Revealed-the true extent and cost of fly-tipping in Brent

The Local Government Association has published an analysis LINK of the extent and cost of fly-tipping in different local authorities. They are careful to point out difficulties in terms of making direct comparisons between authorities (1) but it makes for interesting reading and shows what a huge challenge the issue is here in Brent and across the country. Whether the higher bulk collection fee LINK Brent has introduced from September will worsen the problem remains to be seen.

On the tables below the comparison is with the mean for London local authorities, excluding the City of London. The site is interactive so if you visit you can select other comparisons.

(1) This data is from the collection "ENV24 Fly-tipping incidents and actions taken", published by the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Fly-tipping statistics are taken from the WasteDataFlow database.

Fly-tipping is the illegal deposit of waste on land, contrary to Section 33(1)(a) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Local authorities and the Environment Agency both have a responsibility in respect of illegally deposited waste. This includes local authorities and the Environment Agency collecting and reporting data on fly-tipping in their area, this dataset however, only includes LA collected data. Due to varying levels of estimation between councils and years, some caution is needed in the interpretation of the trends. Direct comparison between local authorities may also not be appropriate as there can be some differences in approach, where there is a level of discretion in using the guidance on reporting. The situation is complex and can be influenced by population density, housing stock, demographics, commuter routes, the rigour with which local authorities identify incidents or encourage the public to report incidents, training of street crews, and increased used of more sophisticated methods for capturing and reporting incidents. Therefore, in assessing the figures local authorities should not be classified as 'good' or 'poor' performers based purely on numbers of fly-tips.

UPDATE Gladstone Park trees: Brent claims only the dead, dying, diseased or dangerous are felled

Brent Council has responded to Green Party candidate Shaka Lish's concerns LINK about the large number of trees recently felled in Gladstone Park with this statement:

We do not remove trees that are healthy and do not threaten to undermine property or threaten personal safety, staff and visitors. The trees that have been removed were dead, dying, diseased or considered to be dangerous and threatening to cause harm to persons or property. The most recent tree to be felled was near the railway line, it had failed at its base and would have fallen across the railway line if left. The trees are inspected by Arborists prior to being felled, unless it is an emergency then Health & Safety comes first.

The Council did not say if the trees are to be replaced.

This is Shaka's response:

Who are the Aborists making these decisions? Is this a new company that Brent is using? It is apparent to many users of the park that in recent times there is a lot of felling taking place, more than has happened in the past. Has your health and safety policy been updated? Changed? The two trees that have recently been cut down were perfectly healthy, there was nothing wrong with them at all. So can you specifically explain to me why they were felled? Here's an inserted picture of one of the trees in the height of Autumn, looking perfectly healthy.

Also, more importantly, I would like to know, as a Brent Green party candidate, campaigner and member, are you keeping a record of the number of trees that are being cut down and do you plan to replace them?

These trees are our heritage and our history. Some are hundreds of years old. They are our natural allies in our fight against pollution and they contribute to our health and wellbeing. They are beautiful and majestic to look at and be around. Brent seems to be cutting down these trees with no thought to these important benefits. Do you have any idea how heartbreaking it is to see these grand trees cut down in this way? I am not alone in feeling this way and I will make sure that it is publicly and widely known the actions that Brent is taking and win support to make sure this violence against our trees is properly accountable and justified.

Now the government hands Quintain £76m loan

Housing Minister Alok Sharma and Quintain's Head of Communications Harriet Park

 Hard on the heels of Brent Council's decision LINK to spend £17.6m of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on public realm infrastructure in the Quintain development comes news that the UK government is to loan Quintain £76m to provide infrastructure for its Wembley development.

Quintain, owned by Dallas based private equity company Lone Star LINK seems to be doing quite well from both local and national government.

Announcing the loan, housing minister Alok Sharma said: “Developments like Wembley Park are a great example of…boosting the choice and quality of homes on the market.” Sharma also promised to relax planning regulations to allow more such schemes.
 
Quintain Chief Executive Angus Dodd, said: “This £65m government loan will be match funded by Quintain to provide a £130m infrastructure investment into Wembley Park to deliver new car and coach parking, an energy centre and the first phase of the new seven-acre public park. Not only will this funding allow these critical elements to be brought forward, it will also support the more rapid delivery of new homes.”

