What does Barry Gardiner think of environmental cuts in his own backyard?

Guest blog by Scott Bartle, Green Party candidate for Brent North
 

In Brent Labour’s local election  manifesto contract they pledged “better cleaner, greener, healthier spaces’. As Barry Gardiner Labour MP for North Brent is the shadow minister for Natural Environment, Fisheries and Climate Change and signatory to this contract you might have thought he could explain to his local party why this pledge is important to keep. 

As a reminder on the 15^th December the Brent Labour Cabinet will start to consider a set of proposals that includes: 

·         Closing Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre

·         No litter clearing on residential roads

·         No weekend litter service in parks

·         Deleting Environment Projects and Policy Team and

·         Ceasing a grant to Energy Solutions

A public attitudes survey from the Department of Energy and Climate change found that nearly half of people (47%) reported they were fairly concerned about the impact of climate change. The same proportion of people recognise that Climate Change is partly caused by natural processes and partly caused by human activity. Yet the same survey shows that it is near the bottom of people’s priorities list.  It is understandable, that when people’s primary needs are not being met it can be difficult to think about aesthetic and altruistic matters such as climate change and the environment.  However, Greens understand that the world is interconnected and as such believe that there does not have to be a choice of either / or.  Green policies are such that can have a beneficial impact upon our well-being, save money in the long run and create prosperity.

If, as the public attitudes survey shows that unemployment is top of people’s priorities, what sense does it make to close Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre which amongst other courses inspires children about renewable energy and how to conserve it.  It is only the Greens that will kickstart our economy through investing in a renewable energy, creating Green Jobs perhaps for these very children. 

The second highest concern relates to the NHS and it shouldn’t take The Department of Health to run a advertising campaign to reiterate that food scraps and other rubbish have lots of germs and sometimes parasites upon them. The spread of disease can be exacerbated by weather as well as our wildlife creatures and at a time where our local hospitals A&E departments are under increasing pressure it should be clear to most that litter clearing in Brent is a protective factor.

At a time when 10.4% of British Households are in fuel poverty, in a borough that is the 12^th most deprived in London support provided by the council to help people improve energy efficiency, which is a key driver of fuel poverty should only have a beneficial impact on people experiencing inequality.

Whilst the Labour Group makes a choice to implement the cuts, blaming the Tory and Lib Dem Coalition, the reality remains that each of them have pledged to continue the flawed economic policy of austerity. There is of course another way, one where people and the environment take precedence and faceless corporations are made to pay their way when trading in our country. 

For that, you’d have to vote Green. 

The proposals that could wipe out Youth Provision in Brent

The possible cuts in the Youth Service in Brent are causing great concern.  As you can see above there are two alternatives but in essence the first (CYP3)  postpones most of the cuts until 2015-17 and the second (CYP17) make them in 2015-16.

The report (below) suggests looking for alternative sources of funding but this would need to be fully explored to ensure that it is sustainable and would make up for the Council's cuts. (Unlikely in my view)

THE PROPOSALS

Proposed savings (cuts)

CYP3: The first tranche of savings (£100k) would be achieved for 15/16 by deleting a managerial post and an operational post as well a s reducing the budgets which support activities, such as printing and publicity. From November also the Youth  Service is part of a Cabinet Office ‘Delivering Differently for Young People’ Programme. This funds a rapid process of developing a set of options for a new delivery model. In particular, officers have proposed exploring through this programme the development of a ‘youth trust’ for Brent which could access funding which currently neither the council nor Brent’s you h voluntary sector organisations are able to access. This could put Brent’s youth provision on a more sustainable footing, with the ‘youth trust’ able to act as a consortium lead and enabler for local organisations as well as being a delivery vehicle, using the expertise of Brent’s experienced and skilled youth workers. As part of this process, alternative funding sources could be identified to mitigate the loss of services from the budget reduction of £900k in 16/17.

CYP17:This option terminates all Youth Service spend for 15/16. This would involve making all the staff redundant (full time and sessional workers as well as managers). The services terminated would be: 

Outreach and Detached Team and Youth Bus – which has a key preventative role in relation to youth disorder and gang violence Poplar Grove Youth Club – year round provision targeting young people from Chalkhill and surrounding areas. 

