Who's going to collect our rubbish after Brexit? Brent Council to call for 'People's Vote'

Of course it is much more than rubbosh collection, Monday's Brent Council meeting are going to debate a report commissioned by the last Full Council on the impact of Brexit on the borough. The full report is available HERE.

It is hard to predict what our EU citizens will do post-Brexit and a lot will depend on the post-Brexit environment and the level of hostility they experience, as well as the future performance of the UK economy and that of their home countries.

Main points:

Leaving the EU will impact Brent, not least because it has the second highest number of European residents in London. Much of its public sector and construction workforce comprise European citizens. The EU settlement scheme offers EU citizens the same rights as they currently enjoy, and is likely to be taken up by our current residents ensuring their continued presence. EU citizens who want to leave due to Brexit are likely to have already left. This theory is borne out in the dip in reception and year one school places required. 

 


Brent has the second highest estimated number of European residents in London comprising a fifth (22%) of its whole population. European residents who come to the UK to work have to apply for a National Insurance number. These applications have been falling steadily since 2014, across London, and saw a sharp decline last year. Since the Brexit vote, the government have introduced the EU settlement scheme, which gives European residents who register, the same rights as they currently enjoy. It is likely that with the introduction of this scheme, current European residents will remain in Brent until they would naturally move on. 

COUNIL EMPLOYEES 


Around 10% of Brent Council employees are originally from the EU. The proportion varies by department and service area with some service areas having one or two staff, increasing to around 20% in others. Customer Services, and CYP have the highest proportion of employees from the EU. It is worth noting that although employees may be from the EU, many have become British Citizens, or have indefinite leave to remain. 

 


VEOLIA CONTRACT

Brent also has a number of contracts with large companies, including with Veolia, who provide the waste and recycling service for Brent. Over half (52%) of the Veolia workforce, and around 70% of its agency staff are from EU countries, and despite paying the London Living Wage, they anticipate it being difficult to attract workers should this source of labour lessen. Although details around migration policies is unknown, it is expected for unskilled labourers to be discouraged from coming to the UK. Currently, the contract comes to an end in March 2023, and the new contract will be commissioned at the height of post-Brexit uncertainty.

 


CONSTRUCTION

27% of London’s construction workforce comes from the EU. Both the Chequers plan, and no deal restrict free movement of labour and could result in a skills shortage in the construction industry as well as pressure on wages, causing construction firms to face higher project costs and reduce current turnovers. 

 


HOSPITALS

There are two hospitals in Brent, Northwick Park and Central Middlesex Hospital. In the NHS in North West London, 7% of all staff are European. This ranges from less than 1% of qualified ambulance staff, to 10% of doctors (including locums). A report by Mercer found that one in three doctors in the UK hope to retire by 2020. Our older population, aged 65 and over is expected to increase by one third over the next ten years, so the demand on our medical services will increase. Staffing shortages is a real problem for the NHS nationwide, and plans need to be made both locally, and nationally to attract more young people to the field. 

 


SCHOOLS

Schools in Brent have a large proportion of EU students, which reflects the local community. Last year there was a dip in the number of school places required for reception and year one. The school place projections suggest that this dip will last for a few years, and then numbers will rise again. The falling demographics are caused by different reasons, including a reduction in migration as people are choosing not to come to Brent. The number of pupils that qualify for the English as an Additional Language (EAL) measure in reception and year one has fallen by nearly 10%. 

 


Although schools are responsible for their own budgets, and managing their staff, the council is working with schools adversely affected by the drop in pupil numbers, putting plans in place to mitigate the financial risks associated with changing pupil numbers for example agreeing short-term caps on admission numbers. 


Cllr Neil Nerva wil be moving h following motion on behalf of the Labour Group:

Motion for a People’s Vote

This Council notes:

It is now twenty-eight months since the referendum in which 72,523 Brent residents voted by a clear majority, to maintain the current benefits Britons enjoy, by staying in the European Union. 


In the months since, the “Vote Leave” campaign has been fined by the Electoral Commission, and, the Chancellor has conceded that leaving the EU without a deal would blast an £80bn black hole in the creaking public finances. 

 


Those that voted to leave, did not vote to be poorer. But it is some of our poorest residents that will be hardest hit; with a squeeze in living standards brought on by increased inflation and the depreciation of the pound. 

