Monday 22 October 2012

Parents bid for secondary free school in NW2 area

A small group of Brent parents are in the process of applying to the Department for Education to open a secondary free school in the NW2 area.

They have circulated e-mails to local residents and are distributing leaflets at local primary schools in an effort to get a minimum of 240 parents of children currently in Year 4 or 5 to pledge support for their application. The deadline is just before Christmas.

I have been warning for some time that the disproportionate number of secondary schools in the south of Brent, compared with the north, could lead to such an application. I have also suggested that many parents prefer a smaller school. This proposal is for a four form entry which would make it smaller than some of the expanded Brent primary schools.

The group have a website HERE.

They summarise their proposal thus:
Gladstone is an exciting new school offering 120 places each year to 11-19 year olds in north west London. Designed by education professionals and parents, the school will create strong links with universities, the local community and London's creative, scientific and cultural organisations.

Our vision is for an ambitious, popular, community-focused school. The knowledge, skills and confidence it provides will transform the aspirations and achievements of all it touches. We'll set high standards, because young people learn best when we expect the best of them. Children starting with us will receive academic rigour, inspirational teaching and rich cultural and physical activities. But we'll also focus on enjoyment since the most ambitious targets are met when learners are active, happy and motivated. Those children will leave us as successful young adults, with qualifications to secure the best that life offers. And they will know the pride of being part of a community, but the confidence to go it alone.
This is what they say about their ethos:

The "inspiration; confidence; success" mantra underpins and informs the management of every element of our school life, from individual child to whole-school policies. Any planned action must be measured against the same checklist: how does this inspire students? how does it increase their confidence? how can we, or they, measure success?
 
It also provides a firm foundation for the school ethos, which includes the following aims:
  • to provide a strong academic curriculum, balanced with creative and entrepreneurial activities;
  • to promote individual ambition by setting and monitoring personalised targets for every student, alongside tailored academic and pastoral support, so that every student maximises their academic and personal potential;
  • to relentlessly pursue exciting and inspirational opportunities for all students, and to seek out individuals and organisations who can support these aspirations;
  • to capitalise on the interests, passions and expertise of local parents and the community;
  • to ensure all students secure the academic achievements needed to go on to university, if they choose to;
  • to encourage and empower young people to become independent: in their learning and their lives generally; and
  • to attract and retain the very best teachers by providing them with tailored support, encouragement and professional development opportunities.
I have submitted a number of searching questions to the group about their proposal and hope to carry their answers soon. The questions focus on issues of  access, equality, accountability and teachers' conditions of service.

The return of Wembley and Willesden as political entities?


My mother and father, hailing  from either side of the Welsh Harp, used to bring the class divisions between Willesden and Wembley into their domestic rows. The political row over the merger of the two councils, now fading into history, still has resonance.

Now the Boundary Commission's revised proposals  suggest a Wembley and a Willesden Parliamentary Constituency which may revive some of the old rivalries.

Northwick Park ward goes into Harrow West and College Park and Oak Oak, previously Hammersmith and Fulham, are now part of Willesden. Brent's Kilburn and Queens Park wards, are now in the Hampstead and Kilburn constituency alongside eight Camden wards.

35. Hampstead and Kilburn BC 78,225 Kilburn Brent 9,777 Queens Park Brent 8,882 Belsize Camden 7,555 Fortune Green Camden 7,181 Frognal and Fitzjohns Camden 7,036 Hampstead Town Camden 7,047 Highgate Camden 7,634 Kilburn Camden 7,504 Swiss Cottage Camden 7,916 West Hampstead Camden 7,693.MAP


66. Wembley BC 73,303 Alperton Brent 8,742 Barnhill Brent 9,773 Fryent Brent 8,274 Kenton Brent 8,922 Preston Brent 9,256 Queensbury Brent 10,080 Tokyngton Brent 8,961 Wembley Central Brent

67. Willesden BC 77,279 Brondesbury Park Brent 7,961 Dollis Hill Brent 7,627 Dudden Hill Brent 7,947 Harlesden Brent 8,254 Kensal Green Brent 7,677 Mapesbury Brent 8,359 Stonebridge Brent 9,240 Welsh Harp Brent 7,908 Willesden Green Brent 7,412 College Park and Old Oak Hammersmith and Fulham 4,894 MAP

There is now an eight week consultation period before the proposals go before Parliament. Consultation closes on December 10th 2012. Responses should be sent to london@bcommengland.x.gsi.gov.uk

Waste and the Wembley Plan - some reservations

As residents of Ealing and Brent in the area around Willesden Junction station fight a planning application for a 'waste to energy' incinerator on the Freightliners Depot site, readers may be interested in Brent Campaign Against Climate Change's submission on the Wembley Plan. This includes references to waste processing. Wembley was of course the site of the 'Wembley Stink' during the Olympics when the stench from rotting organic waste at the Seneca Materials Recycling Facility became a national issue.

