Parkinson's sufferer Hakeem M Haleem granted limited right to remain after campaign

Following a petition signed by nearly 23,000 people and lobbying of the Home Office Hakeem Muhammad Haleem has been granted limited right to remain without recourse to public funds.  Hakeen suffered from vascular dementia, Parkinson’s disease, heart problems, angina, diabetes, vision limited to one eye, and of very poor quality, and has in the past had a stroke. There was no one to care for him except his son and daughter-in-law. The Home Office wished to deport him to Pakistan.

Today Mehwish Nadeem wrote to supporters:

Right in time for Christmas's Day and New Year, we have been told by the Home Office that the original refusal of leave to remain has been reconsidered in light of the fresh evidence provided and that “subject to final security checks and enrolment of biometrics, Hakeem M Haleem will be granted limited leave to remain without recourse to public funds.”

This is a wonderful result and *THANK YOU* for all your vital and overwhelming support empowering this campaign. Every single one of your messages and comments have meant the world to M Nadeem and Haleem, we are all grateful beyond words.

We will now be planning to already present this Petition LINK to the Government urging them to change this law which has caused M Nadeem and Haleem and so many others like them, such heartache and suffering.

When we told Haleem of the Home Office decision to grant his leave to remain, he said through tears:

I feel like a weight has been lifted off me. I want to thank everyone who has supported me and God bless them all. It has made such a tremendous difference to me. It’s too wonderful.

His daughter in law, M Nadeem, thanked us all and added: “Words cannot explain how I am feeling. I am overwhelmed. It is the best Christmas's Day & New Year present we could have hoped for.”

As Haleem's M N, I think what this amazing campaign has shown is that family values have won after a long battle. The unequivocal strength of sentiment expressed by all of you, shows that the public does not support Immigration Rules which do not allow family members to care for and look after their vulnerable relatives. We are now hoping that the Government is listening to you and will reverse the change to the current Adult Dependent Relative Rule.

For now, let's all celebrate this amazing joint effort without which, Haleem and M Nadeem would never have achieved the best Christmas's Day and new year gift of their lives.

We still need your support to allow him British Nationality.

Thank you,

Mehwish Nadeem

Green 'jobs of peace' could replace Trident jobs claims new report

Green MEP for the South West, Molly Scott Cato, is to launch a new report tomorrow looking at how jobs linked to Trident can be converted into green jobs

The report explores how the current 2000 or so Trident-related jobs in Plymouth could be replaced within the emerging local ‘green’ economy, while making use of existing local skills and facilities.

Speaking ahead of the launch Dr Scott Cato said:

Some people, including some Trade Unions, argue that the UK’s Trident nuclear weapons system helps sustain thousands of high-quality jobs in the UK, including in Plymouth in my South West constituency. But this report blows that argument clean out of the water. For far less public money, we
could invest in socially productive employment to replace Trident-related jobs.

We can abandon Trident replacement while maintaining employment but start transferring investment and skills into socially useful and sustainable jobs, making use of all the fantastic skills and resources available at Devonport.

Trident is militarily useless, immoral, and is a breach of our obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Creating new green jobs can be viewed as an act of peace; nuclear defence is an industry of war.

The full report will be published on November 16th.

Brent Council recommended to bring housing management in-house

BHP's King's Drive Estate, Wembley

Brent Council is set to bring its housing management back in house if a recommendation going before Cabinet is approved. The issue brought tenants and leaseholders out in force at a recent Scrutiny Committee LINK.

They were determined to make the case for tenant involvement in any new arrangement and that any in-house arrangement be superior to that which existed before housing management was allocated to Brent Housing Partnership (BHP), an arms-length organisation.

Three options were considered - an enhanced BHP, in-house and a partnership arrangement. 

The report states:

In light of the evaluation it is concluded that the In-house option offers the best prospect of achieving the service transformation to deliver high-quality services at significantly reduced costs, benefitting from the Council’s wider experience in doing so in recent years. Accordingly, this report recommends to Cabinet that the In-house option be the preferred option. If agreed consultation will then be undertaken with all tenants and leaseholders and the results of this will be reported to Cabinet for a final decision.

2. Recommendations

That Cabinet:

 2.1  Agree that the preferred option for future housing management service provision to the Council’s tenants and leaseholders is Option 2, an In-house service, subject to consultation; 


2.2  Authorise officers to undertake consultation with Council tenants and leaseholders on the preferred option as set out in paragraph 2.1 and to then provide a further report to Cabinet on the responses to that consultation to inform a final decision on future housing management service arrangements.


 2.3  Instructs officers to report further on appropriate arrangements to provide for effective oversight and scrutiny by members and residents of the housing management service should the final decision be that the service be provided in-house. 