 


That, despite promises to the contrary, Government engagement of local political leaders has been virtually non-existent. 
   That the London Assembly, the neighbouring boroughs of Camden, Ealing, Hammersmith and Fulham have all passed motions that back a “People’s Vote” on the final deal and an option to stay within the European Union. 


This Council believes:

That Brent is better off together. And put simply, we are a global borough, united in opposition to any form of Brexit that has deleterious effects on our residents. 

 


That leaving the EU will disproportionately impact Brent, not least because Brent has the second highest number of European residents in London. Moreover, many of the public services our residents rely upon, from their GP to their waste collection, are provided by dedicated European citizens. 

 


That any deal which undermines the principles of the hard-fought “Good Friday Agreement” should face wholesale rejection. 

 


It is evident that a calamitous Brexit will hurt all but the very richest, and that it will be our children, for the first time, poorer, less prosperous, with fewer opportunities than the generation before. 
With this in mind, this Council resolves to: 

Voice its concern against any arrangement that damages the rights or prospects of EU nationals in this proudly diverse borough. 

 


Work with organisations representing EU nationals to help address the uncertainty that this careless Government has left in its wake.

 


To liaise with local businesses, public sector partners, trade unions and our colleagues at the West London Alliance to ensure that Brent remains open for business throughout any transition period. 

 


Call upon Parliament to entrust the British people with a meaningful vote on the final deal; with options to remain in the European Union upon the ballot paper. 



CORRECTED: Will Brent be London's dirtiest borough after ending of residential litter picking?

THIS IS A CORRECTED VERSION OF THE ORIGINAL STORY AFTER I SOUGHT CLARIFICATION FROM BRENT COUNCIL. (My original impression from the cuts document was that street sweeping in resiential streets would end completely.)

Under proposals rubber-stamped for consultation by the Brent Cabinet weeklylitter picking of the borough's residential streets  would end in 2019.  At the same time litter bins would be removed. Sweeping of the streets once a week will continue.

Cuts in 2011 LINK reduced residential street sweeping to once a week and Brent Green Party predicted this would make Brent London's dirtiest borough. Now litter picking of our residential streets would be ended completely.

The proposal is listed in the B category of the budget  deemed 'difficult' as it would impact on standards of service and  prove unpopular. However it could well be implemented as the categories range to D 'most difficult'.

The reduction would require a negotiation with Veolia, Brent's out-sourced supplier of waste collection, street sweeping and parks maintenance.

The ending of the litter pick is a cut of £180,000 and removal of litter bins £70,000.

The timetable would require a decision by late 2018/early 2019 with a communications strategy launched from January-March 2019.

The report does not give details of any job reductions presumably because these fall on Veolia rather than directly on the council.

Proposals affect other environmental areas including reducing parks to a 'reactive' service and the dimming of the borough;s LED street lights.

Details HERE

More on the state of Brent's parks & the 'meadows' debate

There's quite a debate going on regarding the state of Brent's parks on social media.  The 'creation' of meadows  was a decision based on saving money (£0.5m) backed by a claim that it would support natural diversity LINK. It has been implemented by  simply  not cutting the grass. Some are happy for sections of the parks to be left unmown hoping it will provide diversity for nature but others point out that real wild flower meadows need proper planning and maintenance.

Local resident Jaine Lunn succeeded in persuading Brent Council and their contractor Veolia to reduce the unmown area  in King Edward VII park to enable children to play ball games

Meanwhile a reader has sent me the above photograph of the 'cricket pitch' at King Edward VII park in Wembley commenting, 'I forgot how much they spent on doing this but they shouldn't have bothered.'

There is an extensive discussion about the issue on the View from Dollis Hill Facebook page regarding Gladstone Park. LINK

As a contribution to the meadows debate here are pictures of the meadows and 'scrape' at Mason's Field in Kingsbury where the Barn Hill Conservation Group has transformed a former playing field into a meadow. The transformation involved a substantial amount of work by volunteers including planting thousands of plug plants. See LINK.

Similar work was done at the University of Westminster wild flower meadow which is hand-scythed at the end of the season.

Mason's Field on Friday:

By contrast this is a view of one of the Gladstone Park meadows:

Brent Council suspends bin collections to deploy staff on snow clearance

Brent Council has suspended bin collections and instead deployed workers on keeping pavements and roads clear.

The council says it will resume bin collections as soon as it is safe to do so.

Veolia workers warned of potential asbestos exposure at Paddington Cemetery. Duffy calls for independent inquiry.

