopp told the Kilburn Times:

The Council not for the first time, didn't proactively engage the local community and a lot of residents living near the site came through with concerns that they weren't aware of this application.

There was a general sense that things were being decided behind closed doors rather than in an open way.

There are questions to be made about who is making decisions about which planning application goes ahead. What causes the the decision made at planning to be made? Is it just on the merits of the scheme or are there political angles there as well?

That's something I'm investigating more.

He took to Twitter after his surgery discussion with residents to say he had formally requested a  town hall-style meeting on the 'Twin Towers' issue.

Now it's three Brent Councillors pledged to fight austerity

In a welcome move Cllrs Sam Stopp and Keith Perrin have now added their names to the People's Assembly Against Austerity letter from local councillors pledging to fight austerity and local government cuts LINK

Other councillors can add their names by emailing office@thepeoplesassembly.org.uk

LATE NEWS Cllr Tom Miller has added a comment that he would like to sign but thwarted by a dud link. I have taken that as support for the pledge.

Just 4 councillors allow TwinTowers to change the face of Wembley Central

Impression from Park Lane Methodist Church/Park Lane Primary

The 26/21 storey Twin Towers block at the junction of Park Lane and Wembley High Road was given the go ahead by the Planning Committee on Wednesday evening. There were 4 votes for the the proposal, 2 against and 2 abstentions.  Sarah Marquis, Chair of Planning Committee, voted against the application.

Afterwards residents were aghast that two councillors abstained on such a major issue. If there is any committee where councillors are expected to make a decision it is planning. If you don't have enough information to make a decision you should keep on asking questions until you do.

If the vote had tied 4/4 I presume Marquis would have exercised a casting vote against the application.

Denise Cheong with just 2 minutes to represent hundred of local residents made a presentation on the impact of the high density high rise blocks on the local area, the impact on current over-crowded roads and public transport and the fact that the development did not comply with established GLA and Brent standards.

Cllr Sam Stopp (Labour, Wembley Central) appeared to have been so impressed by the developer's consultation procedures and his openness that this had persuaded him to support the development despite recognising that the building was not perfect. He would like to have seen it less high but its height was based on what officers had told the developer was possible. He thought the building's orientation was not ideal.

Stopp went to to list the positives: The excellent consultation by the developer, quality of the building design, provision of community space.

He went on to contrast the developer's consultation with that by the Council. Local residents seemed to have found out about the proposal late in the day with a rush of contacts comparatively recently. The Council needed to adopt a more open and transparent approach to consultation. As in Islington, we need members' panels which are accessible to the public so they can question developers and councillors.

David Glover, the planning officer,was faced with the task of explaining why officers were supporting the application despite it not complying with policies on density, carbon emissions, living space,  open space, play space and the proportion of affordable housing.

He claimed that although the building did not meet the standards that it could be approved by reference to the  guidelines that interpreted policy.  He echoed Cllr Stopp in praising the quality of the finish of the building and the flats.  He said that the restricted nature of the site justified the developer in building at greater height and density than set out in the local plan.  The 28% affordable hosing (rather than the recommended 50%)  had been subject to independent viability assessments. Initially the developer offered a higher proportion of affordable housing but this was limited to a 7 year period after which it would move to market rents.  Officers had negotiated a lower proportion of affordable housing but for perpetuity.

Some of the most  incisive qustioning came from Sarah Marquis, chair of the committee, who pointed out that the density was double that recommended for town centre locations and doubted that it complied with the requirement that not meeting those standards could only be supported if it was 'clearly and robustly justified by local circumstances.'  The density was that which applied to international city locations rather than a local town centre.

She went on to query the planners' claim that the development was allowed because the local plan allowed 'tall building' in the  Wembley Central vicinity. She pointed out that local tall buldings were much lower and that the previous application in the sites had been for 17 storeys. It was a big leap from the 30metre definition of tall to the 85metres of this development.

In the course of the discussion the developer confirmed that they were also seeking to purchase the green space on the embankment behind Chesterfield house and their aim would be to build residential properties there. This was not followed up by the Committee but would obviosuly add to the issues around local infrastructure including traffic density and school places. The negotiations had not got very far  and purchase of the garage space behind Chesterfield House to provide disabled parking for the new development has not been completed.

The extent of this additional land which is now subject to acquisition and development can be seen in this illustration:

Click to enlarge

There was a group of young people in the public gallery who applauded when the planning application was approved. Apparently in the wake of the closure of the Wembley Youth Centre LINK they thought they would be able to carry on their activities in the ground floor community space provided by the developer.  It is of course by no means certain that they would be chosen to occupy the space and we know from other applications that this could be a fraught process.  It feels sometimes that we grasp crumbs from the rich man's (developer's) table.

The actual process of building on a site surrounded by traffic congestion with difficult access and parking sounds as if it will be a two year nightmare for local residents not to mention the impact when crowds travel to the stadium and arena.

