Wednesday, 16 January 2013

Vulnerable to get help to find cheaper fuel tariffs

From London Councils
 
Vulnerable residents in up to 1.75million homes across London will be offered assistance by their local council to get a better energy deal and save money.  

The pioneering scheme involving 17 boroughs, including Brent,  and London Councils, the organisation which represents the capital’s local authorities, was given £686,655 by the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) from its Cheaper Energy Together fund.

The initiative will help the capital’s most vulnerable residents by getting them a cheaper tariff for their gas and electricity bills.

Each borough plan to use their equal share of the funding to work with residents who could benefit most from switching their energy tariff and advise them what their options are. It is estimated that 325,000 homes in the 17 boroughs are in fuel poverty which means more than 10 per cent of income is spent on electricity and gas.

The aim of the project is to sign up as many Londoners as possible, especially those who struggle the most to keep warm, and collectively negotiate a better deal with the gas and electricity companies on their behalf.

Chair of London Councils’ Transport and Environment Committee, Councillor Catherine West said: “People who most need to keep warm to stay healthy are the least likely to make sure they are on the best energy deal. Some of the most vulnerable Londoners will not turn the heating on because they do not want to risk running up a large bill.

“This cross borough scheme will make a real difference this winter by advising residents about their options and helping them to switch to cheaper gas and electricity tariffs or suppliers.”

Kingston Council is the lead borough for the scheme. Council leader, Councillor Derek Osbourne said: “With energy bills soaring, we must help Londoners get cheaper energy deals and improve their home energy efficiency. Councils across the capital will do all that they can to help people, particularly the vulnerable and those on low incomes, keep warm at home.

“Switching collectively to one domestic energy provider to get better energy deals can benefit us all as residents.”

Sunday, 13 January 2013

Progress on Green Charter but much more needs to be done

Heat loss = money wasted=global warming
 The Green Charter Monitoring Report  LINK that goes before the Brent Executive on Monday reports good progress but admits 'There is, however room for improvement over the next year'. Cllr James Powney, lead member for the Environment on a recent posting on his blog says that 'it is important that as a major employer in Brent we (Brent Council)  show the way if we are to have any credibility in getting others to follow'. LINK.

Although a lot of work has gone into energy savings in Brent buildings and Report emphasises the Civic Centre's green credential, I think the council could have done far more in terms of the existing  housing stock.  They seem to have  gained little from the funds available through the Community Energy Saving Programme aimed at areas of deprivation which ended in December 2012 or the Green Deal.  A successful bid was made to the 'Warm Homes for Healthy People Fund' which gained £150,000 to reduce fuel poverty which can be used to provide advice and pay for new boilers, insulated and other energy saving equipment.

In Brent during 2011-12 the report states:
  • 54 homes with single glazed windows received new double glaxed windows
  • 45 homes benefitted from additional loft or flat roof insulation
  • 116 homes had cavity wall insulation installed
  • 232 homes were fitted with a new, efficient condensing buildings
Although welcome these figures seem small beer compared with the number of houses and flats in the borough. By contrast this has just been issued by Energise Barnet as social enterprise in the London Borough of Barnet:
LONDON UK. 27 November 2012. Energise Barnet CIC, a social enterprise, has submitted a plan to Barnet Council to create £200 million of social, economic and environmental benefit through the installation of energy saving measures and renewables in 40,000 homes and buildings.

Under the plan, the CIC proposes that it provides the operational hub, generating leads for Green Deal Providers and other delivery partners through it's referral network of community organisations, businesses and tradespeople.

Nigel Farren, local resident and the CIC's founder, said "most of the 140,000 homes and buildings in Barnet are uninsulated and hardly anyone generates their own energy. As a result, owners and tenants spend more on gas and electricity than they need do. Barnet also has the highest carbon emissions of any London borough, some of the UK's highest energy consumption areas and there could be 50,000 residents in fuel poverty with associated health problems that adversely impact NHS costs."

He continued: "Through the Big Society Innovation Bank, the Council asked us to develop an effective approach to solve these issues and draw up a plan for delivery of the Green Deal which will enable people to improve their homes with no upfront cost and save money in the process.