In a hand-delivered letter Veolia has written to employees advising them of their possible exposure to asbestos contamination at 'the mound' at Paddington Cemetery. Burials on the mound were suspended in May this year and a survery commisioned.

The survey LINK confirmed contamination and Veolia advise employees who worked on the mound over the last year to register potential exposure with their GP. They point out that doctors will not be able to do tests at this stage as it takes many years for asbestos related symptoms to manifest themselves.

Veolia have told Brent Council that they will not be carriyng out any further burials at the mound and the only works will be 'topping out' of sunken graves as this does not require the breaking of ground. Veolia says that Brent Council has committed to having the mound capped with a special membrane installed over the current surface.

Reacting to the news Cllr John Duffy (Labour, Kilburn) has written to Carolyn Downs, Brent Council CEO to call for an independent investigation into the contamination rather than referral to the Internal Audit Team.

He says the contamination puts the former Brent Council workforce, as well as Veolia's after out-sourcing, at risk. He claims that relatives of those buried on the mound have complained that they are not being kept informed by the council.

Duffy points out that waste contianing over 0.01% asbestos should be treated in a proper facility and that any dumping in the cemetery should be tracable via a waste transport consignment note.

He estimates that treatment of the mound will run into tens of thousands and the total loss to the council including reopening existing graves to inter relatives could total one million.

He calls for ther council to be open and transparent by engaging an independent investigator rather than an internal investigation.

Cllr Duffy calls for Special Council Meeting on waste strategy waste

Cllr Duffy (Labour, Kilburn) has sent the following email to all Brent Councillors:

Dear Councillor

Firstly I am sorry for the length of this email , but I believe it deals with important issues.

I am asking for your support to call a special Council meeting to discuss the issues concerning  the waste of resources  around fly-tipping , enforcement and bulky waste collections, together with the cabinets failure to maximise income on the green bin service  and their failure to improve our recycling levels.

FLY-TIPPING

To get to the issue why I am sending this email  and to put it into respective. In Nov 2015 a scrutiny task group reported into fly –tipping which was plaguing Brent ( and other boroughs) and made up more than 90% of Street Environment complaints. The Task group review was concerned with "reducing the levels of fly tipping in Brent and ensuring clean and safe environments for Brent resident’s; and as a result, a reduction in cleanup and enforcement costs".

The committee looked at 14 different types of fly-tipping , which were causing problems in Brent. Dog-ends was not among them and did not figure in any charts made known to the committee. The task group was informed of 2013/14  fly-tipping incidents and costs. There were 7001 incidents of reported fly-tipping. 

The  Lead member for the environment advocated employing Kingdom Securities  to deal with the problem of Fly-tipping. Kingdom Securities are a well known low-wage , non-union company.. The cabinet and later the Scrutiny Committee agreed (against my advice) to award the contract to Kingdom Securities without going out to tender or looking at an In-House option. You may remember the details of that contract  that the private contractor was to get £46 per Fixed penalty notice (PFN) issued ,the council would get £34 for every PFN paid  and the council would  paid all legal fees and that Kingdom securities would not search or investigate fly-tipping instead they would concentrate on Cigarette dog -ends even though they were not named as a problem. Altogether approximately 6000 were issued ( many to vulnerable people ) therefore Kingdom securities received  £246k and the leadership and Lead member used the soundbite "Zero Tolerance"  to explain the policy.

How wrong they were!

Brent holds no information on tree losses and plantings in its parks

Trees on BHP's Kings Drive Estate, Wembley

As the importance of trees for cleansing the air attracts attention following recent  'Red Alert' air pollution days in Brent and the rest of London, it is surprising to find that Brent does not keep a record of tree losses and replanting in its parks, and that Brent Housing Partnership has not replaced trees lost on its estates.

Maintenance of parks and BHP Estates is out-sourced by the Council to Veolia. The lack of information on parks may need further investigation to ensure that there is not a net loss of trees. The Council will soon take over BHP and I hope they will adopt a ;olicy of tree replacement.

I deliberately excluded Fryent Country Park and the Welsh Harp Open Space from the request as they are natural rather than formal open spaces.

