LETTER: Please let me know your views on the impact of redevelopment in Wembley - positives and negatives

 Dear Readers,

I’m an A level student studying Geography.

As a part of my studies, I have undertaken a research project on the Positive and Negative impacts of the redevelopment of Wembley for the local community.

As local residents, your views would give me a very accurate picture of the perspectives of the local residents 

What has changed since the regeneration projects have seen tall tower blocks sprung up?

 

How safe do you feel? Has anything changed in your sense of belonging to the place?

Your input and comments would really mean a lot!

The data will be used only for academic purposes and will be completely anonymous.

I will also share my findings of these data collection for you to gauge an overall picture of the perception of the local residents.

The following are the links to short survey questions.

Many thanks in advance

 

Questionnaire for access to green spaces in Wembley

 Survey-Community engagement and sense of belonging in Wembley after regeneration

 

Only limited response by Labour Group members to Whip's survey aimed at listening to them

Brent Labour Whip, Steve Crabb, is trying hard to improve 2-way communication with his Labour Group colleagues, with limited success.

A recent survey of the 49 strong group achieved only 27 responses. 

Of the 27 most felt the length of Labour Group meetings and content  was about right but wanted more financial debate and data that would help them measure the Council's performance standards.

Ahead of the Labour Group Away Day, that will include a personality assessment, ('how our character, our outlook and our lived experience, shape the way we work individually and as part of a team;) the survey found only 8 members had not undertaken any personality questionnaire  and 11 had completed the Myers Brigg test LINK.

CLOSES TOMORROW NOV 30th: Have your say on Brent's Air Quality Action Plan

 From Brent Council Website

Dirty air costs lives.

That's why we have made it a priority to work with our residents and businesses, TfL, the Mayor of London and national government to improve air quality across the borough. While great progress has been made in recent years, there is still work to do; and we want to hear your views on what action to take.

We are working to update our Air Quality Action Plan to make sure the action we take over the next five years will have the most impact, where it's needed most.

In 2019, 59% of Brent’s monitoring sites had an annual nitrogen dioxide level higher than the legal limit. When it comes to particulate matter, both our PM2.5 sites and one of the PM10 sites exceeded World Health Organisation limits.

Clearly, more needs to be done. Air pollution is considered the world's largest environmental health threat, with over 4,000 deaths across London attributed to air pollution in 2019.

This is not just an inner London problem – a report by the GLA and Imperial College London shared that the highest number of these deaths were recorded in outer London boroughs.

Pollution levels lowered during 2020 as a result of COVID-19 restrictions but there is a risk that, if more people return to using cars, pollution levels could increase to over and above 2019 levels.

We want to work with you, our residents, to ensure this doesn’t happen.

Over the next year, we will be working to review progress made against our current Air Quality Action Plan and updating it to make sure the actions taken over the next five years (2023-2027) are as ambitious as possible. This will support national and London-wide policies, such as the Ultra Low Emission Zone, to help protect Brent residents from the health impacts of poor air quality.

The review will take place over a series of stages:

 1) Developing the draft Air Quality Action Plan:

We want you to help us design the plan. By filling in the below survey, you can tell us what air quality means to you and what action you think should be taken across the borough. The survey will be open until 30th November 2021.

Meanwhile, we will also be undertaking borough-wide air pollution modelling to better understand the situation in Brent, identifying pollution hotspots and dominant sources for those locations.

2) Feedback on the Draft Air Quality Plan:

The information you share in the first survey, along with the borough-wide data modelling, will help feed into the creation of a draft Air Quality Action Plan.

Once the draft is written, you will have an opportunity to give your feedback on the draft plan, through a public consultation on this site, before the final version is published in 2023.

3) Publishing the Air Quality Action Plan

Once the plan has gone through that final public consultation, the final plan will be shared in 2023 and delivery of the actions will start.

In other news! Brent’s Long-Term Transport Strategy is being developed alongside the AQAP – you survey responses will also be fed into this. You can have your say on the draft Transport Strategy in the coming months – watch out for more news on this site.

