Has email planning fraud probe been downgraded?

Guest blog by Meg Howarth
 

It seems that the investigation in to the fake online email support around Andrew Gillick’s original planning application for Kensal Rise Library is now in the hands of Brent police. To date, it had been understood that the Kensington and Chelsea force - the developer’s office is sited in the borough - was dealing with the matter after it was passed evidence and information about the misuse of addresses by the City Police National Fraud and Investigation Bureau (NFIB) - Wembley Matters, 27 February.

Today, however, west London journalist Hannah Bewley is reporting that the local force is now in charge of the inquiry in to whether the allegation of fraud can be substantiated. This is allegedly because Brent Council is technically the ‘victim’ in this sordid affair - it was to the council planning department that the emails were sent. 

As the council spokesman quoted in the Local Government Chronicle on 6 November 2013 stated: ‘It is clear that a number of the emails came from bogus email addresses but, unfortunately, it is not so clear that this necessarily constitutes a criminal offence’ LINK

Evidence of misuse of addresses was first brought to the council’s attention in September of last year, and today’s update suggests a police decision is likely to take some time yet: ‘Due to the complex nature of the evidence, the [Brent police] review may take a while for a decision to be arrived at’. It is six months since the matter was reported to the council, How much longer must local residents wait? 

To some local residents the handing over of the inquiry to Brent police appears like a downgrading of the affair. If Brent Council is the victim, why was the matter ever sent over to the Kensington and Chelsea force? Was this incompetence by the NFIB or a misunderstanding?

Meantime, Andrew Gillick submitted a revised change-of-use planning application for the Kensal Rise Library site on 7 March...

Queensbury Pub in Willesden Green Saved

Community, councillors, Assembly Member and MP rally behind Queensbury Pub campaign -decision tonight

Making community representations to the Planning Committee

Brent's Planning Committee will tonight decide whether to accept the officer's recommedation to approve Fairview's planning application, subject to Section 106 conditions*, to demolish the Queensbury Pub in Willesden Green, and replace with a 10 storey block, or to refuse planning permission.

At the time of writing campaigners have not yet heard how many of the public will be allowed to speak and it could be limited to just two. Local councillors are also likely to speak.

These are the most frequent obkections made by local residents (number of objections in brackets)

Loss of the Queensbury Pub and Busy Rascals which are both important local community facilities (140)

Height of replacement building too tall with surrounding area and modern design out of keeping the character of the area (105)

Replacement building is inappropriate and detracts from the character of the Mapesbury Conservation Area and setting of nearby heritage assets including Willesden Green Underground Station (69)

Demolition of existing building (68)

Designation of pub as Asset of Community Value should require its protection and be a material planning consideration (43)

Loss of existing pub will affect the wider regeneration of the area. Reference made to loss of the Deli on Walm Lane and loss of other community facilities including the Spotted Dog Pub and Willesden Library (41)

Replacement community space within the new building does not adequately compensate for the loss of the Queensbury Pub and Busy Rascals (33)

Lack of residential parking will lead to further congestion on surrounding roads (31)

The site is large enough to be redeveloped whilst retaining the existing building for use by The Queensbury public house and Busy Rascals. Housing can be provided elsewhere within the site.(26)

Lack of affordable housing within the scheme (26)

The Planning Committe is statutorily independent of the Council and therefore not whipped but these are representations made by councillors representing Liberal Democrat, Labour and Conservative parties and a Labour Assembly Member and a Liberal Democrat MP :

 

Councillor Krupesh Hirani (Dudden Hill Ward) - objection raised based on a representation received from a constituent that wishes not to see the site replaced by flats.

Councillor Christopher Leaman (Mapesbury Ward) - Objections raised on the grounds of the loss of the

community facility (The Queensbury public house and Busy Rascals) and the design is not in keeping with the area.

Councillor Carol Shaw (Brondesbury Park Ward) - Objections raised for the following reasons:- (1) The Queensbury Pub has been listed as an Asset of Community value and therefore needs to be protected and not demolished; (2) loss of public house which is a community facility; (3) loss of building in a conservation area; (4) replacement building does not fit in with its surroundings and will adversely impact on setting of other listed buildings in the area; and (5) increased traffic, noise and pollution.