This is the Council's reponse to my FoI request:
 

1. The number of a) street, b) BHP & other social housing estates and C) park trees (excluding Fryent Country Park and Welsh Harp Open Space) removed by the council and its contractors from January 1st 2016-December 31st 2016. 

a) (Street) - 220 (approx)
b) (BHP) - 62
c) (Parks) - The Council does not hold this information 

2. The overall pattern of reasons for removal (eg safety, redevelopment, disease) expressed as an approximate percentage. 

a) (Street) -
End of life (dead/decayed/diseased) - 60% Damage to pavements, walls etc. - 30%
Other (insurance claims, vandalism etc.) - 10%
b) (BHP) -
Unsafe 12 trees 19%

Rot/decay 22 trees 35%

Dead 28 trees 45%

c) (Parks) - The Council does not hold this information 

3. Of those trees the numbers where stumps were left.
a) (Street) - Almost all but no precise figures available. b) (BHP) - 62 (all)
c) (Parks) - The Council does not hold this information 

4. Of those trees the numbers where they were replaced by a) semi mature trees b)saplings
a) (Street) - All replaced by saplings, 155 in the last season but this runs from September and is not recorded by calendar year
b) (BHP) - None
c) (Parks) - The Council does not hold this information 

5. The number of new trees planted: a) street trees b) social housing estates c)parks and d) new developments/regeneration (eg Wembley Park, Alperton, South Kilburn) in the stated period. 

a) (Street) - 155 in last season
b) (BHP) - None
c) (Parks) - The Council does not hold this information
d) (Regeneration) - 240 (mostly funded by S106 money)

I think 5a is probably a mistake as 155 is the same number as street replacement trees. I wanted the figures for new planting in addition to replacement.

Wembley development: 'I feel trapped in a nightmare'

Guest blog from Jaine Lunn in reaction to Brent Council's plan to review the Local Plan LINK

I saw your blog and so wanted to comment/blog but am at a loss as where to start. Whilst I think in theory it is a fantastic idea to get local residents involved in the Local Plan review I feel once again Brent Council are just blowing smoke up our arses.  They don't really care, its futile to think that we will be listened to and our suggestions taken on board and acted upon, for them it's just a PR exercise.  They will do what they like and when it goes "Tit's up" they will blame Central Government - they made the laws.

As you know I live in one of the oldest streets in Wembley circa 1906.  I have lived here for 30 years, in the past 10 years I have paid attention to all propaganda delivered to my door on Wembley's UDP, Local Plan etc etc,  It has been changed so many times I have lost count.  I now find myself trapped in what I can only describe as an absolute​ nightmare.  Since the changes in planning laws thanks to Sir Eric Pickles, minister for Local Government and Communities, two office building's at the entrance to my one way street are in the process of being converted to flats.  Despite mine and my neighbours protests at every opportunity to planning, both have been given planning permission to do what the hell they like.  Both have been given permission to increase height by 2 floors.  Neither Developer is providing any social housing, or affordable.  Both buildings will house 1/2 bedroom flats, open plan, live in your kitchen type flats.  Neither one provides any out door amenity space, no balconies etc.  Some in one development does not even meet basic standards in terms of square metres and falls short by even the Councils minimum standards. But hey "they have a get out of jail card" as under permitted development they were not allowed to take action as to what is built within the fabric of the building,  only if they change the outside would they need planning permission.  This has been going on for 3 years and neither building is finished as yet.  When finished it will result in approximately 200+ ( taken from the developer's assessment) people accessing my street.  From 29 houses we will have increased by 60 additional homes.  Whilst they have some parking they are not able to accommodate every flat.

Brent House Annexe's ground floor flats will have their windows open directly on to the high road, despite it being in the Local Plan that they should be offices or shops at ground level.

You need to visit my street, take pictures and post the results. ( Brent Council have made changes to their system so you cannot upload numerous photos):

• Residents with permits cannot park.
• Broken pavements and knocked down bollards created by all the heavy goods vehicles delivering plant and supplies, parking on pavements as street is so narrow.
• Daily blocking access.
• Huge holes in the road as water, gas and electrics make constant upgrades to accommodate the extra facilities required.
• Constant disruption to Broadband and Telephone.  I have had loss to my service 3 times this year so far.  Directly due to all works in the street.
• Ugly hoardings which prevent any natural surveillance of entrance to street, people persistently driving in the opposite direction of the one way system.
• Trucks, Lorries, and workers vehicles parking on private property with gay abandonment.  With no consideration to the residents private parking.  Blocking access to garages, and their own parking  bays. Clogging up the CPZ. We rarely see any parking wardens during the day.
• They work Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays,  drilling and making noise. I have persistently called Planning enforcement who issue notices to cease and desist but to no action is actually taken. Despite being consistently in breach of planning regs, building regs, etc etc.
• Flytipping is a daily occurrence.  I use the "Cleaner Brent" app daily.  I have the proof.

