Don't bomb Syria - weaken ISIS by cutting off its funds and arms supplies

I am publishing this letter to Dawn Butler from local activist Sarah Cox as a Guest Blog in the light of Dawn Butler's call for constituents to give her their views on the bombing of Syria. Butler's poll is HERE

 I have just sent this email to Dawn Butler. Please email her too. You can do it through the Stop the War Coalition website Home or write your own email LINK
 
Dear Dawn Butler,

Thank you for your very thoughtful reply to my previous email to you about the possibility of Britain joining in the bombing of Syria. I would like to ask you to consider again how dangerous and indeed counterproductive such a course of action would be.

I am sure you agree that policy decisions should be evidence based, not the result of knee jerk reactions or simply about this country's position in the world, so I am asking you to consider the following facts:

The US has been bombing ISIS positions for a year now and far from reducing the number of ISIS fighters or the area of land they control, both have increased. In fact it has been argued by some Middle East experts that US bombs act as recruiting agents for ISIS.

The bombing and invasion of Iraq did not bring peace and stability to that country, in fact ISIS was born out of the divisions in Iraqi society introduced by the US sponsored Iraqi government.
The bombing and occupation of Afghanistan have not brought peace or stability to that country, nor did NATO forces succeed in their stated aim of eliminating the Taliban, which still controls large parts of the country.

Allied bombing of Libya has not brought peace or stability to that country, in fact it has resulted in the creation of a chaotic failed state in which ISIS is able to recruit and organise.

Only today we learn that Turkish forces have shot down a Russian plane, claiming it was over Turkish airspace, while Russia insists it had not left Syrian airspace. How sensible is it to send more planes into the already crowded airspace over ISIS positions in Syria?

There are up to six million civilians living in the areas under ISIS control. Do you seriously believe that US, French, Australian, Jordanian, Russian and, if this country joins in, British bombs can distinguish between innocent civilians and ISIS supporters any more than the bombs dropped on Dresden (arguably a war crime by today's standards) did between Nazis and ordinary people suffering under Nazi rule?

Can there be any justification for dropping bombs on ISIS because they behead and inflict other barbarous punishments on the people in the areas they control, while continuing to supply arms to Saudi Arabia and other states which also behead and inflict barbarous punishments on people living in their countries? Saudi Arabia does behead people publicly, contrary to what David Cameron says, earlier this year they advertised for eight more executioners and recently sentenced a Sri Lankan woman domestic worker to be stoned to death, yet Britain regards Saudi Arabia, which arms and supports ISIS as a friend and ally.

Surely Jeremy Corbyn is right to say that the priority must be to cut off funding, support and arms supplies to ISIS and to seek a political solution to the immensely complex situation in Syria?

As for the threat of terrorist attacks in this country, I believe that indiscriminate bombing and increasing Western intervention in the Middle East make these more likely and that cuts to police funding will make us less safe. At the same time, a climate of rising Islamophobia, cuts to youth services and policies like the Prevent strategy that seek to silence debate about foreign policy or issues like Palestine could increase disaffection among young Muslims.

Thank you for taking the time  to read this. Please vote against further bombing of Syria and support policies that weaken ISIS by decreasing or stopping its funding and its arms supplies.

Yours sincerely,
Sarah Cox

Sheila Robin: fellow activist and friend

Sheila Robin

A wave of disbelief swept through friends and fellow activists of Sheila Robin on Wednesday when  we heard of her death after a short illness.

Sheila combined energy, commitment, thoughtfulness, courage and a love of life in a unique way that makes her loss particularly painful.  Fiercely politically independent, she not only supported many campaigns but did much of the detailed  hard work that made them successful.  

Characteristically my last email from her was about the Brent Stop the War meeting that is being held on Monday. She was concerned that the title  of the talk 'Don't bomb Syria' was rather boring and uninspiring and urged people to come up with something 'brilliant'.

That nagging at the detail to get the most out of a political action was very much a Sheila trait and the annual Stop the War-Brent PSC Fundraising Garden Party was an event that brought her organising skills to the fore. She managed to persuade Julie Felix to perform this year which made it our most successful fundraiser to date.

