Barn Hill heron still awaiting assistance after at least 4 days with bag/material wrapped around its beak

 

The heron managed to catch a small fish (Photo: Amanda Rose)

For the last four days locals have been seeking help for a heron that has been seen with material (or perhaps rubber ballon or plastic bag) wrapped around its beak.  The heron has been seen often on Barn Hill Pond, Wembley. It had not been seen yesterday so there was relief today that it was still alive.

By the time I saw it today it appeared to have weakened, allowing people to approach close rather than flying away.  During the half hour I observed it was scooping water up from the pond but it only appeared to catch anything once.  Later, local professional photographer Amanda Rose, photographed it catching a small fish.  It appears that the constricted beak would not open wide enough for anything bigger.

Please send a link to this article to any organisation that you think might be able to help catch the heron and unwrap the material. 

 

 Photo: Amanda Rose

This magnificient bird's plight should help people stop and think before discarding litter on Barn Hill.

LETTER: More time needed for rethink on waste and street cleansing proposals that could make things worse. Deadline tomorrow on under-publicised consultation is not good enough.

 

Dear Editor,

 

I thought your readers would be interested in the issue of waste management, recycling and street cleaning in Brent given your many tweets on the issue. There is a consultation in progress about possible service changes which has not received wide publicity and ends tomorrow.  I have written to Krupa Sheth asking for an extension to the consultation and expressing my concern about the proposals. I urge Wembley Matters readers to respond to the consultation here: https://haveyoursay.brent.gov.uk/en-GB/projects/future-waste-collections-and-street-cleansing-services-consultation

 

Dear Councillor Sheth, 

 

The Council’s public consultation seeking residents’ views on changes to recycling and street cleaning services in Brent will conclude shortly. I am writing with concerns about the way that this consultation was conducted and about your proposed changes to these vital services. 

 

I do not believe that enough time was given to residents to make their views known, nor do I believe that enough residents are in fact aware of the major changes the Labour Council plan to make. As such, the Liberal Democrat group is requesting an immediate extension to the consultation period and for the Council to make more of an effort to engage with local residents and listen to their concerns.

 

In the Summer 2022 ‘Your Brent’ magazine, which is supposedly distributed to all households in the borough, at a cost to the taxpayer, there is very little reference to this major consultation. Why? I would have thought including full details of the proposed changes to recycling and street cleaning should have been a priority in this communication from Brent Council to residents. 

 

·       Could you please confirm why informing residents about the recycling and street cleansing consultation was not prioritised in the Summer 2022 ‘Your Brent’ magazine? 

 

The Liberal Democrat group have been circulating information about the consultation in recent weeks. The consensus from residents is that not enough time has been given for a response. Many are also unsure why information about these major changes to services were not highlighted during the recent local election campaign. The previous Labour administration would have known decisions were needed regarding budget setting and Veolia’s contract with Brent Council, surely, this should have been explained to residents during the election campaign. The perfect opportunity to engage with and seek views from residents.

 

I am also very concerned about the proposed changes themselves. 

 

Firstly, I do not believe that the plan to ask residents to segregate recyclables, for collection on an alternate week basis, will work. 

 

·       What evidence is there that this system will lead to improved recycling rates? 

·       Have you factored in the education campaign that will be needed to ensure all residents are familiarised with this major change? 

·       What are the financial implications of this decision?

 

On street cleaning, I fear the proposals are even worse. The consultation stipulates that streets will not automatically be cleaned every week, instead they will only be cleaned “if required”.

 

·       Who will judge whether local street cleaning is “required”?

·       How exactly does the Council plan to execute this intelligence led initiative?

 

Local residents are rightly unhappy that services they pay for through their Council Tax, are being changed in this way. We believe it will lead to dirtier streets and worsening recycling rates in Brent. Both things we all want to avoid. 

 

We request an urgent rethink to these proposals and more time for local people to be consulted. I am also requesting a Councillor briefing, with yourself and Council Officers, for all political groups. I am aware you have already delivered a briefing to the Labour Group, however, the Opposition need to be consulted too and afforded the opportunity to scrutinise proposals as is proper in a democratic setting. 

 

I look forward to your response on these matters. 

