Further comments on Welsh School planning application to build in King Eddie's Park

Denise Cheong has submitted the following additional comments regarding the Planning Applciation to convert the Bowling Green Pavilion in King Edward VII Park Wembley to a classroom and build an additional classrook nearby. This will be used by the London Welsh School, displaced from Stonebridge, along with Stonebridge Adventure Playground, by the expansion of Stonebridge Primary School. The Adventure Playground has not been offered an alternative site  or any other help by Brent Council, indeed its Council  funding has been cut.

The below additional comments are in relation to planning application no. 14/4208:

The council has a duty of care to Brent residents when providing pre-application planning advice, during the planning process and when deciding on planning applications.

The historic value of this parkland is worthy of preservation: King Edward VII Park was bought by the council in 1913 (and opened in 1914) to compensate the residents of Wembley for the loss of Parkland at Wembley Park, which was being developed as a high class residential garden suburb.   
Cllr Stopp mentioned the possibility of a disconnect arising in his committee speech on 13th January. Now is the time for Brent planning officers and planning committee members to take serious note of the Brent residents this application will affect. The residents who actually are neighbours of King Edward VII Park (affectionately known as King Eddie's Park), the residents who actually use King Eddie's Park, residents who grew up in Brent and or actually live in Wembley and the London Borough of Brent.

The additional documents submitted fail to provide an area of land (for the proposed landswap) that is of equal or better quality as per paragraph 74 of the National Planning Policy Framework, as highlighted by Sport England. The documents propose that residents sit or lie down on what was completely waterlogged grass yesterday (18th January 2015), beside the traffic fumes of the frequent tail backs of stationary vehicles on Park Lane whilst enjoying a beverage and the views. I noted the predominant view from the steep bank yesterday as being of a couple of leafless trees. In addition, opening that land up to public use would put the striking London Borough of Brent landmark, that is the mock tudor Collins Lodge, in danger of vandalisation and arson.

The community have expressed a willingness to provide a community hub, which will truly enable the wider Wembley, Brent and a broad spectrum of the population to make use of it. Furthermore, they will re-open Wembley Bowls Club with the Council's permission and have 60+ happy to be fee paying members provisionally signed up to date.

Under these community proposals:
1. No park trees would be unneccesarily cut down. i.e. the 4 category B trees (a Monterey Cypress Tree and 3 Irish Yew Trees) proposed to be removed, which have the ability to contribute to the quality of an area for up to 20 years (and even if proved to be diseased through probe testing, rather than merely showing signs of disease, could live on for a many years),
2. No land within the bounds of our King Eddie's Park would be built on
3. No children would be put at risk through misguided planning advice and inexperience of actual life in the Wembley area

Whilst planning application number 14/4208 does not comply with paragraphs 74 and 123 of the National Planning Policy Framework, as well as CP18 of the core strategy and the All London Green Grid, our Community Business Proposal would comply with all the aforementioned planning policies.

Please acknowledge receipt by return reply. Thank you.

Pain and anger as news of Stonebridge Adventure Playground closure spreads

Audley Harrison and children fight for the playground

Following Brent Council's vote to close Stonebridge Adventure Playgroubnd after nearly 40 years of serving generations of children in one of London's poorest areas comments are pouring into the playground's Facebook page:

One of the most galling aspects of the campaign is the contempt that councillors have shown to campaigners not hesitating to lie when it suits them:

Butchery at the Civic Centre as Labour closes playground and approves £54m cuts

Demonstrators held these signs up at the meeting

No 'rebellion' emerged at tonight's meetiong of Full Council and the cuts were voted through by the Labour majority.

I spoke to Stonebridge Adventure Playground before the meeting and they told me that they would not be attending. They had thrown themselves into a campaign gaining massive support from the community that they have served for almost 40 years, had been lied about by Cllr Margaret McLellan and had passionately put their case to the Cabinet last Monday.

They said that attending tonight would have been like going to their own execution.

They were right.

Now they have to make staff redundant and break the news to the children.

