SAVE OUR TOWN HALL - SAVE OUR LOCAL DEMOCRACY

© Copyright Roger Kidd and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence

The local newspapers have this week carried reports of the dispute between Shahrar Ali, a local resident and member of the Green Party and Cllr Kanta Mistry who chairs the Kingsbury Area Consultative Forum. The immediate controversy is about the minutes of the Forum which Shahrar Ali claims were initially inaccurate and reworded by verbal agreement at a Forum meeting, and then reworded again prior to publication.

The effect of the rewording was to remove the rather stark claim by a council official that Brent Council had not consulted on the proposed civic centre which will replace the Town Hall and other major council buildings, 'because it did not need to' and substitute with 'The council had not consulted residents on whether a new civic centre needed to be built and had not done so because the business case for a new building was felt to be overwhelming'.

Underlying the dispute are wider issues about consultation:

* Should the council have the power to decide not to consult on major projects that impact on the people of Brent?

* Are the minutes of consultative forums the property of the meetings themselves or of the council members and officers?

*What happens when participants in the consultation process seek to extend democracy and accountability and the council seek to limit it?

LIB DEM 'POLICY FREE' ELECTION VICTORY

The 'Tory Car' parked outside Ealing Road Library polling station

The many expressions of support on the street and the doorstep for our Green campaign in the Wembley Central by-election failed to be translated into actual votes at the polling booth and we came fifth in the poll.

During polling day supporters of the other parties had predicted we would do well and one said that their canvassers had indicated that when people said they were voting Green this support was firm and positive, rather than a protest vote.

We will be reflecting on lessons to be learnt over the next few days but it seems clear that many people saw this election as a fight between the three main parties, and especially between the Lib Dems and Labour. Although there was a low poll of 30%, almost one fifth of the votes cast were postal votes.

The Lib Dem campaign was intensive in terms of both person power and the amount of literature produced. I lost count of the number of leaflets they produced and these were supplemented by two personally addressed letters to each household. The first was delivered in a business type envelope and was a letter of support for the Lib Dem candidate from Sarah Teather MP. The second was a photocopied, apparently hand-written, letter from the candidate on pale blue paper delivered in a matching pale blue hand-addressed envelope.

Their actual literature was almost 'policy free' and concentrated on attacks on Labour with particular emphasis on Gordon Brown, local Labour MP's second homes and the threat of higher council taxes under Labour. Amazingly they were relatively untainted by the scandal of the jailing of their former Lib Dem colleague which gave rise to the vacancy. This was helped by the fact that the Lib Dem group ejected him when the charges of fraud were first raised and he subsequently sat as an Independent. It is interesting that the public seemed more tolerant of fraud against a private company than misuse of taxpayers' money by MPs. Although some voters complained to me that they they were fed up with receiving a Lib Dem leaflet every other day the sheer volume of material ensure a high profile for the Lib Dems and they were successful in getting posters displayed in many homes and gardens giving the impression of wide support.

The Labour campaign seemed to have fewer people involved and circulated less literature. One Lib Dem remarked that the party did not seem very committed to the campaign but that certainly wasn't true of their candidate who was keen and enthusiastic. An early Labour leaflet which included a mock-up of ex-Lib Dem councillor Vijay Shah behind bars, and listed other Lib Dem councillors who had resigned for various reasons, was rejected as distasteful by some voters. Labour leaflets accused the Lib Dems of reneging on their promise not to increase Council Tax.

The Conservatives were very active on polling day itself. They produced glossy full colour leaflets which had vague promises about 'improving Wembley' but were strong, as befits a family that employs 100 local drivers in their car firm, on the rights of motorists but also highlighted congestion on Ealing Road.

The garrulous Independent, who had previously stood for Motorists and Residents, used his long-established local contacts well and ran a populist campaign against tower blocks and council tax increases and for a shopping centre and the handing back of the Copland playing field to local people.

Our campaign focused on positive policies on climate change, housing, work, schools and consultation and eschewed attacks on the other parties. The ward is not 'natural' Green territory, which was brought home to be when I had to squeeze between several gas guzzlers park in paved over front garden to deliver leaflets, but I thought that the social justice aspects of our policies would resonate with voters in some economically disadvantaged areas of the ward. Unfortunately, living as they do in short-term privately rented accommodation, they were less likely to be registered voters. Although we have a solid campaigning record in Wembley this has concentrated on aspects of the Wembley Masterplan and the Wembley Academy which are both outside the ward.

