Wembley & Willesden Observer closure a blow to local democracy

This week's edition of the newspaper

Trinity Mirror today announced the closure of 7 of its regional titles including the Harrow Observer and thus its offshoot the Wembley and Willesden Observer (WW0).

The WWO recently lost its well-regarded Brent reporter Tara Brady and the Brent brief was subsumed into the role of an existing Harrow Observer reporter, John Shammas.

For some time the WWO has mainly had one main Brent front page story and perhaps a handful of others in a paper dominated by Harrow news and Harrow letters. Its 90p price tag, where sold, thus represented poor value for money.

At the same time Trinity Mirror developed its Get West London website for digitial news and Wembley became just one of a long list of links on its news page. The Wembley link takes you to the page below which as you can see in no way replaces what a local newspaper can offer.

 

 Trinity Mirror said:

A radical new structure is being implemented across the west London titles in Uxbridge, Ealing and Hounslow that focuses on driving more traffic to the getwestlondon website. The newsrooms are being restructured to support a revised print portfolio while concentrating on accelerated digital growth.

We intend to withdraw from the Harrow market and the Harrow Observer will close.

The Press Gazaette, covering this story, publishes an extract from an article by Mike Lockley, who by coincidence write it to mark his 25th year as editor of the Chase Post which is now to close:

Occasionally, the national newspapers will be intrigued enough by a tale to write ABOUT the people of my patch - I write FOR them. Their reporters can get the facts wrong, ruffle feathers, then disappear into the distance. I can’t because there’s always someone in the street ready to loudly broadcast the inaccuracies.

I still can’t believe I get paid for spreading stories. You might call it gossip, but one man’s tittle-tattle is another’s key local information....

I’m something of a dinosaur. I know this because the exasperated IT expert who spent a week trying to teach me computer skills called me a dinosaur, or was it a fossil?
I may not have the new technology skills, but I have a contact book crammed with 'curtain twitchers' and devoid of numbers for gushing PR gals, usually called Gemima, Hannah or Suzi. Poor 'Hannah' rang, close to hysteria, this morning to proclaim: 'My client’s done something reeeeally exciting with milk.'

He hadn’t. It’s still white and hasn’t started coming out of cows’ noses.

And I, like every other weekly journalist, can play a part in the community I work in. I’ve helped save schools, stopped telecommunication towers being erected and even put pink custard back on a school menu.

Times and technology change, people’s desire to know what’s happening in their community doesn’t. A town without its own weekly newspaper is a town without a heart.

I have written before on this blog about the importance of local newspapers for ensuring accountability of local councils, particularly at a time when the council has an overwhelming majorority, an ineffective opposition and poor scrutiny.

In its heyday, which for me was during the libraries campaign, the Willesden and Wembley Observer did a terrific jon in supporting the local community. The Kilburn Times is currently backing the fight to keep the much loived Stonebridge Adventure Playground open.

The Wembley and Willesden Observer at its best

Now the Kilburn Times is left to do the job on its own but it too isn't unscathed in the present climate. News Editor Lorraine King's role has been changed with much more of it devoted to digital content and last week its most recent reporter, Myron Jobson, left for Financial Times feature writing. Nathalie Raffray from the Ham and High, another Archant newspaper, is filling in at present.

The Kilburn Times has seen a reduction in the number of its pages, as well as the number of reporters, and advertising takes precedence over editorial space affecting the number of stories carred as well as whether there is room for a Letters Page. The latter is again an essential ingredient of local democracy.

Down to one and a half people to produce the editorial content, the Kilburn Times, is only slightly over the staffing level of this blog!

Aside from the impact on our local community let's remember the 50 or so people who will lose their jobs as a result of this closure. I'd like to express my sympathy to them and their families as they face a dismal weekend.

Greens welcome new report showing net contribution of EU nationals in UK

At an event yesterday in the European Parliament to launch a new report, [1] Jean Lambert said of the study:

This study shows, yet again, that the Government’s portrayal of EU nationals in the UK as being takers rather than givers is just not backed by evidence.

