Times will be getting harder in Brent in 2013

There was a flurry in the press over the holiday about local government cuts.  David Blunkett in the Guardian  LINK argued that the cuts were horrendous, an attack on local democracy and would reduce councils to providing only the statutory minimum of services but went on to state that ' the message of "austerity" has successfully debilitated the will to take on central government' and cited the failure of the 1980s fightback.

Ted Knight, late of Lambeth Council,  disagreed in his comment piece: LINK

In the 1980s, Labour councils like my own did organise a fightback. A price was paid, councillors were surcharged and forced from office. But resistance, far from being futile, mobilised communities. We won additional funds so that budgets could be set without cuts. Labour councillors today have the same choice – they can either lead a struggle against a vicious government or stand aside for those who will.

In Brent Cllr James Powney stated on his blog LINK 

This year's (Brent) budget, has fairly limited cuts but the failure of George Osborne's economic policy and the Conservative Party's hatred of local government mean that we will face massive fiscal pressures for years to come.

Brent Council is likely to respond to these by having a much tighter economic focus on everything we do.  This means that Council services will need to demonstrate a much more direct effect on economic well being than hitherto.  Local government has never had a challenge like it.

Meanwhile leaders of  Newcastle, Liverpool and Sheffield City Councils warned of potential civil unrest LINK

 The unfairness of the government's cuts is in danger of creating a deeply divided nation. We urge them to stop what they are doing now and listen to our warnings before the forces of social unrest start to smoulder.

There are seeds here of a possible fightback but there are clear divisions between those who will manage the cuts while complaining about the damage that they will do and those who want a proactive campaign against them.  The Labour Party nationally is very much in the former camp but the left of Labour, Gren L:weft, other left groups, the labour movement and the Coalition of Resistance are in the latter.

In Brent the Labour Group on the council are under pressure from the Labour left and the LRC but so far are managing the cuts in line with Powney's position. Unfortunately a leadership challenge to Muihammed Butt's leadership from the Ann John faction at the May annual meeting seems more likely than a successful challenge from the left. By that time the budget will have been adopted and any subsequent room for manoeuvre by a new administration will be extremely limited.

Although Cllr Powney intimates that the Brent budget will have 'fairly limited cuts' (we residents of course have been given no details and appear to have no say in the planned budget) the changes in housing benefit, council tax support and the postponed benefit cap, will also be hitting the least well-off.  It is yet to be confirmed whether Brent Council will be implementing a Council Tax increase and whether they will use their reserves to limit the cuts.

Getting social housing in Brent to become harder under new proposals

The Housing Allocations Policy that Brent Council is currently consulting on LINK will have major repercussions for residents wishing to go on the register for social housing in the borough. There will particular impact on extended families, people without leave to stay in the UK, young adults living with their parents, those at a specific income threshold, families in rent arrears in the social housing sector or in homeless temporary accommodation.

The Council will no longer have an 'open' waiting list and in addition to having a housing need residents will need to establish a local connection through residence or work. The 'reasonable preference' criteria will include households in employment in addition those below:

· Homeless people as defined by Part VII of the 1996 Housing Act, including people who are intentionally homeless and those who are not in priority need

· People who are owed a duty under section 190(2), 193(2) or 195(2) of the 1996 Act (or under section 65(2) or 68(2) of the Housing Act 1985) or who are occupying accommodation secured by any housing authority under s192(3)

· People occupying insanitary or overcrowded housing or otherwise living in unsatisfactory housing conditions

· People who need to move on medical or welfare grounds, including grounds relating to disability

· People who need to move to a particular locality in the housing authority area, where failure to meet that need would cause hardship (to themselves or others)

The Council state that legislation forbids it to give assistance to individuals subject to immigration control:

A restricted person is a person subject to immigration control who is not eligible for homelessness assistance because he or she does not have leave to enter or remain in the UK or has leave which is subject to a ‘no recourse to public funds’ condition (s.184(7) of the 1996 Act).

The Council seeks views for when the individual subject to immigration is a member of a wider household:

Note that it is not mandatory to exclude a person subject to immigration control from a household, although a household cannot be regarded as having reasonable preference solely on the basis of the needs of a person subject to immigration control as noted above. The council is minded to adopt this exclusion but views on the point would be welcome.

 The Council its definition of what constitutes a 'household' for the purposes of allocation of accommodation. It excludes the  extended families sharing accommodation that are common amongst some ethnic groups in Brent:

Considered as households:

-A single person without dependents
- A married couple
-An unmarried couple, who can prove that they have been resident together for at least 12 months at time of application and at time of offer.   
-A lone parent and their dependent children   
-A married or unmarried couple with dependent children   
-A civil partnership with or without dependent children

 The following would not usually be considered to be part of a household when considering qualification and priority for housing:

· Anyone subject to immigration control

· non-dependent adult children over the age of 21

· other adult relatives

· non-relatives and lodgers

· Extended family members such as cousins, nephews, aunts and uncles

The scheme excludes the following:

-A young person aged 21 or over and therefore not treated as a child would not normally be considered as part of a household and will usually be disregarded when considering applications for rehousing.