There was a demonstration outside the Civic Centre before the meeting protesting both at the Coalition's cuts and Brent Council's implementation of them.

The only real sign of revolt came from Cllr John Duffy who initially protested at the lack of democracy in the allocation of time to councillors in the debate. The administration and opposition leaders got 15 minutes and back benchers only 3 minutes.  He said this was not enough to deal with the complex issues involved in the budget.

Labour leader Muhammed Butt and his Deputy Michael Pavey basically made the same 'dented shield' speeches they had made at Cabinet. Butt said his heart was with the demonstrators outside but they council had to obey the law. Pavey said that he respected those Labour members who wanted a rise in Council Tax and this might be something to consider next year.

Conservatives proposed a Council Tax reduction of 2.5% but at the same time wanted to save Stonebridge Playground. Labour challenged their 'sums' which seemed to be based on raiding the reserves. It was hard for me to judge as the detailed Conservative budget was not available to the public. Public scrutiny is meaningless in such circumstances. Cllr Warren said that the budget consultation was more about scaring the people of Brent than really getting their views.

Cllr Nerva (Labour) quoted the Conservative leader of Buckinghamshire County Council who had said that there was no more room for deeper cuts without damaging services and claimed, 'we can;t go on cutting year after year. We face difficult decisions about how to protect Brent residents.'

One 'difficult decision' may be to raise Council Tax. Cllr John Duffy claimed that his Labour colleagues  were making  £2m more cuts than Eric Pickles required. He was referring to the £1.7m that would be yielded over 2 years by a 1.99% rise in Council Tax which would have saved some of the services being cut tonight including the Adventure Playground, Energy Resources and the Welsh Harp. He said that the Council had lied to local people by claiming that the consultation would make a difference.

On Stonebridge Cllr Duffy said that the Council was behaving like a bad landlord by mixing funding cuts up with development proposals, throwing the Playground out of its site to make way for housing.

However Duffy, to the disappointment of the public gallery, then said that nonetheless he was staying with Labour and would 'fight from inside the tent'.

Veteran Councillor Janice Long (Labour) warned that the Council's Scrutiny was inadequate. Backbenchers hadn't known when the meetings were and had no access to the papers.  She said, 'If we don't scrutinise properly the cuts will go wrong and we'll end up having to cut even more.'

Certainly the report the chair of Scrutiny presented was a mere echo of what the leader and deputy leader had said.

She called on the Council to set an example by making councillors pay to park at the Civic Centre and ending the provision of food at meetings.

This all seemed small beer compared with  the cuts that were then voted through by the Labour group as demonstrators staged a silent protest holding up the 'Only Butchers Make Cuts' posters.

Muhammed Butt, who had been barracked through by former Labour Councillor Graham Durham for doing the Coalition's dirty work and putting vulnerable children at risk, finished by listing all the services that had been 'saved' some of which will be farmed out to the voluntary sector.

Certainly his claim that the council had 'listened't o residents and was protecting the vulnerable  rang hollow when they had ignored 3,000 people who had signed the petition to save Stonebridge Adventure Playground.

He did not mention that the original list of cuts put out to consultation amounted to £60m over two years and that actually 'only' a  £54m  cutwas required. As mentioned on this biog before, there was always £6m to play for that could then be used as PR to give the impression that the Council had listened and thus put a gloss on the massive £54m cuts that had actually been made.

On the Stonebridge Adventure Playground Facebook Page, Glynis Lee posted the following message tonight:

At tonight's Council meeting Brent (Labour) voted NOT to save Stonebridge Adventure Playground...they all turned their backs on Bridge.....and will go ahead and sell the land to property developers, and give even more to Stonebridge school.....

So we must close at the end of this month.

So very sorry...we fought hard and long, and had tremendous support especially from the local paper and from the local community. I don't think we could have done any more.
We nearly made 40 years and thats an achievement in itself...

Brent Council likely to to pay the Big Lottery to close Stonebridge Adventure Playground!