 

Kind regards, 

 

Cllr Anton Georgiou

Liberal Democrat Councillor, Alperton

London Borough of Brent

 

Tokyngton residents get some action over the state of their streets

Sonia Francis (no relation) presented the Tokyngton residents' 320 signature petition about littering, flytipping and street drinking to the Brent Cabinet this morning LINK that was publicised on Wembley Matters last month.

After publication, and before today's Cabinet, a site meeting was arranged in the area, attended by Cllr Butt (Brent Council leader and ward councillor), Cllr Krupa Sheth (lead member for Environment), Chris Whyte (Operation Director Envirnment), the Council Enforcement Manager and three Neighbourhood Enforcement Officers as well as local residents.

Quite a turnout!

Responding to the petition presentation Cllr Sheth said she agreed that there was a definitely a problem in the are aznd that the council would agree an Action Plan,  hold regular meetings with residents and set up a Whats App grouo for residents to report concerns. In terms of the detailed request she said that action was limited by budget constraints  but she would work with enforcement officers, council officers and Veolia to clean up the area.

Chris Whyte added that it was good to hear directly from residents and the council could not deny that there were problems in the area. Cllr Butt said that a Fixed Penalty Notice was served on a street drinker during the site visit,

Brent Council respond to Welsh Harp litter issues after ITN report on the beauty spot's sad state

 

ITN REPORT CLICK HERE

ITV London News yesterday reported on the 'plague of litter' at the Welsh Harp Reservoir after local residents had despaired at the huge amount of litter and dumping revealed when the reservoir depth was lowered by one metre for maintenance.

 After the link to the report was widely distributed on social media many residents expressed shock at the state of the local beauty spot and Site of Special Scientific Interest and the threat the littering posed to animals and birds and their habitats.

Cllr Anton Georgiou wrote expressing his concern to Brent Council and received the following response.

 

We have been discussing the images that we have seen at Welsh Harp with Councillor Krupa Sheth as Lead Member.

 

As you may be aware, the Canal and Rivers Trust (CRT) have purposely reduced the water level by one metre for maintenance purposes. Inevitably (and sadly) this has revealed a significant amount of detritus at watermark level that has built up over many years and demonstrates how some people act so irresponsibly in relation to such a significant asset within an urban area.

 

The Council has well defined responsibilities for the greenspace in Welsh Harp and we take those responsibilities seriously. We will add more bins, improve signage, ensure Veolia prioritise litter removal so our area is kept better and commit to supporting any longer term proposals for the whole site. Our remit does not stretch to the reservoir itself which is a CRT responsibility and one that the Environment Agency would also have some responsibility for as a water course.

 

Officers are therefore discussing with CRT and the EA their proposals to clean up the reservoir. We understand there are immediate plans to clear the more accessible rubbish from traps at either end of the reservoir, and that local volunteers assisted with a clean-up last weekend. Removing the more problematic detritus in the silted areas will be a longer term consideration given the likely cost and the operational difficulties.

 

You are correct that this goes beyond what volunteers could and should undertake. The silt is very dangerous and the clean-up will need to be undertaken professionally.

 

When CRT / EA have responded as to how they intend to approach this problem, I will liaise with Councillor Sheth and contact you again in order to update you.

 

 

 

Brilliant work on River Brent off Blackbird Hill by Thames21 and volunteers

 

Some of the volunteers

The walk through the urban orchard and St David's Open Space and along the River Thames appears on my Green Walk (see side panel) and is a great off the road route from Blackbird Hill  (Quainton Open Space) to Wembley Park Station.

If we want to reduce car trips to schools it is a good route for young children accompanied by parents or independent older pupils. I was using the route the other day to get from Chalkhill School to Birchen Grove allotments and notice two extensive heaps of rubbish that had been collected in a Thames21 cleanup of the area which is part of an ongoing project.

The route of the river can be seen in the line of trees below.  The river disappears under the railway line to re-emerge behind Wembley Stadium where there is another walking route to Stonebridge.

Brent Rivers and Communities Project Officer, Carolina Pinto, sent this report of the clean up day:

Last Saturday volunteers arrived on time, and the event started at 10.30am with a safety talk and instructions.

It is worth mentioning the important participation of our partners Ashford Place. We also counted with the presence of a representative from Extinction Rebellion Brent.

Everyone geared up, the group was divided to either litter pick or help to clean some duckweed from the pond. *Duckweeds are small, free-floating aquatic perennials that combine to form a green 'carpet' on the surface of the water. At Quainton we saw a thick mat covering the surface of the water, hard to remove, therefore a task to be continued.