Since this response was submitted the Brent Executive have agreed plans for the purchase of a site for a new waste management depot in Brent as part of the four-borough contracts for waste management, recycling, street sweeping and parks maintenance. £6m has been allocated and one wonders if the site will be in the Wembley Plan area.

Brent Campaign Against Climate Change – submission on Wembley Plan


We have limited our comments to the most relevant aspects of the Plan. Omission of comment on other areas neither indicates agreement, nor disagreement, with those proposals.

VISION OBJECTIVES (p13)

  • To preserve open spaces for recreation and biodiversity and create new and enhanced open spaces to address deficiencies where possible, but particularly to meet the needs of additional population commensurate with current levels of provision. AGREED
  • To increase the amount of public open space (at least 2.4ha within Wembley) and the amount of land with enhanced ecological value. AGREED
  • To enhance green and blue infrastructure by tree planting, returning rivers to their more natural courses and mitigating the pollution effects of development. AGREED
  • To achieve sustainable development, mitigate & adapt to climate change. AGREED
  • To reduce energy demand from current building regulation standards and achieve exemplar low carbon schemes and combined heat and power plants. RESERVATIONS SEE BELOW
  • To create a well-connected and accessible location where sustainable modes of travel are prioritised and modal share of car trips to Wembley is reduced from 37% towards 25%. AGREED AS A START BUT NEED TIMELINES FOR MORE AMBITIOUS TARGET
  • To promote access by public transport, bicycle or on foot and reduce car parking standards because of Wembleys relative accessibility AGREED
Wembley Area Action Plan - Preferred Options 13

Business Industry and Waste

  1. We are in favour of strict controls on waste management and processing sites in the entire area, rather than the limited area proposed. We would also favour relocation where that is possible. The events over the summer regarding the Seneca MRF and the ‘Wembley stink’ should serve as a warning for the future.  The Neasden/Wembley area already suffers from severe air pollution problems with school pupils particularly at risk because of the impact of air pollution on their smaller lungs. Chalkhill Primary, St Margaret Clitherow Primary, Northview Primary, Oakington Manor Primary and the proposed new Wembley Stadium Primary in Fulton Road are all in the vicinity. Older people also suffer disproportionately from respiratory problems.

  1. We propose the creation of a Green Enterprise zone in the area with a concerted effort by Brent Council, in conjunction with the College of North West London, to bring green training, apprenticeship and jobs into the area. At present aside from the building jobs associated with regeneration there is an over dependence on the creation of jobs in retail and leisure. Green jobs would make a significant contribution to the upskilling of the Brent labour force.

Response to Climate Change

  1. We welcome the inclusion of a response to Climate Change in the report and note this statement from the Wembley Plan:
10.6 Climate change will have a significant impact on the economic, social and environmental well being of Wembley. Hotter summers will have a bigger impact in Wembley because of the predominance of concrete and buildings. Heat waves will mean more people are likely to suffer from illnesses and could also lead to damage to roads, railways and buildings. Heavy thunderstorms and intense winter downpours will become more common, and will lead to flash flooding where the drainage system cannot cope with the increased rainfall. It is therefore crucial that future development in Wembley addresses these impacts and limits its contribution to climate change by minimising carbon emissions.
10.7 Specific issues for Wembley include the legacy of industrial use in the area which led to a lack of green and cool spaces. Much of Wembley is deficient in open space and there are few mature trees. Land adjacent to the Wealdstone Brook is most at risk of flooding, although much of Wembley is also prone to surface water flooding. In addition, the majority of the sewer network in the Wembley area is undersized.

2.       We welcome the recognition of the importance of this issue and that fact that it is being addressed in detail by the Council. We welcome the proposals on naturalising of the Wealdstone Brook, flood plain storage, tree planting, green roofs and creation of new parks are all welcomed as  responses to this situation.

Climate Change Mitigation

1.       Under this heading the Council make a number of proposals for Decentralised  (CHP) Combined Heat and Power facilities and for Energy from Waste over which we have reservations.