FILL IN THE SURVEY HERE

Survey reveals largest group of public feel lockdown should have been earlier and has been relaxed too soon

From Ipso MORI 

New polling from Ipsos MORI reveals how the British public divides into five groups, according to their different views towards the timing of the original lockdown measures in March, and the relaxation of some of the measures in July.

The survey, taken after the announcement of the relaxation but before the measures were actually lifted, shows that the largest grouping are the “Earlier, longer lockdown” segment.  Making up around half of Britons (48%), this group says both that the original lockdown measures on the 23^rd March were introduced too late (with the benefit of hindsight), and that the relaxations in England announced for July 4^th are happening too quickly.  Another 11% are “Becoming more cautious”: they believe that the original measures were introduced too soon or at the right time, but are now worried they are being relaxed too quickly.

Who is in these groups?

• The “Earlier, longer lockdown” group is relatively likely to be aged between 45-64 (42% of this group are that age), and to have voted Labour in the 2019 General Election or Remain in the 2016 EU referendum (45% and 50% of this group respectively).
• The “Becoming more cautious” group is the oldest segment (39% are aged 55 to 75), is slightly more female than male (by 53% to 46%), and six in ten live in the Midlands and South of England. Half (52%) of this group voted Conservative in 2019.
• The “Government got it right then and now” segment is the most middle-class group (36% are in social class AB), and it also has relatively high proportions of 25-34 year olds (29%) and of parents (34%).  Unsurprisingly, six in ten of this group voted Conservative in the 2019 election and Leave in the 2016 referendum.
• The “Started too late but now ready for relaxing” group is also slightly younger (39% are aged 18-34), but in this case are slightly more male than female (by 54% to 45%).  They also have a slightly higher proportion of 2019 Conservative voters (45%). 

Overall, seven in ten (69%) now think that the original lockdown in March 23^rd was imposed too late. 22% think it was at about the right time and 5% that they were taken too soon.   While perceptions have changed little since the end of April, there has been a clear shift since immediately after the lockdown was introduced, when 56% thought the measures were being taken too late, and 35% at the right time. 

Six in ten (60%), feel that the relaxation announced for England on the 4^th July are happening too quickly, rising to seven in ten among Labour, Liberal Democrat and Remain voters.  Almost three in ten (28%) think the measures are being relaxed at the right time (rising to 42% of 2019 Conservatives), but just 8% think the relaxation is happening too slowly.

Gideon Skinner, Head of Political Research at Ipsos MORI, said:

 These findings confirm our other research that, overall, Britons tend to err on the side of caution when it comes to the lockdown measures.  But it also shows that these views aren’t static.  Even though the real number of cases has fallen, perceptions have hardened that the original measures were imposed too late, underpinned by a clear partisan divide. 

Nevertheless, even with the benefit of hindsight, not everyone takes the same line for both the March restrictions and the July relaxation.  Some want to keep the restrictions in place for longer, but others are ready for them to be relaxed, even if they felt they were originally introduced too late, and there is also a minority who think the government has always picked the right time.  This all suggests that despite views hardening the public hasn’t yet come to a final view, with the impact of the relaxation this weekend likely to be key in determining whether the Government is seen as leading public opinion or moving before it was ready.

Complete Brent Council's Covid19 impact survey to help current & future planning

Brent Council has launched a residents' survey so as to understand the impact of Covid19 and to enable planning for current and future needs.

The survey can be found HERE

NEU, NASUWT and Rebecca Long-Bailey tell PM 'no re-opening' until tests met

Battle lines are being drawn tonight following Johnson's confusing announcement which totally ignored the views of education unions over the re-opening of schools. The NEU has warned members to expect an email survey tonight. Here in Brent we need to hear from the Lead Member for schools, Cllr Amir Agha, whether he supports an early return to school even if the 5 sensible tests are not met.

