The fans arrived in good spirits, coached in from various London airports and a little bemused to find themselves in what appeared to be the middle of the countryside. They soon found their way to the stadium by way of the Paddocks and ASDA...
WEMBLEY MATTERS News and views on local politics, the environment, climate change, culture and local history
Saturday, 28 May 2011
Barcelona fans take over Fryent Way
The fans arrived in good spirits, coached in from various London airports and a little bemused to find themselves in what appeared to be the middle of the countryside. They soon found their way to the stadium by way of the Paddocks and ASDA...
Act now on threat to our NHS
 |
| "The NHS will last as long as there are folk left with the faith to fight for it" Nye Bevan |
Stuart Jeffrey, Green Party spokesperson on health, wrote in the Guardian:
Turning the wheel slightly and easing off from the accelerator are not signs that Andrew Lansley will steer the NHS away from the cliff edge of privatisation (Report, 23 May). His plan must be stopped before we lose our NHS to market management. Of course, the true driver for this sorry state of affairs is the prime minister, who has overall responsibility for the actions of his cabinet colleagues. If Cameron and Lansley are able to turn the NHS into a full-blown insurance scheme, it will be a car crash.The website 38 Degrees continues to organise opposition. Here is their latest message:
Andrew Lansley's NHS listening exercise closes in just 4 days. We need to move fast to flood it with objections to his dangerous plans.
Thousands of personal submissions to the listening exercise will make it much harder for Lansley to spin the results. He'll have to publish the figures, whether he likes it or not. They will tell a clear story: the overwhelming response is against these dangerous changes to the NHS.
It's easy and fast to send your message to the listening exercise using the 38 Degrees website. It only takes a couple of minutes. There are suggestions for what issues to raise, and you can see what other 38 Degrees members are already saying.
Get started here:
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/nhs-listening-exercise
There are signs our pressure is starting to work. Yesterday, Nick Clegg said he thought Lansley's plans need to be watered down and delayed. But today's Daily Telegraph reports that Conservative hardliners have started planning their fightback. They are determined to rush Lansley's plan through. We need to keep the pressure growing!
We've already created a huge stir this week with our hard-hitting newspaper adverts. Next week we will submit a copy of our 400,000-strong petition. So now, let's back all of that up with thousands of personal submissions telling the listening exercise we don't want our NHS ruined.
We have got until 5 PM on Tuesday, May 31 to send messages. Send yours now:
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/nhs-listening-exercise
Lansley wants to use the listening exercise to claim he's building support for his plans, so he can plough ahead. But by working together we can make that impossible.
The British Medical Association's own submission to the listening exercise says Lansley's plans should be scrapped. Nurses' groups, health care charities and patient groups all seem to agree. If we all keep working together, we can protect our NHS for future generations.
The listening exercise closes in four days. Please take a couple of minutes to write in now:
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/nhs-listening-exercise
June 4th - challenge councillors on library closures
A message from Save Kensal Rise Library Campaign:
Regular monthly surgery with Councillor James Powney who made the decision to close Kensal Rise library and has been vigorously attacking our campaign in his blog, Council Executive member Bobby Thomas who voted for the closure, and Councillor Claudia Hector who voted for the cuts but has pledged to pay for a lift in the library out of her own pocket.
Regular monthly surgery with Councillor James Powney who made the decision to close Kensal Rise library and has been vigorously attacking our campaign in his blog, Council Executive member Bobby Thomas who voted for the closure, and Councillor Claudia Hector who voted for the cuts but has pledged to pay for a lift in the library out of her own pocket.
Saturday 4th June, 10.30 until noon,
St Mark’s Church Hall, All Souls’ Avenue, London, NW10 5HX (5 mins walk from Kensal Rise library)
St Mark’s Church Hall, All Souls’ Avenue, London, NW10 5HX (5 mins walk from Kensal Rise library)
Local MPs and Councillors speak on green issues
 |
| Photo by Jon Goldberg www.jongoldberg.co.uk |
There are appearances from Sarah Teather MP (Brent Central), Barry Gardiner MP (Brent North) and Willesden Green Councillors Lesley Jones, Ann Hunter and Gavin Sneddon.
New CPZ for Civic Centre
The construction timetable and building phase details for the Civic Centre are now available on the Brent Council website HERE The plans include details of the cranes that will be deployed, traffic movements and public transport links.
