Friday, 4 September 2015

Join Global Justice Now in Paris to demand system change



A message from Nick Dearden, Director of Global Justice Now

 This December, world leaders will be meeting in Paris to negotiate a new deal to “stop climate change”. With extreme weather conditions, such as droughts and floods, starting to hit across the globe, finding a solution is more important than ever.

Unfortunately, the climate negotiations in Paris are very unlikely to bring a solution to climate change. Over the past 20 years of climate talks, the fossil fuel lobby has successfully diluted targets and pushed for false solutions, like carbon trading and offsetting, which not only are ineffective at reducing emissions, but in fact increase the gap between rich and poor.


We believe that what is needed is system change, not climate change. This change will not be made by corporations or world leaders. Rather it will be made by us as a global movement of citizens, together with grassroots organisations. Paris offers the chance for us to gather and strengthen this movement, so that we are better able to fight for a world that isn’t defined by corporate interests with the control of resources concentrated in the hands of business elites.


If you are interested in joining us in Paris on December 12, please register here. You’ll be the first to know about our plans, and how to get tickets and accommodation.


And of course, there are lots of other ways to get involved. Find out more here


Paris is not going to bring a final solution to climate change. Instead we must make it the beginning of the end to corporate control of our energy.

EVEN MORE BRENT SCANDAL! - 'Worse than Kafka' claim by councillor


"This is surely worthy of the darkest Franz Kafka novel the verdict before the trial, but then again in even in Kafka they had the trial before the verdict."

Courtesy of a sympathetic informant with a conscience comes news of further efforts of Brent Council to control people. Now it is not just Philip Grant, and his efforts to get answers to the 'Two Questions' or the Brent Conservative Group attempting to get an inquiry into the Cara Davani case who are silenced, but a member of the Labour Group itself.

It appears that over the holiday the Labour Whip, Cllr Sandra Kabir, decided to take disciplinary action against Cllr John Duffy who, in a blog on Kilburn Calling and a letter to a local newspaper ,revealed that without his intervention Brent Council would have lost council taxpayers £500,000. LINK

The allegation is that Cllr Kabir summoned Cllr Duffy to a meeting while he was on holiday and because he didn't attend went on to take unilateral action.

Duffy wrote to her:
"Since you have not confirmed your availability for this morning's meeting, you have either not returned from holiday or have decided not to respond" Yes Cllr Kabir you were right I was on holiday,  therefore I did not respond. You then went on to say "Over this long week-end I shall email you the action I am taking in respect to your unacceptable behaviour and conduct over the past fifteen months" therefore you have come to a conclusion about your  basis opinion of my behaviour without any  defence from me or even telling me what  the allegations were.
Duffy, with long experience in politics, clearly saw red when confronted with this on his return from holiday.  He wrote to colleagues in the Labour Group enclosing copies of the email exchange. It appears that he has sympathisers in the group  as well as officers but whether they will openly support him, given the current atmposphere, in a group meeting  is another matter. This is what he told members of the group in an email:


Dear, All,
 
I was happily enjoying myself over the summer in Turkey laying in the sun,visiting place of historical interest, eating lots of food etc.
 
While I was away bothering no-one minding my own business and everybody else was playing cricket. It seems the Chief Whip was hatching a plan. Last night she informed the group she had tried to contact me on several occasions for a meeting.This is untrue, she sent me these two notes ( attached at the bottom) in the last few days while I was on holiday,which I opened over the weekend on my return from holiday.
 
I am of course willing to have a meeting with Cllr Kabir providing a regional officer is in attendance, so we can discuss other elements of the treatment I have been recieving from the cabinet members  and the leadership. 
 
For instance
 
(1) Where did my missing nomination for the Tricycle Theatre go to after Cllr Thomas saw it.
 
(2) Why she changed the date of the full council meeting in November last year. the regional office are already aware and wrote to the leader of the council and the chief whip with their concern about their shenanigans ) to try and ensure me and Zaffar were removed from the council causing unnecessary By-elections.The chief whip was fully aware of this but chose not to inform me which would have meant me being disbarred.It was only that an officer alerted me  ( yes lots of them like me) became he was concerned that I was not beening informed  by her about the consequences of the change .It was only after  this officer alerted me I contacted the regional office who intervened saying they would take legal action against the Council. I am not aware of any other occasion where the National Labour Party had to threaten a Labour council with legal action. I will seek a full explanation from her why she decided not to inform me of the consequences of the change of date of the meeting, when she was fully aware and the concern it would have cause the Labour Party forcing two unnecessary  by-elections. I am also asking for the release of all letters sent to the Leader of the council /chief whip about this issue by the Labour Party legal department be released to me.
 
