1500 Green candidates will fight tooth and nail to protect services and tackle the housing crisis

Natalie Bennett, Leader of the Green Party of England and Wales, has launched the Green Party’s Local Elections campaign in Bristol alongside Tony Dyer, the Greens’ Bristol Mayoral candidate, and Bristol councillor Daniella Radice.

Ahead of the launch Bennett said:

Green councillors have proven their ability to stand up for their constituents and deliver real change and we are excited to be standing almost 1,500 candidates on 5 May. In a period when councils have been under enormous pressure to execute savage cuts handed down from Westminster, I am proud to say Green councillors have fought tooth and nail to protect essential public services and vulnerable people. By challenging the destructive budget priorities of councils led by the old parties that have run out of ideas, and holding planners and developers to account, Green councillors have made a real difference to people’s lives.

The Green Party are standing over 1,500 candidates on 5 May. Alongside the Greens’ 168 principal authority councillors, those newly elected next month will move to demand that local authority pensions are not invested in companies that have links to tax havens or unethical concerns.

At the launch, Bennett challenged our unfair tax system, and the notion that austerity is inevitable:

The recent tax evasion and avoidance scandals involving the shady financial arrangements of the super wealthy show that austerity is not unavoidable – it is a choice. The loopholes that exist in our unfair taxation system, and the ability of millionaires to avoid paying their way, shows there is enough money to pay for our vital council services - all that is needed is the political will. 

But while councils have been hard hit by Tory austerity, they should be straining every sinew to protect care services, community facilities and leisure spaces - finding creative ways to preserve them for the future. Greens have ideas to help with that, as well as scrutinising, challenging, and asking tough questions - being a new broom sweeping through often dusty corridors. 

If you want to send your message about the need for real change – about the need for multinational companies and rich individuals to pay their way and about the need for creative solutions in local communities, vote Green on 5 May.

Tony Dyer commented:

The astonishing success of the Green Party's recent Election Broadcast  clearly shows that it struck a chord with people who are sick and tired of the playground antics that too often dominates political debate. From standing up for the most disadvantaged, to taking real steps to alleviate Bristol's ever worsening housing crisis, Greens are committed to grown up politics that deliver real change."

Greens will campaign tirelessly in coming weeks for measures to address the housing crisis and deliver decent homes for all. The party is committed to cap rents, introduce longer tenancies and license landlords to provide greater protection for renters. We will also break the stranglehold of the big volume builders, helping smaller builders, community groups and individuals build genuinely affordable homes and renovate more empty homes.

Daniella Radice, part of the team of that have been rapidly greening Bristol’s council, commented:

We call on this government to restore local peoples’ powers to protect their own environments, and to stop damaging and exploitative developments in our towns and countryside.

Where one part of government talks about devolution, in fact it is busy removing powers from local councils and the people they represent. The government must stop treating local communities like children. Local people know what is best for their areas and must have a real say over new developments. They should be able to say no to polluting industries, fracking, and unaffordable housing built by exploitative developers – all to the benefit of investors rather than local people.

The Green Party is opposed to the centralising proposals in the Housing and Planning Bill which will further undermine the ability of Local Councils to insist on truly affordable homes, or negotiate with major developers.

Cllr Radice added:

It is no coincidence that the Conservative administration has received so much funding from the same property tycoons and investors who will benefit from this centralisation of control. We call on the government to halt this damaging bill, and enable local councils to build the affordable homes we desperately need.

No Council Tax Benefit review this year as 3.99% Council Tax rise set to be approved by Cabinet

This statement has just been released by Brent Council. It confirms the 3.99% Council Tax rise and Muhammed Butt states the Council's  intention to continue  protect those least able to pay Council Tax.  However, there is no proposal to review the scheme to protect them from this rise as Scrutiny Committee recommended.

Chancellor George Osborne is passing on the burden to raise council tax to local authorities if they want to protect adult social care services.

In his Budget, Mr Osborne admitted that, after years of cuts and with growing numbers of older people needing care, many local authorities could not cover the cost of adult social care services from existing budgets. Such services include care for elderly residents in their own home and support for adults with disabilities or mental health needs.

But instead of providing Government support, the Chancellor has left councils to shoulder the burden by providing the option of raising council tax by an additional 2 per cent.

Leader of Brent Council, Councillor Muhammed Butt said: 

"The indicators are that councils across the political board - Conservative and Labour - will be raising council tax to protect the most vulnerable.

"We in Brent have worked hard to keep council tax frozen for the last six years. We know how hard our residents have to work to pay all their bills.

"But it looks like we agree with the Chancellor that the services for some of our most vulnerable are now at breaking point. It is a shame that, instead of restoring some of the support the Government has withdrawn, he is hitting our residents again by saying the only way out is through a council tax rise."

Following a six-year freeze, and in line with Government expectations, Cabinet papers reveal today (Friday 29 January) that the council's share for the bill could rise by 3.99 per cent while the Olympic levy has fallen, meaning overall an average 'Band D' household would pay an extra 45p per week.

