NUT: Our Prevent concerns are raised to ensure the best possible system to protect children

The National Union of Teachers has issued the following statement from Kevin Courtney, Deputy General Secretary, after the Daily Telegraph accused the union of 'colluding in undermining the Prevent Strategy' LINK: 

Keeping children safe is a central concern of teachers and the NUT. The union opposes any attempt by any organisation to exploit children and young people. We do however have some concerns about the operation and training for the Prevent strategy which could undermine its aims. In particular there is a worry that some children may feel unable to speak in class discussions.

Our concerns, alongside many other organisations, are raised in order to ensure  that the best possible system is in place to protect young people and society.  To stop rational debate about Prevent is in the interest of no one. It is only through discussion with the profession that we will get this right in our schools.

Green Party 'Proudly stand alongside' Plane Stupid activists found guilty today

Sian Berry, Green Party candidate for London Mayor reacts to the news

 The Green Party of England and Wales has issued a statement in support of a group of environmental activists called the Heathrow 13 who were found guilty today of “aggravated trespass” and told to expect prison sentences.

Green Party deputy leader, Shahrar Ali, who attended a demonstration in solidarity with the Heathrow 13 outside the court on the trial’s first day, said:

I am deeply disappointed by the irony of this judgement. The Judge finds the Heathrow 13 guilty of Aggravated Trespass and their actions in need of punishment. Yet alongside the support shown for them beyond the courtroom her acknowledgement that the campaigners are ‘principled’ demonstrates the legitimacy of their cause.

Bigger airports make no climate sense. The UK cannot make its contribution to cutting carbon emissions while expanding airports and increasing emissions from aviation. Greens applaud the determination of the Heathrow 13 for standing up for increased numbers of residents who will suffer enormously from increasing noise and air pollution if expansion gets the go-ahead at any London airport.

We proudly stand alongside these activists who had the courage and foresight to stand up for the well-being of not just today's citizens but tomorrow's, too.

The Green Party 2015 Autumn Conference passed the following resolution:

Plane Stupid activists occupied Heathrow Airport on 13 July 2015, less than two weeks after the Airports Commission recommended a new runway at Heathrow. Heathrow Airport is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions. The science confirms that greenhouse gases must be dramatically reduced from present levels to tackle climate change. In addition, Heathrow Airport is a major cause of illegal and deadly levels of air pollution in London. Local residents also suffer serious health impacts as a result of noise pollution and sleep disturbance.

Conference instructs GPEX to include and publicise an item on the Green Party website supporting the 13 Plane Stupid climate activists who on 13 July 2015 took non violent direct action at Heathrow Airport. Their trial is from 18 - 29 January 2016 at Willesden Magistrates Court.
 

Plane Stupid Heathrow demonstrators found guilty and told to expect custodial sentences

From Get West London LINK

A group of 13 Plane Stupid campaigners who caused 25 flight cancellations after breaking in to Heathrow Airport 's north runway have been found guilty today of aggravated trespass and entering a security restricted area.

The seven men and six women cut a hole in a fence and chained themselves to railings on the north runway, beginning at around 3.30am on July 13 2015.

As the verdict was read out, one defendant shouted: "This is a farce!", as other gasped in disbelief.
District Judge Wright has told defendants they can expect jail sentences for their actions.

During their three-day trial at Willesden Magistrates' Court, defendants told of how they carried out the pre-planned action in order to 'save lives', using the defence of necessity.

The protesters claimed their actions were necessary and reasonable in order to reduce carbon emissions and halt climate change.

The court previously heard how Graham Edward James Thompson, 42, of Durlston Road, Hackney and a press officer for Greenpeace, explained that he was “compelled by his conscience” to take action that day.

Mr McGhee, prosecuting, said: “Why do you feel that your conscience entitles you to break the law?”
To which Mr Thompson replied: “In the context of this situation, breaking the law was not the most serious issue at hand.”

The 13 defendants all pleaded not guilty at Uxbridge Magistrates Court on August 19 2015.