Mosaic LGBT Project – award winning provision for a key group of young people

liable to risk and discrimination Duke of Edinburgh Award – Brent is a very successful provider with a high success rate

Granville Youth Arts Centre – youth arts provision which supports re engagement in education and work 

Brent in Summer – the youth contribution to this programme has good attendance

Brent Youth Parliament

Wembley Youth Centre – high quality provision 

Funded with £5m from the Big Lottery - opened November 2012

Roundwood Youth Centre LINK would have to be transferred to an organisation willing to meet all running costs and TUPE relevant staff since closure would require very large scale repayment of government grant.  Some of the above services have partial external funding and with alternative funding sources being found, some provision could remain and officers would work with partners to ensure this. 


The council has a statutory duty to provide sufficient activities for young people but does not have to provide them itself. Some councils have almost terminated their youth offer and simply put a signposting page on their website. 

How would this affect users of this service?   

Young people in Brent experience high levels of deprivation, high levels of gang and serious youth violence, high levels of youth offending (especially more serious offences), high levels of mortality in the under 17 age group and high levels of sexually transmitted diseases. 

The current youth provision is located in areas of highest deprivation and is able to target crime hotspots, including key estates. It also supports young people who have arrived as unaccompanied minors, LGBT young people who are at risk of mental health issues and homelessness as well as young people who are at risk of radicalisation and involvement in gangs. There is significant work with young Afghani males and young males from Somali communities. There are also programmes targeting young females.

Young people involved in our provision, especially the Duke of Edinburgh award, contribute at least 5,000 hours of volunteering to the local community. 

The loss of Brent Youth Parliament would reduce young people in Brent’s opportunity to participate not just locally but nationally through the UK Youth Parliament.

Key milestones 

CYP3:

Consult on staff reorganisation in December 2014 to deliver savings for April 2015 Options appraisal from Delivering Differently for Young People – February 2015, with report to Cabinet on proposed option for future delivery of youth provision – March or April 2015.

CYP17:

Consult with local communities (especially Brent Youth Parliament) on cessation of youth services/closure of youth facilities – January and February at the same time as consulting staff on redundancy/redeployment. 

Approach schools and other organisations for buy back of youth services

Key consultations 

Whatever option is taken forward, there will need t o be extensive consultation with young people and service users including groups who may be particularly affected. 

Young people, especially those from BME groups, will be disproportionately affected as well as LGBT young people and young people with special educational needs.

Key risks and mitigations 

The council will need to be mindful of the November2013 ruling by the Court of Appeal that North Somerset Council acted unlawfully when it cut its youth service budget by 72 per cent. The learning from this is that there must be adequate consultation and consideration (through equality impact assessment etc) of the needs of vulnerable users. 

Youth services are essentially part of the council’ s ‘early help’ offer and therefore contribute to preventing young people causing spending down the line through crime, anti social behaviour, social care, poor mental health etc. 

There is also potential for ‘capital clawback’ on certain buildings e.g. Roundwood Youth Centre was built with Big Lottery funding.  

The Council Equality Impact Screening lists the following groups  to have a 'disproportionate adverse impact' From the proposals:

Disabled people, particular ethnic groups, men or women, people of particular sexual orientation, people undergoing gender reassignment, particular age groups and those with particular faiths or beliefs.

The proposal go first to Cabinet on December 15th and then follow the timetable set out in the side panel

Temporary accommodation for the homeless at Brent House?

Brent House in Wembley may house homeless families if the Cabinet agree the proposal on Monday.

Brent House has been vacated by the Council and Air France. It will be 12 months before Henley Homes are likely to get planning permission so the Council is proposed to outsource to a provider in the interim.

The Officer's report states:

The existing office space is to be converted into non self-contained accommodation with shared facilities across eight o f the nine floors (or as many floors as possible). The scheme is expected to accommodate between 40-60 units of non-self contained accommodation (approximately 120 persons at any one time). The scheme will require planning permission for a temporary change of use. 

The accommodation will be provided to homeless (and potentially homeless) households under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996.  At the end of the scheme the provider(s) will be required to hand-back the building to the Council with vacant possession and free of fittings and temporary installations put in for the scheme. Households in occupation will be provided with alternative suitable temporary accommodation in advance of vacant possession being required