Brent secondary school applications for September 2014 - the figures

I have now had a very belated response to my FoI request on applications for secondary school places in Brent for September 2014.

Two new free schools due to open in September 2014, but so far without premises, Gladstone and Gateway Academy, are not included as they handle their own admissions rather than using the Brent Common Admissions Form

The table is useful in order to assess the relative popularity of schools and to see where there may be vacancies in September. You can also see where there are large numbers of applications from outside the borough.

Parents can make up to six choices in order of preference so the total of applications in colum2 does not represent the number of children applying.

School	Number of places available for 2014	Total number of applications received for the school for 2014	Total 1st Preference applications	Preference 1 - Brent Residents	Preference 1 - Out Borough Residents
Alperton Community School	220	513	139	130	9
Ark Academy	180	1388	385	380	5
Capital City Academy	196	439	117	111	6
Claremont High School	252	1100	327	248	79
Convent of Jesus and Mary Language College	180	265	102	85	17
Copland Community School	240	172	20	20	0
JFS	300	734	375	20	355
Kingsbury High School	336	935	220	178	42
Michaela Community School	120	256	51	47	4
Newman Catholic College	150	74	15	15	0
Preston Manor High School	252	1120	184	179	5
Queens Park Community School	208	536	182	177	5
St Gregory's Catholic Science College	176	597	149	100	49
The Crest Boys Academy	150	84	27	27	0
The Crest Girls Academy	180	152	51	47	4
Wembley High Technology College	210	1244	442	433	9

Respecting Brent Council's Constitution

This is the 'Soap Box' delivered by local resident Philip Grant at the Kingsbury Connects forum last night. Apparently it was well received by the 40 or so people present.

I will begin by reading three short extracts from Brent’s Constitution:

The purpose of the Constitution is to support the active involvement of citizens in the process of local authority decision-making. (Article 1.4)

The Council is committed to involving the community through effective consultation and two-way communication. (Article 10.1)

The Council recognises that meaningful participation can only take place ... where community spirit is fostered so that people care enough to want to take part, and are encouraged to do so. (Part of Article 10.2)

Last October I was one of six local history society members who “cared enough” to take part in a stakeholder meeting at the Civic Centre, to contribute ideas which will help the Council to draft a new Museum and Archives Strategy. That Strategy will go out for public consultation next month, and be decided this Spring.

At the meeting on 16 October we asked that a staff restructuring exercise at Museum and Archives should be put “on hold” until the new Strategy was in place. The Head of Libraries, Arts and Heritage, who had only told staff about her plans the previous month, would not discuss this, claiming it was ‘an internal matter’.

Our request made sense, because until the Strategy had been consulted on and decided, how could anyone know what staff would be needed to deliver it? This Officer’s actions were undermining any effective consultation on the Strategy, because she was imposing her ideas of what staffing the service needed, while the decision-making process was still taking place.

I contacted Senior Officers at Environment and Neighbourhoods about this breach of the commitments in Brent’s Constitution. They ignored the constitutional point and simply backed their Officer’s actions, refusing to discuss the matter further. I complained to Brent’s Interim Chief Executive, and she also declined to take any action, while sidestepping the clear breach of Brent’s Constitution which was involved.

This is one of a number of examples I have come across in the past three years where Brent’s Officers have ignored what are supposed to be Council commitments about consulting with the community, and engaging in proper two-way communication. 

I believe that much better results can be achieved for our community by local people, Council Officers and Councillors working together. I try to work positively with the Council in areas where I can help, but community involvement needs to be seen to work in practice.

I have written an open letter to the Leader of the Council, and to the leaders of the other political parties on the Council, about this problem. I would ask that they work together to find a solution to it, so that everyone at Brent Council respects the commitments in its Constitution, for the benefit of our community.

Brent Council's fraud evidence demands a proper police investigation and potential prosecution

The case of the fraudulent emails in support of Andrew Gillick's planning application for Kensal Rise Library, owned by All Soul's College and closed down by Brent Council,appear to be coming to a head.

Below you will find a redacted version of the evidence sent by Brent Council to police through the National Fraud Reporting Centre:

Council’s Supporting Information Statement to Police

The attempted fraud concerns false representation to get planning application approved by submitting false supporting comments to the council. The application has been made by a developer, Andrew Gillick, of Platinum Land Ltd, for conversion of the existing vacant building to provide 3 one-bed flats, 3 two-bed flat & one two-bed house and community space on ground floor and basement. The planning application was made by Kensal Rise Properties Ltd, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. On all applications the council has consultation with residents and others and received a significant number of objections to the proposal. Unusually, the council also received a high number, 176, supporting comments through its on-line consultation system. Almost all of these are false. They emanate from 5 separate IP addresses, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. The names and addresses given on the supporting comments do not match with official records held by the council, i.e. false names have been associated with real addresses and the email addresses provided do not exist. Although the planning application was refused, the supporting comments may have affected the process. The attempted financial gain associated with the fraud is not known but would represent the profit on sale after conversion. Much of the investigation work into the IP addresses has already been done.