POLLING DAY ISSUES

There was camaraderie amongst tellers from the various parties and campaigns at polling stations in the face of public disenchantment with politics and absolutely horrible weather. However some issues did arise about a car festooned with Tory posters parked strategically outside Ealing Road Library and concern that some voters felt pressurised as they approached the polling portacabins. The latter was resolved by agreement that voters would only be approached for their polling card numbers after they had voted.

It would be helpful if guidelines were agreed about proper conduct of tellers and candidates at pollings stations and their environs and circulated and publicised before polling day to all involved. This would avoid any misunderstandings.

WEMBLEY RE-THINK NEEDED

Some of you may have seen the five page Wembley Regeneration Special in the Willesden and Brent Times. The 'Special' reminded me of the old Soviet Weekly which used to extol the shining achievements of the regime, complete with impressive pictures and the words of the Great Leader.

In this case the words of the Great Leader are those of Cllr. Paul Lorber with contributions from the Quintain and St. Modwen developers all under the imprint of Brent Council, The Big Lunch and the Times. The headlines give a flavour: THE REGENERATION GAME, BOLD VISION FOR FUTURE (The Wembley Masterplan), SCORING GOALS FOR RESIDENTS AS DEVELOPMENT SPREADS WINGS (Wembley Masterplan), A NEW LANDMARK EVERYONE CAN BE PROUD OF (proposed Civic Centre), ACTION STATIONS AT WEMBLEY CENTRAL (the St.Modwen development at Central Square). Anyone reading this would not realise that every one of these developments has been contested by residents, the Green Party and in the case of the Wembley Masterplan, the Labour Party.

Publication in the middle of the Wembley by-election, when these issues are being hotly debated, is questionable to say the least.

The Willesden and Brent Times stable has always had my respect for being fiercely independent of the council. It is unclear whether this is 'paid for content' and thus not under the paper's editorial control or actually reflects the paper's views.

However, it is clear that we need to look again at the plans for Wembley High Road in the light of the recession, the changes in the Copland proposals following the dropping of plans for a tower block, and the impact of the Civic Centre.

Many Brent council buildings will be replaced by the Civic Centre including Elizabeth House, Brent House, Brent House Annex, Mahatma Gandhi House and Chesterfield House. There is already much vacant office accommodation to let in Wembley High Road and nearby streets, including Lanmor House, Dorland House, 390-400 High Road, Valliant House and some of Madison House. Empty office accommodation, like Unisys House at Stonebridge, will lead to neglect and dereliction with an adverse effect on the High Road.

We need to re-open consultation on the future of the High Road and its vicinity and address the controversial issue of high rise developments in the area. Future plans should have the support and consent of local people and actually improve the area in which they live.

The above is based on a 'Soapbox' I gave at Wembley Area Consultative Forum on July 21st.

GARDINER ATTACKS PRIVATE SCHOOL BOSSES

North Brent MP, Barry Gardiner, may need to rethink his support for academies and other forms of privatisation after his experience with St. Christopher's School, a private school in Wembley.

St. Christopher's, which is run by Happy Child, told Year 5 parents in May that they would not run a Year 6 class in September, leaving them only two months to find a new school for their children. Ms Tracey Story, managing director of Happy Child, told Gardiner, who was seeking help for the parents concerned, that she was not prepared to discuss 'Happy Child's decision to ensure the viability of our business'.

Gardiner lamented in the Royal Assent Adjournment debate on Tuesday that, 'There was not one mention of regret or the effect on the children and their lives, or the breach of contract with parents'. He urged the deputy Leader of the House of Commons to take the issue up with the appropriate minister in the Department for Children.

Unfortunately this take it or leave it mentality is symptomatic of the private sector. Perhaps Gardiner will now put his weight behind publicly accountable and democratically managed local services.

BACK VESTAS OCCUPATION

I fully endorse the following statement from the Green Party Trade Union Group:

Workers at the Vestas wind turbine blade plant on the Isle of Wight have occupied their factory in Newport in an attempt to prevent its closure, which was scheduled for the end of this month. The Green Party Trade Union Group sends its full support to them.

Job losses in a recession are tragic and counterproductive, serving only to worsen it by throwing people out of work.

