So what have cats got to do with politics? Ask the Young Greens...

Brent hospital proposals must come under intense scrutiny on Thursday

Days after NHS England announced an inquiry into why waiting times at Ealing Hospital and Northwick Park A&Es have the longest waiting times in the country, LINK, Brent's Scrutiny Committee on Thursday will be examining several important aspects of local health care.

Representatives of the North west London NHS Hospital Trust will be questioned about progress on the recommendations of the Care Quality Commission's (CQC) critical  report on Northwick Park Hospital.

The report LINK sets out the issues to be examined clearly:

CQC made specific recommendations for improvement at Northwick Park Hospital concerning A&E and related services. These are set out below:-

• Ensure that there are appropriate numbers of staff to meet the needs of patients in the A&E department, surgical areas and critical care.

• Ensure that there are systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of services provided in A&E, critical care, surgery and maternity to ensure that services are safe and benchmarked against national standards.

•Review the coping strategies within A&E during periods of excessive demand for services.

•Empower senior staff to make changes to ensure that patients are safe in A&E in maternity.

•Review discharge arrangements in A&E and critical care to avoid re-admission to these areas.

Given the significant number of areas requiring improvement in the current A&E provision at Northwick Park Hospital reassurance is sought from the senior management concerning implementation of actions and the safety of the A&E services available to Brent residents.

Another area to be examined is the proposals from Shaping a Healthier Future and Brent NHS to close maternity and other associated services at Ealing Hospital. 

The committee is recommended to question representatives of the Brent Clinical Commissioning Group on:-

•the robustness of their modelling assumptions and assurance plan;

•the timescale for their implementation; and

•what contingency plans are in place in case any of the proposals turn out not to be possible or feasible

A puzzling aspect of the report LINK is the timing. This meeting is on November 26th and it looks as if key decisions on this issue are actually to be made by the CCGs on the same day:

The next stage of reconfiguration is the changes to maternity services and the inter dependent services at Ealing Hospital. Brent Clinical Commissioning Group is due to make a decision on delegating the decision on timing to Ealing Clinical Commissioning Group, along with the other CCGs across North West London, on 26thNovember 2014. Ealing Clinical Commissioning Group is due to make a decision on the timings of changes to maternity services, and the interdependent services at Ealing Hospital on 26^th November 2014.

One can only wonder if what the Scrutiny Committee thinks will have any impact given this timetable.

The report's authors reach a soothing conclusion:

The impact on Brent residents and NHS services of changes to maternity and inter-dependent services at Ealing Hospital is not expected to be significant. Local services have the capacity to receive additional activity from Ealing without causing a negative impact on accessibility for Brent residents

The final health report to be considered is on the future use of the Central Middlesex Hospital site LINK. Current proposals are:

•An elective orthopaedic centre.

•Mental Health inpatient facility relocated from the site at Park Royal.

•A GP and primary care ‘hub’.

•A Genetics laboratory relocated from Northwick Park Hospital.

•Relocation of rehabilitation beds currently at Willesden.

This is a crowded agenda with lots of 'suits' from Brent NHS Health, the Clinical Commissioning Group abd Shaping a Healthier Future attending.  At previous meetings the chair has seemed irritated by the searching questions posed by Cllr Mary Daly and tried to hurry through proceedings with so many of the scrutinised wanting to speak.

In fact Daly's interventions seemed based on the fact that, unusually, she is a councillor who has done her homework as well as being someone passionately committed to the health of local residents.

I hope that at this meeting, however inconvenient, she gets a fair hearing. I also hope, for the sake of the public, microphones are installed to get over the acoustic problem in the committee rooms as well as the suits' mumbling.

If all that Health material is not another there is a major and very interesting report  LINK by a Task Group on the Agenda.The Task Group, chaired by Cllr Neil Nerva, looked at promoting electoral engagement following the introduction of Individual Electoral Registration and is packed with information and ideas. The most innovative of which is the involvement of the campaign group Hope Not Hate.

Once again such a crowded and complex agenda raises the issue of the wisdom of reducing Brent Council's scrutiny committee to just one. This was a hasty decision made at the beginning of the administration with no prior consultation which took many Labour councillors by surprise.

These are decisions about vital issues, at the extreme perhaps a matter of life or death, and must have proper scrutiny.

December 15th Brent Cabinet likely to produce a gloomy Christmas

The December 15th Cabinet meeting is shaping up to be the most controversial of the year and unfortunately is likely to produce some bad news just ahead of the Christmas holiday.

Among the items on the agenda LINK will be the restructuring of the council's senior management which will see some lose their jobs while other jobs will be created. This is currently tabled as 'open' so the public should get sight of the proposals a week before the meeting.