This is what the NEU said a short while ago:

Commenting on the Prime Minister’s announcement on changes to lockdown, Dr Mary Bousted, Joint General Secretary of the National Education Union, said:

“We think that the announcement by the Government that schoolsmay reopen from June 1 with reception and years 1 and 6 is nothing short of reckless.

“Coronavirus continues to ravage communities in the UK and the rate of Covid-19 infection is still far too great for the wider opening of our schools.

“A study published last week by the University of East Anglia suggested that school closures are the single most effective way of suppressing the spread of the virus.

“If schools are to re-open, we need the Government to meet the five tests we have set to keep children, their families and our staff safe.

“There must be much lower numbers of Covid-19 cases, with extensive arrangements for testing and contact tracing to keep it that way. This test has manifestly not been met.

“We must have a national plan for social distancing, hygiene, appropriate PPE and regular testing to ensure our schools and colleges don’t become hot spots for Covid-19. This test has manifestly not been met.

“And there must be plans drawn up to protect vulnerable staff, or those who live with vulnerable people, to stop more educators or members of their families dying of this dreadful disease.

“We are supported in this by nearly 400,000 staff and parents who have signed our petition to reopen schools only when it is safe. And Parentkind, one of the largest parents’ groups in the UK, back our tests

“We have written three letters to the Government for the science around school reopening, to share the modelling it is using and discuss the concerns raised by our five tests. We have received no reply.

“If schools are re-opened to blatant breaches of health and safety, we will strongly support our members who take steps to protect their pupils, their colleagues and their families. The worst outcome of any wider re-opening of schools is a second spike of Covid-19 infection.

“Our members care deeply about the children they teach – and no-one is more aware of the struggles faced by vulnerable pupils, or those from vulnerable families, than their teachers. If schools cannot safely re-open, we need other ways of supporting those children. For instance, the better weather gives us a chance for some education to take place outdoors, where children are least likely to pick up infection.

The NEU will survey its members immediately after the Prime Minister has spoken to gauge their reaction to this announcement.

“We urge the Government to follow the example of the Welsh and Scottish governments who have made the decision not to re-open schools at this time.

“Now is the time for Government to listen and do the right thing.”

The NASUWT issued this statement:

 Responding to tonight’s statement from the Prime Minister, Dr Patrick Roach, General Secretary of the NASUWT – The Teachers’ Union, said:

“The Prime Minister’s statement that it would be “madness” to risk a second spike in transmission of the Coronavirus highlights the need for extreme caution.

“Regrettably, the Prime Minister’s announcement is likely to provoke confusion and does not address the genuine concerns that have been raised by teachers.

“The Prime Minister’s announcement lacks the clarity of statements issued by Ministers in Scotland and Wales who have reaffirmed the key ‘stay at home’ message.

“The Government’s announcement that schools in England might reopen to more children from 1 June risks thousands of schools rushing to make decisions about how best to safeguard the health and safety of children and staff in the absence of any clear national guidance.

“It is baffling that following the Government’s decision to close all schools on public health grounds that the Government now expects individual schools to work out for themselves whether or not it will be safe to reopen on 1 June and potentially put at risk the health of children, staff and the public.

“With no date yet set for when the Government’s guidance will be forthcoming, school leaders in England are being placed in an extremely difficult position of being asked to draw up plans affecting lives of children and their teachers.

“Today’s announcements will do little to assuage teachers’ concerns about the premature reopening of schools.

“The Government must, with the utmost urgency, address teachers’ concerns or expect to lose the goodwill of the profession.

“Unless and until the Government can demonstrate that schools will be safe for staff and children, all schools should continue to limit their opening only to vulnerable children and to children of key workers.

“The NASUWT will continue to press the Government on the need for clear guidance and stringent and enforceable health and safety risk assessment measures to be in place in every school prior to relaxing the current restrictions.

“The UK Government’s message to be responsible and to ‘stay alert’ will ring hollow with teachers who are still being denied access to appropriate PPE and who have been given no clear guidance about how social distancing can be practiced in school settings.