Don't even want to go into the times that Veolia now think its OK to reverse down my street buzzer and lights flashing waking up everyone at 2.30 am, 1.30 am, Midnight was the latest time recorded, but regularly after 11.00 pm at night.

I have proof from Land Registry that the Brent Council (Len Snow being on the Board of Directors for Copland School) transferred the Public Land "Coplands Fields" to Copland School, which is now Ark Elvin who have gained 26+ acres for FREE, to use for the building of the school and MUGA facilities, despite us knowing that we are 50% down on green space for the amount of residents in the area.

The list is endless!

I have no confidence in the system anymore.  Even to the extent of citing the Human Rights Act, which affords people the right to peaceful enjoyment of their property it does not apply to us regular Council Tax payers.

Cllr Southwood working on improving bulk waste collection service times with officers

A few minutes after I tweeted an update of my story on the long service times of Veolia's bulk waste collections LINK Cllr Eleanor Southwood tweeted that she shared frustrations at the service times and said that she was working with officers to improve the service.

UPDATE: It is time for Veolia's Public Realm Contract performance to be scrutinised

"Love where you live'

Brent Council's bulk collection service before the Public Realm contract was handed to Veolia used to take about a fortnight from request to notification.

I have received a number of complaints about how long it now takes for goods to be collected. 

This is an example sent in by reader Paul Lorber with a 7 week gap.

From Brent Customer Services June 15^th 2016
Thank you for your Special Collection enquiry. Your request for:
Item 1: Freezer
Item 2: Non Metal Bed Frame
Item 3: Other Household Waste
Item 4: Other Household Waste
Item 5: Other Household Waste
To be collected has been logged and your unique reference number is  XXXXXXX
Your items will be collected on 08 August 2016.
Please ensure the items are placed together in the front garden ready for collection.
If you have any queries or wish to change the week of your collection please telephone the Customer Services on 020 8937 5050.

 Lorber has asked what the service timescales are but remarks that if this service has been commissioned by Brent Council and is acceptable to them it is clearly poor value for money, although representing plenty of profit for Veolia.

 Lorber is fortunate in having a front drive in which the items can be placed but many residents have extremely small front gardens or none at all and is is surely no wonder that mattresses, sofas, fridges, gas stoves, lavatory pans and broken gym equipment all end up on the pavement attracting further fly-tipping.

Brent Council promised an improved service when Veolia took over but I pointed out what I saw as a weakness in the contract:

One aspect that may concern councillors is that Veolia will be responsible for monitoring itself:

The contract will be self-monitoring, meaning that the contractor is accountable for measuring, monitoring and improving their own performance with the council carefully auditing their performance. This, along with Key Outcome Targets set for each of the different services will ensure that the Contractor is motivated to deliver the services.

Veolia will also be dealing with complaints from councillors and residents in the first instance thus 'placing responsibility on the Contractor to ‘own’ and be accountable for service complaints'.

I think it would be useful for the Scrutiny Committee responsible for Public Realm to review Veolia's performance by inviting Veolia executives to answer questions from councillors and the public about the service.  Cllr John Duffy has raised a number of issues on his own blog LINK and on Wembley Matters  LINK  LINK

This should cover the grounds maintenance of BHP estates and parks maintenance which were handed over to Veolia along with street cleansing, cemeteries, sports centres and much else.  When the Council gave the Public Realm contract to Veolia they withdrew from the Green Flag scheme for parks and open spaces which had provided a widely valued external audit of parks maintenance.

One matter we have heard little about is how the litter enforcement contract, awarded to Kingdom, is working.  This was also criticised by Cllr Duffy LINK and an update on it would be useful as it was seen as a trial.  At the same time Veolia's promised role in spotting fly-tipping and acting upon it included  working with Brent's enforcement team. Is this happening?

From the original Officer's report to Cabinet on the Public Realm contract:

Fly tips will be cleared promptly. That is a key requirement. Veolia have committed their operatives to becoming “the eyes and the ears” of the council, trained to identify, report, and manage all day-to-day fly-tips using mobile devices. The initial role on all enforcement will be Veolia. Enforcement investigations will be managed as far as possible by the Veolia supervisors and managers who will ensure photographic evidence and pocket notebook records are taken to secure evidence. Once a case is correctly and sufficiently built, Veolia will work with Brent’s enforcement team to bring final prosecution. 