The new homes in question are 7,600 new flats of which 6,800 will be for private rent. It is the UK's biggest development of homes built specifically for private rent. These homes will not be affordable for Wembley residents earning the average local income.

Brent Council introduces £35 charge for bulky waste collections & gives tips on how to avoid the charge

From the Brent Council website

Residents are being called upon to offer their old white goods and furniture to charities and others through online web communities in a bid to help those in need - and avoid the cost of a collection of bulky items.

From September, collection charges in Brent for large items such as sofas, beds and washing machines will be brought into line with those of neighbouring boroughs and Brent Council is keen for its residents to avoid paying out unnecessarily for a collection.

“It doesn’t make any sense to pay someone to get rid of something, that someone else in your local community would gladly take off you for nothing,” Cllr Eleanor Southwood, Brent Council’s Cabinet Member for the Environment, said.

“Online web communities such as Freecycle and Freegle and several auctioneering sites are becoming more and more popular and they are a great way to link up people in need of certain items that can’t afford to buy new, with those who need to get rid.

“We have heard how people have used these sites to get rid of everything from an old piano, drawers, wardrobes, beds, electronic equipment, baby buggies through to empty paint pots, so it’s true that one person’s junk is another’s treasure.

“Charity shops too are interested in what you might be off-loading and many offer a collection service for furniture, so it may be worth a call to them in the first instance to see if you can support a worthy cause.

“Of course, it may be the case that your item can’t be used by the charities and Freecycle users, so if you are unable to take it to the Abbey Road recycling centre yourself, you may wish to order a special collection.”

Bulky waste collections with private companies start at around £50 and increase in price depending on the weight of the items collected, however Brent Council offers up to five bulky items collected at price of £35.

Neighbouring Harrow also charges £35 but for four items, Ealing charges £40 for eight items, Barnet charges £45 for one electrical item and Hounslow charges £50 for five items. Only Camden is cheaper than Brent, with up to five items collected for £25.

Cuts to local council budgets have led Brent and other local authorities to find new ways to cover the cost of providing a bulky waste collection service, however exceptions will be made for the most hard-pressed residents as eligible benefit claimants will not be charged for a one-off collection.

Cllr Southwood added:

“Like anything in life it would be great if the service was free for everyone, but year-on-year cuts to our budget from central government mean that’s just not a possibility.

“The good news though is that if you can’t donate, sell or give away your items, then at £35 this is a really competitively priced service which helps keep it sustainable and offers Brent residents great value for money.”

Give it away and save

Charities

Most charity shops love to take things off you that you no longer need. If you have trouble finding a shop willing to take a large item, try the British Heart Foundation's free furniture and electrical collection service.

Online sites and web communities

• Freecycle – the original platform for helping match up those in need of certain items, with those who want rid.
• Freegle – Around 17,000 people in Brent are using Freegle to give away and make use of items that are no longer needed by some people.
• Gumtree – Online classified adverts to pass on your no longer needed items.
• Facebook – Now featuring local buy and sell groups to sell or giveaway items with no fees.
• eBay – Buy and sell items on the well-known online auctioning site.
• Preloved - The popular classified site features a Freeloved section, letting you pick up things for free. While it's free to advertise your wares, users pay £5/year to get first dibs on the latest freebies.
• SnaffleUp - While still relatively small, SnaffleUp's modern design means it's easy to browse for freebies.
• Re-cycle - A charity that isn’t able to collect unwanted bicycles, but can take them off you at several drop off points for them to be reused in developing countries in Africa.

Know of any others? Let us know and we’ll update this web page.

Save money

If your bulky item can’t be re-used and you need a special collection, then why not ask if your neighbours if they have anything to get rid of at the same time, so that you can split the cost of collecting the five items with them?