I am left puzzled by how the committee members who voted for the development could have felt persuaded despite all the arguments above. Does a community space and 'quality finish' really outweigh the disadvantages?

The voting details are below. A further puzzle was how Cllr Colacioco asked all the right questions, got extremely unsatisfactory answers, and then voted for the application!
 

Voting on the application was as follows:

FOR 4                           Cllrs Agha, Choudhary, Colacicco and Mahmood

AGAINST  2                Cllrs Marquis (Chair) and Cllr  Maurice

ABSTENTION  2         Cllrs Ezeajughi and Cllr Patel

Denise Cheong's speech on behalf of residents can be found HERE

Duff litter enforcement proposal slammed by Kilburn councillor

The proposal to out-source litter enforcement came in for a drubbing from Kilburn Councillor John Duffy at last night's Scrutiny Committee. Cllr Sam Stopp stated at the beginning of the meeting that the Task Group he led report on illegal rubbish dumping could have been interpreted as advocating some sort of out-sourcing  but this was not the case. He cited Islington as a borough where in-house services had proved to be more efficient.

Stopp went on to express 'deep dissatisfaction' that the Task Group had not been consulted on the implementation of any of the recommendations made in their report. He opposed out-sourcing because the Council needed to earn revenue and provide employment  opportunities and in-house provision could deliver both.  He said that there should be a clear commitment to continuing liaison with task group members when implementing recommendations.

Cllr Duffy said that the proposal to out-source to Kingdom was a decision made to employ 'cheaper people'. The Council had reduced enforcement officers from 21 to 7 but were now proposing getting people back to do the same job through a private company - the 'most basic and primitive' form of out-sourcing.  They would be employed well below the average wage and would be reliant on in-work benefits.  He challenged the officers and lead member's view that these would be 'different jobs'.

He challenged the Council's claim that Kingdom's enforcement officers would not be involved in Court appearances.  This was tantamount to saying to those caught 'if you don't pay you won't end up in court'.

He presented figures to show that the Council stood to lose income of up to £100,000 by out-sourcing rather than setting up an in-house operation.

Chris Whyte in response said that the Kingdom employee's enforcement role was on the ground, patrolling streets, spotting litter dropping and issuing tickets, while the Council enforcement team, did a wider spectrum of work investigating fly-tipping crime and follow up work including preparing cases for Court. Kingdom staff would make occasional appearances in Court but would not prepare and investigate cases.

Cllr Duffy said that he had got hold of a Kingdom job description and it was very similar to that he used to have to do as an enforcement officer.  Cllr Southwood, lead member for environment admitted that a job evaluation would only be done if the Council went out to procurement after the six month pilot with Kingdom.

Cllr Kelcher, chair of Scrutiny expressed concern over the safety of enforcement officers issuing £80 Fixed Penalty Notices. Chris Whyte responded that a risk assessment would be undertaken as Brent Council was responsible for the safety of staff.

A 'social value' assessment would be incorporated into the specification if it was decided to go for external procurement after the trial. Whyye said it was essential to collect data during the trial to see what the scale of the litter problem in Brent. By out-sourcing the risk of little return via fining would rest with the contractor and not the Council.

Duffy pointed out that Kingdom would  be motivated to issue a high number of tickets as this would boost their profits. Operatives were likely to go for the easy option of targeting 'rich pickings', such as smokers outside tube stations, where they could issue many tickets in a short time, rather than areas where real action was needed on street litter.

Cllr Southwood said that Kingdom would be guided by Veolia, ward councillors and the public, Chris Whyte said monitoring of the contract was essential. He would be concerned if it was only cigarette butts.

Duffy said that the report had argued that the proposal was cost neutral but the real issue was whether it was best value for money.  He questioned how much of the £52,000 income to Brent Council would be taken up by costs of going to Court.  He claimed the Council were 'addicted to out-sourcing'.  He presented figures to suggest that there was little risk to the Council from an in-house contract but  Whyte said that Ealing Council had found their in-house provision was inefficient and had therefore out-sourced to Kingdom.

For the Committee Matt Kelcher said that after the pilot Brent Council should look at in-house provision and build social value into the process.

Brent Council abolishes fly-tipping

Mattresses on the corner of Chapter Road and Deacon Road earlier this week

The Brent Council Cabinet last night agreed to change the term 'fly-tipping' to 'illegal rubbish dumping' . Arguing for the change Cllr Sam Stopp, who chaired the Scrutiny Committeee Task Group on fly-tipping, said that many people did not understand the term 'fly-tipping' and in a borough with many people who were not fluent in English it was important that the terminology should be understand - he was not expecting other London boroughs to adopt the usage.

The emphasis on 'illegal' was welcomed by other Cabinet members. Other recommendations adopted included appointing 'Community Guardians' who would tackle illegal dumping in their areas and have a profile on the Council's web page, a Brent Against Rubbish Dumping Charter which businesses, landlords, estate and letting agents and schools would be encouraged to sign up to and display publicly, and the soft relaunch of the Cleaner Brent App (see side panel).

