Fo! about FoI to Brent Council results in no information held!

It is rather odd that a Brent Labour councillor has to resort to a Freedom of Information request to his own Council about their performance regarding Freedom of Information requests. This is what Cllr Dan Filson did on Thursday. He got a response the next day which is amazing, However he did get fobbed off like the rest of us often are:

I am still waiting for the answer to an FoI request made on November 28th 2014. I hasd heard that the maintenance of large trees had been left out of the Publc Realm contract in which Veolia took over parks maintenance. It had been suggested to me that this was an oversight that would result in additional expenditure.

This is the  response to my intial request:

 1. State who is responsible for safety checks, maintenance, felling and replacement
of trees in Brent's parks, open spaces and cemeteries.

The Contractor is only responsible for minor tree works which can be carried out
whilst working at ground level. The Council is responsible for major tree works.
Grounds maintenance staff from Veolia and the Council’s monitoring officers
(horticulture) would look at trees when they are working in the park or carrying out
monitoring visits. The Coucnil would then engage specialist contractors to carry out
the major works.

My follow-up which is still awaiting a response:

-->

1.     Is the cost of major tree works by a sub-contractor included in
the Public Realm budget out-sourced to Veolia?

2.    If not, what is the expected annual cost of this sub-contracted
work (recognising it might vary considerably due to major weather
events such as storms)?

BREAKING NEWS: Having posted this article at the weekend I got this answer about 9.30am this morning:

 1: No
2: The Council’s street trees maintenance contractor is Gristwood & Toms. The budget for street tree maintenance works was £500,000 in 2014/15, but this is expected to fall to £450,000 in 2015/16.


 

Brent Council: Communicating Rubbish

I was incensed yesterday when I saw the leaflet about Brent Council's waste collection that had been pushed through my door.  It put such a gloss on the £40 annual  'garden tax' charge for green bin collection that many people must have thought that it was almost as good as winning the lottery!

It advertised a free bulky waste collection despite the fact that proposals are going before the Council to introduce a charge of £15 for such collections.

The bulky waste collection charge has long been an issue between Labour and the Lib Dems. The Lib Dem-Conservative administration  introduced a charge of £25 and the incoming Labour adminstration in 2010 abolished the charge.

The arguments the then councillor James Powney made against the charge still stand.  LINK

Now Paul Lorber, Liberal Democrat Brent Council leader at the time of the £25 charge, has made a formal complaint to Council officers about the current leaflet. He suggests that the £15 charge was put into the proposals merely so that it could be withdrawn and show that the Council had listened to residents:

I have expressed my concerns as to how the scrapping of the weekly service and the proposed £40 charge for a reduced service has been presented. The latest leaflet delivered to residents continues to provide misleading and incomplete information.

I am disappointed that the misleading information produced by the Council and Veolia has continued. Please treat this email as a formal complaint on the following grounds:

I object to a reduced and chargeable service to be described as 'New' as if it was something positive when in fact residents are being asked to pay £40 for a substantially reduced service with collections just fortnightly during the summer and just monthly during the winter months.

On a separate issue I note that the leaflet is also advertising the 'Free' collection of bulky household items. This confirms the sham of the current budget consultation as the item to charge £15 for this service in the hope of a massive reduction in take up is just a 'sham' as this was put on the list simply to enable the Leader to claim later that this is one service "I have managed to save".

I think that the Council (officers and councillors) are showing a great deal of disrespect to Brent residents in the misleading way you are communicating with them. The leaflets are paid for from taxpayers money and should therefore provide honest information and not to reflect misleading information from the Labour Administration.
 

Walkers get active in Fryent Country Park via Streetlife

It has been great to see local people organising various walking groups in Fryent Country Park  on Streetlife this week. One group is walking in the park as I write this. LINK

Since I made the above video celebrating the park's Green Flag Award, Brent Council has withdrawn from the award and has privatised parks maintenance in the borough. Veolia has taken over the role as part of the Public Realm contract.

I hope that these two decisions do not signal any deterioration in the care of our park.  We are lucky to have the volunteer work of the Barn Hill Conservation Group who are out in the park most weekends clearing litter, maintaining footpaths and enhancing its unique landscape.

Fryent is a wonderful resource and deserves to be better known. With the pressure on green spaces for development it is vital that it is used and valued by local people.

I run nature walks and activities in the park for Brent School Without Walls LINK and many parents accompanying school groups are amazed to discover it for the first time.

On Saturday September 6th Willesden Harvesters, Kensal and Kilburn Fruit Pickers, Mapesbury Pickers the Conservation Group are joinign together to harvest fruit from the 900 or so small trees in the park.