Our plan will help the Council and delivery partners minimise cost and risk. It is the first of it's kind drawn up by a social enterprise and by asking us to draw up the plan, the Council has demonstrated that it wants to encourage local leadership in delivering community services in accordance with it's (sic) motto of "Putting the Community First".
 Brent Council needs to work with the Brent Housing Partnership and local housing associations to maximise their take up of the available grant schemes as well as pressurise private landlords to take action to insulate their properties. Muhammed Butt's intention to find ways of reducing fuel bills by a community procurement is obviously worthwhile but it needs to be accompanied by a large scale and systematic programme of retrofitting housing stock with double glazing and insulation.  Otherwise money will still be disappearing through roofs, thin walls and draughty windows.
Solar panels on the Brentfield Estate
Solar panels as a way of reducing fuel bills alongside such measures should also be considered and BHP has a model available in their work on the Brentfield Estate LINK

The Report covers the work on ensuring that new developments are sustainable and work that is being done in schools to reduce energy costs but I would like to see more on using the vast expanses of school roofs for solar panels for micro-generation. The extension of recycling to cover plastics and collection from flats is welcome but more needs to be done on persuading  commercial premises and industry to play their part. I have seen for myself the positive impact on children of cycling projects in schools.

Some of the entries on the RAG report raise a wry smile. The Coucil has handed out 100 free bags to encourage owners to scoop their dogs' poop and has given award packs to 4 owners who were seen cleaning up their dog's mess! 'Presence detectors' for the Civic Centre urinals sound like they could be fun...

Getting the message about Climate Change across to residents is clearly a challenge and there is mich scepticism to overcome. The Climate Change Pledge ( I confess I couldn't remember if I had signed, so I did again whilst writing this) has been signed by only 400 residents and 50 businesses. Minuscule compared with the population of the borough. The Pledge can be signed online HERE

Brent Council, Brent Campaign Against Climate Change and the College of North West London are jointly holding a Brent Students Conference on Climate Change on March 20th and there is an accompaying Competition for young people aged 11-12. Details HERE

One of the areas the Conference will look at is career opportunities in the green economy.  Given the massive regeneration project around Wembley Stadium I do feel that the Council could look forward both in terms of its climate  employment strategies, and consider setting up a Green Enterprise Zone in the area, backed up by training opportunities at the CNWL.
 





 



Preview of decisions to be made at Brent Council Executive on Monday

Monday's Meeting of the Brent Council Executive will be making some important decisions. Here is a preview of some of the post important ones:

Delegation of awarding of 'Supporting People Contracts' to achieve 'savings'
Re-procurement of existing services which provides housing support workers, sheltered housing managers, women’s refuge workers, etc. support vulnerable adults to prevent hospital admissions, evictions, mental ill health, homelessness and anti-social behaviour. The budget is additionally utilised to provide a range of non-statutory welfare services including handyperson, accident prevention, and hospital discharge support.

The council aims to make a reduction in costs (cut) of £900,000 through the new contracts. As they are due to run from February 1st there is no time for the Executive to make a decision so it is delegated to Head of Regeneration, Andy Donald and Director of Adult  Social Services, Alison Elliott in consultation with the lead members. LINK

Blue Badge Scheme for people with disabilities
Introduction of a £10 charge for Blue Badges usually payable every three years when badges are renewed plus tougher enforcement. LINK

Green Charter Monitoring
I will cover this in a separate posting. LINK 

Secondary School Expansion 2012-16
I have already blogged on these proposals which involve increasing the capacity of some secondary schools to cater for rising numbers. Kingsbury High will have 15 classes in each age group which will make it a very large school. My blog  HERE Executive Report LINK 

Capital funding for expansion of Vicar's Green Primary, Ealing
Vicar's Green is just over the border in Ealing and provides places for many Brent children. Brent will make a contribution to its expansion to provide more places subject to consultation LINK  

 London Living Wage 
Brent is aiming to becoming an accredited London Living Wage organisation itself and enouraging out-sourced suppliers to also pay it. It is not included as a requirement in the current Public Realm procurement.  My blog on it HERE Council Report: LINK 
 
 Working with Families
An integrated strategy to work with Brent's 810 'Troubled Families' aiming to save money by making it unnecessary for children to go into care and maximising Brent's income from the Government's 'Payment by Results' funding.(!)  It is worth reading the report in full LINK

Annual Audit Letter 2011-12
The letter from the Audiitor states:   
 Following the Audit Committee, on 28 September 2012 Ithe Auditor:
• issued unqualified opinions on the 2011/12 financial statements of the Council and the Pension Fund; and
• concluded that Brent Council made proper arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in your use of resources in 2011/12.


London Housing Consortium
Proposes that the Brent Executive's responsibilities for the Consortium be discharged to the Lead Member for Housing and another non Executive member (TBC) who will be on the the newly formed Joint Committee of the London Housing Consortium LINK

 The meeting begins at 7pm at Committee Rooms 1-3 Brent Town Hall and is likely to be over by 7pm.