Sheila never shrank from difficult issues, thinking exhaustively through all the principles involved, before reaching a position. I saw this close up when we were involved in the controversy over the Tricycle Theatre's decision not to accept Israeli government funding of the Jewish Film Festival.

It wasn't all hard work though, Sheila enjoyed having fun whether at the theatre, cinema, comedy club, choir or sailing!

Below are tributes from those who both worked with Sheila politically and enjoyed socialising with her:

Sheila with Brent Stop the War Banner

From Brent Stop the War Facebook: I am sorry to have to pass on the very sad news that Sheila Robin, the immensely hard working secretary of Brent Stop The War, active in the Red/Green socialist choir and many more labour movement and international campaigns died suddenly on Tuesday. 

Sheila has been absolutely central to Brent Stop the War, making it the priority of her political activity for the last few years. We will miss her immensely.

We felt that Sheila would have wanted us to proceed with Monday’s meeting and to do all we can to keep the group going, although she will be impossible to replace.

Sheila had been unwell for several months and was awaiting an operation, but we all expected her to recover in the near future, so this has come as a huge shock to us all. Our thoughts are with her daughter, Anna, and all the family at this very difficult time.

Sarah Cox (Brent Stop the War)

 
Sheila contributed so much to so many - individuals and causes.... Here is a photo of her, taken a few years ago, with her friend (and my partner) Ian Saville.  Sheila was always a person to go to for good advice. She absolutely committed to thinking and thinking and thinking again about the best way to go about things - whether it was buying a new hoover or organising a campaign or supporting family and friends with some difficulties to sort out.

Pam Laurance
  

Sheila was a dedicated and hard-working member of Brent Stop the War from its inception, taking on the role of Secretary in recent years. She worked tirelessly on fund-raising intitatives and to make our monthly meetings a success. In recent months, she was especially inspired by Jeremy Corbyn’s bid to become Labour leader, contacting repeatedly her local MP to get her to nominate him. Her persistence succeeded and Jeremy got the requisite number of nominations, allowing him to achieve today’s stunning success. It is highly poignant that Sheila is not here to share in the celebrations today. More than that, she will be greatly missed by activists in Brent who will remember her anti-war and anti-cuts campaigning and her unshakeable belief that a better world was possible. 

Mike Phipps, Chair, Brent Stop the War.

Sheila was inspiring to work with, a human Dynamo as described by Diane. 

I was inspired by Sheila to implement strategies /ideas/suggestions that were originally thought impossible or impractical. She did not follow 'a party line' and was always questioning.

She initiated contacts with a variety of community and political groups as well as individuals such as Joan Baez.

Sheila had a wide range of friends and interest.  I always enjoyed going with Sheila to mainly non mainstream theatre, comedy, concerts and cinema, although I never sailed with her  or accompanied her to distant places!

Sheila would proclaim each year she would withdraw from organising meetings and fund raising but each year she would be involved as enthusiastically as before. She was always direct and honest. 

Despite her medical problems and the associated pain and exhaustion Sheila would persevere.

We will miss her.

Liz Lindsay (Brent and Harrow Palestine Solidarity Campaign) 

There was a sense of unbearable shock to hear the news of Sheila Robin’s death. She had not been struggling with a long term illness but had died after a short period of ill health.  It was not as if she was a close friend, but it was as an activist in Jews for Justice for Palestinians that I came to know her.  She was someone who could be relied on to be open and forthright, to address issues with a passion and with commitment.  

Sheila was someone who could be relied on to make a contribution to debate and to take on the humdrum tasks that any organisation needs.  We kept bumping into one another at meetings, at events and at protests.  This is how many of us came to know and appreciate Sheila, a sound helper and comrade active in the grassroots of the movement for Palestinian self determination.   Her courage and good humour were always in evidence and it is almost impossible to absorb the fact that her vibrant personality is no longer with us.  It was a privilege to know her

Diana Neslen (Jews for Justice for Palestinians)


 I was very shocked and saddened to hear about about Sheila. She was always one of the people I could guarantee to bump into on any protest and campaign, and we waved hello to each other at the crowded Jeremy Corbyn meeting in the Camden Centre just a few weeks ago. I also used to see her occasionally in her work capacity in Islington. Wishing long life to her family and close friends.

