Concern over safety on Olympic Way after last night's match at Wembley Stadium

Photo: Daniels Estate Agents

The photograph above was taken from a high vantage point above Olympic Way at 10pm as fans made their way to Wembley Park station from the Spurs v Manchester United match. As usual stewards held fans back (bottom centre in high visibility jackets) while the station platforms were cleared.

The match had the highest ever attendance at a premier league match which Spurs celebrated:

However, on Facebook others were concerned about such large numbers packed into a restricted space.  One person remarked, 'A tragedy waiting to happen' and another, 'Nothing learnt from Hillsborough it seems.' A Brent resident said, ' Looks scarey to me. Please remind me not to go to Wembley Stadium for an event, or on an Event Day. I forget, most of us residents that can, already avoid the entire area just in case it's an Event Day.'

A year ago today I publicised Spurs application to remove the capacity cap and increase the number of events.

 The next big match,which may record a new record attendance is Tottenham Hotspur v Arsenal on Saturday February 10th, kick-off 12.30 pm. 

I advise families not to take their children to change their  books at Wembley Library on that day!

Bid for equality, to end the ban on opposite-sex civil partnerships

From Equal Civil Partnerships
 

This Friday morning MPs will debate Tim Loughton’s private member’s Bill to end the ban on opposite-sex civil partnerships. Currently, civil partnerships are available only to same-sex couples.

The Bill is titled: Civil Partnerships, Marriages & Deaths (Registration Etc.) Bill. 

Following recent ministerial changes, the government has gone back on its commitment to support reform. It now wants more time to deliberate. Nevertheless, it estimated that a majority of MPs back equality. 

A petition calling for equal civil partnerships has over 80,000 signatures. 

View and sign the petition HERE: 

Find out more about the Equal Civil Partnerships (ECP) campaign: www.equalcivilpartnerships.org.uk

Peter Tatchell, human rights campaigner, is backing the Bill; having championed equal civil partnerships since they were first proposed in 2003 for same-sex couples only. He said: 

It’s time for ‘straight’ equality. It cannot be right that same-sex couples now have two options, civil partnership and civil marriage, whereas opposite-sex partners have only one option, marriage. 

In 2016, the Isle of Man became the first part of the British Isles to open up civil partnerships to opposite-sex couples. If the Isle of Man can have civil partnership equality why not the UK?

The government’s public consultation in 2012, involving over 200,000 submissions, found that 61% of respondents supported allowing opposite-sex couples to have a civil partnership. Only 24% opposed. 

In a democratic society, everyone should be equal before the law, with the same rights and responsibilities. It is outrageous that for 14 years successive governments have been unwilling to legislate equality.

The founders and lead opposite-sex couple in the Equal Civil Partnerships (ECP) campaign are Charles Keidan and Rebecca Steinfeld. 

Charles Keidan explained: 

Currently, more than three million unmarried couples in the UK cohabit. That’s an average of over 4,500 couples per parliamentary constituency. Two million children in the UK have parents living together as unmarried couples. 

Over 80,000 individuals have signed our petition in support of equal civil partnerships. The vast majority of those polled are in favour of the extension of civil partnerships, according to Populus. 

Same-sex civil partnerships remain popular in the LGBT community. The number formed in England and Wales rose from 861 in 2015 to 891 in 2016, an increase of 3.4%, according to the Office of National Statistics. There is every reason to believe they would appeal to a sizeable number of different-sex couples if they were legalised.  

Rebecca Steinfeld added:

The current situation is self-evidently unfair. Civil partnerships promote stable families and protect children. They should be available to everyone. There is no such thing as common law marriage. This leaves unmarried couples and their children vulnerable. 

Couples choose not to marry for many reasons: its history, cost and past bad experiences. The State’s responsibility is to protect children, not judge their parents: children should not be placed at risk, just because their parents don’t marry. 

The number of same-sex couples opting for civil partnerships increased last year, despite the introduction of same-sex marriage. This shows that the demand for civil partnerships is not going away and it is likely that many different-sex couples would like this option. There is cross-party support for equal civil partnership legislation.

Sufra Foodbank struggling to fill shelves asks for help from volunteers

From Sufra North West London

The food bank is struggling to keep up with demand and our shelves are almost empty. Help us to fill the food bank!