(5) Why did she removed me from all committees, knowing that because I am a trustee on a International Aids awareness charity I cannot always attend all full council meetings on Mondays, therefore because I am not a name sub on any committee, I am unable to sub at any meetings to ensure that I have attended the required number of meetings in a six month period. 
 
(6) When was the preparation for the removal of my name from the "All Labour Councillor" list done (clearly in expectation of the result of the Kangaroo court) and by whom.
 
(7) What are the allegations against me? I am puzzled what the charges/allegations are other than I have voiced my concern about the way we have made more cuts than the Tories forced us to do, I have never broke the whip, I have never leaked any internal information .So I hope she will provide her allegations to me in WRITING, so I may defend myself.
 
The emails below from Cllr Kabir are not only confrontational she has already come to a predetermined conclusion of my guilt . It is because of  the tone of her emails and the preemptive removal of my name from the all Labour Councillors list,  I have taken advise and decided not to attend any meeting with Cllr Kabir until she issues her allegations in writing so I can prepare myself and also I request we agree on someone who is independent (a back bencher) is present to witness the procedure.
 
As a active trade -unionist all of my adult life and  I have seen many disciplinary cases where the allegation have been proven or unproven.However I have never  seen a disciplinary take place , where there are no allegations, no hearing just a predetermined  judgement and a recommendation  from the Judge Cllr Kabir.This is surely worthy of the darkest Franz Kafka novel the verdict before the trial, but then again even in Kafka they had the trial before the verdict.
 
So bearing in mind the predetermine emails from the chief-whip, the question is should a kangaroo  turn-up at a kangaroo court,to hear his sentence without knowing the charge only knowing the Judge has already come to her view. 
Well the answer is no I will not attend this spurious  trial  until regional office have confirmed that she has followed the correction proceedures I believe Cllr Kabir does not understand  the meaning of justice and the fact that she thinks her verdict comes before the trial not the other way  around is very disturbing .This  may be inconvenient for her and other members of the cabinet and leadership (you know that old chestnut innocent till proven guilty ) but its a basic right, which I hope all backbencher and other democrats would all support. 
 
I am totally confident that her recommendation as they were made without any hearing of my case will be thrown out by the Regional Office.
It seems to me that the Labour Regional Office adding this to their own disquiet over the Zaffar Kalwala case, might end up mounting their own inquiry into Brent Labour Group and its leadership.



Let's pause and consider an alternative vision for education before the system imprisons us for another year

Children and teachers returned to school this week with both facing the narrow concept of education now embodied in the high stakes testing regime imposed by successive governments.

Before they and parents are captured by the system for another year I recommend viewing this Al Jazeera interview with Sir Ken Robinson. Wide ranging and at time very personal it gives much food for thought.

Another education system is possible.


Thursday, 3 September 2015

Cricklewood Green Space pulled from Monday's Barnet Committee Agenda

Following a request from Cllrs Shimon Ryde and Peter Zinkin (Conservatives, Childs Hill) Deputy Barnet Council Leader Daniel Thomas has announced that the item will no longer be discussed at Monday's Assets, Regeneration and Growth Committee.

This is likely to be a delay, rather than abandonment of the scheme.

One resident commented that this gave councillors more time to 'pretend to care', but protesters are likely to make the most of the delay to step up their campaign.

Meanwhile the proposal to build on the green space outside B&Q received front page treatment  today in the Brent and Kilburn Times.

See full story on Kilburn Times website LINK



UPDATED: Support Refugees Welcome Here National Day of Action September 12th

Please note now assembling at 12 and marching to Downing Street

National Day of Action, Called by Stand up to Racism, BARAC, Stop the War Coalition, Migrant Rights Network

This event has been called in response to various reports of refugees fleeing war, persecution, torture and poverty losing their lives or struggling to find a safe haven. This includes the death of 200 refugees off the coast of Libya, around 70 refugees in a truck in Austria and on going reports of refugees drowning crossing the Mediterranean, stranded in Hungary and prohibited from moving around the EU, and those in Calais struggling to find sanctuary.

The government response to this has been disgraceful. Unlike Germany, Italy and Greece, Britain has not offered a safe haven for these people.

On Mon
day 14 September Home Secretary Theresa May will be meeting with EU leaders about the refugee crisis. We must learn the lessons of history and call on the government to take a humanitarian and compassionate response to refugees.

We are calling on the British government to meet its share of the responsibility for providing protection. Let's send a strong message: we say refugees are welcome here.