There was a particular emphasis on co-operation from landlords and Cllr Margaret McLennan said she would like to see the Landlord Licensing Scheme, presently operating in three wards, extended to the whole of Brent.

Cllr Stopp said 80% of his case work was illegal rubbish dumping but he also claimed that Brent wasn't the worse borough in London as sometimes portrayed as it came about half-way in the London Boroughs league table.

Derivation of the term fly-tipping

On the fly meant to move or do something in a hurry. so tipping on the fly, so you don't get caught.

King Edward VII Park, Wembley - an explanation from Brent Council

The following explanation has been sent to Cllr Stopp regarding the works in King Edwrd VII Park, Wembley

The works taking place at King Edwards Park are to improve the quality and drainage of the five football pitches, and the cricket pitch on site, which have historically been of poor quality. This project commenced in August, and was originally expected to be concluded with 5-6 weeks; however, a number of issues- including the discovery of a buried electricity power cable and an unregistered gas pipe running across the site- resulted in delays whilst we liaised with the utility companies, and unfortunately the colder and wetter weather we're now experiencing means that the final cultivations (which rely on dry ground conditions and higher temperatures) cannot currently take place.

The specific status of the works is as follows:

Part A: Site remodelling of King Edward VII Park

All works have been completed aside from final cultivations, sand amelioration and seeding.  Final cultivations rely on dry ground conditions and as expected, ground conditions are unsuitable for these works.  These works will be completed at the earliest opportunity in Spring once the soils have dried sufficiently.  It is envisaged that these works will take a maximum of 3 weeks to complete before seed is in the ground.  Once seeded the pitches will be green within 1 week to 10 days.

Part B: Maintenance of Football pitches (not including Cricket square)

The maintenance works will begin once the seed is germinated and ready to cut.

Part C: Cricket square construction

This element of the works have been completed in full

Part D: Cricket square maintenance

The maintenance works will begin once the seed is germinated and ready to cut.

The contractors will ensure the site is secure before winter. They will also come to site in the next couple of days to verti-drain and overseed the track way and make good damage caused by the caterpillar digger.


Unfortunately therefore, it is now unlikely that some of the works will be concluded before better weather in the spring, and the temporary fencing will need to remain in place until then.

We have asked for some fresh signage to be placed on site explaining the delays, and hope that this will be in place within the next week or so.

We are also attempting to locate the source of the smell that is being reported.

Clearly there is a need to keep yourselves, the Friends of Group and all interested parties abreast of the latest developments.

I am sorry this has not properly happened to now. I will personally schedule regular updates.

Brent councillors join criticism of Stop the War Coalition and Lucas steps back from involvement

Brent Labour councillors Neil Nerva, Bernard Collier and Sam Stopp have signed an Open Letter to Jeremy Corbyn launched today by a new organisation called Labour Internationalists.

The letter LINK urges Corbyn to pull out of the  Stop the War Coalition dinner he is due to attend on Friday and states;

We believe that StWC stands apart from the Labour movement’s values of Internationalism, anti-fascism and solidarity. The vast majority of Labour MPs who heard Hilary Benn’s powerful speech in parliament last week (regardless of how they voted), supported his broad argument that fascism must be defeated, and that the UK must be prepared to join coalitions to do this.

and concludes:

We urge you to distance yourself from this organisation. We believe that Labour Party unity, and electoral credibility in the face of a Conservative government that is pursuing a right wing domestic agenda, would be advanced if  you pulled out of this event.

Meanwhile it was announced today that Caroline Lucas, Green MP, had stepped back from her involvement with Stop the War Coalition a few weeks ago.

The spokesperson said:

Caroline stepped back from the Stop the War Coalition a few weeks ago. Her busy parliamentary and constituency schedule means that she doesn’t have time to fully engage with the role of a Patron and, in light of some recent StWC positions that she didn’t support, she felt standing down was the responsible thing to do. Like the Stop the War Coalition, Caroline is opposed to British bombing in Syria because it will neither keep Britain safe nor help bring about a lasting peace in Syria.

Caroline was specifically troubled by some Stop the War Coalition statements after the Paris atrocities. Though the pieces were subsequently taken down she felt unable to associate herself with them. 

She was also concerned that some Syrian voices were not given an opportunity to speak at a recent meeting organised by the StWC in Parliament.

StWC has played an important role in building the anti-war movement in Britain, and Caroline will continue to work in support of peace.

That view is not necessarily the view of the Green Party as a whole. Policy is made at its twice yearly conference rather than by its MP or leader.

Many Green Party members support the StWC through attending its demonstrations and meetings, although this is not uncritical support.

Shahrar Ali, Green Party Deputy Leader,spoke at the Stop thr War 'Don't Bomb Syria' demonstration at the end of November. LINK

Whatever criticisms we can make, Stop the War Coalition remains the single strongest anti-war organisation in the country and I don't doubt governments, both Labour and Tory, would have engaged in more military adventures if it had not been for StWC's ability to mobilise large numbers in opposition.