During the break, we had surprise. The singer Maria Costa performed a song called the ‘River Brent’, a song she composed last year for the volunteers that joined forces in this initiative, to help the river Brent.

The result from litter picking: 40 full black bags of litter, a baby buggy, and a few other items.

Most volunteers mentioned coming back to the next events.

The next steps of the Brent Rivers and Communities project are to improve the park area (informal paths and more vegetation management now that the bird nesting season is coming to an end), and to start the river restoration activities- pre-booked for the beginning of October.

Come join us in the next events that will happen on Saturday 19^th September 2020 (Please remember to book in advance).

Carolina.Pinto@thames21.org.uk

Brent Council, councillors & Network Housing fail to deal with 'extraordinary' flytipping and litter problem in Neasden

A Brent resident who moved from south Brent across the North Circular to Press Road, Neasden has met a brick wall when trying to 'Love Where you Live' and getting something done about the 'extraordinary' amount of litter that he has found in the area.

He told Wembley Matters:

In the last 15 months or so and after I moved to Neasden, something quite extraordinary caught my attention and that was the staggering amount of rubbish, fly-tipping and plastic waste. It is particularly bad around Press Road, near Neasden tube station and Neasden Lane on both side of the North Circular.
 
I have done everything I could to improve the neighbourhood. To my disappointment, my endless efforts have had very little effect if any. 
 
I communicated the issue with Brent Council first over a year ago and many times after. The Neighbourhood Manager from Brent Council was assigned to deal with the matter. They agreed that the situation with litter is very bad. But unfortunately they didn’t do much to tackle the problem.

In addition we have a huge problem with litter around our building, Printworks Apartments, on Press Road. The council advised that it was our building management's responsibility to deal with litter. But again, to my disappointment the management, Network Homes, could not care less despite charging a generous amount of service charge for maintenance and cleaning.

I think I have exhausted every possible option. I spent a considerable amount of time and energy trying to report the problem and work with both the council and our housing association to improve the situation, but the more I try the less improvement we see. Out of desperation, I contacted our  Welsh Harp ward councillors. But again they either didn't respond or didn't take any action. One of them mentioned that they are aware of the problem and they're looking into it. That was last summer.

Needless to say  the problem with litter and fly-tipping is not only very unpleasant, but also poses a serious health and environmental hazard.

 I hope Wembley Matters  can help to raise awareness and assist me to tackle this tragic situation in Neasden.  

It appears that the slogan should be 'Ignore those that want to Love Where they Live' ! Let's see some action on this.

Wembley & Alperton Residents' Meeting March 18th

Brent Green Party backs Cllr John Duffy on waste services

Fly-tip in King's Drive, Wembley

Brent Green Party has announced that it backs Cllr John Duffy’s call for a public consultation on improving Brent Council’s environmental services.


A spokesperson said:

‘Leaving aside Cllr Duffy’s difficulties with the Labour Group we believe it is in residents’ interests to review environmental services, particularly waste collection and fly-tipping, with a view to improving efficiency and value for money.

'We know from speaking to residents that their daily experience of Brent as a ‘dirty borough’ littered with discarded mattresses, clothing and much else, is demoralising and degrading.

‘Cllr Duffy has expertise in this area that the Council should utilise rather than ignore.’

Cllr Duffy's waste strategy is outlined here
 

Join Welsh Harp clean up on Saturday

Join Thames21 to spruce up the Welsh Harp around  Neasden Recreation Ground and learn why plastic pollution is such a problem. The Welsh Harp is a very important Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), however high amounts of littler damage the habitats which made the Welsh Harp a SSSI. Our task is to remove all of the plastic litter damaging this amazing landscape.

Help to create an inviting space for people and wildlife and improve your understanding of rivers, plants and animals at the same time.

All welcome and all equipment will be provided. Under 16’s need to be accompanied by a responsible adult.   Please bring a packed lunch. Tea and Coffee will be provided.  Meeting in the car park off Aboyne Road inside Neasden Recreation Ground 10am.

Duffy rubbishes Council litter contract but does he know about BHP?

Cllr John Duffy, elected to the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee by the Labour Group on the evening of the tube strike, has lost no time in setting out his stall in an email to fellow councillors.