The plans for the Civic Centre also include the introduction of a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) in the area. Consultation on this will commence in September 2011. The CPZ will cover a large area (Click image to enlarge)
 | ||
| Boundaries of the area that may be affected by CPZ (from planning documents) |
Friday, 27 May 2011
Primary Places Consultation Deadline Extended
Following protests Brent Council has extended the deadline for responses on the Primary Places Strategy to July 1st. The initial deadline of June 10th gave headteachers and governors just 9 school days to respond. The new deadline should enable more governing bodies to meet and debate the issue before responding.
Tuesday, 24 May 2011
We need time to give school places consultation proper consideration
Headteachers and governors in Brent have been sent a consultation document on the 'Development of a primary places strategy 2011/14'. I have long-pressed for a borough wide strategy rather than the ad-hoc approach of recent years and welcome the consultation. However I am disappointed that headteachers and governors have been given a deadline of June 10th, meaning that they have less than 10 days (taking into account that schools are closed for half-term next week) to consider a response to a complex issue. Some governing bodies have already had their summer term meeting and most will held after the deadline, giving no opportunity for a thorough discussion of the issues. I have appealed to the Director of Children and Families for the deadline to be changed to the end of the summer term.
Although parents are represented on governing bodies I think a wider consultation with parents about their children's future schooling would also give the consultation more credibility. They must be able to say if they want their children to go to primary schools with more than 1,000 pupils or to large 'all through' schools with children aged between 4 and 19.
The document asks if respondents agree with 5 planning principles:
1. Sufficiency of demand - evidence that there is a demand for additional places in particular areas in the medium and longer term.
2. Improvement of learning outcomes - schools identified for expansion must demonstrate they provide a good quality of education. The council will consider current progress and achievement and capacity to improve further.
3. Efficient use of resources - due to the limited capital budget the LA will want to secure the maximum number of additional high quality places within the available budget.
4. Improving local SEN provision - there is a projected shortfall in specialist SEN provision in both special schools and additionally resourced mainstream provision. In expanding primary provision improving the range and quality of SEN provision will also be considered.
5. Diversity of type of provision - The Council will consider different types of provision 'that will contribute to the overall objectives if providing high quality school places, cost effectively in areas of greatest need.
The paper dismisses the most obvious option of new build primary schools: "New build primary schools are currently not being considered as an option because the Council does not have sufficient funding nor the land to build upon. Similarly free schools have been excluded from this consultation because such proposals are outside the decision making of the authority."
Interestingly as you will see below they do see new build primary departments on secondary school land as an option for all-through (4-19) schools. So there is the money for that new build and the land, albeit on a secondary school site. Presumably such schools could be run as separate stand-alone primaries. I fear that in rejecting new build primary schools the Council will open the gates to free school providers.
These are the options the Council is putting to headteachers and governors:
1. Expansion of existing primary schools Advantages include building on current expertise and experience, may support improved learning outcomes particularism in smaller schools. Disadvantage is that there is limited scope for expansion in Brent's primary schools.
2. Establishing all through schools at existing secondary schools The Council see the advantages as increased opportunities for personalised learning through older primary pupils having access to the secondary curriculum, smoother transition between primary and secondary reducing the transfer 'dip', sharing of resources and expertise across phases. Disadvantages include primary schools may find it difficult to compete with larger all through schools in terms of resources and popularity, all through schools usually requite a newly built facility with a higher start-up cost. I would add that stand-alone primary school pupils would be at a disadvantage at secondary transfer as fewer places would be available to them at secondary schools. All through schools would give priority to their own primary phase pupils. This would increase inequality particularly with regard to the imbalance of secondary school places between the north and south of the borough.
3. Establishing 5 form entry primary schools (this means 150 pupils in each year group). The advantages are claimed to be that this offers more places than conventional two or three form entry schools and that a larger budget would support wider curricular and specialist provision and a wider range of staff expertise. The disadvantage would be that parent may be concerned about young children attending a large school and the potential impact on child-teacher relationships.
4. Amalgamating schools This is not explained fully but seems to mainly refer to amalgamation of what are currently separate infant and junior schools. The advantages are seen as providing continuity of progression between Key Stage 1 (Infants) and Key stage 2 (Juniors) and improving the deployment of staff and resources. The disadvantages are that it will not automatically increase capacity and may be difficult and complex to achieve in some circumstances.