Covering the period from 2007 – 2013, the findings from four countries: the UK, Austria, Germany and The Netherlands shows that EU migrants made a positive contribution to their respective state budgets. The total taxes paid in exceeded the total benefits received by EU migrants by between 0.2 and 0.9 % of GDP, on conservative estimates.

Directly responding to some member states, the UK included, who want to restrict the right to free movement of people in the EU, the new report from the European Citizen Action Service (ECAS) [2] further showed that:

·      EU migrants received, on average, 50% less in terms of social benefit expenditure than the average citizen of the countries studied

·      Even when pension-related benefits and contributions are not taken into account, the net positive contribution remains for the UK

Hosting the launch event in the European Parliament, Green London MEP Jean Lambert concluded:

While these findings are welcome the conclusion isn’t new, and you certainly wouldn’t know it based on the reporting of the mainstream UK press.

If the Prime Minister really wants to reduce benefit payments, he should concentrate on ensuring people are paid decent wages so they don’t need state top-ups. Pay is a national responsibility.

[1] http://www.ecas.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Fiscal-Impact-of-EU-migrants.pdf

[2] http://www.ecas.org/

At an event yesterday in the European Parliament to launch a new report, [1] Jean Lambert said of the study:
‘This study shows, yet again, that the Government’s portrayal of EU nationals in the UK as being takers rather than givers is just not backed by evidence.’
Covering the period from 2007 – 2013, the findings from four countries: the UK, Austria, Germany and The Netherlands shows that EU migrants made a positive contribution to their respective state budgets. The total taxes paid in exceeded the total benefits received by EU migrants by between 0.2 and 0.9 % of GDP, on conservative estimates.
Directly responding to some member states, the UK included, who want to restrict the right to free movement of people in the EU, the new report from the European Citizen Action Service (ECAS) [2] further showed that:

• EU migrants received, on average, 50% less in terms of social benefit expenditure than the average citizen of the countries studied

• Even when pension-related benefits and contributions are not taken into account, the net positive contribution remains for the UK

Hosting the launch event in the European Parliament, Green London MEP Jean Lambert concluded:
‘While these findings are welcome the conclusion isn’t new, and you certainly wouldn’t know it based on the reporting of the mainstream UK press.
‘If the Prime Minister really wants to reduce benefit payments, he should concentrate on ensuring people are paid decent wages so they don’t need state top-ups. Pay is a national responsibility.’
-ends-
Notes To Editors
[1] http://www.ecas.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Fiscal-Impact-of-EU-migrants.pdf
[2] http://www.ecas.org/
- See more at: http://www.jeanlambertmep.org.uk/2014/11/13/eu-migrants-pay-take-another-study-finds/#sthash.OeInKzTv.dpuf

Confusion over Children's Centres outsourcing consultation

Brent Council officers seem confused by what the Cabinet decided on Monday on the consultation on  out-sourcing of the day to day management of Children's Centres.

Look carefully at this notice sent out earlier this evening and the TJ1 comment:

So who is going to decide what the Cabinet decided?

Butt told: 'This is a line you should not cross!' as Stonebridge fights back

This is the second part of a recording of Mo Butt's meeting with supporters of Stonebridge Adventure Playground who are trying to stop its demolition by Brent Council. I am full of admiration for Doug Lee as he launches an impassioned defence of the playground and its work. This is how a community fights back!

The last consultation on the plans takes place at Stonebridge Primary School from 5-78pm tonight. There is still time to email Brent Council with your views stonebridge.consult@brent.gov.uk or visit www.brent.gov.uk/stonebridgeconsultation

The consultation closes on November 17th 2014

Why the Green Party should endorse the NUT's Manifesto

The Green Party is the only one of the mainstream parties that challenge the Global Education Reform Movement (GERM). The GERM seeks to move both the structure and content of education in a neo-liberal direction. It reduces the role of education to competition in an ever expanding global market and opens the system to private profit.