Stop the War, as its name states, is a Coalition, and contains people of many different parties, religions and philosophies and is a vital part of a movement that challenges increasing aggression and militarism. It has come under attack from media and right-wingers as a means of undermining its fundamental challenge to the flimsy basis of  Cameron's.

At such a time they deserve our support.

Lucas differs from Labour Internationalists in her anti-bombing position. She said in a recent Huffington Post article:

I listened carefully to the Prime Minister make his case for why the UK should join the bombing campaign against Isis. The debate in the House of Commons was thorough, and the horror and revulsion at recent atrocities in Syria, Paris, Beirut and elsewhere is shared by MPs from across the political divide. 

Yet I have still to see any evidence to suggest that UK bombing Isis targets in Syria is likely to increase our security here in Britain or help bring about a lasting peace in the region in question - to the contrary, the evidence appears to suggest it would make matters worse.

Nerva, Collier and Stopp appear to be supporting military intervention, if not the bombing operation itself.

Brent Fly-Tipping Report's wide-ranging recommendations

The Final Report of the Brent Scrutiny Committee's Fly-Tipping Task Group, head by Cllr Sam Stopp has now been published.

These are its recommendations:

Knowledge

1. The task group recommends that the term “Fly-tipping” should be changed to “Illegal Rubbish Dumping” (IRD) in communications with residents. Residents rarely refer to dumped rubbish as fly-tipping and there is apparently confusion among some residents about what “fly-tipping” actually means.
   This is not a good basis on which to communicate with residents about the issue, therefore the task group recommends changing the language we use.
   *We recognise that authorities and bodies outside of Brent will, for the time being, probably continue to refer to illegal rubbish dumping as “fly-tipping”, so we accept that we will have to use this language when communicating with them.
   
2. A named officer/s within the Waste Management service should be responsible for continuous monitoring of new methods to tackle IRD, keeping the council abreast of the latest developments and leading improvement practices; not just from other London boroughs and the UK, but from Europe and the rest of the world. The task group supports the behavioural studies that the council is currently participating in as part of the West London Alliance (WLA) and recommends that it should continue to build on this area of work.
   
3. Brent Waste Management service should review its internal benchmarking, looking internally at how we monitor our own performance and should report performance quarterly in public. It is recommended that this is communicated to residents and other councillors via the council’s website and Brent Magazine.
   
4. Brent Waste Management should liaise with neighbouring London boroughs to develop a benchmarking network. The West London Alliance (WLA) would be a good place to start as there are links already established. There should also be additional cross-border networking, feeding into intelligence with the aim of bringing forward more prosecutions for trade waste dumping.
   

Education 

5. Constitutionally empower “Community Guardians” by appointing, through an agreed selection process, figureheads like the chair of Keep Wembley Tidy. Councillors can support this by identifying suitable candidates. These guardians are to be given a profile on the council’s web page, support and resources from the council and Veolia; to tackle illegal rubbish dumping in their appointed locations.
5.1. It was identified in the task group’s research that residents often identify with different place names than the wards in which they live. The task group is recommending that the community guardians structure in Brent is mapped in the following village localities and guardians are allocated to these areas: 

Wembley	Dudden Hill	Kensal Rise
Kenton	Neasden	Stonebridge
Queens Park	Sudbury	Kilburn
Harlesden	Alperton	Willesden

*This list is intended as a guide and residents are of course free to suggest the names for their own campaigns, as well as the areas these campaigns cover. Keep Wembley Tidy covers Wembley Central and Alperton wards, and it is suggested that campaigns should not overlap with one another. This approach should be integrated with the voluntary Community Action Groups.

2. 5.2.  Guidance and a code of practice for the community guardians and village areas should be drawn up and agreed by officers and residents. This should include action days and identifying and evidencing illegal rubbish dumping hot spots. Village websites should also be linked to the council’s waste management web pages.
   
3. 5.3.  It will be a priority of the community guardians, councillors, officers and Veolia to devise and produce a ‘Brent Against Rubbish Dumping Charter’, which Businesses, HMO Landlords and Estate/Letting Agents will be encouraged to sign up to and display publicly.
   
4. 5.4.  It will be a priority of the community guardians, councillors, officers and Veolia to engage with places of worship, youth clubs and sports clubs to engage and promote the Brent Against Rubbish Dumping Charter.
   

6. The process of reporting IRD should be clear and straightforward, so that both residents and officers know what is to be expected and how and when there will be communication between parties. This should be documented on the council’s IRD web page.

7. Brent waste management and Veolia should liaise with Brent education and Brent schools partnership to ensure that there is a strategic anti-Illegal rubbish dumping programme going into schools, aimed at both primary school and secondary school level. The programme should be continuous and target 100% of schools on an annual basis, encouraging schools to sign up to the Brent Against Rubbish Dumping Charter. Progress should be reported on the council waste management web page on a quarterly basis.
   
