Caroline Lucas & Davy Jones condemn Green councillors' privatisation decision

The political decisions of the minority Green Council in Brighton and Hove have been controversial , locally and nationally, within the Green Party and within the broader left movement. At the crux of the argument has been the degree to which the Council should go along with the austerity agenda and implement cuts and costs savings, claiming that 'Green cuts' would be more progressive than those made by the other parties. At the same time the Council has also made considerable progress on the Green agenda. (See article on New Statesman website LINK)

A decision made at by some Green councillors at a Council committee last night has brought out the differences between the Council leadership's perspective and that of the city's Green MP and prospective MP.

Caroline Lucas MP, (Green Brighton and Hove) and Davy Jones (Green candidate for Brighton Kempton) have issued the following statement:

We are disappointed that at yesterday's Brighton & Hove Council Policy & Resources Committee meeting some Green Group councillors including the Council leader Jason Kitcat, voted to accept a Health & Well-Being Board recommendation to out-source a local NHS service (ICES) to provide specialist equipment for people with disabilities to a private sector provider.

It is a complicated situation - the Sussex Community NHS Trust was threatening to pull out of the service, "cost shunting" the responsibility over to the cash-strapped local Council that only provides a small component of the service currently. This is deeply regrettable. But we believe the Council has made a mistake in allowing itself to be forced by the NHS Trust to out-source this service to a private sector provider.

There was no necessity to make this decision earlier today – the existing contract runs until September 2015, leaving plenty of time to seek alternative solutions to keep the service in public hands.

We are particularly disappointed in today’s decision as it is not one that is in line with national or local Green Party policy, that unreservedly opposes the privatisation of NHS services. Neither was the ICES decision brought before the local Green Group or Green Party in advance for discussion. The Green Party councillors on the Council recently successfully proposed a motion to the full Council meeting opposing privatisation of NHS services.

We reiterate our outright opposition to the out-sourcing of the ICES service and to support the staff in the NHS in their campaigns to remain in the public sector, and NHS campaigners fighting against privatisation.

More feeble excuses from Cllr Butt as 'error' reveals his deceit on Stonebridge Adventure Playground closure

Cllr  Muhammed Butt today told the Kilburn Times that the Forward Plan notice uploaded on the Brent Council website  that the Cabinet would be making a decision to end the funding of the Stonebridge Adventure Playground  LINK had been 'uploaded in error'.  It is reminiscent of the Tweet sent out inviting residents to speak at a Full Council meeting on a Friday, giving Monday as the deadline which was said to be an error when I applied to speak on the subject of the appointment of a permanent Chief Executive LINK

This is what Cllr Butt told the Kilburn Tines: LINK

The forward plan item considering the future funding of the Brent Play Association was taken down from our website as it was an incorrect version which had been uploaded in error. A correct version will be published later today. (Tuesday).

It is important to note that this funding issue is completely separate from the regeneration proposals for Stonebridge. They are two separate decisions.

Given the fact that by 2018 Brent Council will have had its funding cut in half by government, we are having to review all expenditure across a wide range of areas including children’s services.

But let me be absolutely clear about this, no decisions on either the funding of the Brent Play Association or on the regeneration of Stonebridge have yet been made.

The new version of the item has been posted and a screen grab is below:

The Heading (below the purple line) was originally published as:

To terminate the funding to Brent Play Association (BPA) at the end of the 2014-15 financial year.

Decision type: Key

Reason Key: Significant expenditure/savings > 30% of budget for the function in question;

Importantly the 'Decision due' date is now the Cabinet of  January 26th 2015 rather than the original posting of  December 15th 2014.

Whether this is to avoid a headline of 'Brent Council give Stonebridge children a surprise Christmas present - they close their playground!' or some other reason is a matter for speculation.

My hunch is that the original wording of the Forward Plan reflects the Council's true intentions and that Muhammed Butt is fully aware that this is the case.

That local residents, and the children who use the Centre, are being subject to such deceit  is a disgrace.

Westminster Labour opposes waiver on affordable housing in stark contrast to Brent Council

While Brent Labour Council approves developments with no, or very little affordable housing, their Labour colleagues in the City of Westminster appear to be taking a different approach. Background on the Jubilee/Moberly Sports Centre background can be found HERE

Wesminster Labour released this statement today:

Labour Councillors have objected to the proposal that the condition requiring a contribution of £500,000 towards affordable housing on the Jubilee Sports Centre development should be waived.

In a letter to the Council in advance of the Planning Committee on this evening, Labour Leader Councillor Paul Dimoldenberg, Queen’s Park Ward, said:

The reasons given for not following the Council’s planning policy arebased on a revised viability report on the expected profits of the Council’s development partner.  