This particular closure would be doubly damaging because it would remove one of the few capacities Britain has to build the new, environmentally friendly technologies urgently needed to construct the infrastructure that could help to counteract the effects of climate change.

Importing turbine blades is a false solution because their transport would increase the environmental cost of wind turbines. Furthermore the skills and knowledge of the Vestas workers could be dispersed and lost just when we need them most.

If the government allows this closure, its commitment to dealing with climate change will seem a total sham.

How can it let Vestas close when it can afford;

¤ The Afghan war effort
¤ The bail out of banks including continuing taxpayers’ support for excessive fatcat salaries..
¤ The renewal of the trident missile system
¤ New nuclear power stations
¤ And a ridiculous scheme of paying MP’s expenses ?

The Green Party Trade Union Group urges everyone who can to support the Vestas occupation and put pressure on government to actually enact a strategy of creating an environmentally friendly infrastructure for Britain and new jobs for its peoples.

P.Murry GPTU secretary

QUANGO ACCUSED OF ACADEMY BULLYING AS PLAYING FIELDS DESTROYED

The Wembley Park playing fields disappear under rubble as building begins

Brent Council and ARK lost no time in securing the Wembley playing fields site and moving the builders in after the London Mayor and Government Office for London decided not to intervene in the academy dispute. However works could still be affected by the possibility of an application for judicial review.

Meanwhile The Policy Exchange has published a critical report on Partnership for Schools (PfS) the quango responsible for running the £55bn Building Schools for the Future programme. The report, Building Blocks, gives accounts from LEAs, local officers, academy sponsors and others about their experience with PfS.

PfS is accused of forcing local authorities to opt for academies or trust schools if they want funding to rebuild schools or build new ones. The programme to improve school buildings has thus been 'contaminated' by government pressure on LEAs to adopt the academy model and all the baggage that goes along with it. This mixing of the two separate issues and the extension of the academies programme via the funding bribe has been condemned by teacher unions.

The Policy Exchange itself favours Conservative and Liberal Democratic policies for 'free schools' - schools with less local authority control, and so sees the PfS's action as a form of increased centralisation. They cite requirements for school ICT systems, where LEAs are pressurised into awarding lucrative contracts to just one supplier across schools, as an example of control and micromanagement.

From this perspective we are left with unpalatable policies from all three parties: Labour continues to push academies on to often reluctant local councils and communities while finding more ways to control them, while the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in 'freeing' the schools will actually limit the role of Local Education Authorities with voters no longer having a direct say in the way their local schools are run.

A worrying developement when local communities have been angered by moves to convert or amalgamate schools is high-lighted by the report. In Stoke the BNP has opposed local reorganisation plans on the basis that they 'foster racial integration against local wishes' and they made opposition to Building Schools for the Future a central plank in their June election camapign.

FOR PLANET AND PEOPLE

I've been away from the computer for a while as I have been immersed in the Wembley by-election campaign, but here's a quick update. We have had a warm reception from many voters and the Greens clearly have a higher profile locally than last time we stood. We are serious contenders in this by-election.

There have two incidents recently that have stood out. One was a conversation with a fairly prominent member of the local Labour party who stopped me in the High Road to tell me that the people of Wembley weren't ready to receive the 'environmental message'. I pointed out that the environmental message in my campaign was linked with social justice policies that would make absolute sense to local people. He ended up taking leaflets from me and pressing one into the hands of an acquaintance who happened to be passing.

The other was someone who said he had supported the Labour Party all his life but was now totally disenchanted. He said he had been following what Greens had been saying and that he was impressed by the cool commonsense of Caroline Lucas. He now intended to switch to the Greens in the by-election.

We still have a long way to go of course but we are fighting the by-election on positive policies that will make a difference to people's lives:

1. OUR PLANET Climate Change is a huge threat to human life. We will work to strengthen Brent’s Policy.
We will press for a Schools and Climate Change Conference to explain the issues and take action
2. DECENT HOMES FOR ALL
Free insulation for all homes that need it, reducing heating bills AND Co2 emissions.
Reduce housing lists by building affordable homes and taking over abandoned empty houses.
3. USEFUL WORK AND FAIR WAGES
Encourage green industries into the regeneration areas to create green jobs.
London is too expensive for many people. We want a London Living Wage of £7.45 minimum for all Council employees. We will persuade other employers to take similar action.
4. LOOKING AFTER OUR CHILDREN
Half of our children who live in poverty don’t qualify for a free school meal. Every child should get a free hot and healthy school meal every day.
We are against giving away schools that WE pay for to private sponsors and have fought against the ARK Academy. Existing academies should be returned to the community sector where voters have a say in running them.
We support the building of a new community secondary school in South Brent.
5. OPEN AND HONEST CONSULTATION
Council consultations on the ARK Academy, Wembley Masterplan and care charges have left people feeling ignored. We are not asked about major projects such as the Civic Centre which will replace Brent Town Hall.
We will fight for open and honest consultation and policies.