'Traditionally Submissive' Muslim Women Hit Back at David Cameron

When is a decision not a decision? Smoke and mirrors at Brent Council

Early days of the campaign to Save the Queensbury

 Guest blog by Ian Elliott

A property developer bought The Queensbury pub in Willesden Green almost four years ago and lodged a plan to build a 10 storey tower block in its place. Save The Queensbury was formed and we convinced Brent Council's planning department to reject the plans. We then represented ourselves at a five day public inquiry when the developer appealed, unsuccessfully and the Inspector spoke highly of the merits of the existing building.

From the start we believed that the building, in a conservation area, should have been protected by being added to Brent's "local list" of buildings. The problem is, we have been left completely confused as to who takes a decision as to what buildings are on the list and have now been stonewalled by decision-makers at Brent Council.

Back in 2012 we were told that there were no plans to review Brent's list, which contains buildings as diverse as the State Ballroom in Kilburn to the bandstand in Queens Park.

In June 2014 a mysterious report appear on Brent's website, rightly adding Kensal Rise library to the list but claiming that The Queensbury had been reviewed but would not be added. Naturally this was a blow so we asked for the assessment to be made public. Brent refused to publish the assessment so we complained to Brent's Chief Executive and asked for this to be looked at by a senior officer, away from those close to the decision. 

Instead we had a reply giving Brent a clean bill of health - from a manager in the same department who we wanted to be investigated as failing to consult with residents. (Bear in mind also that officers in planning have twice recommended that the pub be demolished, in spite of local opposition). Weird, eh?

Fast forward to summer 2015 and Brent consulted on a review of the local list and we, along with dozens of residents, asked for The Queensbury to be listed. Cllr Margaret McLennan, Brent Council’s lead member for housing and development, said: “This consultation is a chance for residents to have their say on the pieces of Brent’s fantastic heritage that are most important to them. I would encourage people to go online and nominate their favourite site of historical interest to be considered for inclusion on the Local List.” So we did.

We thought we were making progress when a report emerged, adding The Queensbury to the local list, later 2015. A decision was promised, in December 2015, but an email from Brent Council reveals that a decision not to proceed was apparently taken by Brent's Cabinet.

We asked for the minutes of that decision, given that it was on a Cabinet agenda for December. No response. No agenda. No minutes. Hang on.... this is getting weirder. Where's the transparency?

The Chair of planning then tells us that a "Policy Coordination Group" would a review the Cabinet decision but that's left us mystified. Of all the 30+ groups and committees listed on Brent's Democracy site, the PCG is not one. So we asked again, only to hear that the Lead Councillor (i.e. the one inviting us to participate in this democracy) will no longer comment or email us on this matter.

At the turn of 2015 we put in a Freedom of Information request to try and clear the smoke around Brent's mysterious PCG and hopefully find out precisely who took a decision not to add The Queensbury (again) and on what basis. 

In law, Brent have to respond to an FoI request, by the first week of February.

We will wait and see if we get transparency and minutes from the mystery PCG. Or at least an explanation as to why The Queensbury was not added, again. Without this, the popular and viable pub in a beautiful conservation area remains vulnerable to demolition.

Scrap the £35k threshold for non-EU citizens settling in the UK

There are so many on-line petitions around these days that I often don't sign them favouring other forms oif political action instead.  I think this one is really important as it not not only tackles someething that is manifestly unfair but will also impact on public services, especially health.

In April (2016) the Home Office and Theresa May are introducing a pay threshold for people to remain here, after already working here for 5 years. This only affects non-EU citizens who earn under £35,000 a year, which unfairly discriminates against charity workers, nurses, students and others.

This ridiculous measure is only going to affect 40,000 people who have already been living and working in the UK for 5 years, contributing to our culture and economy. It will drive more workers from the NHS and people from their families. This empty gesture will barely affect the immigration statistics. It's a waste of time, money and lives.

This is the first time the UK has discriminated against low-earners. £35k is an unreasonably high threshold. The UK will lose thousands of skilled workers.