- If there are children aged 21 or over who are living at home, advice will be provided on housing options but they will not count towards any calculation of overcrowding. They will be able to apply for housing in their own right but may be disqualified if they do not fall within any of the priority groups defined in this scheme.

- Given the severe shortage of housing and in particular of larger homes, the Council will consider whether people living in a household could move into smaller homes of their own, thereby creating a separate household. If a household member has already made a separate housing application they will not be included in any new or subsequent applications.

 The proposals introduce income thresholds that will try and shift those in need of housing into the private renting sector (which has grown enormously in Brent according to the most recent census and which Muhammed Butt has pledged to improve in terms of quality) or shared ownership.

The ranges which will be reviewed regularly are set at:

· 1 bed - £35,000 a year

· 2 bed - £45,000 a year

· 3 bed - £ 55, 000 a year

· 4 bed - £70,000 a year

 The Council states that in assessing the number of bedrooms required by a household, the following criteria will apply: 

· One double bedroom for a cohabiting couple

· One double bedroom for two additional persons/children of the same sex and generation.

· One double bedroom for two children of the opposite sex, where both children are under 7 years.

· One double bedroom for two children of the same sex unless one is over 10 years of age and there is an age gap of more than 5 years.

· One double bedroom for two dependents of the same sex over 18 years of age.

· One single bedroom for each person who the Council's Medical Officer considers should have their own bedroom on health grounds.

· One single bedroom for any other person included as part of the household.

· Single people will normally be considered for Bedsit accommodation.

· A couple or single parent with a child under two years of age can be

 offered a one bedroom property.

In addition the Council propose that the following categories will normally not qualify:

· Anyone guilty of serious anti-social behaviour where a possession order is being sought or has been obtained

· Anyone who has assaulted a member of staff where an injunction has been sought or obtained

· Anyone who knowingly gives false or misleading information or withholds information that has been reasonably requested.

· Applicants with an income above the limits set out above

The following will apply to housing transfers:

-Tenants with rent arrears of six weeks or more will be suspended from receiving the offer of accommodation. Consideration will be given to varying this rule in some circumstances including;

-Tenants with urgent management or medical priority in band B or A may be transferred at the discretion of the Rehousing Manager.

-Offers of accommodation may be made despite rent arrears to tenants who need to move because of statutory overcrowding or because of an overriding priority awarded by the Allocations Panel or where a permanent decant is essential

-Tenants moving under the Incentive Scheme subject to the above guidelines may be made an offer with the incentive payment being set of against the arrears

Families in temporary accommodation may also face problems

· Homeless households in temporary accommodation may be advised that, if they fall into rent arrears, their housing register application may be suspended. Applications may be suspended when an applicant either

a) refuses to pay the rent

b) fails to make a commitment to repay arrears or

c) fails to provide supporting information for a Housing Benefit claim.

d) accrues an excessive level of arrears

e) is in arrears such that the landlord is taking action to end the tenancy

· If an applicant falls into arrears, their application may be suspended. The application will remain suspended until the arrears are cleared or an agreement has been reached to clear the arrears and this agreement has been kept to for an agreed period. Depending on the amount of the arrears and the nature of the agreement, discretion may be exercised to review cases and lift suspensions. Exceptions may be agreed to this policy, in particular for those cases in bands 1 or 2.

The Council recognises that private sector tenants on the register may be in difficulty because of the welfare reforms:

The council is not minded to introduce any blanket restriction on cases involving rent arrears, in particular since recent and proposed reforms to the welfare system increase the risk that some households may not be able to cover their full rent and because there are cases in which a move may assist in tackling rent arrears, for example where a household moves to a cheaper home

 There are additional detailed proposals regarding carers and military personnel that can be found in the main document.