We are also calling for a national day of action on Saturday 12 September, organise local events at places of worship or unveil a "Refugees Welcome Here" banner at football matches, use your imagination!

Join us on Saturday 12 September 2015 12 noon at Marble Arch anf marching to Downing Street, London FACEBOOK


Caroline Lucas writing in the Independent today LINK said:
 “The heart wrenching scenes we’re seeing– of children being washed up dead on beaches, of people being detained en masse on trains, of thousands upon thousands risking their lives to come to Europe – serve as a reminder of our duty to help those in peril however we can.

“We have the capacity to take more refugees in Britain, but the Government lacks the will to do what’s right. Indeed David Cameron’s reluctance to give a home to those in need is a damning indictment of his administration’s pernicious attitude to those fleeing atrocities in other countries. When our Prime Minister’s only real action of note is to fund higher fences in Calais, it’s clear he’s lost all perspective of the gravity of the situation.

Britain can and must do more – it’s time for the Government to wake up to the cruelty of its current stance and give many more refugees the chance to settle here.”
 

Wednesday, 2 September 2015

Natalie Bennett puts the Green Mayoral and Assembly Campaign in Context


MORE BRENT COUNCIL SCANDAL! Now they ban opposition motion seeking the truth

On top of the denial of a deputation to Philip Grant (see posting below) Brent Council has now advised that a  motion for Monday's Council Meeting from the Brent Conservative Group should not be moved or accepted as drafted:

This is the message received by Cllr John Warren: 

Dear Councillor Warren

I have reviewed the Motion selected by the Brent Conservative Group.  My advice would be that it is not appropriate for individual, current employees or former employees of the Council to be named in this context in a Council motion and that the Motion should not be moved or accepted as drafted.

Kind regards,  

Fiona Alderman Chief Legal Officer Chief Operating Officer’s Department
Wembley Matters won't be silenced so here is the motion:
This Council agrees to an independent inquiry into all aspects of the Rosemarie Clarke Employment Tribunal case.

This Council agrees that the inquiry shall commence at the conclusion of the Tribunal remedy hearing. We further agree that the inquiry costs shall be funded from reserves ,and that the new Chief Executive shall be charged with setting up the inquiry panel.

The new Chief Executive will have overall responsibility for setting the terms of reference, but this Council agrees that the following questions will be included in the terms of reference...........

1. What was the rationale behind the Council initially bringing disciplinary action against M/ s Clarke.... and was it fair and reasonable?

2.Why did the Council pursue this matter so vigorously through the Tribunal ......and was it fair and reasonable?

3. What part, if any, did this case figure in the departure of Fiona Ledden from Brent?

4.What part, if any, did this case figure in the departure of Cara Davani from Brent?

5. What were the financial arrangements behind Ms Davani ‘s departure from Brent, including any Brent  indemnity given to Ms Davani in respect of Tribunal costs awarded against her personally?

6. What part, if any, did this case figure in the departure of Christine Gilbert from Brent?

7. What part did Cllr. Butt play in this case throughout its course?

8. What were the total costs in this case.......and was it a fair and reasonable way to spend Council taxpayer monies?

This Council believes this  is an important independent inquiry, and that both Brent Council staff and Brent residents would support such an inquiry

BRENT SCANDAL: Cara Davani and Christine Gilbert – Yet another Deputation the Council won’t be allowed to hear! (or, “The Cover-up Continues”)

The cover-up at Brent Council is fast becoming a scandal and surely should at least be taken up by our local and London  press and TV. Here in a Guest Blog  Philip Grant shares the latest twist in the sordid tale:
 


In a guest blog last week LINK  I  let readers know that I had given notice to Brent’s Chief Legal Officer that I wished to present a Deputation to the Full Council meeting on 7 September. One element of that Deputation was to be asking, in open Council, for answers to the “two questions” I had put to Christine Gilbert on 9 July about the possible “pay off” by Brent to Cara Davani, its Director of HR until June 2015. 

I was promised a reply to my notice on Tuesday, but it actually came today, at 08:47am. In the interests of transparency, I am setting out the full text of the reply from the Chief Legal Officer, and my response to it:-




Dear Mr Grant

I apologise that I was not able to respond yesterday.

I have carefully considered the constituent parts of your deputation request and I have also considered it as a whole and in the context of your previous correspondence on related matters.

The purpose of the deputation procedure is to allow members of the public to address all Members of the Council in relation to Council services or policies etc. The deputation procedure is not intended to be used as a continuation of an on-going complaint or grievance about decisions made by the Council. Further, any attempt to use the deputation procedure in such a way would not be appropriate.