8. Business liaison should be part of an officer’s role; this should include an evaluation of any non-monetary incentives that can be offered. Brent should encourage businesses to sponsor a bin or bins, as a result of which businesses will become certified and will be allowed to display a Brent Council sign stating that they are opposed to IRD.
   
9. Additional resources should be invested in to the Special Collection Service, so that items are collected sooner and the number of bulky items illegally dumped is reduced. Other alternative options for waste disposal and recycling should be promoted with direct links on the council’s web page and offered on the phone when residents call to request Special Collection Services such as Freecycle and Freegle.
   

Enforcement

10. The task group recommends the formation of a strategic approach between Waste Management Enforcement services and the CCTV service to ensure more use of the current CCTV provision to monitor IRD hotspots. It is understood that this will require collecting evidence and providing a supported case for each camera.
    *The task group endorses all of the recommendations on IRD made by the concurrent CCTV task group.
    
11. Waste management services, specifically trade and Environmental health services, must work together more strategically; sharing information and working on joint visits where there is clear intelligence that there are crosscutting priorities.
    
12. A strategic approach between Housing Enforcement and Waste Management Enforcement services via Veolia should be formed to ensure that HMO landlords are educated as to their responsibilities regarding waste disposal for themselves and their tenants.
    
13. Enlist the support of night workers such as black cab drivers and night bus drivers to use the cleaner Brent app and report any perpetrators of IRD. This could be achieved by contacting taxi firms and Transport for London to explain our case and by asking them to cascade our request down to workers. The council would in turn be able to release positive press stories about these organisations.
    
14. We will look to pre-capitalise on new fly-tipping legislation, to be brought forward next year, by following a similar model to Ealing Council, as below:
    ‘The council has teamed up with Kingdom Security to provide dedicated teams of uniformed officers in the borough. Kingdom Security will work with the council’s environmental enforcement officers, providing a high-profile deterrent and issuing £80 fines. Operating initially on a one-year trial basis, Kingdom Security is working at no cost to the council. Instead they will take a share of the fines they issue’.
    
15. The Council should work with other local authorities and the National Fly-tipping Prevention Group to lobby the Government for more effective enforcement powers.
    
16. The selective Landlord licensing scheme should be reviewed annually and reported on publicly with statistics on how effective the scheme has been, where it has been effective, areas where the council can strengthen its enforcement and any lessons learnt.
    
17. The landlord licensing guidance should have more detail in the wording regarding waste & refuse, so that it is harder for landlords to avoid discharging their responsibilities effectively.
    

 The most referenced licensed scheme is that of Newham Council’s. Newham’s licensing condition in respect of waste simply requires that “No refuse shall be kept in the front or rear garden other than in an approved storage container for that purpose”.

19. Further investigation is required into the impact of the garden waste collection charges. Cabinet should review its effectiveness from a cost and efficiency perspective, annually until 2018.
    
20. Owing to the lack of quantitative data to evidence the effects of the garden waste charge at this stage, officers should review and report the effects of its first year in operation. Officers should devise logical metrics against which it can compare its performance annually until 2018.
    
21. The number of Brent residents that have signed up, and continue to sign up, to the Garden waste collection service should be more widely publicised. The Brent website and Brent magazine should be the media for this.
    

Publicity

22. Future publicity about IRD should be continuous, mainly word-of-mouth and not confined to one-off PR campaigns. The last major PR campaign in 2013 involved large, difficult-to- read signs under which rubbish was dumped. It also saw photo opportunities to show the lead member was determined to deal with the issue, but officers confirm that it had little tangible impact on levels of IRD.
    
23. Officers, councillors and community guardians need to visit relevant local meeting places – whether they be religious meeting places, youth clubs or sports clubs – to pass on the council’s messages about IRD and how communities can work with Brent to tackle it.
    
24. Leafleting campaigns led by the council and voluntary groups should be in multiple languages, appropriate to the socio-dynamics of the local area.
    
25. Any future communications should also be easy-to-read with no conflicting messages. This should be backed up with targeted local advertising. Brent London Underground and National rail stations are prime locations for such advertising.
    
26. The Cleaner Brent App requires further publicity, and probably a re-launch, as not enough people are aware it exists. There should be further publicity on the web and in the Brent magazine.
    

Does Butt's interference with Ark Elvin application amount to improper conduct?

Wembley resident Jaine Lunn staged a one woman protest at Brent Planning Committee tonight against plans that residents think will affect their right to access the playing fields behind Copland  (now Ark Elvin) School in Wembley High Road.

The Committee voted unanimously to approve the school the Chair, Cllr Sarah Marquis, accepted legal advice that they could not consider the Right of Way issue. She noted that residents might want to take up the issue under the Highways Act.

Raphael Moss, headteacher of the newly expanded Elsley Primary School spoke in favour of the new build and changes to the playing fields and raised issues about the safeguarding of children under current public access conditions.