Brent Council is at present wanting to turn  number of its services over to voluntary groups and charities, even to the extent in its Equalities Policy of asking council staff to volunteer.  So staff will be expected to volunteer, in their spare time, to run services where their colleagues were made redundant.

However, at the same time its treatment of voluntary organisations, such as Brent Play Association, and facilities bequeathed by local philanthropists such as Titus Barham, and agreements reached with organisations such as Fields in Trust, has been cavalier to say the least Now in the 21st century it is the Big Lottery that Brent is disrespecting.

The Big Lottery financed Stonebridge Adventure Playground, through Brent Play Association, which itself raised funds for many other businesses. Ironically the fact that it was  part-funded by an annual Council grant, limited how much the BPA could raise for itself.

Now, the Coucil is adamant that it will cut playground funding at the end of the financial year, and apprently, even while the BPA is finalising redundancy terms for its employees, has had the gall to ask if it would be possible for workers to carry on as volunteers, to cover the Easter and Summer holidays.

The closure is going to be expensive for the BPA but may also be so for Brent Council as they will be breaking an agreement made with the Big Lottery - that is if the Big Lottery decide to play ball with the Council.  My reading is that this may cost the Council up to £250,000 which they appear willing to pay.

Potential penalties are set out below:

Meanwhile Philip Grant has pointed out that:

-->

At item 9 on tonight's Cabinet agenda is a report from Andy Donald, Brent's Regeneration Director on how he proposes to spend S.106 (planning) funds for 2015/16 (the Development Funds Programme). One of the items is: 

Title: King Edward VII park landscaping bowling green. Purpose: Landscape the disused bowling green to increase informal recreation area. Ward: Wembley Central Details: There are no legal impediments to using this funding for this project. Given the importance of King Edward VII park to providing amenity space for the future occupants of the borough's largest growth area, this park is considered a priority. Proposed spending for 2015/16: £152,044.

Is it coincidence that the bowling green is adjacent to the proposed London Welsh School to be housed in the Bowling Green Pavilion, with an additional classroom to be built on the site?  The possible use of the bowling green as a play area for the 30 or so children at the school was mentioned at the beginning of the planning process but did not form part of the planning application. It was subsequently denied that it would be used as a regular part of the school's amenities. However, there seems to be little reason for it not to be used by the school as parks are public spaces.

As Jaine Lunn  has pointed out LINK this land is subject to a trust agreement between the Council and Fields in  Trust. This raises a question over 'no legal impediment' above as the Trust told Jaine re the Welsh School development:

I can confirm that Brent Council did submit a formal request to Fields in Trust with regards to granting a lease on the disused bowls pavilion area to the London Welsh Language primary school on a 15 year term, and in addition to erect a single storey classroom block and convert the paved hard landscape area to an all weather playground.   We were advised that the bowling green and Pavilion are unused and the area fenced off, furthermore there was no bowls interest. 

I can confirm that the Council’s request was rejected by our Trustees in January 2015 because the site is protected for recreational purposes and the proposed new use would be outside the objects of the Deed of Dedication.  In order for the matter to even be reconsidered by our Trustees the Council would need to offer up for protection a replacement site of at least the size of the land being lost or provide a payment which is to be made available for investment in the facilities within the remainder of the site.  To date we have not received a revised application, which I believe would only be forthcoming should planning consent be granted.

Neither the Fields in Trust Agreement, nor Regeneration's proposal feature in the Welsh School Planning application, although surely both are relevant to the application.

So the Council will pay money to get rid of the Stonebridge Adventure Playground and will spend money on landscaping a bowling green in Wembley. They help the Welsh School displaced from Stonebridge through the same school expansion process which requires building on the adventure playground, but cut the playground's funding and pay compensation to the Big Lottery.

Who said politics is about priorities?

Children, young people and parents will challenge Brent Cabinet over cuts on Monday

Monday's Cabinet will be approving the budget to go to the Full Council on March 2nd amidst press coverage of the row over the leadership refusing to take account of the vote of the Labour Group in favour of a Council Tax rise.