Councillor Aslam Choudry (Dudden Hill Ward) - Objections raised to the planning application.

Councillor Alison Hopkins (Dollis Hill Ward) - Objections raised on the grounds of the loss of the community facility (The Queensbury public house and Busy Rascals) and the design plans are not in keeping with the area.

Navin Shah Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow - Objections raised for the following reasons:- (1) Loss of public house/community facility; (2) Loss of a building in a conservation area; (3) Design - to tall for conservation area; (4) Substandard accommodation - lack of affordable housing and family sized units; and (5) development too dense for this location.

Sarah Teather MP for Brent Central- Objections raised for the following reasons:- (1) Out of character with surrounding area - too tall; (2) Loss of public amenity - building will overshadow area; (3) Substandard accommodation - lack of affordable housing and family sized units; and (4) loss of community asset, The Queensbury Pub - replacement ground floor use does not compensate for the loss of the pub and its status as an Asset of Community Value should be a material planning consideration.

The Save The Queensbury Campaign submitted a letter of objection and a petition with 4,011 signatures and objections were also made by the North london branch of the Campaign for Real Ale, Mapesbury Residents' Assocation and North West Two Residents' Association.
 
The meeting is at 7pm this evening at Brent Civic Centre, Engineers Way, Wembley.  Follow events on Twitter @QueensburySOS

* SECTION 106 DETAILS

The application requires a Section 106 Agreement, in order to secure the following benefits:-

(i) Payment of the Council's legal and other professional costs on completion of the deed in (a) preparing and completing the agreement and (b) monitoring its performance.

(ii) Notification of material start 28 days prior to commencement;

(iii) Affordable Housing - 10 shared ownership units (3 x one-bed, 3 x two-bed and 4 x three-bed) + £138,346 offsite contribution + financial review mechanism on an open book basis;

(iv)Community Access Plan - to secure a minimum of 18 hours per week for community use, requirement to find alternative accommodation for Busy Rascals (existing community use) during the construction period; and provision for the ancillary community space to continue to operate in the event that the A4 use is not occupied;

(v) Sustainability - submission and compliance with the Council's Sustainability check-list ensuring a minimum of 48.4% score is achieved. Compliance with Code for Sustainable Homes Code Level 3 and carbon reduction of 40% improvement on 2010 Building Regulation (with compensation should it not be delivered);

(vi) Notify Brent 2 Work of forthcoming job and training opportunities associated with the development;

(vii) Join and adhere to the Considerate Contractors scheme;

(viii) Provision of a Travel Plan for the site;

(ix) Enter into a permit free arrangement to remove the rights of future residents and visitors being able to apply for a permit to park on neighbouring streets

CIL DETAILS

This application is liable to pay the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). The total amount is £1,382,214.75 of which £1,167,110.71 is Brent CIL and £215,104.04 is Mayoral CIL

Natalie Bennett: Narrow schooling for a failed economic model betrays pupils

This article by Natalie Bennett, leader of the Green Party, was first published yesterday by the Huffington Post, LINK  under the title:

Education Reform - Why It's Time to Abolish Dictatorial, Oppressive Ofsted

When I talk to people in the schools system, there's a huge and growing concern that we are on entirely the wrong path in terms of institutional structures, teaching practice and direction. These were all issues addressed when we updated the Green Party education policy at our Spring Conference in Liverpool.
The policy calls for the abolition of Ofsted, which has become unduly dictatorial, oppressive and rigid in its views, while also being subject to political meddling.

It calls for its replacement with continuous collaborative assessment and for national council educational excellence working closely with local authorities. To further encourage local accountability and reaction to local needs, the policy calls for education authorities to encourage schools to set up parent councils or forums, providing a mechanism for direct local input, and also for representatives of older students to be able to attend governing body meetings and have input into their decisions.