Dear All,

As you know I have been elected to the scrutiny committee, albeit the leadership of the Labour party wished to rule my nomination out of time so the leader could play musical chairs with who he wanted to scrutinise the cabinet decisions or council contracts.

Now that I have been endorsed by the full council. I wish to state my view on scrutiny. I believe that just as a puppy, is not just for Christmas, Scrutiny is not just for committees. Members of the committee are duty bound to raise issues of waste and financial mis-management by the Cabinet.

Therefore I listen to Monday night's full council meeting, which seemed to allow cabinet members to make statement without explanation. They were also allowed to avoid questions by saying the problems were caused by a lack of resources. Whereas I believe many problems are caused by government cuts. However the cabinet has to take responsibility for bad polices making which undermining our ability to be efficient and use our limited resource’s to ensure service improvements. Those who care about these issues should read on and those who do not should stop reading now.

ENVIRONMENT (CAUSE)

On Monday Cllr Southwood, said we have successfully taken 50 residents to court for non-payment of June 2016 Fixed Penalty Notices (FPN) for mostly smoking related litter. However as far as I understand the true number is 41. The problem of smokers litter around tube stations and bus stops is an easy way to make money from FPNs as a smoker about to go into a tube station or get on a bus have no alternative but to put out their fags before boarding their train or bus, particularly as we have no cigarette butt disposal bins place close by.

The government in the middle of devastating cuts to service,did however allowed L/As to keep the 100’s thousands of pounds income from those FPNS and was this was one of the only ways councils could raise money for environmental protection.

Unfortunately and bewilderingly Cllr Southwood and the cabinet decided not to use the money for environmental protection. Instead the cabinet decided to outsource the service to Kingdom Securities (KS)  therefore ensuring the majority of the income was not used for Environmental protection but was paid in profits to the private company. KS introduced the service using cheaper less qualified staff and ensured the council agree certain conditions.

(i) They received £46 for every ticket issued, whether the fine was paid OR NOT.
(ii) Residents were not allowed a discount if they paid early unlike all other fine given out by the council.
(iii) The council meets all the costs of appeals and legal support and reviews.
(iii) The service did not undergo a VFM review

These conditions were introduced purely to increase KS's profit and is the cause of the council having no increased resources to deal with other environmental enforcement .The figs show-using June (the period Cllr Southwood mentioned) as an example. The council have received £49k and paid £35K to KS (approx. £25k pure profit a month for KS), whereas the council makes £9k a month after write –off, costs of admin and legal costs, work stations, free use of our car pool etc.

ENVIRONMENT (EFFECT)

I believe that bad policy making by the lead member and cabinet has cost us £25K+ per month of income and  has had the effect of ensuring that we have no strategy or resources for other environmental enforcement. Whereas dog–ends concerns were less than 1% of complaints that are 99% of our enforcement (FPN) strategy.

For example, when Cllr Crane on Monday night rightly raise the issue of dumping behind shops in a private area by the Hyde in Colindale on behalf of his residents.Which is an ongoing issue which has caused concern from residents about the unpleasant and nasty conditions they are forced to live with.They also complaint the place was overrun with rats.

Cllr Southwood reply (I think) went something like this saying we have not the resources or trained officers to deal fly tipping on private land and was therefore was difficult to deal with. Cllr Southwood reply ignores the reality of the situation. There is legislation EPA (S59 private land) where the owner of the land can be fined £5000 if they do not clear the land and £500 a day if they fail to comply.There are also ways of working with the Environment Agency  to ensure any companies using the alley way for fly-tipping are dealt with.However you need qualified, trained officers with a full understanding of legislation, to carry-out surveillance, interviews and ultimately prosecutions. However the cabinet policy of introducing cheap (LLW) unqualified officers has left us deprived of well trained officers to deal with issues as well as ensuring we have no resources.

I believe Scrutiny committee should be asked to look at the way we organise our enforcement section, to ensure VFM, flexibility ,priorities and increased investment.They should also look at the way the FPN are issued and why 154 (20%) are written off, remember we already paid KS over £7k   for the issuing of those ticket and writing them off is a direct lost  and if that is constant over a year it would mean a loss of £84k per year.

I intend to talk to the Chair of Scrutiny to see if there are ways the committee can  review and recommend service improvements.