2.       The  reservations below regarding CHP are pertinent: and should inform the Council’s plans: (From  www.arthurshumway.smith.com)
 "Combined Heat and Power" (CHP) or "cogeneration" systems for producing both heat and electric power are generally mature and really can reduce emissions of CO2 compared to other fossil-fuel technologies. But there are two problems with typical discussion of CHP:

(1) Fossil-fuel-based CHP cannot be a long-term solution on climate or energy because they still burn fossil fuels, and therefore still emit a lot of CO2. Reducing that by 20% or even 50% is not enough; we need to take steps that over the next 30-40 years will bring fossil CO2 emissions close to 0.
(2) Efficiency claims for CHP systems are frequently greatly overstated. Heat is lower-quality energy than electricity, and only at high temperatures does it become close to comparable. Efficiency claims for CHP systems that use high-temperature heat are not so far off, but CHP systems that make use of low-temperature waste heat have much lower thermodynamic efficiencies than usually claimed.

The inflated efficiency claims often lead to assertions that CHP is the "largest" or one of the largest potential solutions. But the number of applications that require high-temperature heat where CHP efficiency really is quite high are limited. And the modest efficiency gains with low-temperature waste heat use, which could be much more widely applied, don't lead to very much improvement in overall energy use. The combining of heat and power production in CHP systems can reduce our fossil CO2 emissions by a few percent, but much more than that is needed in coming decades.

3. The Wembley  Plan (WEM 33) supports Energy from Waste and again we have reservations.

3.i The first issue is that the emphasis should be on the reduction of waste at source in manufacturing,  then re-use and recycling. There is a danger that in using residual waste as fuel in order to reduce landfill, the incentive to reduce waste is removed. Furthermore, dependence on waste as fuel to generate heat and power, can lead to the need to import fuel in order to keep the processes going. The NABU Study (2010) in Germany illustrates this:

The study shows that in 2010, somewhat less domestic waste will be produced in Germany than at present.. This is due to a decline in the population and a slight increase in recycling. Overcapacities with incinerators are already occurring. This applies to combustible material used in energy from waste plants as well as conventional incineration   
At this point in time, 2 million   more tonnes  of waste are imported into Germany than exported. This is equivalent to a goods train 1000 km in length. Germany is therefore a net importer of waste

We would not want Brent to become an importer of waste in order to fuel our EfW plants.

3.ii  Secondly, the Plan states ‘There are a number of new and emerging technologies that are able to produce energy from waste without direct combustion’ . Our reservation on this is that in some technologies the initial stages do not involve combustion but further stages involve, for example, gases being burned off..  We cannot pretend to be expert on these issues but urge that complete transparency, independent expert advice (rather than assurances from the companies involved) and public debate must take place before any such technologies are employed.

3.ii In investigating the detrimental impact on human health the Council must take into account the concerns that exist over nanoparticles  produced in the incineration process and the emerging science discipline of nanopathology that studies the impact of such particles on the human body.


Food Growing

1.       We welcome the proposal to include food growing areas in new development (WEM 38) and the use of temporary vacant spaces. However we do not agree to the claim that restricted space means that such spaces cannot be provided in any new schools in the area. Raised beds do not take up much space and there are many imaginative solutions involving containers, window boxes, growing walls etc that could be incorporated into new build. In addition the growing spaces in existing schools in the area show what can be done. Provision of demonstration food growing areas in newly created parks would be useful as well as support for finding food growing spaces alongside the Chiltern/Metropolitan and Jubilee  railway lines.

2.       Food growing in schools raises awareness of the children about the impact of climate change and encourages healthy eating and a long term interest in gardening. It links with the curriculum and awards such as Healthy School and Eco School. The Council should be vigorously supporting it and making every effort to find food growing space for children.

3.    The Metropolitan Housing Trust is already working on these issues on the Chalkhill Estate with residents and are seeking additional growing spaces on the estate Involvement of other housing providers should be sought.





Friday 19 October 2012

Butt and Shah condemn Brent fire station cuts


Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council, has strongly condemned Government plans leaked from the London Fire Brigade that reveal that two of Brent’s three fire stations could be forced to close to meet drastic savings targets.

The leaked document shows that only Wembley fire station is included on the ‘safe’ list of stations that will not be considered for closure. The borough’s other two fire stations in Harlesden and Willesden are not listed and are now in jeopardy. Butt has expressed anger that he was not consulted about the future and it took a leaked document for him to find out  the closure plans.

Cllr Butt said, “These plans are absolutely disgusting.  If two of our three fire stations are closed, this will seriously endanger thousands of our residents. Everyone understands that times are tough, but you cannot put a price on a person’s life, which is exactly what the Government is doing.