This all reflects the fact that a general revolt against Ofsted is growing, with schools around the country (and their communities) saying that its processes are not fair or reasonable, its criteria arbitrary, and its inspections incredibly stressful and destructive.

From Hogarth Primary in London, to a range of Stoke-on-Trent schools; from Oldfield School in Bath to Sandy Lane Primary in Reading, and many more, there's grave dissatisfaction at Ofsted's behaviour and a failure of transparency and apparent fairness in its decisions.

Schools that serve disadvantaged communities, and community schools that the government wants to convert to free status, often despite the wishes of parents, seem particularly vulnerable to negative Ofsted inspections, despite the views of parents and their communities.

That's in part a function of the increasing pressure on all schools to produce test results at the expense of any broader quality of education, and to follow narrowly prescriptive recipes for teaching, of which perhaps the worst example is the phonics test.

The ideological attachment of our current education secretary to this single method, based on an extraordinarily narrow evidence base, is possibly the worst single example of 'goveism' - the attempts to decide the nature and content of what our children are taught according to the whims, prejudices and preferences of a single man.

It's telling that when I talk to sixth formers and university students around the country, one comment that invariably gets enthusiastic support is my call for pupils to no longer be treated like the material in a sausage machine, shoved through a series of gauges to force them into a uniform shape and size, with 'failure' penalised by them being thrown aside into the 'waste' bin. That's why we're calling for an end to the current testing regime and rigid age-related benchmarking.

Our new policy also highlights the way in which free schools, like academies, lack local democratic accountability and oversight, and calls for them to be incorporated back into the state system, with oversight from local authorities.

That reflects growing signs of collapse in the free and academies school systems, with disasters ranging from the E-Act education charity, which is to have nearly a third of its 34 schools taken off it, to the frankly incredible disaster of the Al-Madinah school in Derby.

There are huge numbers of empty places in free schools, and the lack of planning for future pupil numbers is having disruptive impacts around the country. The government certainly won't admit it, but this is an utterly failed policy. It was always clear that the free school programme was an attempt to open the way for private companies to make profits from teaching our students - threatening the same kind of destruction and chaos that companies like G4S, A4E and Atos have brought to so many other public services. But there's increasing hope now that the whole system will fall apart before getting to that point - which is great for the long-term future of our school system, but dreadful for the many thousands of pupils and parents caught up in this Govian mess.

There is an even broader problem with the nature of our education system that needs to be tackled. We're increasingly being told that its purpose is narrowly instrumental - to prepare pupils for jobs - despite the fact that many of the states we're now trying to copy - from Singapore to China - have released the limitations and problems of that approach and are frantically seeking to improve their students' creativity and general skills development.

Training pupils for jobs that often don't exist now, or may well not exist in the future, is an obvious, enormous waste. We're in a fast-moving world, and young people need to develop their ability and desire to learn throughout their life, to have flexible skills, whether intellectual or hands-on, to deal with what is going to be a rapidly changing economy and society. To prepare pupils for the narrow conditions of our failed economic model is a massive error that betrays our young people.

For more details on Green Party education policy and reforms follow https://twitter.com/GreenEdPolicy

Katharine Birbalsingh and the tale of the black and white shoe laces

Michael Gove applauds Katharine Birbalsingh at Tory Party Conference

Parents of Year 7 children who have been offered a place at the Michael Free School have been somewhat bemused by a letter from Katharine Birbalsingh, if not left feeling a tad patronised. As the self styled headmistress says herself, it promises to be an 'extraordinary education':

We are expecting a great deal of you and you should be expecting a lot from us. We have set ourselves a challenge to show that children from the inner city can learn as much as any child educated in the private sector. This will require a lot of hard work, commitment and perseverance, not just from our children but from parents and teachers as well.

We are ready for the challenge and hope you are too. I look forward to the weekly contact that we will have when you access [you child's] assessment and behaviour records on line and [his/her] progress with [him/her]. We expect children to read every night at home and complete a reading log. Anyone who does not meet our expectations will be kept for a 30 minute detention the following day. I know you will support our strict line on uniform, our insistence on all pupils being prepared and polite and our desire that children should take pride in themselves and in their schools.