David Rosenberg (Jewish Socialist Group)


Sheila was both a friend and a fellow activist. She was always a pleasure to work with for her enthusiasm, great ideas and energy. She was completely dedicated and an important part of a number of local, national and international campaigns and will be missed by all. I particularly appreciated her support and advice.

Aisha Maniar

Please feel free to add futher tributes as comments or by email.

NW London Hospital's 'Requires improvement' rating raises serious questions about planned closures

Guest blog from local activist Sarah Cox on the Care Quality Commission's report LINK on the North West London Hospital s NHS Trust which includes Central Middlesex, Northwick Park and St Mark's hospitals.

-->

With only a few weeks to go before the A & E at Central  Middlesex closes for ever on September 10th, this report raises grave concerns. Patients from the most deprived areas of Brent which are served by Central Middlesex will be forced to travel to the A & E at Northwick Park which is short staffed and "requires improvement".

The report also reveals that:

Patient flow through Northwick Park Hospital was having an impact on people waiting in A&E, and pressure on the critical care units was so great that some people were being discharged too early and subsequently readmitted.

Time and again the Clinical Commissioning Group and the architects of the Shaping a Healthier Future project under which these closures are being implemented, have assured the community that, transformed into a Major Hospital in which all the services for a wide area are concentrated, Northwick Park Hospital would provide better services for patients. Time and again patients and community members who are concerned for the NHS expressed our doubts. Judging by this report, we were right to do so. The NW London Hospital Trust assured recent Overview and Scrutiny meeting of Brent Council, that Northwick Park Hospital will be ready to take on the extra patients when Central Middlesex A & E closes. Really?

This report is also critical of Maternity services at Northwick Park:

CQC also identified that maternity services required improvement to ensure women received a safe and effective service. Maternity was rated as Inadequate for responsiveness, as women could not always summon the assistance they required and individual needs were not being met.

 This is due to staff shortages, yet under the SaHF proposals, Hammersmith and Ealing Hospitals will lose their maternity services. Many patients who would have gone to Ealing for maternity care will have to attend NPH in future. Will it be able to cope?

Overall, Central Middlesex is rated good, but the report points out that many staff there feel isolated from the rest of the trust. Over the last few years, services have been transferred from CMH to NPH with staff often being required to move at a few days' notice. Many staff have said that they much prefer working at Central Middlesex, but are not given the choice.

Health campaigners believe that the changes being imposed on our hospitals are driven by financial considerations and the Government's policy of handing over our NHS to private companies who will run services for profit not the needs of the patients. 

REPORT SUMMARY

Truce called as election opponents unite against UKIP's racism

 

Supporters of the various parties and campaigns fightinfgthe elections in Brent took time off this afternoon to unite against the racist and Islamophobic views of Heino Vockrod, UKUP candidate for Dudden Hill, revealed by the Kilburn Times LINK 

Labour leader Muhammed Butt, was joined by Pete Murry of the Green Party, Sarah Cox of SWP and TUSC, Alex Colas of Make Willesden Green, and L:ucy Cox of TUSC.

Leaflets urged residents to use their vote to keep out UKIP in the upcoming local and European elections.

Cllr Butt with the welcome message at Neasden Shopping Centre

Stop them Blocking A Healthier Future: Give evidence to People's Inquiry into London's NHS

Guest blog from Sarah Cox

The People's Inquiry on London's NHS held its NW London session yesterday in Ealing. There was powerful and compelling testimony from many people, notably Anne Drinkell, who described from her immediate experience, backed up by research, the strains on those working in the community, their need for accessible comprehensive back up services in hospital for the increasingly complex needs of the patients and the inadequacy of the Shaping a Healthier Future proposals. She proclaimed her commitment to keeping people out of hospital wherever possible, but the resources are being cut, not expanded as they would need to be.