The change is being proposed among a number of cost-saving options as the council wrestles with having to find savings of more than £60million by 2019 due to central Government cuts. Since 2010, the council has delivered savings of £117million as the Government slashes its funding to the authority in half.

The council estimates the move could bring in an extra £4million a year to help bridge part of the gap left by the Government's relentless squeeze on local government spending.

The proposal was a difficult choice which, if approved, would allow the council to protect more services than it would otherwise be able to.

"A combination of dramatic reductions in Government funding over several years and increasing demand for our services, such as adult social care, leaves us between a rock and a hard place," says Cllr Butt.

"These are very tough times and we will continue to take a business-like approach in planning our finances and rigorously explore the most cost effective ways to deliver services to our residents. The bleak financial outlook will inevitably lead to some difficult choices but our aim throughout this process has been to maximise efficiency savings wherever possible. However, the council is so much leaner and efficient than before and we can only shift services online, or sell a building, or merge support services once.

"In addition, unlike previous years, the Government is no longer providing a grant to freeze council tax.

"The vast majority of the savings proposals are either increased efficiency measures, service innovations or a more enterprising approach to income generation, but this is no longer enough if we want to protect the services that residents rely on.

"We're still listening carefully to what local people are saying so if you haven't responded to the consultation yet I would encourage you to do so as soon as possible. Whatever is decided, we will continue to protect the council tax support scheme for those residents on modest incomes to ensure that those less able to pay council tax continue to be supported."

Whatever the Cabinet recommends, following its meeting on Monday 8 February, will be considered by the Full Council meeting later in the month, as setting the budget and the council tax rates is the job of all elected councillors.

Have your say at www.brent.gov.uk/budgetconsultation2016 or visit one of the remaining consultation meetings next week on:

• Monday 1 February, 7-10pm, at The Library at Willesden Green, 95 High Road
• Tuesday 2 February, 7-10pm, The Roundwood Youth Centre, Longstone Avenue, Harlesden
• Wednesday 3 February, 7-10pm, Main Hall, Kingsbury High School, Princes Avenue, Kingsbury.

VOTE ON WHETHER BRENT COUNCIL SHOULD INCREASE COUNCIL TAX

Please see the side panel to take part in this poll.

You can add a reason for your vote as a comment below this posting.

Brent 'Local offer' service for parents of children with special needs and disabilities goes live

From Brent Council

 

Information and advice for parents and carers of children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) is now easier to access thanks to the launch of Brent's Local Offer.

Developed with the help of a parent support group and pupils from Brent special schools, the Local Offer is a single point of contact for families who want to find out about services and support for children and young people with SEND from 0 to 25.

Statutory services like education, social care and health are included, as well as information about leisure, transport, money advice and independent living, all of which can be searched for by area or age range.

Further work to review and enhance the information available on our Local Offer will take place with parents over the coming months so that we can ensure it is responsive to what you want and need.

Find a service in the Local Offer

Brent NHS CCG takes its toys away

Guest blog by Nan Tewari

-->

In the most extraordinary spectacle I have ever witnessed in over 40 years of attending public meetings and meetings of public bodies (two different things) on Wednesday evening, Brent NHS Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) fell out spectacularly with its patient representatives. In short, the CCG refused a perfectly reasonable, unanimous patient request to change the order of the agenda items of the patient engagement meeting and in the face of patient disapproval, decided to close the meeting with no business having been transacted. The badly run meetings (by a CCG public appointee) had failed consistently to run on accepted lines, namely, apologies, approval of minutes. matters arising etc. and as a result, minutes of meetings held in November 2013, March 2014 and May 2014 have never been approved and therefore cannot be put onto the CCG website for the benefit of the public at large.

The law requires CCGs to consult with patients and the public on proposed changes to the delivery of health services.   Failure to comply with the requirement can be serious with the CCG being challenged by providers as well as by individual patients and groups of patients who perceive changes as being detrimental.  Even if the CCG is confident that it is making the best decision, it still needs to go through a proper and proportionate public engagement process.

In order to meets these legal obligations, the CCG set up a committee of its Governing Body called the Equality, Diversity and Engagement (EDEN) Committee to provide itself with assurance that its public involvement activity in the multiplicity of proposed service changes was as robust as it should be.

My fellow patient reps and I (some, appointed by the CCG and others, elected by fellow patients) worked really hard to help the CCG and pointed out where it could be open to challenge.  We take the view that we are neither a rubber stamp nor nodding donkeys, and it is our duty to withhold the desired assurances if patient involvement is unsatisfactory.  The CCG did not appreciate this one little bit and started a smear campaign against patient reps saying that we were failing in our duties.

The CCG is effectively rewriting the rules to tell patient reps how they must act. In the course of doing so, they are also breaching all of the accepted rules of public body committee procedure and have stated that their particular public body (the CCG) does not have to act in accordance with these norms.