The viability assessment dated December 2013, which has not been made available for inspection, is a year out of date. Since 2013 house prices in  London have risen 16.2% and 11% in the City of Westminster (Source: Rightmove property index November 2014). As the Council’s independent viability report has not been made public we have no way of knowing whether the model used by the viability consultants does or does not ignore residential growth in values that occurs between construction start on site and the commencement of marketing and phased release of the dwellings.

Moreover, unlike Brent Council, Westminster Council does not require a second viability report following the completion of the development to assess whether overage payments should be made by the developer so that the Council can share in the profit from developing its own land. This is a serious failure by the Council in failing to capture the increase in value for the public benefit. This is something on which we will be contacting the District Auditor.

In addition, it is now common knowledge that the Mayor’s fund for affordable housing is substantially unallocated. It has not been proved that the Mayor’s Fund has been taken into account when drawing conclusions on viability.

The Committee should also be aware that the current balance of funds held in the Council’s Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) at 10 November 2014 was £87.4m. Of these AHF balances £48.6m is contractually committed to ongoing affordable housing projects. A further £16m is currently earmarked for further affordable housing projects that are currently being worked up.

This leaves over £20 million unallocated. In addition, at the end of March 2014, there were c.£34m in payments due to be paid into the AHF from consented schemes that had been partially implemented.

There is clearly sufficient money in the Council’s AHF to build more social rent homes on this site.

Moreover the application should be rejected as unacceptably contrary to the following policy grounds:

POLICY S16 AFFORDABLE HOUSING

• Affordable housing and floorspace that is used or was last used as affordable housing will be protected.

• The council will aim to exceed 30% of new homes to be affordable homes, and will work with its partners to facilitate and optimise the delivery of new affordable homes.

• Proposals for housing developments of either 10 or more additional units or over 1,000 sqm additional residential floorspace will be expected to provide a proportion of the floorspace as affordable housing.

The development proposes to replace 12 existing socially rented housing units with five socially rented units and seven shared ownership units. The ratio of shared ownership has now been altered to 80/20, amounting to a further unacceptable overall reduction in the number of social rented units. The Council’s policy requirement requirement to protect floorspace last used as affordable housing has not been met.

The overall number of units available for affordable housing amounts to 16% of the total number of units proposed, far short of the 30% target specified in policy S16. The Cabinet Member Report on the Supply an Allocation of Social Housing and Low Cost Home Ownership 2014/2015 dated 9th May 2014 recognises at para 3.2.1 that: “demand for social housing in Westminster continues to outstrip the supply of available accommodation to let “. The report goes continues: “Thirty four per cent of households need larger home (3 bedrooms or more) and ethnic minority households have a higher than average need for them at 38%.” The report is a material consideration for the determination of this proposal. The mix of units proposed does not reflect the demand projected by the Council’s Supply and Allocation Report.

The Committee has heard in the past about the extensive local opposition to this unwanted proposal.

In summary, the Committee should refuse permission for the conditions to be waived.

Brent Council removes compromising Stonebridge Playground funding proposal from its website

At the weekend I published an item from the Brent Forward Plan which showed that despite the consultation about the future of Stonebridge, including the closure of the Adventure Playground, not ending until today, the Council was intending to cut its funding.

Muhammed Butt had assured residents and their children (recorded on video) that nothing had been decided ahead of the outcome  consultatiopn on the expansion of Stonebridge Primary school and the building of new housing that necessitated  the Playground's demolition.  He did go on at length about needing to save money so presumably it was the funding cut he had in mind.

The  Council's  Forward Plan published at the weekend including a proposal for the December 15th  Cabinet that funding for the Stonebridge Adventure Playground be 'terminated'.

Now that item has been removed from the Forward Planning section of the Council website, If you follow the link I published this is what you get:

Luckily I had copied the item on Sunday.  For those of you denied access by the Council, this is what it said (original format):

Revenue funding to Brent Play Association which supports the running costs of Stonebridge Adventure Playground

Details
History

To terminate the funding to Brent Play Association (BPA) at the end of the 2014-15 financial year.

Decision type: Key

Reason Key: Signficant expenditure/savings > 30% of budget for the function in question;

Decision status: For Determination

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Notice of proposed decision first published: 14/11/2014

Decision due: 15 Dec 2014 by Cabinet

Lead member: Lead Member for Children and Young People

Lead director: Strategic Director, Children and Young People

Department: Children and Young People

Contact: Sara Williams, Operational Director, Early Help and Education Email: sara.williams@brent.gov.uk Tel: 020 8937 3510.