 

Brent won't revise Council Tax Support Scheme despite 3.99% CT rise in 2017-18

Brent Council Tax Support caseload

A report LINK going before the next Brent Cabinet recommends that the Council Tax Support Scheme should not be revised to support vulnerable residents despite another expected 3.99% rise in the tax in 2017-18.

The report points out the impact of the Universal Credit Scheme:

The greatest potential impact upon the future level of Brent CTS expenditure arises from Universal Credit (UC) roll-out. This is because the existing Brent CTS scheme provides for a maximum CTS entitlement of 80% of Council Tax liability where a claimant is in receipt of certain benefits  including Universal Credit. Tax Credits, which are to be incorporated within Universal Credit in the future, are currently subject to a means test for CTS purposes and consequently generally result in a lower level of CTS award than the 80% referred to above for Universal Credit claimants. 

Consequently, when recipients of Working Tax Credit transfer to Universal Credit, they will, under the current CTS scheme arrangements, become eligible for the maximum 80% CTS entitlement rather than the lower level of award that they would currently get as a consequence of the means test applied. The pace and timing of UC roll out is set by the Government and is currently available only to single jobseekers making new claims in Brent although it includes couples and families in some other parts of the country. 

If Brent Council were to revise the scheme the changes would have to be be made by Full Council by January 31st 2017.

Hope for Granville Plus Nursery and Granville Kitchen in new Cabinet Report

The Granville Plus purpose built extension - will it survive?

 A new Cabinet report going before the Brent Cabinet on November 15th gives some seeds of hope for those campaigning for the Granville Nursery Plus, Otherwise Club and the Granville Kitchen. LINK

The report admits that there was a negative public reaction to the proposals for the Carlton and Granville Centres:

Key feedback from the consultation and through officer meetings has been that the community has been upset that there has been a lack of consultation prior to the 25 July 2016 report and that they were not presented with options for the site. It should be noted that the 25 July 2016 Cabinet paper was focused on meeting timescales in order to adhere to a tight timescale for the Greater London Authority (GLA) funding (described below). There has been upset that the occupiers were not engaged and that the services which are being delivered were not understood by the Council. There was a large response that would not wish to see the buildings being demolished and for the current facilities to stay within the buildings. The current occupiers, whilst also wishing the building not to be demolished, would be amenable to development as long as they stayed on the site. 



Phase one would be the refurbishment and reconfiguration of the Granville Centre to allow an Enterprise Hub to be established.

Phase 2 would require further consultation and a £1m fee for design and consultancies. Decisions on the plans will be delegated long-term to Richard Barrett, head of South Kilburn Regeneration. The report appears to show that the officers have listened to the concerns of campaigners as put forward on this blog LINK  LINK  LINK but of course there is many a slip 'twixt the cup and lip.

• The work of the design team will also include proactive consultation and engagement with affected stakeholders, service users and residents with protected characteristics such as:  
•  the diverse group of children, the majority of whom are from BAME backgrounds and with English as a second language, attending the Nursery School and Barnardo’s operated Children’s Centre and their parents/families 
• SEND children and service users with disabilities 
 
•   Residents, elderly and economically disadvantaged groups who use the Granville Kitchen and Otherwise Club*

Although is must be remembered that proposals are subject to consultation, discussion with various bodies and a Cabinet decision next year the report outline what they anticipate:

The Council is seeking to review options for Phase2 in light of the consultation provided within this report. The Council would seek to engage with a Design Team to take forward a review of the options for the site and to conduct in-depth engagement with the local community. The Council would envisage that the site would still deliver an Enterprise Hub, Education/Community Space and Housing, with the priorities being: to secure a permanent enterprise hub, to secure the future of the Nursery School, to secure the future of the Barnardo’s operated Children’s Centre (within the South Kilburn area although not necessarily on this site) and to secure the future of the Granville Kitchen and Otherwise Club as being incorporated into the Enterprise Hub space. 


The Council would seek that a Nursery School would remain on site, though the location within the site may change as part of a redevelopment. One important aspect to note in regard to the Nursery School is the importance placed on the external area which, in an urban area such as South Kilburn where a number of the children can be expected to live in flats with no external play area, provides a safe environment for them to explore; it is also an integral part of the educational aspect of the Nursery School therefore the re- provision of suitable external space, if this area is to be utilised in any redevelopment, will be highlighted in the specification provided to the appointed team. 


The Council would anticipate that the Granville Kitchen and the Otherwise Club would integrate within the Enterprise Hub space. The Council would envisage that a Children’s Centre would continue to be operated within the South Kilburn area, but that this may not necessarily be from the Carlton and Granville Centres Site, though the intention at this time is that it would stay on this site until more detailed options are examined. 