More importantly in the long run are two budget items.

One is the two year budget for 2015-2017 which will set out draft 'savings' to produce a reduction in expenditure of more than 30%.

Cllr Michael Pavey is the Lead Member for both these items.

The other is the schools budget for 2015-2016. Cllr Ruth Moher is the lead member for this item. Although reductions are unlikely to be headline grabbing there may well be changes in charges for services to schools which will affect their overall budgets.

Speaking Up For Libraries today

I filled in at the last minute as a Green Party speaker at the Speak Up for Libraries Conference in Bloomsbury today. It was inspiring to see so many people passionately committed to the survival of libraries in the teeth of local council cuts, privatisation and volunteer solutions. Barnet library campaigners were there who have a particularly hard job on their hands. LINK

I made the link between developments in libraries, education and health - all public assets being handed over to the private sector for profit.

I quoted the Green Party core value that should be the basis of  our libraries policy as well as our other polices:

The success of a society cannot be measured by narrow economic indicators, but should take account of factors affecting the quality of life for all people: personal freedom, social equity, health, happiness and human fulfilment.

I went on to  support locally accessible, professionally staffed, adequately funded, democratically accountable local libraries.

I stressed their importance as shared public spaces contributing to social cohesion in addition to their primary role.

The other people on the panel were  Helen Goodman MP (Labour, Shadow Minister for Culture, Media and Sport) and Justin Tomlinson MP (Conservative). Liberal Democrats were invited but did not send a speaker. Author and library campaigner Alan Gibbons chaired the panel.

There was a discussion about the need for clearer national standards for library provision but delegates pointed out that these were not being enforced by the current Secretary of State despite Lincolnshire campaigners win in the High Court LINK.

I said that I had no faith in Ed Vaizey intervening in the Barnet case as that council was the Tory flagship after Hammersmith went Labour at the local elections.  He would hardly interfere with a council that was the pathbreaker for other Tory councils wanting to shed services. I suggested that there was no substitute for a mass national campaign in defence of libraries.

Non-intervention reflected underlying assumptions about the library service and contrasts with Michael Gove's many interventions in education.

On national standards I agreed that broad standards were important but how they were implemented was a matter for local decision making. However, they would mean nothing if there was not adequate funding for local government and at present there were indications that many council may fail financially and be unable to deliver even core services.

This is how Speak Up for Libraries told the story of the panel on Storify:
(first slide should be 'professionally staffed')

Miss Ledden takes over from Miss Marple as she investigates Lorber's leak

Fiona Ledden, currently under pressure from Christine Gilbert and Cara Davani as they take action on the senior management restructuring in the run up to the Christmas break, has in turn, attempted (or been instructed)  to put the heat on ex Liberal Democrat Council Leader, Paul Lorber.

Ledden has written to him about an investigation she is undertaking into information 'of a sensitive nature' which appeared in a letter from Paul Lorber published in the Brent and Kilburn Times on November 8th.

The letter was about the senior management restructuring which did not go to General Purposes Committee until November 5th.

Ledden said:

In the letter...you refer to the disbanding of the Environment department. This was confidential information  and staff in the department were not aware, no consultation documentation could be available until after the meeting of General Purposes Committee.

She went on to say:

I am very concerned that this information was available to you and I an writing formally to ask you who gave you that information.

Ledden went on to offer to have a meeting with Lorber 'if that would assist'.

Ledden does not cite any authority for making such a request of someone who is now a member of the public.

Lorber replied that he was sorry that she had been asked to waste her time on the matter and wrote:

I expect that the Labour Leader must have been furious at the disclosure of his secret hatchet plan. Secret even from his own Councillors and even the newly appointed Lead Member of Environment.

He went on to say that 'in the spirit of Open Government' he would be happy to answer the question:

I worked it out for myself from the headlines of the report. My many years on the Council and my intuition led me to guess which Department was for the chop and which Lead Member was the weakest and therefore least likely to cause a fuss.

Perhaps you would now reciprocate by forwarding a copy of the General Purposes Report so that it can be properly scrutinised and debated.

Ex Executive member Cllr George Crane was appointed successor to Cllr Keith Perrin on October 21st. Perrin had  the previous month resigned for 'personal reasons'. The appointment made by Muhammed Butt and not by ballot of the Labour Group was first announced on the Wembley Observer's  Get West London website.

Wembley Matters published the outline Agenda item for the General Purposes Committee on October 30th LINK and the anonymous officers' report on Saturday November 8th LINK  which identified plans to delete Fiona Ledden's post as Director of Legal and Procurement along with the post of Assistant Chief Executive which has only been created a year or so before.  Some information was still withheld as the Council claimed details about individual staff could be identified.