Natalie Bennett rounds on the 'real shirkers'

Many important points have been made about the ridiculousness of the government’s various claims about the closed blinds or curtains of those who they identify as the “shirkers”, the unemployed – which will presumably include many of the employees of Jessops, who on the government’s account this week are strivers but will soon be “shirkers”. (Not to mention the fact that closed blinds in the morning might well indicate a night-shift worker…)

Many of the progressive side have, rightly, been rushing to say that people trapped in unemployment are not shirkers. It’s a term that, in the usual terms of the debate, rightly has a bad name.

But shirkers there are.

Group one of the shirkers are the employers who’ve shirked their responsibility to provide decently paid, secure, reliable jobs on which their staff can build a life, and that can be the foundation of the a secure, stable economy – which the future of their businesses must ultimately depend on. The CEOs and CFOs and their henchpeople have certainly shirked their responsibility to look beyond the next quarter’s profit-and-loss accounts, and their own annual bonuses.

We can offer excuses for some employers – the small retail businesses struggling to compete against the multinational giants who’ve been enjoying tax-dodging and monopolist benefits on a huge scale, the small wholesalers, farmers and manufacturers who’ve seen their profit margins squeezed by the same giant customers.

But there are no excuses for the profitable multinational giants, which have privileged the position of their shareholders and top managers at the expense of their staff – and their own long-term future, for ultimately they need customers who can afford their products, and staff on a minimum wage well below the level of a living wage, on part-time contracts and short shifts to maximise company convenience, and on the obscenity of zero-hours contract can’t do that. It’s the old Henry Ford story – he knew he needed to pay his production workers enough to buy their own Model Ts.

And there’s a second group of shirkers: the leaders of successive governments. The former Labour government has to bear a large share of the blame – how could it be after 13 years of their regime that the minimum wage was significantly, in the South East hugely, below a living wage, that people working in a full time job needed significant benefits – housing benefit and family tax credits – simply to survive?

Of course, the blame lies with more than just the single figure of an inadequate minimum wage. Labour did nothing against job insecurity, short-hours shifts and zero-hours contracts – indeed cut further the already Thatcher-slashed ability of the unions to fight for better conditions.

And it swallowed hook-line-and-sinker the neoliberal line about Britain being able to abandon food growing and manufacturing – importing essentials from developing nations, plundering their water and soils, exploiting their grossly underpaid workers – while relying on the “genius” of bankers and the luxury industries servicing them and their friends as a foundation for the British economy, a foundation that it turns out was built on shifting sands of fraud, incompetence and incomprehension of risk.

Further, it ignored the fact that in the low-carbon world we need to be moving towards fast supply chains must be shortened – the distance from field to plate for food cut to a minimum (for reasons of cost as well as carbon emissions), that most goods need to be made much closer to where they are needed.
What a shirking of responsibility that was.

But beyond the blame, we can look to the positive green economic shoots, the small signs of the future, the small businesses, cooperatives, social enterprises and community groups - the true strivers, who against all of the odds, against the efforts of the Tory-Lib Dem coalition to intensify the neo-Thatcherite policies in Blair-Brownism, are trying to start to rebuild a sustainable British economy.

Whether it is the Transition groups up and down the country, promoting food growing, jam-making, baking and encouraging crafts, innovative small co-operatives like Who Made My Pants? or The People’s Supermarket who are building a new model of business, or groups setting up new community-owned generation schemes, there are strivers who are now trying, from the grassroots, working to build the new British economy.

And then there’s the countless other individual strivers – the parents struggling to give their children a decent life with inadequate funds, going without meals themselves so their children eat properly; the carers who for the measly sum of £58.45 labour huge hours, with inadequate chances for relief, for their loved ones; the unemployed who battle on for employment, completing courses, putting in applications, even in the face of multiple knockbacks and government insults.

So maybe we can rescue the terms shirkers and strivers. Let’s highlight the real shirkers – most of whom fit in the Occupy classification of the 1% - and celebrate the many strivers, the 99%. With those ratios, the future of Britain can only be bright.

Muhammed Butt promises to consult on Brent budget


Following my posting on the lack of consultation on the Brent Budget LINK, Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt has sent me this comment:
I can assure you that we will be consulting on the budget. I am formalising dates and times with the consultation team and will get back to you and we will let everyone know as soon as things have been set.

We have not been able to put the budget on the agenda due to the government giving us our funding settlement figures so late and they are still giving us the data in chunks which is making setting the budget process very difficult.

Everyone has the opportunity to use the soap box to highlight any issues and concerns to us at every forum and would encourage you to use that and you can always suggest topics of conversation for the forums.

We are always looking to find different formats and topics that will allow us to engage better with our residents.