The Consultation specifically asks for views on:

• The period that should be required to establish a local connection
• How that should be demonstrated through employment (inc part-time and self-employed)?
• What othjer factors could be taken into account to establish a local connection?
• In what circumstances should the Council make exceptions to the local connection requirement?
• What other groups should not qualify under the scheme?
• Should anyone subject to immigration control not be considered as part of the household?
• At what age should non-dependent adult children not be considered part of the household (18.21.25)?
• Are there other people who should normally be considered as part of an applicant;s household?
• In what circumstances should rent arrears mean that a household should not qualify or that an application should be suspended?
• The circumstances in which a transfer application can be made outside the scheme (see main document for details)
• Details regarding how long applicant should have been in employment (see main document)
• Are the proposed bands that rank applicants according to level of needs appropriate (see main document for details)
• Time limits on bidding for accommodation (see main document)
• Should the income thresholds be as set out above?
• Details setting out factors defining 'reasonable preference criteria' (see main document)

 The main consultation document can be found HERE and should be read before responding as it is not possible to cover all the issues in this posting. I hope however that this is sufficient to alert readers to the serious issues involved. The consultation closes on March 8th 2013

Brent fails to connect with residents on budget

In January 2012 Ann John and Muhammed Butt toured the Area Consultative Forums to speak about the Council budget. LINK One year on, after Muhammed Butt ousted Ann John promising greater openness and engagement with residents, no budget discussion has been included on the agendas so far published for next month's forums.

Pleas to formulate a needs based budget as a campaigning tool to challenge the Coalition's unequal slashing of local government expenditure have been ignored. An opportunity to engage with local residents and mobilise them in defence of vital services appears to have been rejected.

Now known as Brent Connect Forums they meet on the following dates. I include the agendas that have so far been published. 

Brent Connects Kilburn and Kensal
08.01.13 7pm Kensal Rise Primary School, Harvist Road, NW6
Brent Connects Harlesden 
09.01.13 7pm All Souls Church, Station Rd, NW10

• Update from representatives of TfL, Network Rail and London Overground (LOROL) on the planned improvements for Willesden Junction Station approach

• The latest news on the Willesden Energy Recovery Centre (incinerator in Ealing)

• Plans for the development of a Neighbourhood Forum covering parts of Stonebridge, Harlesden and Dudden Hill

• Proposed improvements to parts of the Brent River Park (Phase 2)

• Local Policing update

• Doing more locally with Residents' Association Groups

Brent Connects Wembley
15. 01.13 7pm Pattidar House, 22 London Road, HA9
Brent Connects Willesden
16.01.13 7pm College of NW London, College Road, NW10

• Government welfare reforms (including Discretionary Housing Payments) - how this will affect you and the benefits you receive

• Customer services at the civic centre - what's on offer

• Local policing update

Brent Connects Kingsbury and Kenton
06.02.13 7pm Kingsbury High School, Princes Avenue, NW9

Pitched battle for unique Watford allotments

Farm Terrace allotments in the summer

 In a battle that foreshadows many likely to take place in the future, allotment holders in  Watford are battling to save their allotment site. Earlier this month Lib Dems approved plans to build 600 houses on the site but the allotees have vowed to fight on.

The Farm Terrace allotments are close to the town centre and provide a green oasis and because of their unique terraced structure can be seen by the public.

The campaign has been supported by local Labour councillors and a petition launched on 38 Degrees: LINK

Campaign Website

The key findings in CIPFA comparative study of Brent Library service

The Kilburn Times LINK is reporting  the CIPFA Report on a comparative study of Brent Library Service and that of 15 neighbouring services.

CIPFA state:

The analysis is simple and non-judgemental. You will not find any quartiles, traffic lights or subjective commentary. Instead the report seeks to visualise the data and to enable readers to draw their own conclusions.

 In that spirit I too will resist a 'subjective commentary' and leave readers to make up their minds from the graphs reproduced below. The boroughs are (s) Brent, (e) Haringey, (a) Lewisham, (d) Lambeth, (x) Southwark, (t) Hounslow, (w) Merton, (f) Croydon, (h) Greenwich, (k) Wandsworth (z) Enfield, (g) Waltham Forest, (m) Hackney, (u) Redbridge, (n) Newham. (BRENT IS BLOCKED IN BLACK)

The full report is available via the link at the foot of this posting.

Above - survey of Under 16s

Fly-tipping is hard work compared with ringing for a bulky collection

Barn Hill pond

I took advantage of the 'lighter shade of grey' skies and temporary cessation of rain this morning for a brisk walk around the perimeter of Fryent Country Park.

The park is waterlogged at present with a number of temporary streams and ponds. In contrast with the Spring the ponds are full which bodes well for a better year for amphibians in 2013.

Barn Hill Conservation Group LINK who do so much to conserve and enhance the park have picked up  320 large black bags of litter as well as bigger items since January this year.  It never ceases to amaze me what lengths people go to in order to dump rubbish.

This morning in the field below the pedestrian bridge to Shakespeare Drive a huge suitcase had been dumped into the hedgerow.  This would have required parking a car by Michael Sobell Primary School, trundling the case up the tarmacked  slope to the bridge, down the steep grassy slope on the other side and then bumping it across the meadow. The case had been opened and the contents scattered across the grass. This included dozens of pairs of trainers, a Gok Wan fashion book, a guide to embroidery, an exercise book of poetry  and items of clothing.