Meanwhile residents, and particularly the young and parents, have got togather to challenge some of those cuts.

The Cabinet will be receiving an unusually high number of petitions, accompanied by speeches from the petition organisers, which indicates the strength of feeling in the borough.

I am sure they will welcome support from the public at the meeting which starts at 7pm in the Civic Centre.

These are the petitions:

Cabinet – 23 February 2015

Petitions have been received in the following terms in response to the budget proposals:

1) Keep Stonebridge Adventure Playground Open “We the undersigned insist that the redevelopment of

Stonebridge School and the new housing, includes keeping the Stonebridge Adventure Playground open.”

From:         Brent Play Association

2) Keep Welsh Harp Environmental Study Centre open This petition comprises numerous letters from individual children at Chalkhill Primary School.

From:         Chalkhill Primary School

3) Save our youth service (paper and e petition)

“Youth services are vital for young people as well as the community and we

believe there will be an adverse effect if the service no longer exists. This will

put added pressure on statutory services such as the Youth Offending

Service, the police and social care. We call on Brent Council to consult with young people effectively before making any cuts to any youth provision in the borough.

We call on Brent Council to scrutinise existing provision to ensure that these

resources are appropriate and effective. The young people of Brent are willing and able to assist Brent Council with this important task. We call upon Brent Council to consider the voice ofyoung people in the light of these savings!”

E-petition: started by Roisin Healy (Brent Youth Parliament)

4) Save School Crossings Patrols

“Brent Council is under a legal duty to promote road safety and to promote sustainable transport, such as walking and cycling.  Road traffic accidents are the biggest killer of children in the UK (they peak when children start primary school and secondary school). 2011-2020 is the United Nations Decade of Action for Road Safety. School Patrol Officers are an integral partof the community, ensuring the safety of our children and they encourage children to have independence. Many schools in Brent are on busy roads (e.g. Salusbury Primary School and Islamia on Salusbury Road in NW6) which are only going to get busier with new housing developments with a new influx of cars and residents. Our roads should become safer places for our children, not more dangerous. And children should be encouraged to walk and cycle to school rather than be driven.”

E petition started by: Michelle Goldsmith on behalf of local residents .

5) Leopold Primary School - save our School Patrol

Officer

“Brent Council is considering removing our Lollipop crossing patrol at Hawkshead Road. The School is surrounded by several busy roads. We believe this is unacceptable and will directly put our children in danger of a road traffic accident.”

From:         the Parent, Teachers and Friends Association of Leopold Primary

                   School

6) Keep Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre Open

“The centre provides a venue for many members of our  local community and plays a vital part in our leisure time. Many of us use the facility on a weekly basis to play football, use the gym, relax in the steam and sauna and meet friends. The centre hosts children education, courses and activities th at are beneficial to their development. The centre serves as a venue where rooms can be hired to many different groups who hold meetings, training and celebrations. Closing Bridge Park would affect all of us in different ways. We need this Centre to remain open so that our young people have a place to meet and do sports in a safe environment.

Stonebridge is a deprived area and we feel that crime and unsocial behaviour will increase if the centre is closed. Unlike a few years ago the centre now is used by men and women of all ages and faith. People come to Bridge Park to get fit and improve their health. Although we understand that the council funds are limited, the cost of dealing with health and antisocial behaviour will far outweigh the cost of operating our leisure centre. We have signed below to show our opposition to the closure.”

From:         Mr Adam, Tordjok, local resident.

Fighting spirit alive and well in Brent as community challenges the cuts

Reposted with permission from the Kilburn Unemployed Workers highly recommended blog LINK
 

By Dude Swheatie of Kwug

Paul K of the KUWG and I attended last night's Brent Fightback public meeting against Brent Council's further erosion of public services.

Platform speakers included writer and broadcaster Owen Jones, along with Anne O'Neil (Brent Mencap), Anne Drinkell (Defend London's NHS), Moses from Stonebridge Adventure Playground, Jasmin from Our West Hendon.

