Brent Greens oppose Harlesden incinerator plans

The site

Brent Green Party has joined opponents of the Energy Recovery Plant (locally known more directly as the Harlesden incinerator)  proposed for the Willesden Junction site on the borders of Brent.  They have sent the following objection to Ealing Council Planning Committee  LINK

CONTEXT

Brent Green Party is concerned about the negative environmental impact of the major part of the planning application, relating to the pyrolysis plant. We do not have equal objection to the anaerobic digestion part of the plant, since we recognise the potential benefit of utilizing CH4 released by biomass for energy rather than putting it in landfill, where it would be released anyway, contributing to climate change.

However, we cannot support the application taken as a whole and state our OBJECTIONS here:

AIR QUALITY

-         Insufficient modelling of potential air quality impacts and their assessment and foreclosure of the need for additional health impact assessments in line with Environmental Agency stipulations.

-         Insufficient assessment of the need for appropriate mitigation measures in light of potential air quality impacts at the planning application stage in line with EA stipulations.

CO2

-         Pyrolysis produces bio-oil and syngas which when combusted for energy, produce vast amounts of CO2, wholly inconsistent with the achievement of EU emission targets.

WATER COURSES

-         Contamination of London canals from run off pollutants during construction, not sufficiently mitigated by drainage measures.

-         Region is water stressed in terms of supply of mains water and site water demand will exacerbate this, in excess to the rainwater-harvesting techniques designed to reduce onsite mains water demand.

PEDESTRIANS

-         During construction, adverse effects on users of playground in Harley road, residential properties and pedestrians in Old Oak Lane Conservation Area, users of the Grand Union Canal and pedestrians walking through Metro Multi Trading Estate.

CONSTRUCTION

-         Adverse noise pollution during construction.

-         Medium to low risk impact of dust generated during construction.

-         Potential for ground contamination during construction period.

-         Potential for ground contamination from storage/handling of oils, chemicals & waste materials from the new plant, not met by proposal to place in storage facilities.

For these reasons we strongly object to the proposal in its current form.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Shahrar Ali, Spokesperson for Planning and Environment
Brent Green Party, PO Box 54786, London NW9 1FL
Contact shahrar.ali@greenparty.org.uk

'Transformational thinking' response to unfair Coalition budget cuts

In his speech to the Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee last night, Graham Durham drew attention to the unfairness of the central government cuts imposed on Labour local authorities compared with those run by other political groups.

Over the last 3 years Labour councils have lost an average of £107 per head, Lib Dems £38 and Conservative £36. The highest loss is the London borough of Hackney at £266 and the lowest North Dorset at £2.70.

The figures for Brent was £120.21 per person.

Durham, stating that this was a concerted attack on Labour councils asked councillors , "What job are we doing?"  and answered himself, "We should not be carrying out cuts on behalf of the Coalition posh boys!"

Condemning the council for complying with Coalition policies by sending families to Hastings he reminded Cllr Helga Gladbaum that she was once one of the councillors who alongside him had fought against making cuts.

He concluded by arguing that a Labour Council should not do this to the people of Brent and instead should set a needs budget.

Isabel Counihan was given her first opportunity to address councillors about the light of her family. She described the background to her family losing their housing in Brent and the impact of localised payments of Housing Benefit.  The family had launched a campaign which had received widespread community support.

She said that her family were one of thousands of homeless families in the borough and asked how the council could justify spending £102m on a Civic Centre in these circumstances. Isabel described how there had been another attempt to evict the family from their temporary accommodation where they could not afford the rent. At the same time she claimed that social services had threatened to take her five children into care. She had told them how expensive that would be, particularly a some would need special needs support,  compared with helping them with their rent.

Isabel Counihan concluded by saying that Brent had got its priorities wrong and backed calls for them to set a needs budget.  She invited councillors to join the Counihan Family March on December 1st.

After the deputations there was a presentation by Allison Elliott on the Adult Social Care budget. She claimed that the council, through a West London Alliance procurement had not 'reduced the service but had reduced the costs'. However she said that the reduction in costs could not be sustained and that there would be a budget gap of £6.87m in 2014/15 if nothing was done.  She said that the council would have to think differently in order to reduce the budget and that this would require 'transformational thinking' - which drew 'You mean cuts!'  and 'What's going to happen to the old people' from the audience.

There were sharp exchanges between Graham Durham and the chair of the committee, Alison Hopkins (Lib Dem) over the availability of committee documents for the public. At one point the police were called into to remove Durham when he protested  but Hopkins managed to procure some copies of the documents for the public.  However police were called again when Graham Durham asked questions from the floor about the council budget, claiming that councillors were failing to ask challenging questions of Mick Bowden, or the council leader or deputy who were present. He demanded, 'You are here to scrutinise - do your job!'. Five police officers and CPOs remained in the public seats for the rest of the meeting which worked out at about one for each member of the public present,

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.

Tributes pour in for Jeff Bartley champion of the environment

Environmental and fair trade campaigners across Brent have been paying tribute today to Jeff Bartley, the Brent Council officer who led on these issues who died on Monday. Along with others  I was due to meet with him this afternoon to further plans for a School Climate Change Conference to be held in the Spring.

I have sent the following message to his colleagues at Brent Council:

I am so sorry to hear about Jeff's passing. He was an unfailingly kind and considerate man who in his understated way was passionately committed to the environmental cause. It was a pleasure to work with him on the Schools Climate Conference and on other issues within the borough.  He was a good man who will be greatly missed.

Here are other tributes that have been sent on to me:

Peter Moore, Vice Chair of Brent Fairtrade Network::

I am shocked and saddened to hear the news of Jeff’s death. As the former Chair of Brent Fairtrade Network I have greatly valued working with Jeff over the last 5 years. Jeff was such a reliable supporter and friend of our work. The strength of his values was clear and his personal commitment to causes such as Fairtrade and his loyalty to the work of the Council as a whole shone through. I shall miss him greatly and his family and colleagues are much in my thoughts.

Jayanti Patel, Chair of Friends of Eton Grove Park:

For many years Jeff has been one of our strongest supporters among Brent Council staff. He was a strong supporter of our annual "Queensbury Eco-cultural festival" in Eton Grove Park and always pointed us to the right department in Brent Council where he could not help us. Being members of the Executive committee of Brent sustainable forum we worked closely with Jeff on environmental issues in Brent.

On behalf of Friends of Eton Grove Park, we would like to express our most sincere and heartfelt condolences on Jeff's passing. He was the senior Council Officer liaising with and offering support to Friend of Eton Grove Park and we are extremely grateful for all that he did for us.

Ken Montague, Secretary of Brent Campaign Against Climate Change:

Jeff was a good man and will be sorely missed. He was completely committed to his job and to fighting climate change.

Viv Stein, Co-ordinator, Transiiton Willesden and formerly Brent Friends of the Earth and Green Zone board member

During the past 8 or so years I have known him Jeff was keen to involve community groups in Brent in environmental projects, and always asked me how the various groups I was involved with were getting on.  Whether it was setting up the Brent Sustainability Forum, the Green Zones project or developing Brent's Climate Change strategy, he has overseen a raft of programmes designed to make a difference in Brent.  He will have had a tough job to tackle these areas of work at a time of harsh budget cuts across the Council, and his passing will be a great loss to the Borough and its residents.

The Brent and Kilburn Times has posted  story about Jeff on their website HERE

I will be happy to post messages from any other individuals or groups. Please send via e-mail.