Brent Start is due to leave the Carlton Centre in 2017 as they are developing their own property strategy which will see them reduce their permanent physical presence whilst maintaining their offer to residents and a more detailed separate report will be brought to Members in due course to outline this strategy. However for the purposes of this report it is believed reasonable to presume that a future Brent Start function operating within this site is not envisaged beyond mid-2017. As the Concorde Café does appear to be linked with Brent Start, when Brent Start vacates the Carlton Centre, officers would need to consider if the café can continue to operate and it may not be suitable to accommodate this on site. In the longer term the Council would need to consider if a café function is appropriate in this building, especially as a new café is proposed as part of the “Peel” site. Therefore officers will need to enter into discussions with Concorde Café regarding the future of their operation post vacation by Brent Start. 


*The Otherwise Cub is a resource centre for Home Educator families.

Obama failed on Guantanamo - what next for the campaign to close it?

From Brent Stop the War

  Brent Trades Hall (London Apollo Club) 375 High Rd, Willesden, NW10 2JR

  Monday, November 14^th at 7.30pm

Speaker: Noel Hamel (London Guantanamo Campaign) One of the campaign promises of Barack Obama, when he became President, was to close the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. He leaves office in January and the Camp remains open. Why? What can we do to close it?

Brent SOS join libraries demonstration in Central London

Some of the Green Party contingent

Writer and broadcaster Michael Rosen addresses the crowd

Sian Berry holds up the Green Party's demands (Photo: Sarah Cox)

March for libraries, museums and galleries from Ian Clark on Vimeo.

Brent Library campaigners were among 2000-3000 people who joined yesterday's march in protest against 'culture cuts' to libraries, museums and galleries. Some cuts come as funding cuts or closures others through the backdoor as out-sourcing and privatisation.

Brent Council closed six of its twelve libraries in the first round of local government austerity cuts. Of the six here are now volunteer libraries at Barham, Preston and Kensal Rise and Cricklewood is on its way.

Neasden Library is particularly missed serving a poor area with many children, as is Tokyngton in Cllr Butt's ward.

In her speech Sian Berry, Green Party Assembly member,  praised library volunteers (she is one too) who had fought to keep library facilities open. She acknowledged it was hard work and would be unnecessary if we had a properly resourced, professionally staffed, comprehensive system.

The rally was addressed by Barnet library staff who were on strike on Saturday. The crowd were warned that cuts and closures, if they had not already arrived, were 'coming to a library near you'.

Amidst widespread disquiet Green Left calls for review of Green Party decision not to stand in Richmond Park by-election

Caroline Lucas's tweet last night

Green Left, the eco-socialist current within the Green Party, of which I am chair, issued the following statement this afternoon:

Green Left calls for a review of the decision not to stand in Richmond Park leaving voters a choice of candidates from parties with a record of supporting austerity and not seriously aiming to tackle climate change by opposing all airport expansion.

Green Left supports a full meeting of all members in the Richmond Park Constituency  with all members invited, to reconsider  the decision not to stand  a Green candidate  in the forthcoming by-election given issues relating to party democracy.

The statement follows debate within Green Left discussion lists and on many Green Party facebook pages. It is important to note that the disquiet is not limited to Green Left and has been expressed by a broad spectrum of members.

Mike Shaugnessy has published a full  account on the London Green Left blog HERE so I will make a few brief points:

ISSUES RELATING TO PARTY DEMOCRACY

1. Local parties are autonomous in the Green Party and it is up to them to make decisions on standing in elections or by-elections. It is not a decision of the national leadership. In this case two local parties cover the constituency and after a meeting of the Richmond Party the existing Green candidate after discussion decided to stand down in order to promote the Liberal Democrat candidate who has more chance of defeating UKIP-backed Zac Goldsmith. Her statement can be read HERE.  However in this case Jonathan Bartley co-leader, was present, by prior invitation, at the Richmond Party meeting that discussed the by-election and Caroline Lucas the other co-leader was at the Kingston meeting. There are allegations that voices were raised at the Kingston meeting which was less amenable to standing down, although a majority reluctantly went along with it following the Richmond decision.  It is further alleged that the Green Party Executive Election Co-ordinator, a former co-ordinator of the Richmond and Twickenham Green Party (she has since moved elsewhere), also made her views known to her former party. The Green Left call seeks to address these issues which may have put the local parties under unjustified pressure.