Saturday, 12 January 2013

Better data needed to monitor successful recycling

'Green' bin in Salmon Street, Kingsbury this week
Green groups in Brent expressed fears that the new co-mingled recycling (everything put into one bin and emptied into one truck) would produce more contamination than the green box system where different materials were sorted at the pavement stage and put into different compartments of a lorry. This would result in more material being rejected at the recycling plant and ending up in landfill.

Now that the scheme has been running for some time I put in an Freedom of Information request to see if the amount of recyclates collected, which have increased now that some plastics are collected, was affected by increased contamination.

Unfortunately some data is not recorded so it is hard to get a full picture but the recent rejection rate seems to vary between  4% and 12%. It is argued that the recycling rate has still increased taking this into account.

Here are the full answers. Thanks to Chris Whyte for another quick response (Answers in bold)

1. What proportion of material collected in the co-mingled 'blue top' bins has been rejected at the Material Recycling  Facility (MRF)  since the new system was introduced as:

 
a. Contaminated. The most recent sampling shows the prohibited fraction can range from 4% to 12%

b. Not recycled under the present scheme
: As above. This is the same waste. The overall recycling rate has increased from 31% to 45% and this accounts for the prohibited fraction.

 
2. How does this proportion differ from the previous separated green box system? Not recorded. This was a different system that saw prohibited items removed at source. Thus there is no real comparison.

 
3. Please provide a table to show whether the proportion rejectedhas declined over time as residents have become familiar with the system. Regular sampling is not undertaken and the prohibited can
fluctuate from period to period. Our records show an overall increase in the amount, and percentage of, waste recycled since the new service began.

 4. If data is available please provide the above information for recyclables collected from communal recycling bins from flats.
Not separately recorded.

5. What has been the cost of sending these rejected materials to landfill? There is no additional cost to the council for landfilling prohibited waste that is rejected. The  cost is contained within the £22
per tonnage charge for accessing the Material Recycling Facility (MRF). This represents a £70 per tonne reduction on waste collected for landfill through the refuse service.

 





Was Brent Council's leafleting licensing a success?

Brent Council's revised regulations regarding the licensing of leaflet distribution designated areas  the borough caused considerable controversy last Spring. Initially said to be aimed at limiting litter during the Olympics it was later justified as merely tightening up existing regulations. LINK

There were concerns that voluntary organisations and campaigning groups may have had to request a licence months in  advance of any events and the impact this would make on free speech. The complex regulations seemed to be using a sledgehammer to break a nut and suspicions that it was a disguised money making venture that would impact on small business.

No one has come to me to say that 'political' leafleting has been affected but I made a Freedom of Information request top find out how much licensing had actually take place.

I got a very quick response (thanks, Yogini Patel ) and here are answers to my questions (Answer in bold):

1. How many licences were issued after the introduction of the new regulations up to December 31st 2012?  20
 
 
2. How many were refused? 4
3. List the number of licences issued for each designated area? Wembley 18, Neasden 2

4. List the number of licences issued during the period of the Olympic Games 2012 compared with the normal period. 9 during Olympics, 11 outside Olympics 


5. How many unlicensed distributors were given warnings by council officers? 28

6. How many leaflets were confiscated from unlicensed operators and on how many occasions was this? Leaflets were confiscated on 15 occasions ranging from 150-300 on each occasion

6. How much increase was there in the amount of littering in designated areas during the Olympic Games 2012 compared with normal times? This information is not gathered but observations suggest that during the Olympics streets appeared to have less litter.





Bigging up Brent Connects, but what about the budget?



Some of Brent Council's sternest critics are featured in this new video from Brent Council extolling the virtues of the council-resident 'dialogue' that take place at the Brent Connects Forums (formerly Area Consultation Forums). I didn't attend Brent Connects Kilburn and Kensal featured in this video but that panel debate format here certainly seems to have produced a livelier meeting. The format hasn't been adopted for all the Brent Connects events. This notice  for Brent Connects Wembley to be held at the Patidar Centre, London Road on Tuesday Jan 15th, with due respect to the councillors concerned, failed to excite me:
 One half of the forum will be devoted to portfolio updates from two members of the council’s Executive
* Cllr Krupesh Hirani – Lead Member for Adults and Health
* Cllr George Crane – Lead Member for Regeneration and Major Projects.

 This is an excellent opportunity for residents, service users and stakeholder groups to put questions on specific council portfolio to key-decision makers to help foster greater understanding of council initiatives. A full agenda will be available at the forum. 
The most important decision the council will be making this year, the 2013-14 budget proposals, does not feature on any of the current  Brent Connect agenda and by the time the next round comes round the cuts and increased charges wil have been implemented.

I criticised the lack of substance in the consultation last year, with no detailed proposals available, but this year there is no consultation at all.