I have written about this in an article on the Open Democracy website LINK

The National Union of Teachers and the Green Party both recognise the need to challenge this threat and so there is underlying agreement on principles between the NUT Manifesto for the 2015 General Election and Green Party education policy.

I have published a paper on the Green Party members' site giving a detailed comparison of the two documents and here publish the main findings. I think there is sufficient overlap for the Green Party to broadly endorse the NUT Manifesto with some more discussion needed on particular aspects.

Here are some major areas of agreement:

VISION AND CURRICULUM

• Both want to develop an exciting new vision for education and move away from a narrow prescriptive curriculum. Greens reject market driven models of education that see  its role only in terms of international economic competitiveness  and preparation for work. they advocate a system that enable people to participate fully in society and lead a fulfilled life.
• Both want a broad, balanced and enriching entitlement curriculum with the Greens emphasising that learners and teachers should be able to develop their own content within this context.
•  The NUT and Greens agree on the need for 14-19 qualifications framework which give equal value to academic, vocational, creative and practical subjects.

ACCOUNTABILITY

• There is agreement on the need for a new approach to evaluating schools include much wider involvement of parents, teachers and community. The Greens would replace Ofsted with an independent National Council for Academic Excellence, linked with the NfER. This would work collaboratively with schools and local authorities on school improvement.
• The Greens want to abolish league tables and the NUT wants to replace them with national sampling. More discussion is needed on how the latter would work.

TEACHERS

• Both want to reclaim teachers' professional respect, responsibility and autonomy with the NUT citing the successful London Challenge.
• Greens and the NUT agree that all children should be taught by qualified teachers or those in training towards qualification and the need for quality initial teacher education and in-service  education and training.
• The NUT wants a recruitment strategy that reflects the diverse nature of school communities while the Greens emphasise education on diversity issues for teachers and other school workers and the effective equality and diversity monitoring of recruitment and staff development.
• The NUT wants to reduce teachers' workload, restore a national pay structure and professional levels of pay, and opposes the extension of the retirement age to 68. The Green Party promises  to work with the teaching unions to reverse the process by which teachers have gradually been deskilled and their professional autonomy eroded and will review pension arrangements and retirement age with then. The Green Party opposes performance relation Pay for teachers.

CHILD POVERTY

•  This is a concern for both the NUT and the Green Party and there is agreement on the immediate need for the abolition of the Bedroom Tax, high quality nursery education , restoration of the Education Maintenance Allowance or a similar scheme. The Green's proposal on a Citizen's Income could replace the allowance in the long term and would begin to tackle child poverty.
• Both agree on the urgent need to tackle youth unemployment.

SCHOOL PLACES

•  There is agreement on the need to strengthen local authorities' role in educational provision and in particular the need for the restoration of the LA's power to provide new school places though building new LA schools.

PRIVATISATION

•  Both Greens and the NUT call for an end to the marketisation of education and oppose schools being run for profit. Greens see education as a right and an entitlement that should be free at the point of delivery to people of all ages.
• Greens oppose the creation of more academies and free schools and would integrate them into the local authority school system. The NUT call for the end of approval for new free schools and support the right of all schools to return to the status of local authority schools. The Greens support parents and communities fighting the forced academisation of their schools.
• Both agree on the need for the restoration of funding to local authorities and their role in overseeing the quality of education in their locality.

INVESTMENT IN EDUCATION

•  The NUT calls for the restoration of education funding to at least 2010 levels in real terms. There is nothing explicit in Green Party policy but it is certainly something we should explore.

Stonebridge speaks Truth to Power over Adventure Playground closure

'THIS IS THE FOUNDATION OF OUR COMMUNITY'

Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt meets local people from the Stonebridge Estate who are fighting to keep their Adventure Playground open.

GP says NW London hospitals under 'unbearable pressure' as A&E waiting times are longest in the country

 

Campaigning Against the Closures

 The BBC are reporting the longest A&E waits are in North West London. Brent Fightback and Save Our NHS, along with Ealing and Hammersmith hospital campaigners warned against the closure of Accident and emergency wards, including Central Middlesex.  LINK

Our concerns have been vindicated.

