UNMISSABLE! Grunwick Mural unveiling Saturday at noon

From Grunwick40
 

We're looking forward to welcoming you tomorrow and revealing not just one mural to commemorate the Grunwick strike but two! 

As you come out of Dollis Hill tube station at the Chapter Road exit you'll be greeted by dhol players and some of the former strikers, and it's here that we'll unveil the first mural just after 12pm. We'll be standing directly outside the former factory, on the same pavement that the strikers and their supporters stood on 40 years ago. 

They'll then lead us in a short procession up Dudden Hill Lane (a 5 minute walk) to the site of the second mural - which is a huuuuge 28 metres long! After this is revealed we'll take another 7 minute walk back down the hill to the offices of Brent Mencap (379-381 High Road, NW10 2JR) for a short reception.

The view from the pavement outside Grunwick 40 years ago

 

Now Duffy asks about missing councillor and 'jollies' from developers

This is part 2 of Cllr Duffy's correspondence with Cllr James Allie who will be chairing the Standards Committee tonight:

Dear James , 

Here is part two of my concerns please ensure the co-opted member are given a copy. Also if you are not the person or committee who deals with these issues please pass them on to the CEO with the questions as a FOI .

(A) Committee attendance 

James as a member of  the Labour group you are  probably aware that I have been left off committees for the past two years. You maybe also be aware that I won an election to be on scrutiny committee but was then removed and was not placed on any committee whatsoever this year. This is in-spite of the fact that attendance at committee meetings is very  low and the recommendation from the Penn report concerning the death of CIIr Oladapo (Tayo) said under 2.

What, if any, improvements the Council should implement"

(i)consideration should be given as to whether every member of the Council should sit on a sub- committee or committee as well as Full Council to improve the potential for attendance and thereby avoid the possibility of breaching the six months rule. This could also obviate the current practice of using the substitution arrangements to enable members to avoid breaching the six months rule". 

I know you have witnessed the exchange of emails between the Labour Party chief whip Cllr Kabir and myself about this issue of me being removed from all committees. Therefore you can imagine my surprise when just before full council meeting on  last Monday! Cllr  Kabir told me that she had put me on the Licensing committee replacing another councillor, without asking my permission or my availability .I informed Cllr Kabir that I would not stand as I believe it was just cover-up to hide the fact a councillor had moved out of Brent sometime previous  and she was not willing to attend any more meetings than the bare minimum. I also told Cllr Kabir I was not good enough  for the leadership to nominate me for any committee meetings in May,  therefore what had changed by September.

I was at the time and subsequently concerned that the Labour leadership are not being transparent to residents  that  I am being brought into a deception without my knowledge. Also in the Penn report it said "consideration should be given to the way in which ‘apologies for absence’ are managed. Currently there is no requirement for the member concerned to tender their apologies directly or personally as these can be tendered on their behalf by another member or an officer". 
I am concerned that the apologies are being managed by the Chief whip in a blanket fashion and do not relate absences due to illness or any other reason , just the unwillingness of a councillor  to travel to Brent.I  wonder if under standards you would be willing to start an investigation into 

(1) When did the councillor leave Brent?

(2) Was the CEO and the Head of Legal informed ?

(3) If not why not ?

(4) Did the CEO and HOL give any advice?

(B) Hospitality 

As you know there has been a  successful planning application for Tottenham Hotspurs to play at Wembley , many people suggested Tottenham got a good deal  and many local Cllrs objected to the conditions. I have been informed by  a member of the public  both the Leader of the council Cllr Butt and lead member for Regeneration and planning Cllr Tatler have received hospitality from Tottenham since the planning permission was granted. Whereas I have some understanding that we need to keep relations open with the Wembley and their tenant Tottenham,  However I  do not understand why the lead member for planning should participate in hospitality as this could seemingly bring  the planning system into disrepute , therefore I ask you to ensure both these councillors  and any others who have participated in Hospitality declare  the reasons why they were offered hospitality and did they check it with the CEO,before excepting also if you could enquire 

(1) How many tickets were received and value.

(2) Who attended the matches with them.

(3) Reason  for the hospitality ( sometimes its OK to look at an issue of say crowd control ,traffic management, or a new street cleansing practise. However  receiving hospitality should not just be for a "Jolly Boys outing@ for them and their family that is not acceptable)

(4) Can you also enquire whether any other Councillors , Officers or relative have received hospitally from Tottenham or Wembley stadium.

In my experience its best to keep clear of hospitality from developers as ' When you dance with a developer, its always to their tune". I hope you see that a declaration alone without reason is not enough, what we must consider is what the average man /women in the street would think, that is why I ask you to look at the issue.

Cllr Duffy asks Standards Committee to defer his item to allow independent input

Cllr John Duffy, subject of a report going to Standards Committee tonight LINK, has requested that members refer back the report to allow independent input into the matter.