5. Bulge Classes This is where a school takes an additional class in a particular year group that then proceeds through the school. It does not increase the overall forms of entry of the school. Advantages are that it provides additional places quickly when there is insufficient provision and it allows for reduction of provision when demand falls. Disadvantages are that physical constraints may not allow for such classes and that parents may prefer a permanent school environment for their children. I would add that in providing space for a bulge class schools may lose facilities such as a school library or IT suite and that their may be overcrowding of halls, canteens and playgrounds. There may be suitable accommodation when children are five which would be unsuitable by the time they are 10 years old. Additionally such classes may suffer high levels of mobility as children leave to take up waiting list places in other schools and new arrivals replace them. Extra resources may be needed for children who have been out of school for some time and have fallen behind their peers. Elsewhere the LA has recognised that some schools may be reluctant to take such children as they fear they will lower their test results and place in the league tables.
Clearly the school places crisis needs to be addressed - every child is entitled to be educated and the local authority is legally obliged to provide sufficient places, but it is a complex issue as demonstrated above, and we need sufficient time to give the options proper consideration.
Although parents are represented on governing bodies I think a wider consultation with parents about their children's future schooling would also give the consultation more credibility. They must be able to say if they want their children to go to primary schools with more than 1,000 pupils or to large 'all through' schools with children aged between 4 and 19.
The document asks if respondents agree with 5 planning principles:
1. Sufficiency of demand - evidence that there is a demand for additional places in particular areas in the medium and longer term.
2. Improvement of learning outcomes - schools identified for expansion must demonstrate they provide a good quality of education. The council will consider current progress and achievement and capacity to improve further.
3. Efficient use of resources - due to the limited capital budget the LA will want to secure the maximum number of additional high quality places within the available budget.
4. Improving local SEN provision - there is a projected shortfall in specialist SEN provision in both special schools and additionally resourced mainstream provision. In expanding primary provision improving the range and quality of SEN provision will also be considered.
5. Diversity of type of provision - The Council will consider different types of provision 'that will contribute to the overall objectives if providing high quality school places, cost effectively in areas of greatest need.
The paper dismisses the most obvious option of new build primary schools: "New build primary schools are currently not being considered as an option because the Council does not have sufficient funding nor the land to build upon. Similarly free schools have been excluded from this consultation because such proposals are outside the decision making of the authority."
Interestingly as you will see below they do see new build primary departments on secondary school land as an option for all-through (4-19) schools. So there is the money for that new build and the land, albeit on a secondary school site. Presumably such schools could be run as separate stand-alone primaries. I fear that in rejecting new build primary schools the Council will open the gates to free school providers.
These are the options the Council is putting to headteachers and governors:
1. Expansion of existing primary schools Advantages include building on current expertise and experience, may support improved learning outcomes particularism in smaller schools. Disadvantage is that there is limited scope for expansion in Brent's primary schools.
2. Establishing all through schools at existing secondary schools The Council see the advantages as increased opportunities for personalised learning through older primary pupils having access to the secondary curriculum, smoother transition between primary and secondary reducing the transfer 'dip', sharing of resources and expertise across phases. Disadvantages include primary schools may find it difficult to compete with larger all through schools in terms of resources and popularity, all through schools usually requite a newly built facility with a higher start-up cost. I would add that stand-alone primary school pupils would be at a disadvantage at secondary transfer as fewer places would be available to them at secondary schools. All through schools would give priority to their own primary phase pupils. This would increase inequality particularly with regard to the imbalance of secondary school places between the north and south of the borough.
3. Establishing 5 form entry primary schools (this means 150 pupils in each year group). The advantages are claimed to be that this offers more places than conventional two or three form entry schools and that a larger budget would support wider curricular and specialist provision and a wider range of staff expertise. The disadvantage would be that parent may be concerned about young children attending a large school and the potential impact on child-teacher relationships.
4. Amalgamating schools This is not explained fully but seems to mainly refer to amalgamation of what are currently separate infant and junior schools. The advantages are seen as providing continuity of progression between Key Stage 1 (Infants) and Key stage 2 (Juniors) and improving the deployment of staff and resources. The disadvantages are that it will not automatically increase capacity and may be difficult and complex to achieve in some circumstances.