Sign the petition to the UK Government and Parliament HERE

Meeting with London MPs as education funding cuts threaten London boroughs

The government's intention to move to a National Funding Formula for education and an overall freeze on spending despite rising pupil numbers and increased staffing costs means that London boroughs, including Brent, will face funding cuts in the near future.
Camden NUT has organised a meeting at Portcullis House on February 3rd to which they have invoted Tulip Siddiq MP, who also represents three Brent wards. Keir Starmer has already said he will attend and it would be good if Dawn Butler and Barry Gardiner also committed themselves to listen to the concerns. Brent could face a cut of 8.6% by 2019-20  and subsequent loss of jobs in schools.

This is the invitation letter:

London schools face unprecedented cuts over the next few years. In the Autumn Statement, George Osborne announced that education funding would be frozen despite a significant increase in student numbers and the introduction of a national funding formula. 

If the plans for a national funding formula advocated by many MPs and the f40 group are enacted this  will mean pupils in London schools will have the spending on their education cut dramatically, as  these changes coincide with other cuts in education spending and schools having to pay higher pension and national insurance contributions. 

These changes will be felt most acutely in the most deprived boroughs; however, funding is at risk in every London borough. 

 Overall funding for London schools could be cut by 13% over the next four years.  Schools have never faced cuts of this size before. Education spending has only been cut twice before in the mid-80s and the mid-90s by 4% and 3% respectively. The scale of these cuts will drag schools back to funding levels last seen in the 1990s.  There is a very effective and influential campaign advocating redistributing funding from London and other metropolitan boroughs largely to the shires as a way for those areas to deal with cuts to the education budget. We believe that we need a similarly effec tive campaign to argue that funding should be protected overall; that a national funding formula should properly recognise the true cost of educating large numbers of children from deprived backgrounds; and that the transition to a national funding formula should not force London schools to make significant cuts. 

We have arranged an initial planning meeting for local stakeholders with London MPs in Room R. Portcullis House at 5:30pm on Wednesday 3^rd February.

This is how the new formula would impact on schools in the London Borough of Brent LINK:

Current Individual School Budget 2015-16 £220,485,342
Current Individual School Budget if F40 revised formula applied £217,958,912
F40 budget adjusted for schools inflation 2-19-20 (Source IFS): £206,611,993
Overall budget reduction: £18,873,349
Spending per pupil 2015-16:  £5,371
Spending per pupil 2019-20:  £4,573 (cut of 8.6%)
Loss of teaching jobs 174 (cut of 7%)
Lost of teaching assistant jobs 349 (cut of 27%)

Other London boroughs are even worse off.
  
 Full documentation here: LINK

Brent Central MP and CLP oppose Overground ticket office closures

The proposed closure of Overground ticket offices on the Brent section of the line LINK has been opposed by Brent Central Constituency Labour Party:

Brent Central CLP calls on the London Mayoral Candidate, London Assembly Members and Brent Councillors to oppose Transport for London's proposed ticket office closures, and to ensure that they are properly staffed during opening hours. We congratulate the RMT on their campaign to oppose the proposed ticket office closures, and resolve to support their planned industrial action over the introduction of the Night Tube.

Brent Central MP Dawn Butler has put down an EDM (Early Day Motion) that has been supported by Gareth Thomas MP (Harrow West) and 15 others opposing the closures LINK.

That this House notes that London TravelWatch is required to consult on London Underground's [actually London Overground] proposal to close station ticket offices at Gunnersbury, Harlesden, Harrow and Wealdstone, Kensal Green, Kenton, Kew Gardens, North Wembley, Queen's Park, Stonebridge Park, South Kenton and Wembley Central; is concerned that the proposals are being bought forward despite many of these stations experiencing large increases in passenger numbers; opposes the closure of those stations on the basis that passengers, especially visitors and the elderly or disabled, would not be able to access the full range of tickets and services they need from a ticket machine, would find it harder to obtain advice on ticket and fare options, would suffer delays to their travel due to insufficient numbers of replacement ticket machines, would experience a more congested concourse, would be less confident using a ticket machine and could end up overspending, would be deterred from travel due to the lower staffing levels, and would be travelling on a network which is less safe with CCTV monitored less frequently; and therefore believes that these Tube ticket offices should be kept open.