Patients requiring emergency treatment in north-west London had the longest waits in the country.

London North West Hospital Trust failed to see 32.2% of its patients within four hours during the week ending 19 October, and 26.7% the following week.

Labour London Assembly member Dr Onkar Sahota said the two "dangerous" results could be connected to the closure of two local A&E departments.

The Trust said it understood "where change is required".

The figures obtained by the Labour Party show the trust performing below the national average, which stood at 11.2% and 9.4% respectively during the two weeks highlighted. 

They revealed 827 and 628 patients had to wait more than four hours for emergency treatment.
In a statement the trust said: "We are working with our healthcare partners... to address specific issues relating to capacity, attendances and delays in discharging patients from hospital.

"Agreed actions are in place to improve performance which includes plans for 70 additional beds at Northwick Park Hospital."

Dr Sahota, a practising GP, said the closure of Central Middlesex and Hammersmith A&E departments in September had put west London hospitals under "unbearable pressure".

The GP said: "Despite consistent warnings, the mayor and government have refused to recognise the dangerous impact these closures have had.

"We can only hope that with the message now devastatingly clear, they will take urgent action to help get A&E services in North West London back on track."

In August the health watchdog the Care Quality Commission said staff across the trust "were found to be caring and compassionate" but that some patients at Northwick Park Hospital were being discharged too early because of the patient flow through its A&E department.

Brent Cabinet considers part privatisation of Children's Centres

Mikey Pavey launches Labour Friends of Sure Start

When lead member for Brent Children and Families, Cllr Michael Pavey launched Labour friends of Sure Start aimed at campaigning for and championing Children's Centres.

Now as Deputy Leader he and Cabinet colleagues are discussing plans to part-privatise Children's Centres in order to save money.

In Phase One of the scheme to make Children's Centres 'sustainable' a tier of local management was removed. Phase Two brought in private and voluntary providers for some Centres:

.    Phase Two comprises the reconfiguration of Barham Library Children’s Centre, St Raphael’s Intergenerational Centre and Treetops Children’s Centre to provide children’s centre nursery places via private and voluntary providers. This change was approved by Cabinet in July and the early years team is working with Property Services and Legal Services to develop suitable agreements and get the new provision in place. 


Now Phase Three proposes to out-source day to day management of and governance of other Centres:

3.19  Phase Three proposal. The proposed third phase of change is to develop a new model of delivery. It is proposed to consult service users, staff and other stakeholders on a proposal to tender the management and day to day governance of the children’s centres to an experienced provider with that provider taking on the running of the buildings, the employment and management of staff and the responsibility for service delivery to meet the core offer requirements. 


 3.20  Under this model the selected provider will resource and develop the required universal services and the Local Authority will fund the targeted Early Intervention services for the most vulnerable families. Under this model the strategic role for the Early Years Service will be to secure good quality children’s centres, challenge practice and performance management, supporting good Ofsted outcomes and focusing resources on the targeted households and other families with additional needs. 


3.21  Essentially this model attempts to deliver a similar level of service to the current model (or potentially better) for a reduced level of resourcing from the local authority. It looks to future sustainability, since external service providers will have the ability to leverage in additional funds from their own contacts for example the National Lottery, European funding, etc which the current service, as a council service, cannot access. 


 This excludes Curzon, Fawood and Challenge House who already have a partnership.

The proposals, following DfE rules, have to go to formal consultation taking 3 - 4 months and the Council would have to devise an appropriate procurement process which may prove complex.

Eventually, unless the proposals are successfully challenged, Centre staff, and some office staff, would be TUPEd over to the new provider.

It will be argued, as often with cuts and privatisation, that new efficiencies will reduce costs without detriment to the quality of service, and further that this is the only way to enable Children's Centres to survive in the Council's dire financial situation. Councillors will point to other local authorities where such arrangements exist as well as those that have closed their Centres.