The clothing could have been bagged and left out with the recycling, the shoes at one of the street side collection banks (the nearest is on the corner of Valley Drive/Kingsbury Road) and the books donated to a charity shop or one of the community libraries. I took advantage of the sunshine on New Year's Day to clear the dump.

The recent figures on the big rise in private rental accommodation does perhaps point to one of the reasons for the increase in fly-tipping. With tenancies changing frequently new tenants throw out stuff left by the old tenants and these are frequently left in front gardens or by the road side. This accounts for the number of mattresses scattered throughout the borough.

One idea I would like the council to consider is issuing leaflets to Letting Agents to go to  new tenants about the recycling services and particularly bulky collections. It would be helpful if this could be translated into Eastern European languages and any others felt appropriate.

Here is a reminder about what can be picked up through the bulky collection service:

Item	Such as	Items must be
Furniture-plastic, wooden or metal	Beds, mattresses and bedframes, sofas, tables (larger tables may count as 2 or more items due to their size), wardrobes, armchairs and chairs.	Small enough to be carried and loaded on to a vehicle by no more than two workers
Flooring	Linoleum and floor tiles	Bagged or bundled. Wooden flooring or ceramic tiles are not accepted.
Metal	Metal filing cabinets less than 40kg and fire guards.
Carpets		Manageable by two people, otherwise it must be cut into smaller sections, rolled and tied. Each section counts as a separate item. Underlay is also classed as a separate item.
Large electrical goods	Washing machines, cookers, microwaves, fridges, freezers, dishwashers, dryers and vacuum cleaners.
Small electrical item	TVs, monitors, Hi-Fi systems and radios
Glass or mirrors	Glass top table, mirrored parts of doors or cabinets and fish tanks.	Wrapped in a safe and secure manne

Thanks for your support for Wembley Matters

It has been gratifying to receive a number of messages from readers over Christmas thanking me for Wembley Matters.  I can't promise to keep it up forever but as the blog appears to be meeting a need I'll keep going as long as I can.

Meanwhile I hope all my readers have a restful break and come back with renewed vigour to fight for environmental and social justice in 2013.

Greens celebrate double victory over Veolia and incinerator

Greens and others fighting a proposed  incinerator in Pinkham Way and campaigning against Veolia being considered for a valuable waste contract by the North West London Waste Authority, got some good news yesterday.

The NWLA have withdrawn their planning application for a mechanical and biological waste treatment plant in Pinkham Way. Originally this was to be one of two sites but it now appears that only one will go ahead and subject to a successful planning application, that will be the Edmonton site. It is likely that a campaign will continue against this site too.

Greens have also supported the No2Veolia Action Group (NO2VAG) which has sought to get Veolia rejected as a possible bidder for the NWLA waste contract on the grounds of its abuse of human rights in the Occupied Territories of Palestine. Veolia announced yesterday that it was withdrawing from the bidding process for the £4.7bn contract.

Andrew Newby of Barnet Green Party said:

Barnet Greens welcome the withdrawal of Veolia and the scrapping of the Pinkham Way plan. We call on the NLWA to abandon the disastrous procurement process -- ie privatisation - and to keep its waste services in house while it researches the various viable alternatives now available to incineration of waste or dumping of rubbish to landfill.

The NO2VAG campaign which has been energetically spearheaded by Yael Kahn and Rob Langland  stated:

For two years the No2VAG has vigorously campaigned for Veolia to be removed from the list of bidders due to its grave misconduct in providing infrastructure to illegal Israeli settlements. Despite this involvement and its dire financial, health, safety and environmental record, Veolia was shortlisted for the final bids in February 2012.

This extraordinary withdrawal of Veolia comes after an intensification of the campaign against the company. The No2VAG staged twelve protests over the last two months at each council contributing £600m to the £4.7bn contracts.

The procurement process was shrouded in secrecy and campaigners faced a wall of denial when it came to Veolia’s unethical practices, environmental and technical shortcomings and financial instability. Engineer Rob Langlands and secretary of No2VAG said:

 North London residents want an environmentally responsible and cost effective solution to waste disposal. The Veolia technical proposals were not on track to provide this. I am especially delighted because of the ongoing Veolia involvement in the illegal Israeli settlements that the Veolia bids have now been consigned to the rubbish bin.

 Yael Kahn, chair of No2VAG said:

Our strategy to force councillors to seriously consider and publicly debate the issues at stake and the further actions planned No2VAG played a critical role in achieving our aim of eliminating Veolia from the NLWA procurement process.