“This is yet another disgraceful example of the Coalition’s clear disregard for people’s basic needs and rights. I am appalled that Brent MP Sarah Teather would allow her own residents to be subjected to such a high level of risk by endorsing the closure of frontline services that are vital to keeping a huge number of people safe.”

Navin Shah, London Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow and Labour's lead member on the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority said, “We understand that savings have to be made, but the level of cuts forced on the London Fire Brigade by the Mayor and government are truly reckless. 

“They are cutting too far, too fast. They are hitting front-line services and putting public safety at risk. The Mayor needs to come clean on fire brigade cuts and tell Londoners what he is planning to close.”

Greens marching for a Future that Works

Party Leader Natalie Bennett and Brighton Pavilion MP Caroline Lucas will head the march in London on Saturday, joining union members, Party activists and thousands of others to demand A Future That Works.

The march has been organised by the Trades Union Congress in protest against the Coalition government’s economic policies and to call for a new focus on investment to spark economic recovery.

Like the TUC, the Green Party opposes the ideologically motivated cuts which are hitting public services, taking support away from society’s most vulnerable, and leaving a generation of young people unable to find work.

The policies are also failing to deliver the single achievement to which the government claims it is dedicated – instead of reducing the deficit by 4.6 per cent as promised, nearly two and a half years of austerity measures forced it to grow by 22 per cent between April and August of this year.

Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett said:

“We’re marching with hundreds of thousands of others to give the government the message that we have to invest in the future.

“The government can’t continue with its economically illiterate cuts – we must invest in decent homes, renewable energy, public services, public transport and the infrastructure we need to bring manufacturing back to Britain.

“We must also restore food production systems within this country. All of these things are urgent, and need investment and planning to deliver.

“And this investment must be used to assist young people in finding fulfilling and worthwhile work. The Princes Trust has revealed that the number of young people in the UK out of work for more than two years has increased by 168 per cent since February 2008 .

“Our young people are doing all the right things to secure a job and future, but we’re not doing right by them.”

The march leaves Victoria Embankment at 11am, and will end with a rally at Hyde Park - London Greens will be meeting at Temple tube station at 10am. For more information please see our events page. It's time David Cameron recognises that "Green is Working"

Green Party members will be bringing local party banners and placards and will be joined by the banners of the Green Party Trade Union Group and Green Left.

A message from Paul Kenny about October 20th

I will be marching with Green Party colleagues on Saturday but non-Green Party readers may be interested in joining this contingent:

Dear Martin 


Over the last 2 years we have seen one of the worst ideological attacks on our country and our economy with the governments failed austerity plan.

The economy is not growing, incomes are not rising and the gap between the richest and poorest in society is growing.

On top of all that this week the government attacked our employment rights in their Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill. A bill that is designed to protect business from third party harassment claims, that makes it easier for businesses to fire people and reduces protections for whistleblowers at work.
They have got it the wrong way round – they are protecting businesses not workers.
 TULO
It is time for us to demand a better plan to protect our jobs, our rights and our futures. This Saturday TULO are marching for an alternative to this governments failed plan – we are going out to make sure that people know there is a different way.

Will you join us on Saturday? Click here to join http://www.unionstogether.org.uk/page/signup/we-re-marching-for-a-future-that-works---march-with-us
TULO will be assembling just outside Blackfriars station from 11.15am. The march will go along embankment and up to Hyde Park where there will be a rally organised by the TUC.

We need to show everyone that austerity is not the only way. We need to make it clear that we need a new plan that includes jobs, that protects our rights at work and that ensures the future of our NHS.

We need you on Saturday to make it clear that millions of people are not happy with this Tory-led government. So please sign up here http://www.unionstogether.org.uk/page/signup/we-re-marching-for-a-future-that-works---march-with-us

I look forward to seeing you soon.
Paul
Paul Kenny
Chair of TULO

Shared Public Health post ditched but Executive goes ahead with Barnet privatisation plans

The plans for a shared Director of Public Health with the London Borough of Hounslow were withdrawn this week by Brent Council.  The plans which were due to go before the Executive on Monday had encountered opposition from Labour councillors on the Brent Health Partnerships Overview and Scrutiny Committee. They had passed a resolution expressing concern over the plans. LINK

However a far reaching plan for a four borough out-sourcing of waste management, recycling, street cleaning and parks maintenance was approved by Brent Executive. The notorious  right-wing, privatising,  Barnet Council will become Labour Brent's partner in a move that will lead to job losses. The Barnet Chief Executive recently left the council apparently unable to stomach their policies any longer.

The Executive's decisions can be found HERE