• Anne O'Neil said that under the proposed budget cuts, daycentre services would be substantially reduced if not completely destroyed, limiting support for people wanting help in applying for ESA. These matters should be referred to at General Election hustings and in any contacts with parliamentary candidates, she said. She also said that care workers' contact time with the vulnerable adults they support would be halved from 30 minutest to 15 minutes.
  Something she did not say about that that I know from previous painful 2005-2006 experience is that care workers do not get paid for the time taken in getting from one shift to the next, nor the travel expenses involved. That will make the plight of care workers untenable under Universal Credit, where people in paid employment would be liable to sanction of all their benefits for allegedly not trying hard enought to become financially independent of income-top-up payments!
• Anne Drinkell reported that older people have been largely scapegoated as a drain on A&E services; GP services are being largely privatised and the Health & Social Care Act should be scrapped; the Harmoni out of hours medical advice service has been taken over by the infamous CareUK; and hospital closures lead to a bonanza for property speculators. She too stressed the importance of General Election campaigning as an opportunity to put pressure on politicians.
• Moses from Stonebridge Adventure Playground said that Stonebridge has actually been a borough-wide service and its fiscal eradication would be a crime against the community. Stonebridge Adventure Playground allowed kids a safe place for recreation and a badly needed break for hard-pressed parents. Closure of such safe places would put kids more prone to mischief. Adventure playgrounds had given the speaker — an ethnic minority member — advantages for advancement in life that he would not otherwise have had access to.
• Jasmin, The Our West Hendon speaker told of the incremental displacement of social tenancies to make way for privatisation of housing, and also said that the tenants had become a force to be reckoned with collectively while their tenancy rights had become eroded over time.
• Owen Jones said that Brent Fightback had acquired a well-earned reputation for fighting back against public services cuts and people should make maximum use of the General Election 2015 for redressing the damage caused by 5 years of cuts in public services. He also referred to the benfit sanctions fiasco and the way victims of cuts had been maligned, and Ukip's attacks on migrant workers as yet another example of scapegoating. Instead of Cameron and Osborne enlisting the services of tax-dodger Sir Philip Green to advise Government on how to cut costs, it would be much better for public services funding in this country if Government squeezed the tax dodgers and reduced the influence of the big four accountancy firms and Google etc that find all the loop holes they can to preserve the wealthy's advantages at the cost of thhe public purse.

Several floor speakers followed, with about two minutes per speaker. I was first of the floor speakers and had already been photographed by Kilburn Times phoographer outside the venue with placard.

In my short floor speech I emphasised our motto 'Never Attend Anywhere Official Alone' and corrected Owen Jones' statement that we had had 5 years of cuts by saying that disabled people had experienced cuts in services for several years previous and that the big difference for the past five years was that cuts in public services had become more mainstream. The situation for disabled people as disadvantaged people was similar to that Martin Luther King referred to in his 1963 'I Have a Dream Speech' where he said that where it came to equality of opportunity for American blacks it was as if a checque had been returned to themmarked 'insufficient funds'. It's important to ask why people are disadvantaged, I emphasised. Eg, Q: why are there so many Polish migrant workers in this country? A: Because capitalism fucked up the Polish economy after the collapse of the Iron Curtain. [More specifically, as Naomi Klein reports "the fact that [Poland] accepted [the] radical prescription of free market economic shock therapy" led to a situation in which the restoration of capitalism in Poland has "created a social wasteland."]

Several other floor speakers followed, including a rep from Advice 4 Renters saying that she would welcome listening to people's stories of renting. I had great difficulties hearing most of the floor speakers, but there was a Trade Union & Socialist Coalition (TUSC) speaker as well as Marie Lynam. There was even a Ukip parliamentary candidate, whose contribution was generally unwelcome. For me, the best of the floor speakers was our friend and comrade Sarah Cox. She denounced the racism of Ukip and scapegoating as means of bringing in an anti-social agenda, and emphasised the forthcoming demonstrations outside Conservative and Lib Dem offices set for the afternoon of Saturday 21 February. 