I have taken up this guest blog spot, courtesy of Martin Francis, because there is nowhere officially in Brent CCG for patients to air their views on matters of public involvement in proposed changes to local health services as is required by s14Z2 of the NHS Act 2006 as amended by the Health and Social Care Act 2012. It would be interesting to hear what others patients and members of the public have to say.

Butt confirms no 2% council tax rise this year

Mike Bowden, Assistant Director of Brent Finance gave a presentation to the Budget and Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee in November 2012  that assumed a council tax rise of 3.5% for the 2013-14 council budget LINK. Shortly afterwards Eric Pickles established a requirement for a local referendum if increases were above a 2% threshold. Last year a number of councils of various political hues increased council tax below the 3.5% threshold that existed then.

I understand that there has been discussion in the Brent Executive as to whether to raise Council Tax with the benefit marginal after grant losses and  a reduced collection rate are taken into account. A rise above 2% would have incurred the cost of a local referendum.  It would of course have been another additional cost for people already suffering from benefit cuts and low or frozen wages. An alternative view is that calling the Coalition's bluff and triggering a referendum could result in a proper political debate about the need to adequately fund  local services and the iniquities of the Coalition's grant reduction to local authorities. Only a very small percentage of local government revenue comes from council taxes and charges.

Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt has confirmed via a Facebook interchange with me that there will not be a 2% rise this year. Asked about a possible lower rise he said that the Council was looking at the settlement figures as part of the budgetary process and considering the offer of the freeze grant.

The case for refusing to make 'impossible choices' in Brent budget

This is the speech I made at this evening's Budget and Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee. Brent Council Leader Muhammed Butt and Deputy, Ruth Moher, attended but were asked only one question. Muhammed Butt confirmed that carers working for the private companies provided adult social care for Brent would not necessarily get the London Living Wage. All other questions on the Budget were addressed to Mick Bowden, Deputy Director of Finance.

I paraphrased towards the end of my speech when my 5  minutes deputation time began to run out.

I start with the assumption that none of the present administration stood for election in order to make cuts that would be to the detriment of the quality of life and the life chances of Brent residents.

I also accept that the Coalition Government’s increasingly discredited approach to austerity is the motor for local authority cuts. I would further argue that this is an ideological attack on local government and local democracy which leaves councils with the job of local implementation of the Coalition agenda.

Under Ann John’s leadership it seemed that the Council was seeing itself in the role of ‘managing’ these cuts with the argument that they could do this without harming services. After the leadership change there has been a slight change of emphasis but there appears to be a contradiction in the stance of Muhammed Butt, the new leader.

In his Priorities statement for the Full Council, Cllr Butt says:

The first priority must remain protecting the integrity of the Budget and making savings.

 But in his blog, he likens the Council’s task to the ‘impossible decisions’ that would have to be made in cutting a third from a household budget.

Again in his press release on the Early Intervention Grant Cllr Butt said that he is dedicated to making sure that no child in the Borough is left behind at a time when' impossible choices' have to be made due to the highly punitive cuts imposed on local authorities by the Coalition.

The issue is clear: maintaining the integrity of the budget and making cuts will mean making ‘impossible choices’ that will inevitably, whatever the council does in mitigation, damage the most vulnerable.

Of course Council officers will stress the legal requirements during the budget process but councillors are not just ‘managers’, they are also politicans and need to adopt a political response both to protect local government as a democratioc entity and to protect local people.

I have likened their position to that of the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail who, despite having his limbs cut off one by one and left (‘Tis but a scratch’ ‘Your arm’s off’ ) as just a bloodied torso, remains defiant and totally unware of the impossibility of his plight. The cruel twist is that the Coalition gives the Council the job of cutting off its own limbs!

The question for this year’s budget making is should the Labour Council continue to make ‘impossible choices’ and continue to cut off its own limbs.

My answer to that quuestion is ‘No’. Doing the ‘impossible’ is also doing the morally unjustifiable.

The impossible is compounded by the constant moving of goalposts by the Coalition, the Council Tax Benefit changes which will not only put more families into poverty and increase the number of defaults, the increased temporary housing costs caused by homelesslessness after the Housing Benefit cap, increased costs for Adult Social care, the permitted (but not encouraged)  increase in Council Tax without a local referendum now established at 2% (3.5% envisaged in forward planning) and anyway such an increase would again hit the poorest in the borough. Only yesterday I heard that in one month 63 children, affected by the housing benefit cap, have moved from a local primary school.

To truly represent local people the Council needs to devise a ‘needs budget’ which reflects the true cost of services that the people of Brent need to maintain their quality of life, consult on this in imaginative ways including going to the community in schools, community centres, places of worship and publicise it, and make sure that people understand who is responsible for the cuts being imposed and the implications of more cuts. Gathering mass support in this way through local action, and working with other councils, especially London ones, for a common approach, could begin a concerted campaign against Coalition policies.

Ken Livingstone, back in the days of the GLC, mounted a fierce challenge against Margaret Thatcher from his County Hal base.  Yes, it didn’t succeed in its immediate aims but did help undermine her in the long-term with an alternative popular agenda.  Brent Council could be in the forefront of such a campaign.