Gurinder Sandhu, a consultant in infectious diseases at Ealing Hospital spoke passionately about the increase in TB - Brent and Ealing have levels higher than many third world countries - the multiple problems caused by increases in homelessness and the number of patients living "below the radar" with whom Ealing Hospital has formed relationships.

Mary Daly, asked at the last minute to take Muhammed Butt's place, was absolutely excellent. Her experience as a health visitor informed her understanding of the problems we face and the inadequacy of the Out of Hospital care proposals without adequate resources and the dangers of fragmentation of our local health services especially as Brent CCG seems to be pursuing a policy of "macho privatisation" a phrase used by one of the panel members.

Participating in these inquiries is really worthwhile. There are more sessions to come and email evidence is also welcome. Please everyone add your experience and views. Unlike the mock Shaping a Healthier Future "consultation" they will be taken seriously. www.peoplesinquiry.org

Now it's time for James Powney to apologise

The Brent Executive approved plans to licence leafleting in designated areas, along with a hefty overall free and additional charges per leafleter, on Monday evening. Sarah Cox and I both spoke against the proposals pointing out the lack of clarity about exemptions, the impact on small businesses and those organising events, the absence of any substantial research on the success or otherwise of such schemes in the past, and the failure to give any information on how the policy would be enforced. Sarah even pointed out discrepancies within the document on charges.

Sarah Cox, speaking for Brent Fightback,  challenged Cllr James Powney's attack on the Brent and Kilburn Times in his blog LINK which implied that the campaign against the scheme  was an invention.  Sarah quite rightly pointed out that the BKT story was based on the Council's own statement to a journalist and said, 'It is absolutely right that the local press has been vigilant and brought this to the attention of the people of Brent".

However in his response to our speeches, Powney again had a go at the reporter about inaccuracy, despite her waving a copy of the Council's e-mail from her seat.

Now in today's Brent and Kilburn Times there is a letter from Michael Read, Assistant Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services, which seeks to 'clarify any confusion about the powers the council has just agreed' and confirms that the exemption will cover campaigning for political purposes, such as local library campaigners'.

He does not admit that the 'confusion' arose from the council's own e-mail to the reporter, which followed the reporters request for clarification.

There is an Editor's note at the end of Michael Read's letter stating:

Brent Council's communication team has issued an apology to the Times for issuing an inaccurate statement on which our original report was based.

It is obviously up to the BKT to decide what to do but my personal view is that Cllr Powney also owes the paper,  and its senior reporter,  an apology.

Below are notes from the speech I made on Monday:

 Talking to people about these proposals over the weekend I was told both that they were a 'farce' and that they were 'fascist'. I think the truth lies somewhere between the two!


Cllr Powney will say we've got it all wrong - it always was meant to be 'political purposes' and not 'political parties' but the Brent and Kilburn Times reporter stands by her quote from the Council and is circulating the council's e-mail here tonight.

“Licensing will only apply to certain streets in Brent.  Charities would be exempt from these new rules and political parties would be exempt during election times."

This is not semantics. The danger is that the Council's interpretation is so narrow that it will affect campaigns. There needs to be precise definitions in the documentation.

Cllr Powney will also say that this is not new and is merely updating of powers but this is not stated in the report and there is no detail or assessment of effectiveness of previous policy.

Cllr John has said we've got it all wrong and it is only about commercial leafleting but again this is not stated  in the report.

Putting aside the political dimension what about small businesses?

Can you imagine the poor contestants of the Apprentice setting up a small shop on Wembley High Road and trying to drum up business?

Let's give out some leaflets... Oh, we have to give 14 days notice....and apply for  licence....and we have to wear a high visibility vest...oh, we have to have 'Authorised Distributor' printed on it...and a badge with our licence number...and pay £175 upfront plus £75 daily for each distributor...and check whether our distributor has been done for littering in the last year.

The Council is in danger of making itself a laughing stock. The Executive should send this poorly written report back to be properly researched and rewritten - they cannot vote for such an unclear policy.