UPDATE; The day after this article was published Brent Council issued a press release on the Kingdom fixed penalty litter enforcment trial. LINK

Butt attacks BDS as he apologises for sharing 'Israel slur'

The Veolia protest outside Brent Civic Centre

On July 14^th the Times of Israel published an article by Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt headed ‘I’m sorry for sharing Israel slur – boycotts are wrong.’ LINK

The article came a considerable time after the minor storm that blew up over Butt’s sharing of a Facebook post of a  video that showed an Israeli soldier  mistreating a young Palestinian girl.  It was not so much the video that led to Butt being accused of anti-Semitism but a comment beneath the video that likened Israel to Isis.

Sharing the video was taken as Butt’s approval of that sentiment.  Anyone who engages in social media will know that in sharing a Facebook post decisions made in seconds and few would check all the comments that are made beneath the post.

At the time, when it appeared that the  allegation may have been used against Butt ahead of the Brent Labour leadership election contest, I tweeted that there were many better reasons to oppose him.  It was at a time when the mass media were in active pursuit of Jeremy Corbyn accusing him of anti-Semitism through his support for justice for the Palestinian people and Butt appeared to have been caught in the backwash.

At the time other Labour figures, including councillors, had been suspended while accusation of anti-Semitism were investigated and the Chakrabarti  inquiry was set up.  In the light of the publicity some were surprised that Butt had not been suspended.

There are several reasons why Butt’s article is curious. 

• It is written in a style utterly difference from any of Butt’s previous utterances and articles – almost as if it had been written by someone else entirely.
• It comes long after the initial controversy, at a time when the Chakrabarti report appears to have calmed things down regarding anti-Semitism and the media have found new grounds for discrediting Corbyn.   Was the article aimed at rehabilitating Butt after he resigned from London Councils as it lead on Equalities following the Facebook controversy?
• Butt’s linking of his apology to opposition to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign, a non-violent campaign aimed at changing Israeli government policy towards the Palestinians, including the Gaza blockade and the building of illegal settlements.

In his article Butt states:

As far as I can see, it [BDS]  does nothing for peace between Israelis and Palestinians. It only provides more ammunition to those who wish to divide and polarise. What it does do is make our own Jewish community feel isolated and disturbed as to why the world’s only Jewish state appears to be the focus of the most vociferous boycott movement. So when boycotters wanted Brent to cancel its contracts with vendors who do business in Israel, the decision to say no was one of the quickest and easiest I have had to make.

The rather vague reference to ‘vendors who do business in Israel’  can only be a reference to the Bin Veolia campaign, of which I was a part.  The campaign was supported by many groups in Brent including Jews for Justice for Palestinians and was backed by Brent Central Labour Party GC, Butt’s local party. LINK

Our case was that Brent Council should not be handing over cash from Brent’s residents to a company that at the time (it has since withdrawn from these activities, arguably because of the national and international campaign against its involvement) provided infrastructural support to Israel’s illegal settlements on Palestinian land.

Although ambivalent about boycotts of all Israeli goods, Labour Friends of Palestine and the Middle East, is clear that the settlements are a ‘gross injustice’. LINK

Grahame Morris MP, Chair of LFPME said:

We should not have to boycott settlement goods; we should not be allowed to buy them in the first place. I am appalled that the government are more focused on preventing boycotts and disinvestment from the illegal settlements rather than attempting to end settlement trade.

This undermines their commitment to international law, human rights and resolving the conflict.

Cllr Butt’s statement claims that it was his decision to say no to a Council boycott.  At the time he said that the decision on whether to boycott Veolia did not rest with him but with officers, particularly Fiona Ledden, head of  Brent legal and prcorement at the time. He was concerned that Veolia, a large French-owned multi-national would take legal action against the Council.

The decision was to be based on external legal advice (source never revealed despite requests) and although campaigners were denounced as having a political agenda the Council decision would not be made on political grounds.

Now, retrospectively, Butt is claiming in an effort to bolster his credentials, that it was a political decision not to boycott Veolia, and one made by him personally.

The Liberal Democrat opposition at the time was  refused permission to put a motion  on the issue on the advice of Brent Council officer. LINK

The Brent Bin Veolia campaign had a two-pronged approach, mobilizing popular support for the cause and taking on the Council’s legal arguments via legal advice of our own.