It is clear from this that the Council know the IP addresses and as the last sentence states much of the investigation work had already been done. They also make clear that there would be financial gain from the fraud ' the profit on sale after conversion. Clearly a considerable sum/

However in its statement to the Council the Police Service stated:

The Police Service has finite resources and it is only right that these resources are directed towards crimes that are solvable with a proportionate level of investigation.

As a Police Service we also need to channel our efforts towards preventing and detecting certain crime types that the people of London and Central Government have identified as being policing priorities.

I have examined your allegation and considered a wide range of factors when deciding if this matter should be further investigated by police. Included in my consideration is the likelihood of detecting and bring an offender to justice.

 It appears that the Police Service think a form of identify theft, possibly carried out for financial gain, in a planning application process, is of no concern to the people of London or Central Government.


Surely our three MPs, Glenda Jackson, Barry Gardiner and Sarah Teather, should get behind the Council's request to the police to think again about taking the investigation further, and to a conclusion.  It is certainly a demand that I am right behind.


Meanwhile the upcoming second Andrew Gillick planning application process must be halted until the case is concluded one way or another.

Police reviewing decision not to take fake email investigation further

The Kilburn Times is reporting that the National Fraud Reporting Centre is reviewing its investigation into the Kensal Rise Library planning application fake emails and its decision not to take it further.

Butt 'bitterly disappointed' over dropping of police fraud email investigation

Reporter Hannah Bewley of the Wembley and Willesden Observer has been busy following up the Kensal Rise Pop Up library demolition story. Her report LINK contains the following statements from the Council and Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt:

A spokesman for Brent Council said:

The council undertook its own detailed enquiries before referring the matter to the police and provided the police with a summary of the outcome as part of the agreed referral process through the National Fraud Reporting Centre. The council remains very concerned about the way that the planning portal was used on this occasion and has subsequently made changes to forestall future problems arising. The council wants to continue to maintain the highest level of integrity with its planning process, since the authority continues to have statutory responsibilities to consider planning applications that are submitted.

Labour leader of the council Muhammed Butt said:

It is bitterly disappointing that the police have chosen to ignore the evidence found in the council’s own inquiries and drop their investigation. When the future of the building affects hundreds of Brent residents and the entire Kensal Rise community, any issue of alleged fraud must surely be a priority in order to maintain the trust of local people. Whilst I know that this Conservative-Liberal Democrat Government has cut the police force by a fifth in the last three years, I am troubled that this investigation has not been carried out as a matter of urgency. Brent Council will be writing to demand that the police review their original decision and launch an appropriate investigation.

Pressure mounted further following an Evening Standard report  LINK on the demolition and Hannah Bewley hinted on Twitter that the police may change their stance and expects a statement tomorrow morning. Cllr James Denselow tweeted back saying that he had 'seen the emails'  (presumably those between the council and police - not the fake ones) and that he had his fingers crossed.

I understand that  Kirsty Slattery, of Gracelands Yard, whose address was falsely used to support Andrew Gillick's planning application is taking up the issue directly with the police, having had no response to her emails to Brent Council.

Video Celebrating the 5th Willesden Green Wassail

Supine Brent Council accept NFA in alleged Kensal Rise fraud

Who would Miss Marple suspect?

Accusations of malpractice in planning application in Brent are not new.  There were suspicions about a last minute surge in support for the Willesden Green development LINK, an independent investigation was carried out over Paul Lorber's email interchange with the bidder for the Barham Park library site LINK and currently we have the issue of fake emails submitted for the Kensal Rise Library development. LINK

At the weekend Cllr Muhammed Butt revealed in a sharp email interchange with a Labour Party member that the fraud police had decided not to take their investigation further. A strange decision when such developments are worth millions of pounds.

One would think that Brent Council, as the guardian of council taxpayers' money and responsible for the fair conduct of planning applications, having had their attention drawn to the fake email by KR campaigners,  and finding enough evidence in their own investigation to pass the matter on to Action Fraud, would have established why the police had decided on no further action.

 I am sure Miss Marple would consider the question, 'Who stands to benefit from this fraud?' and then investigate accordingly.

Does the lack of a police investigation mean Brent Council just goes ahead with hearing the planning application as if nothing has happened. Do the residents who have clearly stated that their addresses were used without their permission, for a cause they did not support, just accept that no further action will be taken?

Instead of any such action Fiona Ledden, Head of Legal and Procurement at Brent Council, copied a complainant into this email, which is a masterpiece in conveying absolutely nothing in four paragraphs.

I am writing to inform you of the outcome of the police investigation into the potential fraudulent use of emails in respect of the planning application for the building of the former library at Kensal Rise.

The Police have now informed the Council that it is not taking further the investigation into potential fraudulent emails in respect of the planning application for the building of the former library at Kensal Rise.

The Council does want to continue to maintain the highest level of integrity with its planning process, since the Council continues to have statutory responsibilities to consider planning applications that are submitted.

I know you will be disappointed by this conclusion but in taking the action, the Council has already demonstrated their continuing concerns with regards to this matter.

If the planning application and committee hearing goes ahead, as if nothing has happened, it will be a strange way of  demonstrating 'continuing concerns' on this matter.

Heron harbinger of Spring in Fryent Country Park

 

On of the first signs that frogs are returning to the Fryent Country Park ponds for spawning is the appearance of heron in the ponds.

My picture was taken this morning at Barn Hill pond.