Outrage as Brent Council plan to charge citizens for free speech

I thought a speaker at the Willesden Area Consultative Forum might have been rather exaggerating when she likened living under Brent Council rule to  living in the Soviet Union but then we read of Brent's plans to include community groups in plans to licence (and charge) distributors of free literature.  I wrote in my blog breaking news of the plans that the definition of 'political purposes' would be open to interpretation LINK. Campaigns around cuts and libraries etc are 'political' but not representing a political party. It now appears that Brent's interpretation is that exempt activities are those of political parties campaigning at election time. See Brent and Kilburn Times story LINK

So if we want to campaign against Council policies in designated areas we must seek their permission and pay a fee to do so!

Veteran activist Sarah Cox has expressed the outrage that many Brent people feel in a letter to Councillors Gladbaum, Long and Beswick:

Dear Councillors Beswick, Long and Gladbaum,

I am writing to you as my ward councillors and copying this email to Cllr Ann John as leader of the Council because I learned from the local paper that you intend to discuss on Monday a proposal to charge £175 for a license to give out leaflets in the main shopping areas of the borough with a further charge of £75 a day. This proposal, if passed, would represent an outrageous curtailment of human rights. Maybe you have been taking lessons from Uzbekistan or China. You may have been irritated by the distribution of leaflets and collection of signatures from people opposed to cuts and closures of services in the borough, but surely that is an essential part of democracy?

According to the paper, political parties, charities and religious groups will be exempted, but I often give out leaflets for bodies which do not fit any of these categories like Unite Against Fascism, the Stop the War Coalition or Brent Fightback. The cost of leaflets I am likely to give out on any day is probably twenty pounds or less, to charge £175 plus £75 a day (for each person?) is to gag all protest and free speech.

The editor of the Kilburn and Brent Times recognises the threat to democracy posed by you proposal, I am shocked and surprised that you do not. I hope someone will be allowed to speak at Monday's Council meeting to oppose this outrageous idea. I hate litter as much as anyone, but the litter I see on the streets is plastic bags, food wrappings, old clothes and mattresses, not leaflets asking people to protest against library closures, fascism and war.

I hope to hear from you that you will be voting against this proposal.

Stark impact of government 'social cleansing' housing policy in Brent

Post eviction scene?

Brent Council expects 512 families to lose their homes through being unable to afford their rent in private accommodation as a result of  the Housing Benefit cap in January 2012, a further 714 in February and 799 in March. 

The weekly loss of benefit will be:
1 bedroomed accommodation £7.69
2 bedroomed £34.40
3 bedroomed £98.74
4 bedroomed £200
5 bedroomed £282.24

Clearly the cuts will affect people with large families disproportionally.

Jacky Peacock, Executive Director of Brent Private Tenants Group, in quietly setting out the figures at today's meeting organised by Barry Gardiner at Brent Town Hall. did more to bring home the seriousness of the situation than any passionate politician's speech could have done.

She reported that in 2009 there were 22,281 privately rented homes in Brent, representing about 84,000 people. There were more children in privately rented housing than in social housing.  Tenants were young and not so young professionals often having to stay in rented accommodation into their 40s or 50s, half of all  renters were on housing benefit. There were students, migrant workers and older tenants with regulated tenancies.

She said that in 2010/11 Brent Council had to find private lettings for 548 families and between April and October another 173. Anyone moving into 'temporary accommodation' as a result of losing their home could expect to be in it for 10-11 years. Many rents in the cheapest third of rental accommodation were already above the capped amounts.

Rents had already increased by 5.7% this year and landlords were expecting another 6% over the next 12 months. One third of privately rented homes fall below Decent Homes Standards and 15% have serious damp problems compared with 8% owner occupied and 10% social housing. Private tenants were four times more likely to live in a cold home with resultant health problems. May were forced to go to bed to keep room rather than  try to keep warm sitting in their room.

Jacky said we had never seen a situation like this before: families would be forced to move out of London to find affordable accommodation with the resultant dislocation of support from friends and families and disruption of children's education.