This is the notice put out for a meeting on Tuesday November 8th in Richmond Park (Details)

2. A wider discussion has taken place about the changing nature of the Green Party leadership. Our  leadership is constitutionally different to other parties. In the Green Party policy decisions are made by the members after thorough discussion on web forums, workshops at conference and finally debate and voting on the conference floor. The Progressive Alliance policy, passionately pursued by Lucas-Bartley, has not had as thorough debate as it merited. Some members fear that in their dedication to the Progressive Alliance cause, reinforced by participation in the think-tank Compass,the leadership are dragging the membership along in their wake.  In between conferences the leaders have the party's philosophical basis as a guide as well as our (probably too many) detailed policies. There is a political committee that advises in between conferences that is consulted on current issues - however 'things move fast; cannot justify wide-reaching fundamental policy changes however well meant.

ISSUES RELATING TO STANDING IN THE BY-ELECTION

3. The case for standing down is that this is a chance to reduce the Conservative majority in the House of Commons by electing the Liberal Democrat. This would be an example of the Progressive Alliance in practice which would help a more anti-Tory alliance at the General Election in 2020. The argument against is that the Liberal Democrats helped create the austerity strategy that we are still fighting and which has done so much damage to to society. The Liberal Democrat candidate herself has few progressive credentials and has supported Nick Clegg's praise for the Lib Dem role in the Coalition Government.  More widely many Greens do not accept that Lib Dems are 'left' - they may share some more libertarian stances on social issues with the Green Party but on the economy they are still wedded to neoliberalism.

4. No other party is opposed to ALL airport expansions on the grounds of air pollution and air travel's contribution to climate change. This by-election with an electorate sympathetic to environmental issues, one of which has dogged them for decades, is a fantastic opportunity to put Green Party policies on the environment, especially on the overwhelming issues of climate change, as well as those on social justice issues, centre stage.  An opportunity that will be thrown away if Greens do not stand.

5. The idea of not standing, but to continue campaigning on these issues, will make little sense to the electorate. The elector, on the doorstep, patiently listening to an earnest Green party campaigner, explaining why they are not standing, is likely to be perplexed if not apoplectic.

THE DIRECTION OF THE GREEN PARTY

6. I am an eco-socialist because I believe that climate change is the greatest issue facing us and furthermore one that cannot be solved within the present economic system which is powered by consumerism. In turn consumerism necessitates increased production and thus more emissions of harmful green gases and the plundering of the planet's finite resources. For the survival of the planet. and human, animal and plant species we need an entirely different economic and social structure.

7. We are not going to solve those problems merely by electoral means, surrendering all that urgency and campaigning, to machinations to get proportional representation introduced in 2002. Yet the Green Party has moved to electoralism as its main focus to the detriment of campaigning. In fact the campaigns (non election) has been cut to zero so you will look in vain for new Green Party placards on marches such as yesterday's on libraries.   As someone remarked in discussions over the weekend we will end up knocking on doors without any 'in-between elections' activity to talk about except campaigning for electoral alliances.  Of course a political party seeks power but it is also a campaigning organisation. Interestingly this reflects some of the current debate within the Labour Party.

IS CORBYN THE ANSWER?

8. I think this is addressed by 6 above. Even under Corbyn, Labour is still fixated on economic growth which has all the drawbacks I have mentioned.  On issues such as proportional representation and climate change John McDonnell may be ahead of Corbyn but the growth issue remains.  There may be areas in which there can be future co-operation such as socially useful production replacing weapons manufacture on the Lucas model but that seems far away at present.  Labour's nomination of Christian Wolmar to fight the Richmond Park by-election is a clever move with some arguing that he is 'as green as a Labour Party member can be without being a member of the Green Party' - but that is attached to an individual rather than to Labour Party policy.

9. None of this means that a progressive alliance, preferably a progressive socialist alliance,  could not be formed and make a significant impact on the General Election. On day to day issues, especially those such as housing, workers' rights, welfare reform, the NHS,  support for the public sector, we have much in common with Corbyn's Labour but still need to keep our unique identity and policies without getting submerged.

GREEN LEFT POLICY ON ELECTORAL ALLIANCE

Green Left welcomes the move to discuss campaigning and electoral alliances leading up to the next General Election.

Green Left has always promoted the idea of working together with the left, where we share values, and that, as much as possible the Green Party should be included in this, lending support to and endorsing Eco-socialists who are members of other parties. We did this by supporting Salma Yaqoob in parliamentary elections.

This needs further discussion with members and we welcome consultations, about it, taking place.

Green Left members with our positive standing amongst others on the Left are able to positively engage people outside the GPEW who share our values and therefore should take the initiative locally in promoting discussions with individuals, progressive groups and other left parties, such as the Jeremy Corbyn led Labour Party.

Any left alliance must be committed to introducing PR for all future elections and the 'Best Placed Left Candidate’ should be a consideration in marginal seats.