Cllr Duffy may also be interested in the contract awarded to Kingdom Security on Brent Housing Partnership's estates.  This is Kingdom's own account - they don't seem aware that BHP is soon to be taken back in-house by the Council.:

Kingdom is pleased to have won a new contract with Brent Housing Partnership (BHP) to help tackle anti-social behaviour in north west London on their behalf. The new contract will start on 9^th January 2017.

Kingdom’s Environmental Protection Division will be providing a reception & concierge service in some of BHP’s properties, and will also be carrying out uniformed patrols, both of which are intended to provide reassurance to residents that anti-social behaviour is being tackled and that the lives and properties of residents are being protected.

Anti-social behaviour is something that can affect the lives of a great many people, making their day to day existence a real misery and leaving them feeling helpless, desperate and with a reduced quality of life. It often includes but is not limited to the following:

• Vandalism
• Graffiti
• Fly-posting
• Nuisance neighbours (noisy or abusive neighbours)
• Intimidating groups taking over public spaces
• Acting in a rowdy or inconsiderate manner
• Littering
• Being drunk in public or street drinking
• Aggressive dogs
• Prostitution
• Begging
• Abandoning vehicles
• Using vehicles inappropriately
• Trespassing

We have previously written in detail about tackling anti-social behaviour – our in depth article on the topic, including more information about what it is, who to contact to tackle it, and what action agencies and individuals can take can be found here.

Kingdom will be acting on behalf of Brent Housing Partnership (BHP), an arms-length management organisation (ALMO) and community housing company owned by Brent Council. In 2013 BHP signed a 10 year management agreement with Brent Council. The council owns the homes and takes responsibility for housing policy and strategy, whereas BHP is responsible for day-to-day management of housing services to over 9,500 council tenants and 3,000 leaseholders.

Young Eco-Warriors: New 'Cleaner Streets' App for primary schools

Bapchild & Tonge School 'Eco-warriors' using the app to report litter

Brent Council already operates the Cleaner Brent Phone App for reporting flytipping and much else.  Could we see Brent schools using something similar in the future?

Primary schools across the country are invited to join a national clean-up mission, using the latest technology to help make the area around their school cleaner.

Environmental reporting app, Love Clean Streets, was successfully used by Eco-Schools across England in July this year. The successful pilot study took place with 11 primary schools from Rochdale to Kent and has resulted in the Love Clean Streets Board committing to develop the app further for use within the curriculum.

Year 5&6 Woolmore Primary School Students making a report of a vehicle part on the pavement

The modified app, developed specifically for primary school children to use, will be launched in schools throughout the UK in early 2017 and will be fully functional as a tool for both learning and taking action on local environmental issues in school catchment areas. Teachers involved in the pilot study reported considerable learning skills and educational value across the curriculum, positively mentioning benefits to Personal Social Health Economic, litter education, use of technology and demonstrating relevance to our everyday lives, encouraging pupils to be active citizens.

Max, aged 9, a pupil from Middleton Parish C of E Primary School in Middleton, North of Manchester, took part in the pilot study in the summer term which involved looking around the school grounds for environmental issues to report. He said: "The app is good as you can inform people of the areas you don't like and they will then make the environment a better place to live in."

Susannah Butcher, Eco- School leader at Bapchild & Tonge School, said: "The children had a lot of fun taking part in the project. It was an excellent chance for us to do some real work in trying to combat the problem of litter in the school area. " Pupils liked that they could take a picture, detail the problem and send it off themselves. They liked it even more when an overflowing bin outside the school as reported at lunchtime and by end of school at 3.15 it had been emptied!

"This project highlighted a variety of local environmental issues and raised questions with the children, which ensured they were fully engaged and motivated by the task. Smart phones and tablets are big part of children's lives, so showing them how these can be used in a positive way made the lesson really enjoyable for them," said Susannah.

Sophie, aged 11, a pupil from Bapchild & Tonge School in Kent, said: "I hate seeing litter on the way to school. With the app I can let someone know there is litter and it is cleaned up." Love Clean Streets Founder, Ian Blackburn, said: "We believe that educating the next generation on the importance of keeping our environment clean is a step in the right direction to ensure our world is a cleaner, happier place to live for generations to come. By getting involved with the LCS Education Project, children will ensure the issues do not go unnoticed and will inspire their peers to follow their lead."