Cllr Janice Long, Brent lead member for housing, told the full hall that she had nothing but doom to convey.  She said she could see no light at the end of the tunnel. She told tenants that the worse thing they could do was to not pay the rent and get into debt - it would  be better to move, She said that if they got accepted as homeless by the Council that was not the end of the problem as there was no spare bed and breakfast accommodation - it would be provided outside of Brent. She said that making the argument that children's education would be disrupted if the family moved far away wouldn't wash - they would have to find a school elsewhere.

Looking forward to the future Janice said that 'affordable' housing wasn't the answer as the Coalition government had changed the definition of 'affordable' to 80% of the market rent - making it not affordable to Brent residents on the average Brent wage. In addition the government would cut housing benefit to those without a job whom they deemed able to work.

She said, 'The Council is not to blame. It's the government that has decided on the social cleansing of London."

Contributing from the floor Shahrar Ali admired Cllr Long's honesty but wondered if rather than merely manage the consequences of the cuts ('You sometimes sounded like a member of the Coalition') the Council should be doing more to engage in the fight against them.  We heard about landlords harassing 80 year olds to get them out of property, landlords giving tenants notice to quiet who tried to get the landlord to improve insulation through the Green deal, a 25 year teacher who could not afford to move out of her mother's home, people who had the income:price ratios to get a mortgage but not the hefty deposits now required, a woman who been forced to move six times in rapid succession losing deposits and fees with each move.

The social cost in terms of health problems, disrupted education and temporary accommodation costs would outweigh the 'savings' made by the government through their benefit cap, according to several contributors. However, as I murmured to my neighbour, most of those costs would be shifted to already hard-pressed local authorities and away from central government budgets.

In my contribution I told the meeting that my experience at Chalkhill School was that families were already being evicted as tenancies came to an end and there were already increased numbers in temporary accommodation. Families were being offered accommodation as far away as Birmingham and Milton Keynes. Sometime ago I met a Nepalese family who had moved to Milton Keynes who had to move again because of racial harassment from local youth there.Brent families, used to living in a multiracial environment, might face similar problems.

I noted that the recent consultation on the Wembley Plan stated that developers were not currently willing to build affordable housing because of low profits. Plans had been put on the back burner and they were instead investing in private student accommodation. The Council needed to negotiate with Quintain, the main developer, to ensure the housing was built. Cllr Janice Long confirmed that the Wembley Plan's definition of affordable was the old one, rather than the new 80% of affordable rent definition.

When  I asked that more be done about locating and taking over empty housing, Janice Long at first said that often such housing had a story attached to it, but later said that the present Compulsory Purchase of Empty Properties policy inherited from the last Brent administration was gummy (lacked teeth) and could do with strengthening. Jacky Peacock said that despite problems her experience was that if the local authority had a robust CPO policy on empty properties and implemented it, for every one property compulsorily purchased owners would put anothet100 on the market.  Jacky also agreed that with Sarah Cox that other empty property in Brent could be purchased and converted to housing where appropriate.

Chris Williamson, Labour MP a member of the shadow housing team, said that the previous Labour government hadn't got everything right on housing but would learn from its mistakes. The Labour Party wanted to bring the private rented sector up to standard but accepted its role in society. He stressed that the Labour Party was in 'listening mode'. He said that the supply of affordable housing needed government intervention and investment in it would provide a stimulus to the economy.

The meeting ended with a call for a big campaign on the issue and requests for people to join the Brent Private Tenants' Rights Group. LINK Navin Shah, Labour AM for Brent and Harrow, reminded the audience that they would have a chance to express their views electorally in next year's Mayoral and London Assembly election.

Find out more from  Brent Private Tenants' Rights Group 36-38 Willesden Lane, Kilburn, London NW6 7ST Tel: 020 7624 4327 info@bptrg.org   Website: www.bptrg.org

What should the council do about Coalition instigated cuts? The debate begins.