A speaker from the Education Funding Agency Priority Building Programme poo pooed residents claims that they had had access to the fields as public land for decades, asserting (without any factual evidence cited) that they were 'incorrect'. In a threatening tone he warned the councillors that if they did not approve the plans the £26.5m earmarked for the new build might be lost. Responding to Cllr Colacicco who asked why green measures were always the last thing to be considered in such projects he said that such measures would require funding in addition to the £26.5m and a planning officer said that there was future proofing in the plans that meant they might be added later.

Speaker as a Wembley Central ward councillor, Cllr Sam Stopp, said he wasn't against a new school build replacing the dilapidated building (altholugh against academies on principle) but expressed concern that Muhammed Butt, the Leader of Brent Council had been consulted but not residents.

He later tweeted 'Very concerning lack of public consultation re. Ark Elvin app in Wembley Central. Further investigation needed, regardless of decision.' and 'Suggest Brent Scrutiny Committee reviews how we consult communities on planning applications. Enough is enough. Need to put communities first.'

Cllr Mitchell Murray said that she was concerned about the lack of respect for local resients shown during the consultation and remarked that the Council had not made a good job of the consultation.

Cllr Stopp has blogged on the issue HERE

The comment on Butt reflects disquiet I have heard is prevalent among both officers and councillors about what could be construed as improper conduct. As the Planning Committee is statutorily independent the Cabinet, and even more importantly the Leader, is not supposed to try and influence its decisions.

Evidence of interference? From the Kilburn Times website

Butt not only went to the site (see above) and talked with residents after the Planning Committee was made its site visit last Saturday, but then misrepresented the residents' views in a widely distributed email. He clearly has an interest not only as a proponent of the scheme in the Cabinet, but also as a governor at Ark Elvin and parent of a pupil attending the school.

Councillors on the Planning Committee could have been left in no doubt about what the 'Leader' wanted. They even referred to the fact that he had promised to write to the residents about their concerns during the meeting.

Perhaps something for Standards Commitee as well as Scrutiny?

Readers may be interested in an earlier planning case involving Cllr Butt LINK

Wembly Central petition Brent Council for more action on rubbish and flytipping

The Green Party and Brent Fightback long ago forecast dirty streets LINK  as a result of cuts to street cleaning and other services and the decision to make the contractor Veolia responsible for monitoring its own performance.  More recently I have also had comments regarding the maintenance of parks which is also part of Veolia's empire.  As a result of the Veolia taking over Brent's Public Realm the Environment Department of the Council has been severely cut LINK.

Wembley Central residents have now launched a public online petition to Brent Council and Muhammed Butt calling for action LINK

The petition reads:
 

--> We the undersigned petition Brent Council to resolve the issue of unacceptable amounts of rubbish being dumped on our streets.  The dumped rubbish is anti-social, it causes potential health hazards by attracting rats and other vermin to our streets and it affects the well-being of responsible residents, whilst making the area unwelcoming to visitors.

We call on Brent Council to implement the following 6 point plan to clean up Wembley Central:

1.      We call on Brent Council to put in place measures which prevent rubbish being dumped on our streets and to fully publicise what these measures are.

2.      We call on Brent Council to strongly enforce existing laws and regulations against those who litter, those who dump rubbish/fly-tip and those who do not manage their waste properly on private land.

3.      We call on Brent Council to raise awareness of this problem, stressing that it will no longer be tolerated, through an education program including posters and leafleting, whilst engaging with local landlords, businesses, schools, colleges and places of worship.

4.      We call on Brent Council to respond to genuine complaints from residents in a timely and respectful manner.

5.      We call on Brent Council to pro-actively combat the effects of recent multi-occupancy housing on the existing local community.  Each landlord licence would generate £400 per property.  This income must be invested to regulate and enforce regulations.

6.      We call on Brent Council to issue financial penalties against Veolia where the service fails to meet the required standard.

For too long the Council have ignored our complaints about rubbish in our area and they need to take immediate and long term action to solve this problem.

On the petition sight Cllr Sam Stopp (Labour, Brent Central) writes:

The cleanliness of our streets is the measure of our community spirit.

To rebuild community spirit, we must first remove the blight of dumping from our streets.

Brent Central Labour nominate 'safe' candidates for London Mayor

Brent Central Constituency Labour Party has nominated Sadiq Khan and Diane Abbott as Labour candidates for the London Mayoral elections. There has to be both a male and female nomination.

The nomination of Sadiq Khan is no surprise as senior Labour councillors have been tweeting in his support for some time and he was active in Brent during the General Election campaign.

However his nomination has not been universally welcome. Cllr Sam Stopp, who was recently elected to Brent Scrutiny Committee, supported  David Lammy denouncing the current front runners as 'safe choices' and 'establishment' candidates.

He argues that Lammy has a wider reach outside the Labour camp.

