Brent Cabinet finding it hard to find cuts to bridge £54m budget gap

See last paragraph

According to a posting on the Brent Fightback Facebook page Muhammed Butt told Brent Central Labour Party members last night that Brent Council would have to make cuts of £54 million 2015-17 (2 year budget) that is equivalent to 20% of the revenue budget.

Every Cabinet member had been asked to find deep cuts - and they were struggling. The Labour Group will meet to discuss the recommended cuts on Saturday November 29th.

Butt told the meeting that he would ensure that new housing in Park Royal will have 50% affordable housing.  However members were disappointed that his definition of affordable rent was 80% of market rent - far too expensive for most ordinary Brent families.  He was asked to go back to officers and challenge this.

I understand that the issue of Stonebridge Adventure Playground was raised by members unhappy about recent developments over its proposed closure. LINK Muhammed Butt told them that a decision would be made in January.

Other sources suggest that the problem regarding the possible barring of three councillors under the 6 month non-attendance rule may be resolved next week.  LINK  Cllr John Duffy is due to attend Alcohol and Licensing Committee on Monday afternoon and Cllr Zaffar Van Kalwala Audit in the evening. 

Cllr  Ahmad Shahzad  has been unwell so may be exempted on those grounds.

The problem was caused by the sudden movement of the Full Council Meeting from 17th November to December 8th. This was explained as necessary in order to discuss the Brent Plan which is currently being consulted on. Many feel this an indequate excuse as the Council calendar, including consultations, is set up months in advance.

Apparently last night Cllr Janice Long mystified many Labour Party members by asking Muhammed Butt, rather cryptically, if he was planning to set off the Civic Centre fire alarm.

Brent Council denies restructuring information to ex-Leader - he issues formal Open Government complaint

As  readers will know Christine Gilbert and Cara Davani have proposed a restructuring of senior management of Brent Council  that some have seemed as part of a 'jobs for the boys and girls' strategy. Details can be found here: LINK

The details were to be discussed at the General Purposes Committee but no details were published on the Agenda. It was marked restricted as individuals could be identified before consultation began. One person who may be affected is Fiona Ledden, Director of Legal and Procurement, as it was proposed that her post be deleted.

At the meeting the item was taken 'below the line' (confidential) and a backbench Labour councillor was none too happy at being excluded from the room.

Now the issue has been taken up by Paul Lorber, former leader of the Liberal Democrats and previously Leader of the Council.

He pressed the case for open government in an exchange with Fiona Ledden:

To: Ledden, Fiona
Cc: Gilbert, Christine Subject: GP Report on Restructuring etc

Fiona  

Can you please supply me with a copy of this Report as I believe that aspects of it should NOT have been kept secret .

Brent supports the concept if a Freedom Of Information and Reports dealing with the abolition of Departments and posts themselves have not in the past been treated as confidential.

Only matters which are confidential are issues specific to individual employees.

The normal practice in the past has been a Report above the line dealing with the general issues and only the specific staff related issues should be kept below the line .

Can you please explain who made the decision to restrict all the information to just the Members of the GP Committee and why were other Councillors excluded from Meeting and prevented from being present during consideration of the items.

How does any of this meet the acceptable Freedom of Information undertakings? Has there been a decision to raise the Secrecy threshold under the current Administration?

I would appreciate an early reply.
Thanks
 Paul

 Dear Paul,

The report was below the line and will always remain below the line I can not therefore provide you with a copy.

The consideration of whether the report should go below the line took into account the relevant information.

Kind regards

Fiona
Fiona Ledden 
Director of Legal and Procurement

 Fiona

Sorry but this is not an acceptable answer. What 'consideration' - absolute secrecy to hide what officers recommend even if breach of Open Government undertakings?

On what basis were Councillors expelled from the meeting of the GP and thus denied an opportunity to Scrutinise. Are you using GP Committee to by pass information and decision making of full Council or even the Cabinet?

This is clearly an abuse and not what was expected of the Cabinet and Scrutiny System. Perhaps you and your colleagues need to review both the legislation and Brent Council policy on Open Government and act accordingly.

Please advise how this decision can be scrutinised if access to the papers is denied to Councillors let alone the public.

Please treat my email as a formal Complaint against a refusal to provide me with information I am entitled to as a local resident and Council Tax payer.

Regards
Paul

Support every child's right to go to school - sign today

A message from Education International


Today marks the 25th Anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child - a defining moment in history, when for the first time, all children around the world were viewed as human beings with their own set of rights, including the right to a quality education.

Despite progress over the past 25 years there are 58 million children out of school and we are seeing increasing attacks on schools and school children and teachers on the frontlines of education.
This was also one of the main reasons why Education International’s affiliates came together for the Unite for Quality Education campaign over the last year: We believe passionately that all children and teachers have the right to go to school without danger or discrimination and so we are actively supporting a new global call to action –the #UpForSchool petition.

World leaders promised to get every child into school by 2015. We now have a window of opportunity to put the pressure on them to keep their promises, making 2015 the year all children secured the right to go to school and learn.

People power works. Big numbers of people mobilising over an issue cannot be ignored. That is why this petition is being collected in every country around the world.

And we need teachers to be pivotal in this movement. To make this the world's biggest petition, we are asking you to collect as many signatures as possible. Can you help? To sign follow this LINK

We are organising a high-level hand-in of signatures during our World Congress in Ottawa in July 2015 so we hope we can do something historic together!

Please help spread the word and share this message as widely as possible across your networks. Together we can make the voices of teachers heard by world leaders.
Together we can make our voices heard and stand Up For School.
 
Susan Hopgood
President
Fred van Leeuwen
General Secretary
Education International

Caroline Lucas & Davy Jones condemn Green councillors' privatisation decision

The political decisions of the minority Green Council in Brighton and Hove have been controversial , locally and nationally, within the Green Party and within the broader left movement. At the crux of the argument has been the degree to which the Council should go along with the austerity agenda and implement cuts and costs savings, claiming that 'Green cuts' would be more progressive than those made by the other parties. At the same time the Council has also made considerable progress on the Green agenda. (See article on New Statesman website LINK)

A decision made at by some Green councillors at a Council committee last night has brought out the differences between the Council leadership's perspective and that of the city's Green MP and prospective MP.

Caroline Lucas MP, (Green Brighton and Hove) and Davy Jones (Green candidate for Brighton Kempton) have issued the following statement:

We are disappointed that at yesterday's Brighton & Hove Council Policy & Resources Committee meeting some Green Group councillors including the Council leader Jason Kitcat, voted to accept a Health & Well-Being Board recommendation to out-source a local NHS service (ICES) to provide specialist equipment for people with disabilities to a private sector provider.

It is a complicated situation - the Sussex Community NHS Trust was threatening to pull out of the service, "cost shunting" the responsibility over to the cash-strapped local Council that only provides a small component of the service currently. This is deeply regrettable. But we believe the Council has made a mistake in allowing itself to be forced by the NHS Trust to out-source this service to a private sector provider.

There was no necessity to make this decision earlier today – the existing contract runs until September 2015, leaving plenty of time to seek alternative solutions to keep the service in public hands.

We are particularly disappointed in today’s decision as it is not one that is in line with national or local Green Party policy, that unreservedly opposes the privatisation of NHS services. Neither was the ICES decision brought before the local Green Group or Green Party in advance for discussion. The Green Party councillors on the Council recently successfully proposed a motion to the full Council meeting opposing privatisation of NHS services.

We reiterate our outright opposition to the out-sourcing of the ICES service and to support the staff in the NHS in their campaigns to remain in the public sector, and NHS campaigners fighting against privatisation.