No to privatisation of public assets - StopHDV latest

From StopHDV

A Judicial Review of the Haringey Development (Demolition) Vehicle  is being filed in the High Court this week on the grounds of it not having been consulted on, never having gone to a full Council, equalities impact not having been adequately considered, and on the risk to public finances not being made transparent or explained. There was a successful crowdfunding campaign which along with local collections and donations has raised  £25,000 towards legal costs. The last update on this is HERE

The campaign is a broad coalition of forces including both constituency Labour parties, LibDems, Greens, trades unions, community organisations, residents and leaseholders associations. Despite this the ‘red Tory’ Labour Cabinet led by Claire Kober, who also is chair of London Councils, are determined to go ahead with the £2 Billion transfer of the local authority’s Council estates, land and property including over 500 business units to a partnership with Lendlease. We believe however they cannot sign any contracts while this in legal dispute and a hearing could be any time through the autumn.

September is a critical month in linking this — the biggest attempted privatisation of local authority assets in UK history — with the various similar attempts at social cleansing and depriving ordinary people of their rights to housing across London in favour of corporate developer-led ‘’regeneration’’. We are aware particularly of what Lendlease has done in Southwark, of the Cressingham Gardens campaign in Lambeth, and of new developments in Tower Hamlets, and possibly Camden, and in most cases in Labour-controlled authorities. We wish to mobilise with groups such as the Radical Housing Network, ASH, Defend Council Housing, those demanding justice for Grenfell in K and C, and others to build a fightback across London sufficient to turn the tide against these ‘’regenerations’’ which are attacking the very lives of our communities.
StopHDV is calling a march on Saturday 23 September in Haringey which will have key speakers from elsewhere as well as local and we want as many as possible from across the capital to join. First details below:

The plan so far is to assemble on Saturday 23rd September at around noon at Tottenham Green (150 yards up the hill from Seven Sisters Tube station), then march from 1pm to assemble around 2.30 - 3  at Finsbury Park.  The route should take us past Seven Sisters up West Green Road along Green Lanes to Finsbury Park. Depending on consent from the authorities, we may have to reverse the route and start at Finsbury Park.

Finsbury Park is close to two tube stations (Manor House and Finsbury Park.). It is also where Haringey, Hackney and Islington meet and not far from the Camden borders. No local Spurs match that day  (they'll be playing at Wembley) and no Arsenal one either, so no congestion on transport from football crowds.  

The start and end points should make it fairly easy for most of London to get to and from. It just needs building across London. Please tell your contacts!
More information HERE

Wembley: How it feels to live on a multi-building site

Guest post by Wembley resident Jaine Lunn
 

A normal day in the life of one Wembley Central resident.

Thank god for a very rainy day, Wednesday 2^nd August 2017.

 At least it keeps all the dust and fumes down from the numerous developments under construction or demolition within 500 metres of my home.

 No birdsong, lack of trees I guess, just numerous HGV’s back and forth fromeight building sites.  Parking wherever they can, engines running, irrespective of pavements or pedestrians, off loading, collecting and delivering skips, and all manner of toxic waste.  Air Quality? What’s that? Brent Council concerned about doing something about it – er I doubt it, well certainly not for the next few years, maybe in 2021 when most of these developments will have been completed.

Cotterell House, Formerly unused and home to Blue Rooms Restaurant	Wembley Hill Road Currently under demolition	55 Residential, 6/8/10 storeys
Mahatma Gandi House Former Brent Council Housing Offices	Wembley Hill Road Under demolition	198 Residential 10 & 21 storeys
South West Lands (Quintain) Area around Chiltern Cutting and South Way	South Way Under construction	800+ Residential Up to 19 storeys
Brent House Former One Stop Shop for most council services	Wembley High Road Under demolition	248 Residential Various sizes no more than 13 storeys = to Elizabeth House
Jenga Court Converted office block	Wembley High Road under construction	34 Residential 6 Storeys
Lanmor House Converted office block	Wembley High Road Under construction	36 Residential 6 storeys
Ark Elvin Academy Former Coplands School	To rear of Wembley High Road Under construction
Chesterfield House Former Brent Council	Wembley High Road and Park Lane	239 Residential units 21 and 26 storeys
8 total in progress		Total 1,610 Units

Jenga Court and Lanmor House were granted planning permission under permitted development so Brent Council had no say in what was being built or size of flats etc, and could not demand amenity space, storage or reduce existing car parking provison.

In actually reading Wembley Calling and Wembley Master Plan regeneration etc etc:

How many of these developments meet the 25% stated for 3 bed+ homes desperately needed in this area?

How many have allowed 10% for disabled use?