Stopp said on Twitter that he suspects that there has been an element of 'machine politics' in Labour's Mayoral selection process and refers to a recent Comment is Free article by Rafael Behr LINK

Behr wrote about the leadership election where MPs have publicly endorsed candidates but it could be equally true of the Mayoral campaign where senior Labour councillors endorse candidates:

  Meanwhile the system by which Labour MPs publicly nominate candidates for the leadership and deputy leadership militates in favour of the status quo. Endorsements are traded for preferment in future shadow cabinet appointments or favour in elections to select committees. Hope of ascent up the parliamentary pecking order – or fear of a punitive pecking by a rival faction – often comes before appraisal of the arguments.

Of course this isn't limited to Labour and although the Greens have few preferments to offer it is something to be aware of in our selection process for London Mayor and GLA.

Meanwhile David Lammy appears to have got into a bit of a spat with Rev Paul Nicholson, a leading poverty campaigner. LINK

It will be interesting to see who is nominated by Hampstead & Kilburn and Brent North CLPs.

New line up on Brent Council Scrutiny Committee

Reliable sources tell me that the Brent Labour Group AGM today elected a new Scrutiny Committee with Cllr Dan Filson as chair. He is joined by Cllr Tom Miller, Cllr Sam Stopp, Cllr Matt Kelcher, Cllr Shama Tatler and Cllr Harbi Farah.

The election involved Labour backbenchers and excluded Cabinet members. [added for clarity at request of those concerned- MF].

The single Scrutiny Committee had come under fire for its lack of bite and failure to interrogate lead members and officers sufficiently rigorously.

Dan Filson has a a reputation for independence and is known to actually read council documentation, a rare attribute amongst Brent councillors. He comes over as a cross between Monsieur Hulot and Victor Meldrew but has a sharp edge.

Whether the younger members will exhibit a similar streak of independence and be prepared to challenge the Cabinet remains to be seen.

On Twitter Matt Kelcher said, 'Looking forward to my chance to serve my Borough in a new capacity, I hope to be an effective and constructive voice.'

However, on Facebook, LINK Michael Calderbank wrote 'New Brent Council Scrutiny Committee elected - and full of inexperienced young councillors who will have an eye on leadership patronage'.

Councillor Sam Stopp Appeals to Wembley Matters on Affairs of the Heart

Well, have to have a headline that will make you read this message from Councillor Sam Stopp! Putting aside political differences it is for a good cause.

You may have heard through the grapevine that I'm running the London Marathon for the British Heart Foundation, with the aim of raising £1500 for the charity.

You probably know that Wembley Central, and indeed Brent at large, has a very high rate of cardiovascular-related diseases. But the British Heart Foundation commissions life-saving research to fight this blight on our lives.

I would therefore be grateful if you could share this tongue-in-cheek video I've made promoting the charity. Would be delighted if you could mention it on your blog :)

 

The video is HERE

Cheers,

Sam

Cllr Sam Stopp

Planning Portal comments in support of Welsh School planning application to be verified by officers

Cllr Sarah Marquis, Chair of Brent Planning Committee, told residents attending the site visit at King Edward VII Park this morning that she had instructed officers to investigate comments that have appeared on the council planning portal in support of the London Welsh School's application to build a school in the park.

The resident of 28 Princes Court, whose address and someone else's name, had been used to post support, when she herself was opposed, said that she was not satisfied with the officers' explanation that this was an 'adminstrative error'.

Marquis has asked officers to investigate that and also to verify the 13 other comments (excluding 23 Toley Avenue) in support of the application that suddenly appeared on the portal on January 8th.

Apart from a representative from the Welsh School the 20 or so residents (including children) who attended seem to have been opposed to the planning application.

Debangshu Dey, a local resident, has offered to collate bullet points from residents that could then be included in a presentation to the Planning Committee on Tuesday. Residents can apply to speak for up to 2 minutes and the points could be spread between several speakers.

Debangshu's email is debangshu.dey@medreich.co.uk (corrected)

It would be useful if you could say if you are willing to speak. The collated points can then be sent to all who have responded.

Cllr Sam Stopp (Wembley Central) also continues to welcome comments on the planning application  cllr.sam.stopp@brent.gov.uk  He will be speaking at the Planning Committee and will have up to 5 minutes for his presentation.

The site visit was also attended by Cllr Jean Hossain (Preston) and Preston ward residents can write to her cllr.jean.hossain@brent.gov.uk .  Most of the park is in Preston ward, including Collins Lodge where the land swap is proposed. The Bowling Green is in Wembley Central ward.

Residents who live opposite the park on Park Lane should contact Tokyngton councillors and copy in Sam Stopp.

Here are some photographs of the Bowling Green site taken this morning.

The additional classroom proposed to be built here, 4m from the boundary with back gardens

This area behind the Bowling Green Pavilion proposed to  be resurfaced as a playground

Planning Officers confirmed that the Bowling Green itself did not form part of the planning application.  Councillors were shown the disused yard adjacent to Collins Lodge which had not been considered as a possible school site or land swap.

