Should others be butting into the Brent Labour leadership contest?

The contest for the leadership of the Labour Group on Brent Council spilled over into the Planning Committee last night as tensions boiled over ahead of Saturday's decision.

Current indications are that the vote will be close.  I have been unable to substantiate suggestions that a third candidate has thrown her/his hat into the ring but discount a commenter's suggestion that Neil Hamilton is just the person to bring integrity back into Brent Council.

Michael Pavey has come in for criticism over his failure to support parents campaigning againsg the forced acadmeisation of Gladstone Primary and Copland High schools while there has been claim and counter-claim over the nature of his politics in reaction to his 'manifesto letter'. (See comments HERE)

Muhammed Butt has been criticised for his actions over pushing for the double Planning Committee this week and blamed for the resulting chaos, as well as ongoing criticism for his over-controlling behaviour in general.

Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have lobbed in a few bricks of their own with John Warren writing to the CEO and Paul Lorber to Jeremy Corbyn calling for action against Butt over the Facebook issue.

Former councillor Alison Hopkins has revealed that Cllr Butt made several attempts to join the the Liberal Democrats but Paul Lorber has not responded to a request to confirm the allegation.

These interventions could well cause some councillors to close ranks around Butt who has yet to issue his own manifesto for his continued leadership - or if he has, perhaps someone could pass it on.

Some have wanted this contest to be kept strictly an internal Labour Group affair and dislike public discussion such as has happened on this blog. This does raise an interesting question about the extent to which the public should have a view, or even a say, in who leads their Council. Afer all they will be at the receiving end of any change in policy as a result of the contest.

Controversial development around Wembley Stadium approved by Brent Planning Committee despite FA opposition

Julie Harrington speaks for the FA against Quintain's planning application


A depleted Brent planning Committee approved all 5 planning applications related to the Quintain (Texan company Lone Star) owned lands around  Wembley Stadium tonight. They include high rise housing, more hotels and more student accommodation.

The Committee was depleted because two councillors said they had been unable to read the huge number of documents (on paper and on-line) associated with each application after having read all the paper's for Monday's meeting earlier this week. Legal advice was that they should not attend.  Cllr Sarah Marquis, chair, was therefore absent and so was Cllr Patel.  Cllr Colacicco left before the final item leaving just 5 councillors making the decisions.

There was a battle on the main application between Quintain and the Football Association each drawing on their consultants' reports.  At one stage there were 4 people from Quintain occupying the speaker seats for deputations.

Julie Harrington made an impassioned speech on behalf of the Football Association. She stressed that they were a non-profit making organisation - everything got ploughed back into football. Unspoken was the fact that Quintain are very much a profit making organisation. Harrington stressed the threat of the development to the safety of fans and the FA's duty to preserve the status of the National Stadium.

Quintain relied on their experts to rebut the claims and emphasised how much their developments were benefiting Wembley.

Brent Planning Officers were challenged as to why a record of a meeting between the FA and Chris Whyte of Brent Council on community safety had not been submitted to the Committee and over officers' claim that TfL supported the application when in fact TfL had said there was much to be concerned about.

Generally the officers spoke in support of Quintain and minimised any issues.

When Cllr Stopp in his presentation remarked that he sometimes wondered why there was no Brent Cabinet member for Quintain it drew an angry response from Cllr Shafique Choudhary who accused him of bringing the upcoming Brent Labour Group AGM into the matter.

The Legal Officer (the same one who advised against Sarah Marquis' deferral motion on Monday, said it was unfortunate that Cllr Stopp had brought politics into the arena which the Planning Committee was strictly non-political (tell that to Cllr Butt who persuaded committee members, behind the chair's back, to hold two meetings this week before the AGM. Legal also intevened when Stopp said some councillors were not present because of the volume of documents that had to be read. She said 'I hope the public feel comfortable that members of the Committee present have read all the documentation.' There were cries of 'No!' from the public gallery.

To be fair there was some probing questioning from councillors, although some of it revealed they hadn't read all the papers. Issues around crowd management, safety of routes out of the stadium, penning in of fans, access to offices and homes on event days, the amount of affordable housing and the 7 year limit on some were all discussed.

I felt that the answers were not very convincing and wanted to urge the councillors to dig deeper. Instead they tended to pause and then say 'Thank you' very politely. The Planning Officer rushed through his answers at high speed which tended to leave councillors looking a bit bewildered, pausing and then another murmered 'Thank you'.

An attempt by Cllr Maurice (Conservative)  to defer the final application ignoted by Cllr Agha who was chaiting and not put to the vote.  In the event Maurice voted against each application and Lia Colacicco (Labour) abstained on each except the last where she was absent.

That left Cllrs Agha, Choudhart, Ezeajughi and Mahmood (all Labour) voting through the applications.