If you are interested in joining them contact: Michael.Stuart6@gmail.com

Brent's 'Garden Tax' called in by Scrutiny Committee

In the first major test of Brent Council's new stripped down scrutiny process, the Scrutiny Committee will consider the £40 charge for green waste collection agreed recently by the Cabinet.

The Commiteee which meets on Wednesday 6th August at 7pm at Brent Civic Centre will consider the following call-in: (Full report HERE)

Whilst not opposing the principle of charging for garden waste, members consider that the system proposed could be improved on.

·      There was concern at the absence of crucial information in the report including:

·      a proper analysis of options available to the council

·      consideration of up front payment (covering collection and disposal) for recycling bags rather than an annual charge

·      clear financial information regarding risk/gain to Brent Council and Veolia

·      information about market research undertaken with residents on options likely to achieve good recycling rates

·      how Brent can seek reciprocal arrangements with neighbouring authorities so

·      increasing drop off points. The only site proposed in the report is at Abbey Road

·      learning from other local authorities

·      contamination of dry recycling/kitchen waste o monitoring and enforcement communication with residents.  

An outline of the suggested course of action of the Scrutiny Committee is to:

·      seek a report responding to the concerns outlined above

·      question lead member and senior officers and the leader

·      if necessary, set up a very brief task finish group to examine these issues in more depth.

Additionally, reference was made to residents’ concerns about the charge and the implications. 

Further clarification was requested on:

·      the way the decision was made

·      what would have changed within a year of a new contract, to justify such big

·      change or adjustment

·      the framework is in place for monitoring and reporting

·      the financial implications for the council in relation to the scheme.

Whilst not opposing the principle of charging for garden waste, additional concerns  were expressed at the absence of crucial information n in the report including the failure to:

·      demonstrate VFM (value for money)

·      show financial information containing savings from decommissioning existing

·      garden waste service

·      give financial information regarding risk/gain to Brent Council and Veolia

·      model other alternatives, available to the Brent Council and consider their financial and environmental impact.

Scrutiny Committee is asked to:

·      seek a report responding to the concerns outlined above

·      question lead member and senior officers o if necessary, set up a task group to examine these issues in more depth to ensure VFM.

Finally, representations expressed the concern that a flat fee was regressive, and referred to lobbying by the Mapesbury Gardening Group, environmental groups and local residents. The main concern was that the arrangement may not represent value for money once scenarios for unintended consequence s were included in the model.

Scrutiny Committee is asked to:

·      invite the Lead Member, the Leader and appropriate officers to address these issues.

Will Brent's 'garden tax' lead to more Birmingham style fly-tipping?

Green waste dumped by the roadside in Birmingham

The KilburnTimes LINK is reporting that the Council's proposed charge for recycling green waste revealed on this blog last week will be an annual fee of £40.

Brent councillors and officers would be wise to look at what happened in Birmimgham in May when a £35 charge was introduced by that Labour Council.

Initially only 20,000 of the city's 400,000 households signed up to pay the charge and there were mile long queues of angry drivers at city recycling depots LINK

Green waste was fly-tipped by residents wanting to avoid the charge and it became an issue in the local elections. 

Just before the election bin men were allegedy told to clear up all the dumped green waste according to the Birmingham Mail LINK:

But now binmen have allegedly been told to clear the streets of ALL abandoned green waste this weekend, whether householders have paid for the controversial scheme or not.

Senior GMB shop steward Paul Langley, based at Perry Barr depot, told the Mail: “All the dumped garden rubbish is going to be picked up this weekend – just before the election.

“Our overtime has been cut and now our crews are being told to collect it all. It means the 40,000 people who have paid for a green waste bin and those who have simply dumped their rubbish are getting the same service.

“I have just spoken to a manager and he has confirmed it.”

The proposed charges follow the awarding of the multi-million Public Realm contract to Veolia which is due to take parks maintenance from next month in addition to recycling, residual waste collection, street sweeping and BHP grounds maintenance. Councillors claimed at the time that the new contract would save public money and there was no mention of introducing charges for basic services.

This opens the way for other charges for basic services in addition to what we pay in Council Tax.

At the same time as introducing this charge the Council is also considering landlord licensing which amongst other things is aimed at the 'anti-social' issue of untidy and poorly maintained front gardens. The £40 charge hardly seems an incentive to tackle this issue.

And of course we have the Council's anti-fly tipping campaign while this policy looks likely to increase the amount of illegal fly-tipping adding garden waste to the builders' waste currently common on our streets.

Cllr Perrin, new lead member for the environment needs to look at this again.

Brent Council to lease out two floors of Civic Centre as staff numbers reduce

Tonight's Cabinet will consider a proposal to lease out the 7th and 8th floor of the Civic Centre to an unnamed commercial organisation. LINK

This follows a review of the accomodation. The proposed 'Partner Village space' has attracted no partners who could afford it and parts of the first floor are empty. 