Green Party's opposition to neo-liberalism and austerity marks them out from other parties

Sam Stopp, Labour Councillor for Wembley Central, caused a stir among fellow councillors, when he posted an article professing admiration for the Green Party, naming them as the true opposition on Brent Council (despite having no councillors) and calling fro Labour and the Greens to work together: I admire the Green Party-I just don't believe them

He uses the example of Brighton to say that Greens, faced with reduced Council funding, do the same as other parties. It is a fair point but ignores the fact that this is a minority adminstration which has been subject to much criticism from within the Green Party (See Red Pepper debate). Extrapolating from one minority Green council to the party in general is a step too far.

One paragraph indicates the difference between the parties quite well:

In the never-ending age of neo-liberalism, the Greens should also be praised for calling for an end to the post-Thatcherite consensus. Often I wish the Labour Party would get back to its roots, oppose this country’s addiction to capital and unashamedly advocate a radical redistribution of wealth. But that’s for another day.

The throw-away last sentence is crucial. The people suffering from the Coalition's austerity measures cannot wait for another day - they are being made homeless today, their children are going hungry today and they will be without heating today.

The Green Party has a clear position of opposition to neo-liberalism and the austerity agendaLINK. As Ed Balls made clear on the BBC Radio 4 programme today, Labour is still trapped within that agenda, and we can look forward to the continuation of austerity and public sector cuts under a future Labour adminstration.

I am a former member of the Labour Party (well it is about 50 years since I left!) who counts himself a socialist and a trade unionist, and because of my concerns about the environment and climate change, an eco-socialist. That is why I am a member of Green Left. I do not think the problem of climate change can be solved within a capitalist system based on ever rising consumption and plundering the planet's resources to extinction.

Sam Stopp calls for Labour and Greens to listen to each other. I am not interested in tribal politics and as a Green will work with anyone on  day to day basis to drive forward the environmental and social justice agenda but we cannot ignore fundamental differences.

Written in a personal capacity

Cllr Butt's alter ego takes to the Twittersphere

Let's face it Brent needs a bit of cheering up at the moment so Cllr Butt's new Twitter identity looks promising, even if it has confused a few people.

The parody account has only a few followers at present but that may change as the situation at Brent Council becomes more widely known.

Here are a few of the first tweets:

And for balance here are recent tweets from the real account:

Cuts may have greatest impact on the most vulnerable says Brent Council budget report

Brent Council spending

There was a short Twitter exchange during last night's Council Meeting on the possibility of raising Council Tax with some arguing that by freezing Council Tax for five years the Council had undermined its own revenue base.  Others said that the amount raised beneath the 2% limit was so small as to hardly compensate for the loss of government grant made to Councils who freeze the tax. In terms of the amount raised as a proportion of the £54m cuts required it was piffling.

Former Labour councillor, and Brent Executive member, James Powney discusses this on his blog today. LINK

In Green Party circles the idea of a 'progressive' Council Tax has engaged people in debate LINK

Meanwhile here in Brent full reports have been published for each  potential area for cuts or revenue raising possibilities. In some cases there are soft and hard options given. The latter being ceasing service delivery.  The report to the cabinet makes clear that no decisions are required of the Cabinet at this stage except to go out for consultation on the proposals.

These are the links to the various reports:

• Chief Finance Officer's report budget-report, item 4. PDF 214 KB
• Appendix 1 Savings budget-app1, item 4. HTM 1 KB
• Adult Social Care 1-asc, item 4. PDF 299 KB
• Children and  Young People 2-cyp, item 4. PDF 266 KB
• Environment 3-env, item 4. PDF 399 KB
• Regeneration and Growth 4-rg, item 4. PDF 462 KB
• Assistant Chief Executive 5-ace, item 4. PDF 238 KB
• Public Health 6-ph, item 4. PDF 118 KB
• Finance and IT 7-fin-it, item 4. PDF 124 KB
• Human Resources 8-hr, item 4. PDF 120 KB
• Budget Savings by theme budget-app1-pdf-format, item 4. PDF 214 KB

The main report states:

There is a risk that the collective savings will have a significant impact on those vulnerable people who are the greatest users of council services.

Overall, the groups most at risk of being impacted are older people, disabled people, children and people from black ethnic backgrounds.

There would also be a low impact on women, people who do not speak English and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. There is a risk that disabled people could be severely affected by experiencing a raft of changes from different service areas, even if each proposal may appear to have a limited impact in isolation.

Many proposals will have an impact on staff, especially in corporate services where the majority of the budgets are made up of staffing costs.

Given the scale of staffing reductions, there is potential for these proposals to have a significant impact on all levels of the workforce. The majority of the workforce is BAME and it is important that changes are not disproportionate in terms of their impact. Brent’s Managing Change Policy and Procedure provides a framework to be followed during times of organisational change to minimise the risk of a negative impact on any equality groups. The Managing Change Policy requires that staffing changes undergo equality analysis to ensure that the restructure process is conducted in a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory manner. The Equality Team will review the cumulative impact of restructures on the workforce diversity profile.

 Cllr Sam Stopp's commentary on the Full Council meeting should perhaps be read with the above comments in mind LINK