Brent Fightback will also protest outside the Council budget setting meeing on 2 March, she said.

Brent Council's current budget proposals for the next few years seem to pre-empt the result of General Election 2015, I recall her saying, and we should make the most of the General Election campaign to say 'no' to further cuts and privatisation in public services.

Saturday 21 February 2pm protest outside offices of Brent Central MP Sarah Teather, Walm Lane, Willesen Green,  and at 3pm outside Brent Conservatives' offices, Preston Road, Wembley

And our friend Ben Samuel as Green Party parliamentary candidate for Hendon learned the hard way the value of getting up early to speak from the floor, as his potential contribution was timed out.

In platform speakers' follow-through Anne Drinkell said that the Ukip speaker should be ashamed of the way his party maligns migrant workers who are a mainstay of the NHS. And Owen Jones emphasised the difference between most Ukip members' desire for a free at point of delivery NHS and renationalisation of our railways with the plans of the Ukip leadership for privatisation of public services.

After the meeting, I noticed the presence of Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt who had apparently remained silent during the meeting. I wonder whether he 'got the message' that those present did not welcome his budget proposals?

Brent Council puts the clock back

The return of the refurbished Jubilee Clock to a new position in Harlesden High Street was celebrated today.

I couldn't resist a cry of 'Save Stonebridge Adventure Playground' during a lull in the public relations to cheers from some of the onlokkers and pursed lips and 'inappropriate' from some of the Labour councillors.

There was a good reception from local people to Brent Fightback leaflets advertising the 'Brent Fight Backs Against the Cuts' meeting that will take place at the Tavistock Hall, Tavistock Road, of the High Street on Tuesday evening. The cutting of school crossing patrols and the ending of funding to Stonebridge Adventure Playground  were particularly unpopular.

The Clock was decorated with a large bow tie:

Brent Fights Back Against the Cuts - Join us on Tuesday

Audley Harrison condemns Brent Council's decision to stop funding Stonebridge Adventure Playground

Boxer Audley Harrrison has just left this message on Instagram about the decision to cease finding Stonebridge Adventure Playground:

My comments on Stonebridge Adventure Playground. Worth a read 🔥 The people in power fail to understand that people in the rougher, tougher neighborhoods in England, lose their way as it's difficult to stay motivated when surrounded by crime, unemployment, & lack of opportunities to better oneself. 

Without hope, without options, many choose the easy Road & start following the crowd and start the bad boy business. A shining light In my community for over thirty years, Stonebridge Adventure Playground (SAP) lost its funding today.

 I'm scratching my head as this senseless decision, when SAP was the one place in the community that was a safe haven for the troubled youths. Makes no sense... Seriously, this will affect the community in such a negative way, these elected official don't even know. #FBF me as a youngster in SAP ... Wishing for brighter days in #NW10 🇬🇧😩👊

Brent Council: those who survived the axe (for now) and the victims

The cuts recommended to the Cabinet have now been published LINK. As expected the gap between the cuts of £54m required over two years and the £60m actually tabled during the consultation enables the Council to claim to have saved some services.

Despite recent moves by some backbench councillors to propose a rise in Council Tax of 1.99% to save some services, Council Tax is frozen for the 6th year. The councillors' move may have been too late to meet statutory deadlines.

The Budget Report itself does not refer to the petition from Stonebridge Adventure Playground in detail or, as far as I can see on first perusal, does not mention the number of signatories, and instead the future of its funding is dealt with in a separate report which ties the funding into the issue of the expansion of Stonebridge Primary School, which serves to complicate the matter.

It refers to alternative provision with a complete lack  od evidence or detail and it is hard to see how they could make up for what the playground provides (from their report):

The SAP enables children and young people to take part in a range of outdoor and indoor play experiences. Outdoor activities at the SAP include: outdoor adventure play, go-karting, gardening, and sports.

Indoor activities at the SAP include: games, arts and crafts, a ball pond, Wii games, and cooking. Other linked activities include trips, access and use of a narrow boat.