Today's Any Questions? with Labour Councillors and representatatives of Brent Fightback  was a lively affair.  Janice Long and Jim Moher (with Lesley Jone as a later substitute for Moher) appeared for Brent Labour Councillors and Pete Firmin and Sarah Cox for Fightback. Pete Firmin is chair of Brent TUC.

Janice Long said she was unwilling to refuse to implement cuts as someone else making them would be worse. Cllr Moher said that he was the only member of the Executive to make changes in proposals as the results of representations and had not implemented the proposed cuts to school crossing patrols. He said the Council had protected front-line services but had to exercise the 'judgement of Solomon' in deciding what to cut. In response to ex-Labour councillor Graham Durham, who called on the council to unite with other London Labour councils and refuse to implement the cuts, he said that the situation now was far more difficult than the 1980s when Durham had been a councillor.

Sarah Cox said the Coalition had no mandate for the cuts in the NHS and it was time to resist bad laws. She said the Council should have put together a 'needs budget' and taken it out to the people of Brent as a basis for a united campaign by the council, its workers, and the Brent public against the Coalition's policies. Pete Firmin said that Labour councillors hadn't taken up opportunities when they could have worked with local activists, such as attending the Fightback lobby of Sarah Teather, MP for Brent Central. He said other London Labour councils were backing the public sector strike on November 30th but no such backing had come from Brent Labour council. Labour's  deputy leader, Cllr Butt, had referred a caller who wanted to oppose the overnight closure of Central Middlesex A and E Department, to Brent Fightback. The council itself needed to get organised against such cuts.

Janice Long said with the council having to choose between closing libraries and enabling people to carry on living in their houses she had to say that having a house was more important.  Her statement was challenged as conflating local government cuts and the government's cap on housing benefit.

Questioned by Shahrar Ali, Brent and Harrow  Green Party candidate for the London Assembly, about the cost of the new Civic Centre, Janice Long said the cost to Brent residents was neutral and it would reduce the council's carbon footprint and provide more space. It would  pay for itself over 25 years.  Cllr Moher said that the cost of the interest on the £102m project would be a further £25m but the Civic Centre would save the council £4m a year compared with the current buildings. He admitted that it was a difficult project to justify in the current situation of cuts and recession.

Pete Firmin said the we needed transparency and honesty about the Civic Centre and that another connected issue was the concentration of services in Wembley rather than in the various localities of Brent.

Cllr  Moher said that he was right behind the November 30th strike as an individual but that the council itself wanted to see lower public sector pensions because of their cost.  He supported a pension based on 'career average' earnings rather than a 'final salary' scheme. He justified this on the basis of the immense burden on council tax papers of the pensions of high salaried senior officers but a member of the audience pointed out that this would also affect the low paid - the average salary based on 40 years service was much lower than one base don final salary.

In response to join the NUT and other unions at the Torch, Bridge Road, Wembley at 9.30am on November 30th, Janice said that she hadn't known about that, but the Brent Central Labour Party would be on the march.

There was a brief discussion about whether campaigners should stand an 'anti cuts' candidate in the forthcoming Wembley Central by-election. There were a variety of views on this and it will be discussed at a later Fightback meeting.

Earlier in the day there had been speeches from Chris Coates about the Brent SOS Libraries Campaign and its success in mobilising people, raising money and getting  high profile support form famous authors. Jeremy Taylor, President of Brent Teachers Association and NUT representative at Preston Manor High School, spoke about the impact of cuts on students at his school and how the changes in pensions would affect teachers. He expressed concern both for teachers and students if teachers were forced to go on teaching well into their 60s when the job required so much energy. He demonstrated that the changes in pension contribution represented a wage cut in real terms.

In a wide-ranging speech Kishan Parshotam, Chair of Brent Youth Parliament and a Brent UK Youth Parliament member said that the BYP was campaigning against negative stereotyping of youth and for their voice to heard. He said that they supported the reduction of the voting age to 16 so that politicians would have to listen to their concerns. The cuts in libraries would mean over-crowded study areas and poor ICT access for the most needy students, particularly in the south of Brent, who lacked those facilities at home.