Although an attempt may be made to bring the two sides togather Brent Planning Officers said that could not be a condition of granting the application.

There is a possibility that the FA will appeal.

Sarah Marquis absent from tonight's planning meeting

Sarah Marquis, Chair of Brent Planning Committee has sent her apologies to tonight's meeting. No reason was given. Cllr Agha is in the chair and Cllr Patel is also absent. This means that tonight's decision on the controversial Wembley Masterplan development will be made by just six people.

I have now heard that they are absent on legal advice because they have not had time to read ALL the enormous documentation attached to the applications to be heard tonight.

We must presume that the six present have read it all...

Posted with Blogsy

Brent Council rejects Wembley Stadium/FA request for more time to consider tonight's planning application

From Supplementary report tabled for tonight's Planning Committee Meeting LINK

Additional letter received from Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners (NLP) on behalf of WNSL / The FA

NLP have specified that a significant amount of new information was submitted to Brent Council by the applicant on 9 May, only 48 hours before committee, including specialist responses on noise, transport and planning issues. They specify that WNSL as well as Brent Council need further time to review the detail submitted that appears to relate to the impact on the operation and safety of Wembley Stadium.

Information has been submitted to the Council. This information has been submitted by the applicant as a rebuttal to the letters submitted by WNSL and their consultants. It does not provide new information. The Council’s consideration of the proposal is based on the information originally submitted to support the information together with Appendix K which was submitted subsequently, with further consultation carried out.

The submission of the rebuttal letters is not considered to trigger the requirement for additional consultation.

Officers recommend tonight's Quintain decision handed to Head of Planning + Football Supporters objections

May 2011, before the UEFA Champions League Final between Barcelona and Manchester United (Photo Philip Grant)

Tonight's Planning Commitee and the battle between Quintain/Brent Council and the Football Association/Wembley Stadium/Football Supporters has hit the Evening stndard headlines tonight LINK.

Meanwhile Planning Officers appear to have changed their Recommendation through a recent published Supplementary Report which hands over decision making from the Committee to the Head of Planning (I am not sure if there is one at present).  This seems to undermine the democratic involvement of councillors in  such a massive multi-million development.

Recommendation in original report:

To resolve to grant planning permission, subject to the Stage 2 referral to the Mayor of London and subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and to delegate authority to the Head of Planning or other duly authorised person to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Chief Legal Officer, subject to the conditions set out in the Draft Decision Notice.

Recommendation in supplementary report:

To delegate authority to the Head of Planning or other duly authorised person to grant permission, subject to the Stage 2 referral to the Mayor of London and subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and to delegate authority to the Head of Planning or other duly authorised person to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Chief Legal Officer, and subject to the conditions set out in the Draft Decision Notice, an additional condition regarding design standards and amendments to conditions 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 19, 22, 26, 29 and 36 as discussed above.

The Football Supporters Federation have also objected to the planning application:

 

Football Supporters’ Federation opposition to planned redevelopment around Wembley Stadium

The Football Supporters’ Federation (FSF) represents more than 500,000 football supporters, with our membership comprising both individual fans and organised supporter groups for clubs across England and Wales. The FSF’s role is to ensure that the collective voice of football fans is heard on important issues and our members are always keen to engage in our work. Our recent campaigns have included our successful work to secure lower ticket prices for away fans in the Premier League, opposing The FA Chairman’s recent “B-team” proposal, and campaigning to enhance the diversity of football crowds.

I am writing to you today to ask you to oppose the recent planning applications for redevelopment around Wembley stadium (15/5550 and 15/5615) as implementing these proposals as they stand will have a hugely detrimental effect on supporters at Wembley Stadium.

For many fans, coming to Wembley Stadium to support their club in The FA Cup semi-finals or final, the League Cup final or the Football League Play-Offs is a once in a life-time opportunity and one that remains hugely special to the millions of people who have enjoyed seeing their teams play at the national stadium. In addition, hundreds of thousands of fans of the England national team also come together for matches at Wembley.

Of course the fans’ experience of Wembley is based on much more than the outcome of the game itself and the whole match day experience from beginning to end is important to football fans.

We are concerned that the planning proposals submitted for the redevelopment around Wembley have been created without football supporters in mind. We understand that the current proposals will mean that supporters would need to queue for over two hours to exit the new multi-storey car park, and that the proposals for the new coach park would see fans leaving the stadium in an anti- clockwise route and then joining the back of the queue towards the south of the stadium before being allowed back to the Carey’s/VDC coach park. Supporters would be held at the south of the stadium after the match before they are allowed to get back to their coaches.