How many meet the minimum requirements of amenity space and storage for the amount of residents that will inhabit these properties?

As many of these buildings will be “Car Free Developments” ……we all know what that old chestnut means.  Where will all these people park their cars?  Wembley is already at astronomic proportions of gridlock during peak hours on a normal day, let alone Event days. 

Buses and Trains are heaving with people on a daily basis.  TfL need to have a re-think of how they are going to deliver public transport in this area when its population is expanding at a phenomenal rate.

Whilst I accept that Wembley is one of the best locations for service by Public Transport with its numerous train stations and buses, in its present form it does not provide the kind of service that makes people want to give up their cars. Many of my neighbours who live in the CPZ and all have permits to park, need their vehicles to get to work.  Many work unsociable hours at Heathrow Airport or in companies providing 24 hour services/logistics often starting between 3.00 and 5.00 am when public transport is not available to get them to their destinations, or bring them home past midnight, only to find out they cannot park as the CPZ ends at 6.30 p.m. creating a “free for all” if you can find a space that is.

GJA: Time to get angry about air pollution

From the Greener Jobs Alliance

The Greener Jobs Alliance gives a response to the Government Air Pollution Plan published in July 2017 and identifies how union and community activists can respond.

No one can say that the Government hasn’t been given a chance to get this right. We’ve had 3 court cases since 2011 all pointing out that the UK is in breach of its legal duty. In May 2017 a consultation document where the overwhelming response was that more needs to be done. Finally, on July 26th, we got the publication of ‘The UK plan for tackling roadside nitrogen dioxide emissions’. LINK


Not surprisingly the ‘plan’ has been panned for failing to tackle this public health emergency. By not adequately addressing what should be done now, rather than in 23 years time, the Government has condemned thousands of people to a premature death. Advocating a ban on petrol and diesel vehicles by 2040 is all well and good, but we needed a clear framework for the urgent implementation of clean air zones before 2020. Other shortcomings are highlighted in articles published following the launch of the report.

Five things you need to know about Gove's air pollution plans - Energy Desk

FoE Latest on Air Quality Plan

The government's air pollution plan is a beautiful smokescreen - Guardian Environment

We agree with Client Earth’s James Thornton’s observation that “it is little more than a shabby rewrite of the previous draft plans and is underwhelming and lacking in urgency. Having promised to make air quality a top priority, Michael Gove appears to have fallen at the first hurdle.”

What happened to the ‘polluter pays principle’?

The Greener Jobs Alliance called for specific duties to be placed on businesses. In our submission to the consultation, we pointed out that ‘There should be a legal duty on large businesses to carry out an emissions assessment. For example, a single employer may be responsible for generating thousands of vehicle movements every day by their staff and suppliers. They need to provide evidence that they have a transport policy in place to bring their emissions down within clear time limits’. 

  It is part of a system that fails to make oil, gas and coal companies face up to the wider social costs inflicted by their products. In fact, they end up getting massive subsidies. For example, earlier this year files were leaked showing £4.9 billion provided to fossil fuel firms in export finance by the government since 2010. LINK


Far from setting out any obligations on employers, the Government plan advocates the exact opposite. We are told in Para 47 that ‘The UK government is clear that any action to improve air quality must not be done at the expense of local businesses’. So much for the principle of the polluter pays. Most air pollution is generated by work-related activities and yet the individual and the state pick up the bill. The need for a focus on employer’s responsibilities makes it even more important that trades unions start to get serious about air pollution. This is a workplace issue and must be treated as such.

Mandatory Clean Air Zones needed

Defra’s own evidence makes it clear that charge zones are the most effective way to tackle pollution. Yet local authorities don’t have to produce plans until December 2018. Implementation could take much longer and cash strapped councils will find it hard to comply. A campaign is needed urgently to turn CAZs that charge or ban dirty vehicles from a last resort to a first resort measure. They must be coordinated and funded by central government. This is a national public health crisis and requires a national response. Who should pay for this? Large businesses that fail to show effective measures for reducing their distribution/supply and travel emissions.

What should trade unions do?