Tune in to Stonebridge kids fighting for their Adventure Playground Sunday 8-10pm 95.4FM

Stonebridge kids fighting to save the Stonebridge Adventure Playground will appear on Roots FM 95.4 on Sunday night.

They will be on the Gussy Roots show from 8-10pm.

Meanwhile follow this link to see some of the amazing  comments made in support of the Adventure Playground on their website: LINK

Brent Cabinet finding it hard to find cuts to bridge £54m budget gap

See last paragraph

According to a posting on the Brent Fightback Facebook page Muhammed Butt told Brent Central Labour Party members last night that Brent Council would have to make cuts of £54 million 2015-17 (2 year budget) that is equivalent to 20% of the revenue budget.

Every Cabinet member had been asked to find deep cuts - and they were struggling. The Labour Group will meet to discuss the recommended cuts on Saturday November 29th.

Butt told the meeting that he would ensure that new housing in Park Royal will have 50% affordable housing.  However members were disappointed that his definition of affordable rent was 80% of market rent - far too expensive for most ordinary Brent families.  He was asked to go back to officers and challenge this.

I understand that the issue of Stonebridge Adventure Playground was raised by members unhappy about recent developments over its proposed closure. LINK Muhammed Butt told them that a decision would be made in January.

Other sources suggest that the problem regarding the possible barring of three councillors under the 6 month non-attendance rule may be resolved next week.  LINK  Cllr John Duffy is due to attend Alcohol and Licensing Committee on Monday afternoon and Cllr Zaffar Van Kalwala Audit in the evening. 

Cllr  Ahmad Shahzad  has been unwell so may be exempted on those grounds.

The problem was caused by the sudden movement of the Full Council Meeting from 17th November to December 8th. This was explained as necessary in order to discuss the Brent Plan which is currently being consulted on. Many feel this an indequate excuse as the Council calendar, including consultations, is set up months in advance.

Apparently last night Cllr Janice Long mystified many Labour Party members by asking Muhammed Butt, rather cryptically, if he was planning to set off the Civic Centre fire alarm.

Brent Council denies restructuring information to ex-Leader - he issues formal Open Government complaint

As  readers will know Christine Gilbert and Cara Davani have proposed a restructuring of senior management of Brent Council  that some have seemed as part of a 'jobs for the boys and girls' strategy. Details can be found here: LINK

The details were to be discussed at the General Purposes Committee but no details were published on the Agenda. It was marked restricted as individuals could be identified before consultation began. One person who may be affected is Fiona Ledden, Director of Legal and Procurement, as it was proposed that her post be deleted.

At the meeting the item was taken 'below the line' (confidential) and a backbench Labour councillor was none too happy at being excluded from the room.

Now the issue has been taken up by Paul Lorber, former leader of the Liberal Democrats and previously Leader of the Council.

He pressed the case for open government in an exchange with Fiona Ledden:

To: Ledden, Fiona
Cc: Gilbert, Christine Subject: GP Report on Restructuring etc

Fiona  

Can you please supply me with a copy of this Report as I believe that aspects of it should NOT have been kept secret .

Brent supports the concept if a Freedom Of Information and Reports dealing with the abolition of Departments and posts themselves have not in the past been treated as confidential.

Only matters which are confidential are issues specific to individual employees.

The normal practice in the past has been a Report above the line dealing with the general issues and only the specific staff related issues should be kept below the line .

Can you please explain who made the decision to restrict all the information to just the Members of the GP Committee and why were other Councillors excluded from Meeting and prevented from being present during consideration of the items.

How does any of this meet the acceptable Freedom of Information undertakings? Has there been a decision to raise the Secrecy threshold under the current Administration?

I would appreciate an early reply.
Thanks
 Paul

 Dear Paul,

The report was below the line and will always remain below the line I can not therefore provide you with a copy.

The consideration of whether the report should go below the line took into account the relevant information.

Kind regards

Fiona
Fiona Ledden 
Director of Legal and Procurement

 Fiona

Sorry but this is not an acceptable answer. What 'consideration' - absolute secrecy to hide what officers recommend even if breach of Open Government undertakings?

On what basis were Councillors expelled from the meeting of the GP and thus denied an opportunity to Scrutinise. Are you using GP Committee to by pass information and decision making of full Council or even the Cabinet?

This is clearly an abuse and not what was expected of the Cabinet and Scrutiny System. Perhaps you and your colleagues need to review both the legislation and Brent Council policy on Open Government and act accordingly.

Please advise how this decision can be scrutinised if access to the papers is denied to Councillors let alone the public.

Please treat my email as a formal Complaint against a refusal to provide me with information I am entitled to as a local resident and Council Tax payer.

Regards
Paul