This is his email to Cllr Allie, cahir of the committee.

Dear James , 

I was not informed of this meeting and only read about it on Wembley Matter on the 22^nd September. No doubt the CEO and the head of legal will say I was told six months ago this would be referred to the next meeting, however it is up to you to decide, whether it would be reasonable for CEO to inform me of the date of that meeting once it has been fixed.  

Anyway I am unable to attend tonight for personal reasons. Can you pass this email on to the co-oped members.

Let  me first point out there is no independent input into the report and I refused to accept that officers can come to a decision on selective emails and therefore I refuse to co-operate unless someone who was not on the officers “payroll” was involved.

Let me get things right and state why I believe the CEO was wrong  to leave Brent  to sit on operation Gold. I believe operation GOLD, was a complete waste of time,it's not my opinion it's the opinion of many  people.I strongly believe that quangos very seldom solve problems and I believe I have a right to voice that, as we live in a democracy.

In the aftermath of the disaster I believe the Ministers were wrong to set up a quangos of CEOs as many of the victims believed senior officers were responsible for not listening to them. What was needed were operation teams with hands on experience of logistics  and how to deal with problems that would arise from Re -Housing, Social Services , Bereavement counselling, Food distribution etc. CEO could play a role by nominating their best officers and put them into the field with resources.The ministers view that we need more Chiefs instead of Indians was proven wrong. 

The following day I went down to South Kilburn  and identified two blocks I believe were of concern, George and Swift House and raised it with the CEO during the next few days neither the CEO, the lead member for housing Cllr Harbi, the lead member for Regeneration Cllr Tatler appeared in South Kilburn, even though they were aware of SK  close proximity to Grenfell and the  fabric of the buildings was similar.

The officers on site did a sterling job on ensuring all survey were carried out.I also recognised that the Leader and Deputy Leader and the MP Tulip Siddiq (who chaired a very well received meeting) turned up to reassure residents.

However the CEO's decision not to support a emergency meeting was in my opinion wrong. It was clear the meeting may have been difficult as many resident needed to vent their  anger and frustration.

The CEO had a number of options of how to respond to the request from the 5 Councillors,Cllr Chan and Cllr Hector requested a meeting via all councillor email which included the Mayor.  

She could have supported the meeting and assist the members who were calling for a meeting to get passed, or to ignore those members of the council and use the bureaucratic tactics to ensure it did not take place. The CEO then compounded the issue saying a meeting would take place but the residents would be barred and the meeting would last no -longer than a ½ hour.I believe the later decision was  the worst decisionand an affront to the democratic process 

I believe the CEO was wrong so I am releasing some of the private emails LINK between the CEO and myself and other officers,which may explain what was going on at the time,means from the bottom-up.

I do have respect for the CEO and I believe she is very competent, however she is not infallible and on this occasion I believe she made a mistake on this occasion.

Overall I believe Brent officers did well following the Grenfell disaster. Therefore I think the CEO should concentrate on where we agree not where we disagree. 

I would ask committee members to refer the report back to allow independent input into the report.

I have other things I wish to raise with the standards  which I will send you later to today before the meeting .

The emails Cllr Duffy refers to can be found on his blog Kilburn Calling HERE

Join the Ecosocialist Network

Following my posting of the Naomi Klein speech at the Labour Conference I thought that some readers may be interested in this initiative.

Ecosocialist Network on Facebook LINK

Local Democracy Week events in Brent

From Anne Kittappa, Brent Local Democracy Week

This year, Local Democracy Week begins on Monday 09 October. The events that I think you might be particularly interested in are:

All About Brent Question Time

Wednesday 11 October, 7-9pm, Brent Civic Centre

This annual event follows the BBC Question Time format. Jonathan Carr-West from the Local Government Information Unit will return to chair. The panel will be comprised of:

·         The Leader of the Council 

·         Leader of the opposition

·         Dean Simon, a social media personality known as Rants n Bants and local resident

·         Yasmin Hai – Author, producer, and former resident with a strong local connection

If you would like to submit a question for this event, please email Localdemocracyweek@brent.gov.uk, or call me on 020 8937 6060, or tweet @Brent_Council using #qtbrent

To book your place, either book online: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/all-about-brent-question-time-tickets-37653433433

 

Or contact me directly.

Scrutiny Cafés

We are holding three cafes, one for each committee, to talk about topics which the scrutiny committees are going to look at in detail this year. Come and join us for a cup of tea and a chat.

Housing

Topics: rent setting for council housing, housing associations quality of service, reviewing how housing complaints are handled, and applying new rules on tackling homelessness.