The scheduled opening hours are:

• Monday – Friday term-time, 2-7pm;

• Saturdays, 11am-4pm;

• School holidays (summer, Christmas, Easter, and during the three School half-term breaks), 7am-6pm.

Some of the services which appear in the above list as 'not agreed' have other actions which will still impact on services.  Despite concersn about the capacity of the voluntart sector to take over Council functions this is a strategy adopted by the Council.

For example both CYP16 (Closing 10 children's centres) and CYP17 (Closing youth services) have agreed options (CYP1 and CYP3) that will out-source them to the voluntary sector and have the potential to reduce provision by the back door.

The proposal to transfer the management of the library services to a trust (ENS18) is to go ahead.

Energy Solutions will be expected to become self-financing but will receive a cushioning grant of £50,000 for 2015-16  during the transition,

It is worth looking at the rather contradictory statements in the Cabinet report on supporting people, that appear to doubt the capacity of the voluntary sector to provide the service but nonetheless recommend the cuts:

Proposal R&G27a would reduce the supporting people budget by £1m in 2016/17. This would be in addition to proposal R&G27, which would reduce the budget by £1.8m over two years. The current budget is £7.1m.

6.75    This additional saving would mean a significant reduction or selective cessation of services to provide supported housing and floating support of vulnerable individuals and families to assist them to maximise their independence and prevent homelessness. The service provides support to individuals with mental health needs, homeless families, ex-offenders, victims of domestic violence, young people at risk and isolated older people.

6.76    However, these services are not statutory requirements. There may be potential for VCS organisations to take on a greater burden of support for these client groups but it is very doubtful that there is capacity to do so to the extent implied by this saving in addition o the significant savings identified elsewhere in this area.

6.77    Supporting People services is a catch-all term for a variety of housing support services aimed at people who do not meet the council’s eligibility threshold for social care services. The services provided are intended to prevent clients developing greater caneeds by addressing housing issues. No significant comment has been received from the general public on this proposal, although  this may be because the term ‘supporting people’ is not well understood

6.78    Taking all of this into account leading Members have requested that officers prepare the budget on the basis that proposals R&G27 and R&G27a are agreed

The bulky waste original proposal has been modified to one free collection a year and  £25 for each additional collection.

Despite petitions opposing the cutting of school crossing patrols (ENS21) the Cabinet are recommended to approve it with schools expected to pay for the patrols themselves if they wish to retain the service. The fact that school budgets have not been reduced is cited to justify this.

The report outlines the devastating impact of the cuts on particularly groups but also argues that some have no equality implications as they affect all equally:

-->

The proposals for budgetary savings are extensive and will affect everyone living and working in Brent. The Council h as already made extensive efficiencies and is now at a point where it is not possible to achieve the level of savings required without impacting on service delivery. It is inevitable that there will be a significant impact on those vulnerable people who are the greatest users of council services, particularly older people, disabled people and children. Many of the proposals would also have some negative differentia l impacts in relation to ethnicity or gender; one or two proposals would have a severe impact on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and in relation to pregnancy and maternity. The collective set of proposals will only have minimal impacts in relation to religion o r belief.

 Some of the proposals will have a negative impact on large numbers of people, regardless of their equality characteristics. Although these proposals will be unwelcome and are likely to attract significant public reaction, they are not considered to be problematic from an equalities perspective as they will not unfairly impact on any equality group

This is necessarily only a summary of a complex document but I hope that readers will feel moved to attend the 'Brent Fight Backs' meeting on Tuesday February 17th 7pm, at Tavistock Hall, off Harlesden High Street where people affected by the cuts will have a chance to speak out.

Lastly it is worth noting the very low number of individual written responses which totalled 37 but because some covered several topics have been counted altogether as 54. Day Centres and Adult Social Care (12), School Crossing Patrols (6) and Council Tax (5) were the highest.