This can only be achieved through retaining high expectations of both children and parents and I am certain you will want to meet our high standards. It won't always be easy. When your child's black shoe lace is broken and you are rushing to work and only have a white shoe lace to give them, you may find yourself wishing that you had sent your child to a school that would make an exception to the uniform once in a while. You'll then remember that we have high standards for a reason: to ensure your child has access to an extraordinary education.

As headmistress I promise you an education that will transform your child's life. Our extended school day, starting at 8am and finishing at 4.30pm will itself be revolutionary in helping your child learn more, build their confidence and extend concentration. Our senior team is now appointed and our team of teachers is nearly complete, Please have a look at our website for their profiles. They are exceptional. They believe in imparting knowledge, benchmarking and healthy competition so that children are prepared for later challenges in life.

Birbalsingh goes on to assure parents that although no work may appear to be going on at the Arena House building which will house the school, 'there is a lot going on beind the scenes' and 'our contractors have a great deal of experience in preparing free schools to open (often on shorter timelines than ours) and we are confident that everything required will be in place for us to welcome our first intake in September'.

All parents will be expected to attend a Welcome Event on Sunday 15th June at Vale Farm Sports Centre when they will hear more about Birbalsingh's expectations and will be given information about uniform.

Ark Academy across the road from the Michaela Academy already has a reputation for strictness which has rubbed some parents up the wrong way.  I hope a 'discipline war' doesn't break out between the two schools in an attempt to prove which is the 'toughest'. We will be watching exclusion rates and the profile of those excluded closely.

Meanwhile a number of parents allocated a place for their child at Michaela did not express a preference for the school or its ethos, they were given a place because none of their 6 preferences came up, and that may well be a source of future conflict.

Chalkhill Park gets fenced in

Open Access

Fenced In

Chalkhill residents were surpised last week to see a railing fence going up around their new park. When the park was being planned many residents wanted a fence but were told no money was available. There was no planned separation of the pavement from the park with turf abutting the paving.

Shortly after the park was opened a car was driven on to the grass causing some damage to planting and seating but since then it has been relatively free from vandalism. Low roped posts were placed around the flowerbeds to stop the plants being trampled. Some parents feared their toddlers running straight into the road from the park and others were worried about children chasing miskicked footballs into the road and being hit by cars.

Although I respect those fears I confess that I really liked the open aspect of the park and the way people could wander in and out without having to find a gate, allowing  very sociable interaction between passersby and park users, particularly those on the outdoor gym equipment.  In a way it symbolised the open, friendly nature of the residents. However, there will be a gate at every point where a park path meets the pavement.

It appears that some money became available at the financial year end and the fence is being put in, at what a  person experienced at such installations, reckoned would be a cost of £30,000-£40,000. There are no plans at present for the park gates to be locked at night.

All Souls College ordered to disclose Kensal Rise 'binding agreement'

Guest blog by Meg Howarth

Protest outside All Souls College, Oxford

All Souls College, Oxford, has been ordered by the Information Commissioner to provide a copy of its Option Agreement - also known as the ‘binding agreement’ - for the sale of historic Kensal Rise Library (KRL) to developer Andrew Gillick. Only the date of completion, price and names/personal details of those involved in the transaction can be withheld.

The Commissioner made his decision on 4 March, in response to a Freedom of Information request by a supporter of the campaign to save the Mark Twain library from conversion to yet more unaffordable housing. The college authorities have 35 days in which to comply with the request. Failure to do so could result in the Commissioner writing to the High Court where lack of compliance may be treated as contempt of court. 

The grounds for the decision are that ‘The Commissioner considers that there is a legitimate public interest in disclosure of information surrounding the transaction, to which there is significant opposition, to promote openness, accountability and increase public understanding’.

Wealthy All Souls was until recently the owner of the site following the closure of the historic library by Brent Council in 2012. Its sale to Andrew Gillick was conditional on vacant possession. This was achieved when the college sent in its heavies to remove the pop-up library - built partly on the site, part on the public highway - at 6am on 31 February this year. Completion of sale occurred on or soon after that date. 