The position regarding local councils is summed up by a recent update from the BDS Movement LINK

In a typically straightforward statement Archbishop Tutu made the case for BDS back in 2014 having visited Israel and Palestine to see things for himself:

We could not have achieved our democracy without the help of people around the world, who through... non-violent means, such as boycotts and disinvestment, encouraged their governments and other corporate actors to reverse decades-long support for the apartheid regime.

In his article Butt refers to the importance of Israel in the life of Brent’s Jewish residents ignoring the fact that many of those supporting the Veolia campaign were themselves Jewish people who support the Palestinan cause.

He does not mention his responsibility towards Brent residents of Palestinian origin.

Follow this link for the Free Speech on Israel submission to the Chakrabarti Inquiry LINK

This is the full text of Muhammed Butt's article:


I’m sorry for sharing Israel slur – boycotts are wrong MUHAMMED BUTT

JULY 14, 2016, 11:42 AM 


The Labour Party – my party – is currently going through challenging times. Frankly, the behaviour of some of my fellow members has not been good enough, particularly towards the Jewish community.

 I too fell short of what standards should be expected in a thoughtless act. Earlier this year, I shared a post on Facebook without properly checking the comments below it.

The post contained a video of a violent incident between an Israeli soldier and young Palestinian girl. As a father of a daughter, I felt an instinctive empathy for the young girl and shared the video.

This was a mistake, not least because I had not read the comments below the video.  One made a claim that was both wrong and offensive: that Israel was in some way comparable to the so­ called Islamic State. I don’t believe this and have never believed it. You can sincerely believe that Israel’s rule over the Palestinian people is a tragedy for both parties, while refusing to indulge in that malicious and lazy smear.

As a local authority leader, I work hard to stop young people and children being groomed into the kind of extremism that ISIS represents. I do not need to be told how evil they are: They have deliberately killed thousands of civilians, used rape as a weapon of war and deployed mass executions as propaganda tools.

 ISIS represents nothing but fear. Israel, however, always offers hope. Right from its Declaration of Independence, it pledged itself to democracy, the rule of law and the equal treatment of minorities – an inspirational determination that was born at a time when much of the world lived under dictatorship.

However, whether on purpose or by accident, I shared the comment that made a wholly inappropriate and offensive comparison. I have to accept responsibility for that and say again how sorry I am.

I am the proud leader of Brent, the most diverse borough in the UK. I take my commitment to all our communities very seriously. We must all stand together and that means respect, understanding the realities of each other’s lives.

 I understand how critical Israel is to Jewish life in the UK: It could only be, when a plurality of the world Jewish community – more than 40 percent – live in Israel.

My Jewish residents will have parents, siblings and children in Israel.

That’s why I have no time for boycotts. As far as I can see, it does nothing for peace between Israelis and Palestinians. It only provides more ammunition to those who wish to divide and polarise.

What it does do is make our own Jewish community feel isolated and disturbed as to why the world’s only Jewish state appears to be the focus of the most vociferous boycott movement.

 So when boycotters wanted Brent to cancel its contracts with vendors who do business in Israel, the decision to say no was one of the quickest and easiest I have had to make.

I have always felt a huge amount of solidarity with the Jewish community. My family was forced out of Kashmir. I know what it is to be from a victimised community, looking to find a safe place and a welcoming community in which to live. When they came to Wembley, Jewish neighbours were among the most welcoming – not to be taken lightly during the often difficult 1970s and 1980s.

I share the frustration of the Jewish community at how long it is taking Labour to grapple with the problem of anti­Semitism in our ranks. It makes me very sad to think that I could have been a part of making matters worse. You can be sure that I will be much more careful about what I share in future.

For me the Chakrabarti report has not gone far enough. I would have liked it spelled out that not only should Zionist not be used as a term of abuse, but that Zionism is an entirely legitimate belief. As it happens, British Zionist groups such as Yachad are doing far more for peace than the official boycott movement ever has.

I can pledge that, for Brent Labour, it will only be the start of our thinking on the issue of antiSemitism, not the end. We can, we must and we will go further to make sure that Jews feel valued and safe in our party and in our borough, working with our local synagogues, the Board of Deputies, the Community Security Trust, and the local police.

I personally look forward to travelling to Israel in the near future to see the facts for myself. Whatever our disagreements about the Middle East, making outlandish claims such as Israel being in any way comparable to ISIS do not help the cause of peace. They only cause hurt and unhelpful divisions. We can, we must, do better.