The proposals will see increased density of workstations on floors 2-6 with the Council anticipating some staff transferring out of the Centre when Veolia takes over the Public Realm contract and Wates takes over Brent Housing Partnership maintenance. 120 extra workstations will be added to floors 2-6.

The report also anticipates further Brent Council staffing cuts as out-sourcing continues and reductions in staff are made as a result of budgetary constraints. Revenue from the lease will be used to supplement the budget.

The report notes:

The security aspects of having a third party commercial occupier will need to be carefully considered. Therefore the Council should not and will not accept any tenant unless deemed acceptable to the image of the Council and the Civic Centre; the one under current consideration is well known to the Council and is reputable with an International standing. However in regard to security issues it should be noted that the Civic Centre already has other 3rd parties using the building: Capita, Serco, Metropolitan Police, Europa, Wates Living Space and Brent Housing Partnership. 

Along with contractual conditions and appropriate management controls it is envisaged that as part of a HR refresh about working in the Civic Centre staff can be reminded again about the need to ensure a clear desk policy is operated and that confidential discussions should take place only in appropriate settings. Therefore at this stage it is suggested that the current physical security arrangements remain in place.

Brent Council ignorant of how many of their contractors pay below London Living Wage or use Zero Hours contracts

Brent Council's commitment to paying the London Living Wage was very welcome but as pointed out in previous postings that is problematic because the Council has very few directly employed manual and service  workers now that so many of its services are contracted out. The same caveat applies to zero hours contracts, also opposed by the Council, but when some out-sourced Civic Centre security staff are employed on a zero hours basis.

The Council has urged local schools and private businesses to pay the London Living Wage and the new Public Realm contract includes a requirement that  Veolia  pay the LWW. The Council in a November press released stated:

We have also agreed to build LLW considerations into our procurement process for contracts and, over a three-year period, will review the bulk of contracts with a positive view to applying LLW.

Again this is welcome although the continued emphasis on 'best value' (often the lowest bid) introduces a tension at a time of massive funding cuts. There is increasing recognition that by lifting local wages the Council will eventually be better off as families are lifted out of poverty and thus less reliant on benefits, including Council Tax Support.

Given all this I was surprised to receive a negative response from Brent Council to my  Freedom of Information request asking for details of how many of the staff employed by the Council via contractors and sub-contractors are on zero hours contracts and paid less than the London Living Wage. After they refused the request I asked for a review and now have a response (below) - which amounts to another refusal .

What concerns me is that if the Council is concerned about the London Living Wage and poverty among Brent residents, it is surely their responsibility to ensure that those employed on their behalf have decent wages and conditions. In terms of budget planning it is also essential to know the cost of bringing those workers up to the LWW and that can only be done through  knowing how many people are involved.

If there is to be evidence based forward planning and decision making it is essential to have high quality information. I had a similar experience regarding school places when the Council refused my request for the number of pupils on Brent school waiting lists who were duplicates - i.e.the same child on waiting lists for several schools.Again essential information on assessing unmet demand and potential school expansions.

Here is the Council's ruling on my Zero Hours/London Living Wage request:

We have reviewed the decision to refuse your request for information under The Freedom of Information Act. Your request related to information that would establish how many staff who work for or on behalf of the Council through a contractor were employed on a zero hours basis and how many were paid the London Living Wage.

That request was refused as the information requested was not held by the Council. You were dissatisfied with that request on the basis that the Council had been critical of such arrangements and would not use a zero hours scheme with its own staff and had made a policy position that the London Living Wage should be paid to all Council staff as a minimum. We have now reviewed the decision to refuse the request and I can inform you of the outcome.
  
It is correct to say that the Council does not hold this information and as such can not readily supply it to you.  It may be possible to contact all of the contractors that the Council engages with but when the number of those contractors are considered and the time involved in obtaining the information you have requested is taken into account this would be a major exercise.
  
The Council would have to identify all current contracts on which staff are employed by the contractor which would, in effect, be nearly if not all of the contractors that are used. This in itself is an enormous piece of work. Once identified contact would have to be made with all of those contractors which would be hundreds of individual contacts. This again would be an enormous piece of work to accurately undertake. Collating the information would also take a significant amount of time.
  
Our view is that the time involved in obtaining the information would be in excess of 18 hours of officer time. Under the Act a request can be refused in the event that the cost of complying with it would exceed the cost limit set out in legislation. The applicable regulations provide that in assessing whether the cost limit has been reached officer time should be assessed at £25 per hour and the overall limit of cost being £450.

Given that the cost here would require in excess of 18 hours of officer time it is clearly over the cost limit set out in the Act. The Executive has taken the decision that any request that breaches the cost limit should be refused.