Primary schools across the UK are invited to register their interest in taking part next summer by contacting Ian Blackburn on +44 203 126 4885 or emailing ian@bbits.co.uk. A further announcement will be made next spring when the revised app for primary schools has been tested and is ready for UK roll-out.

£96k levied in litterering fixed penalty fines in first 6 weeks of Brent Council trial

On Sunday I posted a blog LINK on the 7 week wait that Paul Lorber experienced for a bulk collection by Veolia. In passing I wondered how the new litter enforcement trial was working. The scheme was out-sourced to Kingdom.

Lo and behold on Monday Brent Council issued a press release announcing that more than 1200 people have been spot-fined in the first 6 weeks of the trial. That gives an income of £96K plus from which wages and overheads have to be paid.

This is the council press release:

More than 1200 litter bugs have been fined within the first 6 weeks of placing dedicated patrol officers on the streets of Brent.

There are few things that can affect the look and reputation of a place more than litter. Whether it’s fast food wrappers, cigarette butts or dog fouling, it’s a blight that should not be tolerated anywhere. And here in Brent, our fight against litterbugs is well underway.

Kingdom, the company whose dedicated officers are patrolling the streets in Brent, have issued over 1200 fines since the pilot scheme began 6 weeks ago.  Officers have been deployed to hot spot areas in the borough with the purpose of issuing £80 Fixed Penalty Notices to anyone caught in the act of committing a waste offence, including littering, paan spitting and not cleaning up after their dogs.

Residents or visitors who do not pay the fine could end up in court, where they face the prospect of being named and shamed, and landed with a much heftier penalty.

This innovative 12 month pilot scheme has been put in place to help keep our streets clean and litter-free, and supports the efforts of our existing Enviro-crime Enforcement Team, who work tirelessly to investigate littering and illegally dumped rubbish offences and prosecute offenders.

Cllr Eleanor Southwood, Brent Council’s Cabinet Member for the Environment, said:

Dropping litter is the kind of anti-social behaviour that really gets people’s backs up, and rightly so. It’s thoughtless, selfish and ruins shared spaces for everyone. Not only that, clearing and disposing of litter costs millions of pounds each year, and this money could be better spent in different areas.

The majority of residents here in Brent love where they live and take great care of our streets and parks, which is why we are determined to take action against those whose behaviours are spoiling Brent for the rest of us.
We want to make it as easy as possible for everyone in Brent to get rid of their waste legally, to recycle more and to take greater care and pride in the local area. These activities are part of our Love Where You Live campaign and send a clear message to residents and visitors that littering will not be accepted here in Brent.

You can do your bit to help make Brent a cleaner and greener place to live and visit, by reporting illegally dumped rubbish or graffiti with the Cleaner Brent App or organising your own clean-up day. You can also download the new recycling app for clear guidance on what you can recycle, and where.

This afternoon the Kilburn Times posted a story in whicb residents complain that the enforcement officers use 'underhand practices' to catch residents out. There were complaints of officers hiding to pounce on offenders and the lack of litter bins etc. LINK 

At Scrutiny Committee in April Cllr John Duffy warned that the enforcemment officers would oook out for 'easy pickings'. LINK

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

£80 spot fines for littering in Brent start on Monday

The 12 month experiment in the use of private contractor wardens to issue fixed penalty fines for littering in Brent will start on Monday.  The scheme came under scrutiny when first suggested earlier this year  LINK    LINK

This is the Council's official press release:

 Litter bugs beware, because as of Monday (13 June 2016), uniformed patrol officers will be on hand to issue £80 on-the-spot fines for waste offences in Brent.

Private security firm, Kingdom, have been chosen to run an innovative 12 month pilot to help keep Brent's streets clean and litter-free.

Dedicated patrol officers will be deployed to hot spot areas in the borough with the purpose of issuing Fixed Penalty Notices to anyone caught in the act of committing a waste offence, including littering, paan spitting and not cleaning up after their dogs.

This scheme will support the efforts of our existing Waste Enforcement Team, who work tirelessly to investigate littering and illegally dumped rubbish offences and prosecute offenders.

We have been working closely with Veolia, our waste and recycling contractor, and both residents and Councillors, to identify particular areas for enforcement activity, known for littering and dog fouling.