Stonebridge Adventure Playground remains defiant -the fight goes on despite being presented with a fait accompli

A Valentine's Day from Stonebridge chidlren to Brent Council

The Cabinet will be finalising the budget and cuts package at its meeting on February 23rd and it will then go to Full Council on March 2nd. Well, that's the theory but it appears that things have already been decided with Muhammed Butt, at his Leader's Briefing, saying that the cuts will go ahead.  In addition Stonebridge Adventure Playground have been told that their funding will definitely stop.

This is a letter from one of Stonebridge ward councillors posted on the Adventure Playgrounnd's Facebook Page LINK:

Dear Glynis,

It was unfortunate that all efforts to keep our cherished Adventure playground open was unsuccessful with the decision of withdrawal of the funding. It will be a devastating news to the Stonebridge community and environs who use this facility.

Regarding your concerns and some information you requested,I'll email you later today for those request and also enquire if their will be room for time to sort out the Staff that work in the Adventure playground instead of March 31st deadline.

Kind regards,
Ernest
Cllr. Ernest Ezeajughi
Stonebridge Ward

Clearly the hope is that the campaign will accept this but the struggle will carry on until the last Stonebridge kid whizzes down the zip wire crying out 'Stonebridge will Stay Forever!'.

I wrote a message on the Facebook page amongst the messages of sadness:

We should not accept that funding is to be stopped until we have exhausted all campaigning opportunities and lobbied all councillors, MPs, candates etc Exactly as you have been doing so well. The Cabinet does not offically decide its recommendations until February 23rd and then they have to be approved by Full Council on March 2nd. Muhammed Butt may have decided funding will cease but are we saying that the rest of the process is therefore meaningless? It doesn't say much for local democracy if so. Let's not give up yet - look at the Kilburn Times fron page today.

The Kilburn Times story is about a rise in youth cautions in the borough and includes a quote from Colin Hunter, a playground worker:

Without youth services it's far too easy for young people to be swayed by peer pressure and get involved with gangs and go down the criminality route, so the figure will rise.

And Doug Lee wrote a message of defiance on the Facebook page:

IT IS NOT OVER We will fight on and even harder for JUSTICE . The gloves are off now and we at Bridge know how to fight and WIN There are at least three rounds to go .Come on everyone lets finish the job and finish it well We are not some walkover We stand our ground and always will . Bless all our supporters .

How Section 106 monies have been spent in Stonebridge and Wembley

Residents have often asked what Section 106 (Planning gain from new developments) has been spent on. Glynis Lee asked  Brent Council this Freedom of Information question:

I would like to know how much money has been paid through section106 (planning gain) for the development of Stonebridge estate, (Hyde Housing) and Wembley (Quintain Estates) and I would like to know details of what this money has been spent on.

Brent Council's Answer: LINK

I can confirm that the information requested is held by Brent Council. I have detailed  below the information that is being released to you.

Funds received are either spent, commissioned (committed to a project for futue
spend) or uncommissioned (not yet committed to a project). 

Total funds received under S106 agreements with Hyde Housing in the Stonebridge  Estate are £315,766.36 of which £135,000 has been commissioned to fund
expansion of Stonebridge Primary School. The remainder is uncommissioned.  

Total funds received under S106 agreements with Quintain Estates in Wembley are  £749,715.63 of which spent and £353.266.68 commissioned to the following
projects: 

£116,199.19 spent on provision of public lavatory on Wembley Hill Road
£116,199.18 spent on improvements to Wembley Central Station
£130,634.48 spent and £213,408.22 commissioned to local employment & training  programmes
£14,627.99 spent and £372.01 commissioned to tree planting in vicinity of York
House
£10,000 commissioned to fund energy efficient street lights in the borough
£50,000 commissioned to fund expansion of Preston Park Primary School
£37,232.26 commissioned to fund improvements to King Edwards Park
£17,254.19 commissioned to fund public realm improvements at junction of
Wembley High Road/Wembley Hill Road
£25,000 commissioned to fund highway improvements to junctions along Wembley High Road/Wembley Hill Road 

Stonebridge Adventure Playground campaigners will be especially interested in the c£180,000 uncommissioned funds from Hyde Housing Section 106 monies.