Documents

Revenue funding to Brent Play Association which supports the running costs of Stonebridge Adventure Playground 

Other items on the Forward Plan sent out at the same time  are still accessible.

Now what possible motive could Brent Council have for removing something that should be publicly accessible and clearly has major repercussions for the parents, carers and children of Stonebridge?

The positives and negatives of public health in Brent

Tomorrow's  Brent Health and Wellbeing Board will be discussing an important report on public health and the issues facing the borough in the future. The full report is available HERE

For each issue the report goes into details of some of the initiatives and projects that address the problem so here I will print some of the tables and graphs to stimulate interest.

Brent actually has healthier statistics than some of the areas with equal levels of deprivation but there are considerable differences between different parts of Brent.

The causes of premature deaths:

Differences in age expectancy in wards within the borough:

Increases in rates of dementia are a long-term issue:

As are rates of diabetes:

One area of success has been the reduction in teenage pregnancies:

The figures on child health indicate health problems building up for the future. I have been keen to persuade the Council to increase school nurse provision to address these issues and procurement is in process

Obesity of Year 6 child (11 year olds)

As they go into Year 7 at secondary schools the pupils are likely to use takeways:

To inform the Council’s planning policies, the Council public health team undertook a survey of secondary school students to explore associations between the presence of fast food takeaways close to the school and students’ use of takeaways and general food knowledge. In the seven schools that participated, all year 7 and year 10 students were surveyed. Nearly two and a half thousand students responded resulting in a unique insight into student behaviour. Students who attended schools less than 400m from a takeaway ate more takeaways at lunch, on the journey home from school and at home for their evening meal with their family.

The survey supports the policy of a buffer zone around schools which the Council is now implementing.

Dental health is a particular issue in Brent:

Some excellent preventative work is taking places from the Chalkhill Wellbeing project which ends in March 2015 unless further funding is found. I will return to this in some detail in the future.

Breakfast time queues of Romanians at Brent Civic Centre to vote in Presidential election

There were queues from 8am this morning as Romanians now resident locally queued to vote in the second round of the Romanian presidential elections.

Traffic slowed to a crawl between Wembley Park and Wembley Central during the morning as the election queue coincided with the new Wembley Market and the opening of the ice rink.

Turnout was reported to be up to twice as high as in the first round of the election.

If only Brent residents were so keen on voting!

Cats threaten to take over Willesden Green

The 'Cat Walk' mosaic abovewas unveiled on the bridge opposite Willesden Green station yesterday.  It is the first of a series of cat-motif mosaics inspired by the illustrations of Louis Wain, an early 20th century Brent artist.

Community involvement is encouraged through attending participatory workshops to complete the mosaics. Residents are encouraged to say where they would like to see future mosaics installed in the area.

Contact: contact@createmosaic.com

The Willesden Green Town Team are working on a number of projects in Willesden Green and Dudden Hill  to 'develop a thriving, vibrant and economically sustainable and uplifting environment for us to live and work in'. 

I am tempted to annouce a similar project but with a rat-motif and a rather different 'vision' to be installed around Brent Civic Centre but will resist. Miaow.

Council tables termination of funding for Stonebridge Adventure Playground before consultation closes

Dawn Butler, Labour General Election candidate for Brent Central, is among the playground campaigners

Brent Council yesterday published its Forward Plan for the December 15th Cabinet. Headed 'Revenue Funding to Brent Play Association which supports the running costs of Stonebridge Adventure Playground' LINK it proposes to terminate the funding to the Brent Play Association (BPA) at the end of the 2014-15 financial year.

It gives the reason for termination as 'Signficant expenditure/savings > 30% of budget for the function in question'.

The future of the Adventure Playground is currently the subject of a consultation  on proposals about the expansion of Stonebridge Primary School which involves building on its 40 year old site.  The consultation does not close until Monday but the funding cut appears to preempt the consultation outcome..

The threat of closure has created enormous concern on the Stonebridge Estate and a passionate campaign by local residents. Residents were unconvinced by Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt at a recent meeting to discuss the Council's proposals.  LINK

At the meeting Butt insisted, 'Nothing has been decided yet'.

The residents were clearly right.

To support the survival of the Stonebridge Adventure Playground fill in the on-line consultation:
www.brent.gov.uk/stonebridgeconsultation

Or email your response to stonebridge.consult@brent.gov.uk

And also sign the petition HERE 

Join the campaign's Facebook group  HERE

Stonebridge has a history of fighting back as this report from 2003 shows: LINK