These plans mean that there will be significant delays for fans when arriving at and leaving the stadium. Meanwhile, queuing or grouping fans together at best will create a poor experience for fans and at worst could lead to public order problems. We also have concerns for the safety of fans leaving the stadium and accessing the coach park at VDC/Carey’s, in particular as the current proposals will lead to conflict between pedestrians and vehicles, something which we feel is not acceptable.

Football fans appear to have been completely forgotten in creating these new proposals which would ruin supporters’ experience of Wembley and surely endanger the prospects of Wembley attracting world-class events in the future.

We recommend that the Council rejects the planning applications and works with supporters, Wembley and the developers to create a solution which ensures that Wembley Stadium retains its status as a world-class sporting venue.

Yours sincerely,

Kevin Miles
Chief Executive
The Football Supporters’ Federation

London Councils calls for academy conversion cash to be used to level up school funding

London Councils' Executive member for children, skills and employment Cllr Peter John OBE has responded to the recent government announcement on academisation. He said:

Revoking the decision to force all schools to become academies is great news for London’s schools. They can now focus on improving their already enviable results at Key Stage 2 and GCSE, working in partnership with boroughs, parents and central government to offer London’s children the best quality education possible.

Money set aside to help schools convert – said to be around £500 million – should now be used to level up funding across the country, ensuring no child is disadvantaged by the introduction of a new national funding formula.

'Dear Mo and Michael' please confirm your promise on Preston Community Library

https://www.flickr.com//photos/saveprestonlibrary/show/

Preston Community Library have called on Muhammed Butt and Michael Pavey, contenders for the leadership of the Brent Labour Group, and thus of the Council to stand by their promise on the future of their library:

Dear Mo, Dear Michael,

I hope you are both well. You were both present at our public meeting on 7 May 2014 at which Brent Labour Party made a very clear election promise to offer the Preston Library building "at a peppercorn rent to any local group who can provide a sustainable community library........that is our pledge". That promise is the reason why we have invested thousands of hours and many thousands of pounds in creating Preston Community Library.

In recent weeks we have become concerned about that promise. In particular, we noticed that a member of the Cabinet referred to the possibility of housing being built on that site - something never mentioned at the time of the last election.

Can you please confirm that if, this time next week, you are the Leader of Brent Council, you will honour that very clear election promise to support a library in Carlton Avenue East?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Philip Bromberg,
Chair, Preston Community Library

FA to challenge Quintain to preserve Wembley Stadium's iconic status at Planning Committee tonight

 The Football Association are expected to speak at tonight's Brent Planning Committee on the massive planning application for the area around Wembley Station. They have been support by  Clive Beets MP.

Clive Betts MP has written in relation to the proposal following conversations that he had with the Football Association about the proposed developments adjacent to Wembley Stadium. This letter seeks reassurance regarding the potential impact of the development on fans being able to get away from Wembley at the end of the games, about facilities for people with disabilities and about the potential for fans to be held back in “holding pens” at the end of the game. 

According to the analysis undertaken by the FA, the development could add two hours before fans can get out of the car park onto the roads leading away from the stadium. This amount of time is unreasonable and unacceptable, and could lead to reputational damage to Wembley Stadium, the FA and English Football and therefore an adverse effect on Brent Council. 

The FA have advised that fans with disabilities would take an extra 40 minutes on top of the two hours to get away from the parking facilities that are proposed, which may be a contravention of the Disability Discrimination legislation. It is presumed that an equalities impact assessment will be undertaken. 

The FA has also advised that, because of changes to the flow of supporters necessitated by the proposed development, it would be necessary to hold some fans in an area for a period of time after the game had finished. This is a throwback to the problems football had 30 years ago where away fans were held for long periods of time after the games, with football fans effectively criminalised and held behind in certain areas. This would be a disaster both for the image of football, the image of the national stadium and the Council.

Letter of objection from the FA

A letter was received from Martin Glen, Chief Executive of the FA raising issues which are summarised as follows:

The proposals which look to develop high rise blocks close to the stadium will severely damage the iconic view and status of the Stadium. 


Whilst regeneration is vital, it needs to be balanced with Brent’s and the FA’s duty to protect the spirit of what is a great venue. 


Wembley is a part of a national identity and positive celebrations of this should not merely be unhindered, but enhanced. 


The aim of the FA’s objection is to retain the visual power of the stadium to help stimulate every aspect of life in Brent, retaining the emotional response Sir Norman Foster intended for the stadium. 


If the Stadium is to continue to hold a special place in fans’ hearts, it needs to continue to provide a world class experience. All regeneration plans must place supporters at the heart of every day and that development need to ensure their safety and free movement. 


Currently the development does not do this. The parking options and pedestrian and traffic flow are not adequate and need to be reconsidered to ensure Wembley Stadium remains the best venue in the World.