5. Bulge Classes This is where a school takes an additional class in a particular year group that then proceeds through the school. It does not increase the overall forms of entry of the school. Advantages are that it provides additional places quickly when there is insufficient provision and it allows for reduction of provision when demand falls. Disadvantages are that physical constraints may not allow for such classes and that parents may prefer a permanent school environment for their children. I would add that in providing space for a bulge class schools may lose facilities such as a school library or IT suite and that their may be overcrowding of halls, canteens and playgrounds. There may be suitable accommodation when children are five which would be unsuitable by the time they are 10 years old. Additionally such classes may suffer high levels of mobility as children leave to take up waiting list places in other schools and new arrivals replace them. Extra resources may be needed for children who have been out of school for some time and have fallen behind their peers. Elsewhere the LA has recognised that some schools may be reluctant to take such children as they fear they will lower their test results and place in the league tables.
Clearly the school places crisis needs to be addressed - every child is entitled to be educated and the local authority is legally obliged to provide sufficient places, but it is a complex issue as demonstrated above, and we need sufficient time to give the options proper consideration.
Monday, 23 May 2011
Libraries Fight Continues - Act Now
A message from Save Preston Library Campaign:
Dear Preston Library Supporters,
You may have been told that the fight is over. Everything is lost. Far from it. If our politicians have resigned themselves to the permanent loss of our libraries (mind you, most of them will not be losing theirs), the residents of Brent fight on. And boy is it getting interesting.
To recap:
* The closure of Preston library is UNNECESSARY and UNJUSTIFIED.
* They say it will save £1million.
* We say STOP the building of a new £3million library no one has asked for, and leave ours alone.
* They say, they will provide a better service.
* We ask HOW? If we have to spend more time and money getting to facilities further away.
Brent is creating a 2-tier library system - some areas will get expanded LOCAL provision, the rest of us will lose what little we have. Fair? I think not.
SO WHAT HAPPENS NOW?
Two things:
1. All six library campaigns have formed Brent SOS Libraries and we are challenging the closure plan legally. It is an exciting prospect with excellent chances.
Please see http://www.brentsoslibraries.org.uk/ for more details. We ARE fundraising, so please watch this space for details of events.
- we are all volunteers, and we haven't asked for a penny so far. We need both volunteers and donations. Email us if you wish to do either. It's your library too.
2. Every resident affected by libraries is writing to the Secretary of State, who can step in and help us, but only if we ALL take 2 minutes to write to him. Details follow.
****URGENT ACTION - WRITE TO JEREMY HUNT, SECRETARY OF STATE (THIS WEEK)***
Thanks to your letters, the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (responsible for libraries) has asked to meet with Brent Council. In theory the government can stop the closure. BUT the only way this can happen is if every resident writes/emails the Secretary of State, Jeremy Hunt, to tell him how you will be affected.
Thousands are affected by the closure of Preston Library, thousands of letters must land on Jeremy's desk.
It takes 2 minutes to write a short email. Do it now. Get your neighbours and kids to sign it.
According to the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964, Brent Council is obliged to provide a "comprehensive and efficient library service". The date is yet to be confirmed, but we are preparing evidence that the Brent Council is failing to meet its responsibilities.
Local Government Minister, Eric Pickles, has already criticised Brent Council's inability to make proper savings. They prefer to chop off important public services instead of cutting out waste.
Thousands are affected by the closure of Preston Library, they need to see thousands of emails/letters. We need you to do this.
*The DCMS will only take our complaint seriously if EVERYONE writes to them. This week, we must all take a few minutes to write short email or letter explaining how the closure of Preston Library affects YOU. It doesn't need to be long or beautifully written, just needs to be written.
Here are some ideas on what you could write.
- It will cost time and money to go to Kingsbury Library - can you afford the bus fare/car parking fee everytime you want to use a library?
- Do you have time in your busy working day to go all the way to the Town Hall or Kingsbury by car or pu blic transprt to take out or return a book?
- Are you disabled or elderly? How hard is it for you to use the bus to get to Kingsbury / Town Hall? Can you manage the stairs at Preston Road Station to get to Brent Town Hall by tube? Can you face the waiting, and the journey there and back?
- Do you have a computer? Does your family have just one computer between you? Will you really be hogging the computer just to read an e-book?
- How do you feel about half the borough having better local libraries while you are deprived of yours?
- Is it fair that Willesden Library gets expensive games consoles and table tennis while you are being asked to "take a bus" because the council says it can't afford your library?
- What are you losing when Preston Library closes? Will the new virtual book groups and far away libraries compensate?
Email: huntj@parliament.uk (please cc: saveprestonroadlibrary@gmail.com AND dempster.marples@culture.gsi.gov.uk)
Address: Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, 2-4 Cockspur Street, London, SW1Y 5DH
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)