Date: Wednesday 11 October

When: 3-5pm

Where: Willesden Green Library

Who: Cllr Janice Long

Community Wellbeing:

Topics: adult social care, children’s services, public health, cultural services and the work of the NHS in Brent

Date: Tuesday 10 October

When: 11-1pm

Where: Costa Coffee, Wembley Central Square

Who: Cllr Ketan Sheth

Public Realm and Resources:

Topics: Regeneration in South Kilburn and Wembley, welfare and benefits, what it’s like to contact and deal with the council, the council budget, recycling rates in Brent, employment support and closure of job centres in Kilburn and Willesden, crime and antisocial behaviour, and how the council engages with residents.

Date: Monday 09 October

When: 10-12noon

Where: St Laurence Larder - Christ Church, Christchurch Avenue, NW6 7BG

Who: Cllr Matt Kelcher

If you would like to book a place, please contact me by email, Localdemocracyweek@brent.gov.uk, or call me on 020 8937 6060

Other events taking place throughout the week, include, Be a Councillor event, the Great Youth debate, Councillors visits to schools, video poetry, and Brent Youth Parliament radio station takeover. For more information about these events, please visit our website, https://www.brent.gov.uk/ldw or email or call me.

Be a Councillor

Saturday 14 October 2017, 10:00am Brent Civic Centre
Are you passionate about your local area? Are there local issues that you feel need to be raised and addressed by the council? Why not consider becoming a councillor?

Most councillors are put forward for election by their political parties, but independent candidates are also just as eligible to stand for election to represent their local area.

This session is for anyone who may consider standing in the May 2018 council elections to find out what you need to do to get your name on the ballot paper, what being a councillor involves and what support is in place to help you carry out your duties once elected.

Book your place today!

 

Why Labour should support electoral reform and how the environment could benefit

Make Votes Matter fringe at the Labour Party Conference this week

The Green Party came up against a solid brick wall at the General Election when it tried to get agreement with the Labour Party and Liberal Democrats for a 'Progressive' (Electoral) Alliance which involved a commitment to campaign for electoral reform in exchange for the other parties standing down in favour of the party best placed to defeat the Tory candidate. In the event neither the Lib Dems nor Labour made the commitment although Greens did stand down in a number of seats.

Some Labour MPs made individual commitments on PR and a number of them spoke at the Make Votes Matter/Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform fringe meeting at the Labour Party Conference. Locally Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Kilburn) has supported proportional representation.

Coinciding with Conference the two organisations published a well researched paper making the case for the Labour Party to adopt electoral reform as policy. The paper has the non-snappy title The Many Not the Few Proportional Representation and Labour in the 21st Century. On line copy here LINK.

This is an extract from the paper addressing the issue of environmental policy:

-->

The evidence

Studies have found that countries using proportional systems
 set stricter environmental policies and were faster to ratify the Kyoto protocol. On environmental performance, Lijphart and Orellana found
that countries with PR scored 
six points higher on the Yale Environmental Performance Index, which measures ten policy areas, including environmental health, air quality, resource management, biodiversity and habitat, forestry, fisheries, agriculture and climate change. 

Using data from the International Energy Agency, Orellana found that between 1990 and 2007, when carbon emissions were rising everywhere, the statistically predicted increase was significantly lower in countries with fully proportional systems, at 9.5 per cent, compared to 45.5 per cent in countries using winner-take-all systems. Orellana found use of renewable energy to be 117 percent higher in countries with fully proportional systems.

Explanation

The UK has historically lagged behind its European peers when it comes to action on climate change and uptake of renewable energy. Depressingly, this is despite having by far the best off shore wind and marine energy potential in Europe. Successive governments have at best taken relatively limited action to move away from fossil fuels and reduce emissions, or at worst have actively resisted such progress (with the current government determined to begin shale gas production despite strong opposition from both local communities and the general public). 

Using data from the International Energy Agency, in his 1990 book, Electing for Democracy, Richard Kuper offers an explanation for this which remains true to this 
day. “Were the Greens”, he writes, “in a position to obtain representation in proportion to their vote, it is inconceivable that Labour would not already have in place a coherent and much strengthened range of environmental policies in order to head o the challenge.” 

Because a vote for the Green Party remains a wasted vote in almost every constituency, we in the Labour Party have little electoral incentive to worry about winning those voters back by competing with the Greens with our environmental credentials. On the contrary, since the swing voters in marginal seats may not be keen on the idea of a wind turbine at the bottom of their garden, an electoral agent may well advise us not to make too much of a fuss about climate change. 

Twitter links @MakeVotesMatter  @Labour4PR

Rebirth of Riddim Up - Harlesden Thursday 28th September

Naomi Klein's speech should strengthen the hand of Labour Party ecosocialists

Naomi Klein's speech at the Labour Party Conference was well received yesterday and should strengthen the hand of those members who want to see the party take a stronger line on challenging climate change.

Her praise of Corbyn's Labour Party was a little OTT at times but it also contained ecosocialist themes that reflect the position of Green Left (the ecosocialist current in the Green Party) and could build links between the two parties.