He told the audience that in discussions 8 and 9 year old children were well able to talk about how cuts would affect them and should not be under-estimated.

As well as councillors, campaigners and residents, the meeting was attended by Dawn Butler, ex-Labour MP for South Brent, but she made no contribution during the open sessions. Cllr James Powney trotted past the venue just before the Assembly started but kept his head down and did not come in.

I think a valuable debate and perhaps even a dialogue was opened up during the day. Brent Fightback wants to involve a broader spectrum of people and this was a modest start. We now need to consider how to involve more people at a time when everyone is feeling hard-pressed and those most affected by the cuts are concentrating on day to day survival.

Shahrar Ali's take on the day is HERE

Teather lobbies Lansley, Cameron and Clegg on NHS Changes

Safe in her hands?

In a letter to constituent Sarah Cox, Sarah Teather MP has recognised the concerns of local residents on the proposed NHS changes:

I have received letters from an overwhelming number of constituents on this issue and I am well aware of the strength of feeling. I believe our National Health Service is a major part of this country's history and something to be proud of.

As I am sure you are aware, the Department of Health are taking the opportunity to pause and review the plans and allow for more consultation with GPs and the public.

I have already written to Andrew Lansley, Secretary of State for Health, outlining the concerns that many of my constituents have raised. I have today written to both David Cameron and Nick Clegg to make them fully aware of the views of the people of Brent on the proposed NHS reforms. I will be sure to write again as soon as I received a response.

Sarah Cox responded by saying, "We don't just want the NHS to be part of our history but part of our present and future too!"

Save OUR College - Kilburn unites against closure

The community and the generations unite to save Kilburn Centre

A bustling Kilburn High Road, thick with Saturday traffic and shoppers, witnessed early resistance to the cuts when lecturers, students and their children, trades unionists, Brent Trades Council and local supporters marched to demonstrate against the closure of Kilburn Centre. The College of North West London is closing the £5.5m centre only three years after it opened in order to save money.  At the same time it has an unused building in Wembley Park worth £4m that it is refusing to sell off because it is waiting for the property market to recover.

Sarah Cox of Brent Trades Council, addressing the open air meeting in Kilburn Square rightly said that the CNWL should be educators, not property speculators. She emphasised the importance of the Centre as a local resource and the necessity for a building within easy walking distance for parents with young children.She remarked that the political parties had been vocal at the public meeting in support of the Centre during the General Election campaign but only the Green Party were present today.

Alf Filer of the UCU and Harrow College delivered a message of support and spoke about how the impact of cuts and recession had hit his own family. Hank Roberts of the NUT spoke about education cuts in general and called for direct action citing the occupation of Wembley Playing Fields in opposition to the building of the Wembley Academy. 

 

Not speaking, but evident from the posters - and very welcome, was the support of the Kilburn Times for the battle to save the Centre.

Standing in for Pete Murry, ex-CNWL  lecturer and Secretary of the Green Party Trade Union Group, who had a meeting elsewhere, I pledged the support of Brent Green Party for the campaign.  I said that Further Education was particularly important to me because as an '11+ failure' who had left school at 16, attending FE evening classes in my 20s had enabled me to get the qualifications to enter teacher training.

Further Education is a lifeline, a second chance, and has the capacity to change lives. That is why we must defend it. At the same time at the other end of the age spectrum Children's Centres, which are geared to improving life chances in the early years, are facing an uncertain future. Funding is only guaranteed for one year and with 20 Centres on stream, Brent may be faced with mothballing new buildings.

These buildings in our borough have been paid for by our taxes. They are OUR buildings and as such rather than letting them be mothballed and useless, we should take them over for community use. I could have added that with the policy on so-called 'free schools' we should be wary that they might be the target for private companies or charities to set up their own schools, funded by us, but outside any democratic accountability.

If we are to fight climate change and create a low carbon economy, we need to invest in education and training. It will be a scandal if the people of Brent, with its high unemployment rate, should miss out on such opportunities.

Sign the Campaign Petition HERE   Contact the campaign to offer help at cnwlkilburn@googlemail.com