WEMBLEY CENTRAL BY-ELECTION - A CHANCE FOR THE GREENS

I'll be fighting the Wembley Central By-Election for the Greens and hope to show that we have a range of practical, appealing policies that offer people something different from the other parties.

I would seek to champion and strengthen the Council's recently agreed Climate Change Strategy and translate it into practical measures such as the Council ensuring that all new developments are energy and water efficient and incorporate the technology to produce their own power; implementing a programme of free insulation on a street by street basis as is being carried out in Kirklees; offering loans for people wishing to install their own solar water heating and electricity; ensuring that all council buildings take energy saving measures; and holding a borough wide Climate Change and Education Conference to encourage schools to educate children about climate change, engage them in projects for home and school, and to ensure that school management implement energy and water saving strategies.

I would press for changes in the Council's consultation system so that people are fully involved in how their area develops and feel that they are really being listened to. Often decisions seem to have be made in advance and those who have taken part in consultations feel their views have been ignored and their participation was a waste of time. I have supported residents angry about the potential impact of the Wembley Masterplan on their environment and have steadfastly opposed the Wembley ARK Academy because we have had no say in the Council handing over tax-payer funded education to a financial speculator and because the particular site will mean the loss of playing fields and increase traffic congestion. I support the campaign for a new community secondary school in the south of Brent to serve local people. I would seek to ensure that all major developments, such as the Civic Centre are consulted about at the proposal stage: "Should we have one?", rather than later: "What kind of roof should it have?"

The Council is blithely going forward with regeneration plans involving increased retail, hotel and office space with high rise blocks totally unsuitable for the area, at a time when those sectors are stagnating. Rather than building expensive yuppy flats such as those at Wembley City, I want the Council to build affordable family homes to tackle the long housing waiting list. I would also expect the Council to use its powers to force private landlords to maintain and improve their often sub-standard houses and flats. Every family deserves a decent home.

Regeneration should incorporate measures to bring green industries into the area which would provide jobs and improve the quality of life for all. Many people in Wembley have to work at several low paid jobs to make ends meet and living expenses are much higher in London that elsewhere. I would campaign for the council to adopt the London Living Wage, at present £7.45 per hour (as Lewisham has done), for its employees and encourage local employers to do the same. Families would also be helped by the introduction of Free School Meals for all pupils. This would put an end to the stigma of claiming free meals. It would remove all the difficult forms and bureaucracy associated with making the claim, which often means people who are entitled to the benefit don't apply, and will ensure that every child gets a healthy, decent meal every day. There are pilot projects doing this in other parts of the country and Brent with its high levels of unemployment should put itself forward to be included. I would also press for the adoption of policies friendly to small businesses and locally-owned shops - rather than encourage the domination of the high street by even more supermarkets. This may involve the Council in following the examples elsewhere and making loans available to small businesses.

The Green Party is the only party to oppose City Academies in principle and I will continue to do so. Academies are run by private sponsors with tax-payers money and aren't accountable through governing bodies (the sponsor has a built in majority) or through elected councillors. Where academies have been set up I will seek to get them reintegrated into the local authority system as soon as possible. At a wider level Greens seek the ending of the system of SATs and League Tables which force schools to 'teach to the test' rather than educate pupils. Having seen the stress this causes for pupils, parents and teachers I will support those heads and teachers who decide to boycott the Key Stage 2 SATs next year. I want to see teachers and pupils enjoy teaching and learning again, rather than enduring it.

The Conservative-Lib Dem coalition is falling apart and the administration is lack-lustre. A Green councillor would inject energy and enthusiasm at a time when it is needed and prepare the ground for a positive Green performance at next year's local elections.

Polling day will be Thursday July 23rd.