That being the case, it appears to me that your deputation is, in reality, a complaint about how the Council has handled your request for greater transparency. As you remain dissatisfied with the Council’s response to date, I will formally deal with this via our procedures in relation to the Freedom of Information Act 2000.  You will receive a formal response within 20 working days and thereafter you have a route for taking the matter further via the Internal Review process and, ultimately, the Information Commissioner.  This is the appropriate statutory procedure for pursuing your objectives and not the Council’s deputation procedure.

Neither would it be appropriate to use the deputation procedure to complain about the conduct of individual members of staff or other matters relating to their employment, irrespective of their seniority. Consideration of such matters at a Full Council meeting would not achieve your desired objective and would only undermine the obligation of trust and confidence that staff can reasonably expect of the Council as an employer and would be contrary to the Data Protection Act 1998.

Best wishes

Fiona Alderman
Chief Legal Officer, Chief Operating Officer’s Department

I replied to Ms Alderman at 11:03 this morning, as follows:

Dear Ms Alderman,

Thank you for your email this morning. I am disappointed that you have used your discretionary power under Standing Order 39(b) to prevent me from making my Deputation to Full Council on Monday 7 September. I believe you have mis-used that power, in part, at least, because you have allowed previous correspondence on one aspect of my proposed Deputation to cloud your judgement. 
I would ask you to reconsider your decision. Please let me know by close of business tomorrow, Thursday 3 September, whether you will allow my Deputation to go ahead, so that I have ample time to prepare my final text for it.

When the provision for Deputations was introduced into Brent’s Constitution by Full Council, at its meeting on 4 June 2014, the report from your predecessor, Fiona Ledden, said:
‘3.6 (ii) Deputations - It is proposed that Deputations by members of the public be included in the agenda. A maximum period of 15 minutes will be provided in total, with 5 minutes maximum being provided for each speaker. Criteria are established requiring that such deputations relate to a significant matter concerning the borough
 The title of my proposed Deputation is “The importance of high standards of conduct in carrying out the functions of Brent Council”, and it can hardly be claimed that this is not ‘a significant matter concerning the borough’. You are wrong to suggest that this is, ‘in reality’, just an attempt to pursue a single ‘complaint’. I first spoke publicly about concerns which I, and other residents, have had about the conduct of Senior Council Officers in a “soapbox slot” at the Kingsbury & Kenton “Brent Connects” forum in February 2014.
 
The timing of my request to make this Deputation now is because of the arrival of a new Chief Executive, Carolyn Downs, and the window this opens for improvements to be made. I accept that I am also taking the opportunity to use, as an example of the main point I wish to make, the failure by her predecessor to comply with her duty to show openness and accountability in response to my “two questions”. This gives the Council, and its new Chief Executive, the chance to re-commit to high standards of conduct, by answering those questions and by investigating, if necessary, whether there has been a misuse of Council funds.

You have referred several times to my continuing attempts to get answers over the possible “pay off” to Cara Davani as being a ‘complaint’. If I were making a complaint, I would have said so. Neither you nor Christine Gilbert has previously responded to my correspondence on this matter by saying that it would be treated as a complaint under the Council’s complaints procedures, so there is no reason why you should refer to it in that way now. 

Similarly, I see no reason why you should now treat my request for simple “yes” or “no” answers to two questions, which I first put to Brent’s interim Chief Executive on 9 July 2015, as a Freedom of Information Act request. If it was such a request, I would have said so. If you or Christine Gilbert saw it as such a request, then the 20 working days for a response to it has already passed! 

It is as if you have tried to find excuses not to accept my, perfectly valid, notice to make a Deputation to the Full Council meeting on 7 September, rather than accept, at face value, my request to bring a matter of real and serious concern publicly to the attention of the Council, so that it can be discussed and resolved. This matter has been “swept under the carpet” for too long, and it needs to be aired, so that it can be properly dealt with. Brent Council needs to deal with this stain from the past, so that it can move forward, and the arrival of a new Chief Executive is the ideal time to do that. 

I look forward to hearing from you. Best wishes,

Philip Grant.

On past experience, it is unlikely that I will be allowed to present my Deputation to the Full Council meeting at 7pm next Monday evening, 7 September. However, if “Wembley Matters” readers still support my efforts to get the “two questions” about a possible “pay off” to Cara Davani, I would ask again, please, that they email their Ward Councillors, as soon as possible, this time with copies to: chief.executive@brent.gov.uk  and fiona.alderman@brent.gov.uk , to say so. Thank you.