Cllr Eleanor Southwood, Brent Council's Cabinet Member for the Environment, said:

"The vast majority of residents here in Brent love where they live and take great care of our streets and parks. More and more residents are working with us to keep the borough clean by reporting illegally dumped rubbish via the Cleaner Brent app and organising their own clean up days. So it's really frustrating that there are still a minority of people whose actions are spoiling Brent for the rest of us.

"We're determined to take action against this anti-social behaviour. I hope that the possibility of getting a fine will make people think twice before dropping litter or allowing dogs to foul our pavements.

"We want to make it as easy as possible for everyone in Brent to get rid of their waste legally, to recycle more and take greater care and pride in the local area. This pilot scheme is part of our Love Where you Live campaign and sends a clear message that choosing to drop chewing gum or flicking a cigarette butt instead of disposing of it properly will have very real consequences."

Renu Kaul, Vice-Chairman of Sudbury Town Residents Association (STRA), an organisation committed to keeping Brent's streets clean and green, is full of praise for the initiative and said:

"I am over the moon to learn that Brent Council has appointed patrol officers to enforce action amongst litter offenders. I believe that this will make a dramatic difference in Sudbury and the rest of Brent.

"We need to continue to advocate a zero tolerance policy to littering, dog fouling and paan spitting and I really feel that the presence of enforcement officers will send out a positive message to the community that we need to take responsibility for disposing of litter and recycling properly."

Duff litter enforcement proposal slammed by Kilburn councillor

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Brent Council clarifies Kingdom flytipping and litter patrols contract proposal

I put a number of questions to Brent Council about the proposed Litter and Flytipping patrols contract LINK which is being discussed at Scrutiny Committee on Tuesday next week.

These are questions and responses:

1.    The report states that the Kingdom operatives will be paid at a lower rate than current Brent staff because they perform a different role. One of the differences cited is that they will not represent the Council in Court as part of their enforcement role. I would have thought that if there is an appeal against a fixed penalty notice or a refusal to pay that the Court would require the officer who spotted the infringement to appear as a witness. Is that your understanding?

The Kingdom role will be to undertake patrols to issue on the spot fines for littering. Our own waste enforcement team undertake more complex and weightier investigations, mainly of illegal dumping offences. The two activities are intended to be separate but will complement each other. Our own officers are professional enforcement officers who will investigate and prepare cases and then attend court to present them. It's complex and usually done without witness evidence.

In terms of Kingdom acting as witnesses, last year they issued over 50,000 FPN’s nationally and had less than 30 trials whereby the offender pleaded not guilty. Approximately 75% were paid which negates the need to prosecute. Out of the remaining 25% the vast majority plead guilty by letter or personal appearance or are found guilty in absence. The remainder of cases are remanded for a trial. In these instances, there may be the need for the issuing officer to attend court as a witness only. They would not be preparing and presenting the case.

2.    Can you clarify the total number of staff that Kingdom would deploy on the contract. Will there be a supervisor and manager in addition to the four ‘on the street’ operatives? Would the supervisor also be deployed on the street? Would there be a separate Kingdom admin support worker or would that be provided by the Council?

The Kingdom model proposes the following dedicated personnel. The supervisor would be deployed on-street as necessary.

            4 Enforcement officers

            1 Senior Enforcement Officer

            1 Supervisor / Team Leader.

            1 Admin officer

3.    As the contract was not put out to competitive tender is it possible to give like for like costings for  in-house provision of the service?

The costings from Kingdom and their anticipated resource allows for a like for like comparison with an in house service. However, each job role would be subject to the council's job evaluation process. That review has not been undertaken so the exact cost of the staffing element is not known. Also, any assumption that existing resource can be used to support an in house model is not tested. One benefit of the Kingdom model is that it complements rather than draws from existing resource. An in house model would obviously see the council retain all fines income so it could create more revenue, although experience in Ealing suggests that non-payment may be a more significant factor with an in-house service. The downside is that it would transfer the financial risk from the contractor to the council. The council would need to commit to the cost of staff and equipment without the absolute certainty of recovering that cost. Also, it is hoped such an initiative would correct behaviour over time so less fines would be issued. A contracted pilot arrangement offers better flexibility in that it can be changed or terminated without liability.

What's intended is a pilot and this will allow us to test the model and costs. When the full procurement process commences, any in house option would be considered alongside a bid from Kingdom (should they bid) and any other firm. The benchmarking from the pilot will ensure we have a clear idea of costs to compare.