If the Council is to conduct a 3 year review as their November press release stated then this is precisely the information that will be needed.  Meanwhile, as residents, we have no way of knowing how many of the workers providing our services are on zero hours contracts with little or no pension or sick pay rights, or employed on rock bottom wages.

Budget cuts, Veolia, Copland, racist letting agents and violence against women on Council agenda tonight

The most important item on tonight's Brent Council Agenda is probably the first reading of the budget which includes the cuts already listed on this blog LINK

Executive members will give reports as follows:

1. The opening of the LDO and update on appointmentof Ben Spinks (Cllr Butt)

2. New Public Realm contract (Cllr Mashari)

3. The future of Copland school (Cllr Pavey)

4. Integrated Care Pioneer bid and conference on adult safeguarding (Cllr Hirani)

5. Action taken on racial discrimination by local letting agents and private rented

 sector licensing (Cllr McLennan)

6. The live-streaming of Council meetings (Cllr Denselow)

7. Conference on khat (Cllr Choudry)

8. An update on parking (Cllr J Moher)

9. Regeneration tour of the borough by Deputy Mayors of London (CllrCrane)

10. Visit from the Mayor of Johannesburg (Cllr R Moher) 

Each party group has tabled a motion for this evening.  They are:

LABOUR

Tackling violence against women

This Council commends the work of the members’ task group on Tackling Violence against Women and Girls in Brent. This task group is committed to ending harmful practices by raising public awareness of issues such as female genital mutilation (FGM), forced marriages and honour-based violence. These practices, and all instances of violence against women, constitute illegal, intolerable acts and human rights violations.

This Council notes the positive influence members can wield within communities by encouraging individuals and groups to speak out against harmful practices, which impact on the wellbeing of women and girls in Brent. To ensure that members are fully informed on all these harmful practices and how to deal with them effectively, there will be a member development event held on Thursday 21 November 2013. Sessions will be led by the expert organisations FORWARD and the Asian Women’s Resource Centre.

Members also note the work of the White Ribbon Campaign day- a charitable organisation started by men which seeks to end violence against women. Members whole-heartedly support this cause and will sign the White Ribbon pledge to affirm that they will never condone or remain silent about violent acts against women. A Brent Council event marking White Ribbon Day – the internationally recognised day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women – will be held in the Civic Centre on November 25.

We call on all members to unite in the fight against these harmful practices, and resolve to end all practices which cause physical or emotional distress to women and girls in Brent within the 5-year target set by the Government earlier this year.

Councillor John

LIBERAL DEMOCRAT 

Cleaner streets in Brent

Council notes that Labour councillors have targeted street cleaning and waste collection for service reductions by:

        i.            Reducing the frequency of street cleaning in many residential streets from three times a week to once a week

      ii.            Reducing weekend street cleaning in High Streets

    iii.            Reducing refuse collections, even in areas with poor storage facilities for residual waste

     iv.            Introducing curtilage collections

       v.            Axing the streetwatcher scheme

Council further notes:

        i.            It is two years since Brent Council hit its target for tonnes of waste sent to landfill

     vi.            In five out of the last six quarters Brent Council failed to hit its target for the percentage of waste sent for recycling

   vii.            Brent Council has never (since the target was adopted as a KPI) met its target for Flytipping Enforcement: number of inspections and investigations

 viii.            Reported fly-tipping increased after Labour's street cleaning cuts, as dirty streets encouraged more people to dump waste

     ix.            There is considerable public concern about the cleanliness of our streets and the amount of fly-tipping in Brent

       x.            The failure to meet recycling targets has significant financial consequences

Council calls on the Executive to:

        i.            Improve Brent Council's recycling performance

      ii.            Step up enforcement in order to target more effectively those who disfigure our streets with litter and fly-tipping

    iii.            Use the resulting additional finance to increase street cleaning where it is most needed and work intensively with residents and managers of blocks of flats to address litter, fly-tipping and waste collection issues.

Councillors Lorber, Brown and Hopkins

CONSERVATIVE

Parking

This Council notes that the parking policy of this Labour administration is hurting Brent's economy as high parking charges on the local high streets and the abolition of visitor parking scratch cards continue to drive visitors away.

This Council also notes that as a result of these ill-thought out policies, shoppers are deserting Brent in favour of the cheap, easy and free parking that is on offer at Brent Cross and in neighbouring borough’s. 

This Council resolves to:

-          Introduce half an hour free parking on our High Streets

-          Ensure that event day parking restrictions only apply for 1hour before the event at Wembley Stadium

-          Continue the use of visitor scratch cards indefinitely,

Councillor Kansagra

You can watch a live feed of the meeting on computer, tablet or smart phone from 7pm HERE and tweet #brentlive