“Notwithstanding the Government’s five tests, the bottom line is that no teacher or child should be expected to go into schools until it can be demonstrated that it is safe for them to do so.”

Brent's CIL information deficit

Given the controversy over the allocation of Brent's Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) I have contacted Brent Council today over two issues.

Firstly the Cabinet will be discussing a review of the £17.8m allocated to Olympic Way public realm improvements, including the replacement of the Stadium pedway by steps, at their meeting on Monday. The review is in the light of the possible sale of the stadium. This is an enormous amoutn of money and of great public interest but there are no details on the Cabinet agenda - a report is promised but not yet published.  How can the public make any representations if there is no infomation available? The full agenda, including reports, should be available 5 working days bfore the meeting.  A similar issue arose with the first full meeting of the council.

Secondly there is currently a consultation on the Neighbourhood CIL underway. I have received several reminders about this and have responded asking for details of the second round of allocations - only round one is available in the council website. The council responded that there were last minute agreements to be signed off but the closing date of the consultation is now only a week away (see consultation notice below) - surely we need this information to provide a context to any consultation response.  Consultation without information is meaningless.

It would have been useful to have the information available before the local election as the Neighbourhood CIL is one of the few areas where the public and local councillors can have any influence.

I have asked for an extension to the consultation if the information is still not available.

Brent Council's message today:

The online survey for the Neighbourhood Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Review is open for just one more week. The survey will be closed on the 23^rd May 2018.

More information about the Community Infrastructure Levy in Brent can be found here and below.

This is your opportunity to tell us about your views, experiences and suggestions for the improvement.

https://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/NeighbourhoodCILReview/

The survey should take approximately 10 minutes to complete.  If you have any questions or would like further information please do not hesitate to contact us via CILadmin@brent.gov.uk.

What employees say about working for Brent Council

A survey of Brent Council employees that will be reported to the Equalities Committee presents a mixed picture showing that although there are areas of strength there is still much to be done. Below I present the 'Headline' findings and those relating to employees with a disability. The latter is particularly concerning. The full report can be accessed at the end of the article and deserves close scrutiny

It will be discussed at the Equalities Committee on Monday 12th September, 6pm, at the Brent Civic Centre.

Figures in brackets are the Council average

Have your say on pharmaceutical service provision in Brent

Brent Council is consulting on local pharmaceutical services and whether they meet the needs of local people. This is what they say:

If you use local pharmaceutical services, we want your views on the services provided so we can make sure that you can access pharmaceutical services easily and that you are happy with the service you receive.

The consultation will take place from 5 December 2014 until 3 February 2015.
Pharmaceutical services include services provided from:

• local pharmacies
• dispensaries at doctors' surgeries
• specialist appliance contractors.

Local pharmacies also provide healthcare help and advice and are often the first point of contact when people are concerned about their health.

The Consultation Document and draft Pharmaceutical Needs Assessment can be found HERE The document is well worth reading for itself as it gives a comprehensive overview of health issues in the borough as well as data on access to pharmacies.

The survey form can be found HERE

The key findings in CIPFA comparative study of Brent Library service

The Kilburn Times LINK is reporting  the CIPFA Report on a comparative study of Brent Library Service and that of 15 neighbouring services.

CIPFA state:

The analysis is simple and non-judgemental. You will not find any quartiles, traffic lights or subjective commentary. Instead the report seeks to visualise the data and to enable readers to draw their own conclusions.

 In that spirit I too will resist a 'subjective commentary' and leave readers to make up their minds from the graphs reproduced below. The boroughs are (s) Brent, (e) Haringey, (a) Lewisham, (d) Lambeth, (x) Southwark, (t) Hounslow, (w) Merton, (f) Croydon, (h) Greenwich, (k) Wandsworth (z) Enfield, (g) Waltham Forest, (m) Hackney, (u) Redbridge, (n) Newham. (BRENT IS BLOCKED IN BLACK)

The full report is available via the link at the foot of this posting.

Above - survey of Under 16s