All Souls’ cowardly dawn-raid echoed Brent’s own barbarism of 29 May 2012 when council contractors entered the library building at 3am, stripping it of its books and Mark Twain commemorative plaque. The aim in both instances was the same - to pre-empt local opposition to the respective actions. The anti-democratic leading the greedy... 

Indeed, the college’s principal argument against disclosure of the Option Agreement was that public knowledge of the date(s) for vacant possession and completion-of-sale - together with the price - ‘would result in increased protest and activism to try to prevent completions’. It argued that should the sale of the property not be completed - for whatever reason - disclosure ‘would also make it more difficult for the college to find an alternative purchaser for the property’. It justified its line of reasoning as follows:

‘the college relies on its income from its property assets to conduct its research activities...prejudicing the college’s ability to generate such income from the sale of property would make it less able to conduct research of a similar standard and scale [something] which would not be in the public interest’. 

Proof, if any is needed, that irony is not yet dead, is the title of such a piece of research by one of All Souls’ senior fellows. It was listed on the college’s website in July 2012 as nearing completion and was published by the university later that year - Restatement of the English Law of Unjust Enrichment! 

You couldn’t make it up. Not only did All Souls pay nothing towards the building of the library - that was financed from a mixture of public taxation and a handsome donation by Andrew Carnegie. But the land on which KRL was built was more likely an act of tax-avoidance, aimed to bypass the land tax in operation at the time, rather than the philanthropic act its donation to the-then borough of Willesden, now Brent, is reputed to have been. Folklore over realpolitik...?

The real philanthropy would, of course, have been for the college elders to have returned KRL to the borough of Brent. Too late for that now. Andrew Gillick is the new owner. His original change-of-use scheme was unanimously rejected by Brent’s planning committee last September. It is currently enmeshed in a Kensington and Chelsea police-led inquiry into fraudulent online support - the headquarters of Mr Gillick’s property firms Platinum Revolver and Kensal Properties is sited in the royal borough (see Wembley Matters, 27 February 2014). The developer is intending to submit a revised change-of-use planning application for the site. 

Footnote: While disclosure of the Option Agreement for the sale of Kensal Rise Library is awaited, it’s worth remembering that the only third party to date to have seen the document is Brent’s legal counsel. He was forbidden to make a copy. Whether he shared the significant information it contained with council officers and/or elected members is unknown but a waiting-game certainly seems to have been played regarding the securing of vacant possession by 31 January.

Democracy, eh - and elections are coming... 

Green MEP warns on trade deal threat to NHS

Jean Lambert MEP has warned that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) damages democracy, threatens the future of the NHS and should be scrapped.

Speaking as negotiations between the European Commission and the US enter their fourth round in Brussels, Lambert said the free trade agreement could override important EU and UK laws which set standards and protect services – on issues such as food safety, data protection, health and the environment.

The London MEP was speaking at the launch of a joint report from her and Green MEP colleague Keith Taylor, which highlights some of the many dangers of the agreement to UK sovereignty.

The right to access public procurement – government spending, which could include the NHS – forms a major part of negotiations.

Transnational corporations from the US would have the right to enter the UK market – with 'regulatory harmonisation' between the EU and US companies leading to standards being watered down.

There is also the prospect that the UK government could be sued if it introduces regulations that might limit the future expected profit of services, making the liberalisation of services virtually irreversible.

Greens are the only major group in the European Parliament which currently opposes the trade deal.

Lambert said:

“These deals being made behind closed doors will have serious consequences for our rights - they will see democracy losing out to corporate power.

“We already know the Tory-Lib Dem coalition don't care about our public services staying in public hands – but this deal could stop future governments reversing their damaging privatisation agenda.

“The deal threatens to open the NHS to US companies, and close the door on a future government putting patients back before profits.

“This trade deal is not about free trade, but a free-for-all, slashing regulations in favour of big business.

“Greens are the only party putting human rights before corporate rights. This deal must be scrapped.”