Union members measure air pollution outside and inside the workplace

Currently, the UCU is the only union with national policy on tackling air pollution. Every union needs to draw up plans for involving their safety reps in making this an occupational health priority. Indoor and outdoor pollution are often linked. Toxic air kills whether a worker is exposed inside or outside a building. It is also an area that lends itself to cross union engagement through trades union councils linking up at a city and regional level with community activists. Unions also need to get involved in consultations over the introduction and implementation of Clean Air Zones. In addition to London, there are 28 other local authorities in England that are required to take local action in ’the shortest possible time’. These are referenced on Page 31 of the report. Unions need to check this list and prioritise how they will respond.

Additional night time fire patrols at Forum House, Wembley Park

FirstPort, the property services company for Forum House at Wembley Park have issued the following advice to leaseholders and residents:

Fire Safety and ACM Cladding on part of Forum House

The following information has been issued to keep you fully abreast of the current position in respect of the building in the unlikely event of a fire at the property.

Following the tragedy at Grenfell Tower we have carried out some reviews of the building that we manage, in line with Government (DCLG) advice.

Through this review it has been established that some of the trim on the roof section and parts of the facia of The North Core (above the reception) are partially clad in a silver aluminium cladding material which is referred to as ACM. This relates to a small proportion of the building façade and at this juncture should not give rise to undue concern albeit that we are considering the options and actions open to us.

On receiving this information we contacted the Fire and Rescue Services and also notified the building’s insurers to establish if any immediate action was required. Initial findings are that no immediate action is necessary.

You may have heard it reported that the Government has produced an updated document, setting out fresh guidelines for testing procedure/s. This includes testing the entire cladding system and not just the exterior cladding material.
This is important as the systems behind this cladded facia can be key to the structure’s performance in the event of a fire, and the nature of this system can differ significantly from building to building.

As a result we need to consider the further guidance provided from these results before we can definitively conclude if any action or replacement is to be required on Forum House.

In the interim we pro-actively invited the Fire Brigade to carry out an inspection of the building in order to ascertain if there was anything further we can do to enhance fire safety at Forum House. Thankfully they were happy with the processes and strategy we have in place and were satisfied that we operate the development correctly and efficiently in terms of fire safety.

Nevertheless, taking into account the guidance issued by the Fire Brigade at other affected comparable buildings, we have instructed additional patrols of the building by the onsite staff during the night time and I can confirm that these have begun. These will stay in place until further notice.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind you all that a “stay put” policy is in operation at Forum House in the unlikely event of a fire. Homes and developments such as Forum House are built with fire compartmentation, which is designed to resist the passage of fire between the walls and doors giving ample time for the fire services to arrive.

In this way, the fire service are given plenty of time to assess risks and ensure that, if needed, any evacuation is managed in a safe and orderly fashion.

In addition, the communal corridors and escape passages at Forum House are equipped with smoke ventilation systems to improve conditions for means of escape and fire-fighting by limiting obscuration and toxicity in the common escape routes. These systems are tested regularly and in line with manufacturers recommendations.

We understand that there may be concerns around the “stay put” policy at this time. The following remains the guidance from the London Fire Brigade:

“If there is a fire inside your apartment leave, closing the door behind you and call 999. If there is a fire elsewhere in the building, and not inside your own apartment their advice is to stay put. The Fire Service will carry out an evacuation of the other apartments if necessary.”

Further information can be found on http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/staying-in-or-going- out.asp.

We also ask that residents ensure they remove anything that is combustible on their balconies. This is of course a stipulation in your lease but as is apparent from walking around the building there are a number of residents that continue to breach this lease requirement. Barbeques and storing items other than small garden furniture are examples of such breaches. In light of the above, we would ask that you comply with this instruction as a matter of urgency.

Fire safety should be at the forefront of everyone’s mind, and to that end please ensure you are comfortable with the fire procedures, know where the nearest fire exit is and make sure the smoke alarms in your apartment are tested regularly and replaced every 10 years. It is also good practice to close all your apartment’s internal doors when you go to bed at night.

We will advise if any specific action or change is needed and we will continue to keep you updated in relation to this matter. Meanwhile, we will also continue to track any findings or new guidelines and take the appropriate actions.

Finally, should you have any further general questions or queries we would in the first instance refer you to the enclosed statement and guidance relating to fire safety. However, should you have any questions that are not answered by this document then please do not hesitate to contact us.