Volunteer with us on Saturday 10 February 2018 and Sunday 11 February 2018 for a 3-hour shift at ASDA Wembley Superstore, distributing "shopping lists" and encouraging customers to make a food donation.

We're looking for happy smiles and lots of enthusiasm. Sign up now.

Shift Timings:

Saturday 10 February 2018
- 10 am to 1 pm
- 1 pm to 4 pm
- 4 pm to 7 pm
- 7 pm to 10 pm

Sunday 11 February 2018
- 11 am to 2 pm
- 2 pm to 5 pm

Sign up HERE

Barnet Unison seek job security for council Capita staff and call for services to be brought in-house

From Barnet Unison LINK

 This morning Capita staff woke up to some scary headlines that the former FTSE 100 company was in serious trouble.

The next Carillion? Shares in outsourcing firm Capita plunged 40% after profit warning LINK.

Outsourcing giant Capita announced the suspension of its dividend as part of a transformation plan this morning – and shares duly plunged by more than 40 per cent LINK.

This news follows on from the recent collapse of Carillion only a couple of weeks ago. Already political commentators are making comparisons with Carillion and Capita.

In light of the much publicised stress and anxiety experienced by Carillion workers in the wake of the company’s downfall; Barnet UNISON has written to the Chief Executive seeking details of Barnet Council’s contingency plan in the event Capita may have to give up their contracts.

We know that whatever happens there is going to be a great deal of speculation and uncertainty for the staff and whilst UNISON has seen the email from Jon Lewis, Capita’s, new Chief Executive trying to stem anxieties of his 70,000 workforce, we know workers will be worried about their jobs.
Barnet UNISON is looking for a statement from the Council in the event that Capita are unable to continue to run the two Barnet contracts, that Council will initiate plans to transfer the staff back in-house.

Who can we trust?

Since the collapse of Carillion, more news has emerged as to how bad things really were for that company. Furthermore questions are being asked about the role of the external auditors KPMG more here LINK
 
It has happened before in Barnet…… 

In 2010 Barnet Homes had commissioned Connaught’s to provide Council Housing Repairs service. Connaught’s went into liquidation. Our members were told they had lost their jobs over a message on a speaker phone. Months earlier Barnet UNISON had held talks with Barnet Homes Chief Executive as it was becoming increasing clear Connaught’s were in serious trouble. There was further problems when it became clear that there was missing pension contributions which needed to be picked up by Barnet Council.

Read more HERE

Footnote: On 26 June 2017 Capita share price was 705.50 now six months later the share price closed today at 202.09 which represents a 72% drop in their share price over a six month period.

On Wednesday 31 January, 2018 the Capita share price opened up at 347 and closed at 182.50 which represents a 47.53% fall in share price.

John Burgess, Branch Secretary of Barnet  Unison said:

Once again the market shows that it is merciless when a company is in trouble. Carillion looks as if it is just the tip of the iceberg. The minute Carillion collapsed I immediately started to look more closely at Capita Share price. I noted that Capita share price had already dropped by around 66% in the last two years. Today seems to have shocked many experts. My concern is for the staff and the local services they provide for Barnet residents. I know from speaking to staff that they are worried and quite understandably cynical about any messages trying to play down what is happening to the company. After the debacle that our former Connaught members went through previously I want to ensure this time that Barnet UNISON does it utmost to try to allay members concerns about their future employment. My view is that this event is a watershed moment for Barnet Council. Please abandon your “love affair” with outsourcing and commence negotiations to return all services back to the Council.

Will voluntary groups at the Willesden Centre get a lifeline tonight?

Tonight's Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee has an item on the use of space by voluntary organisations at the Willesden Centre for Health and Care. I hope councillors will take the opportunity to try and get a positive outcome for organisations that contribute a great deal to provision but cannot afford market rents, such as Brent Advocacy Concerns LINK.

This letter  to Cllr Sheth, from Sheik Auladin, Interim Chief Operating Officer of the Brent Clinical Commissioning Group could enable the Committee to focus on some possible solutions and give voluntary organisations some reassurance regarding costs and space ahead of the end of March deadline.

-->

Thank you for your letter dated 6 th November 2017 regarding the progress the CCG has made in respect of supporting voluntary sector organisations, working within the NHS estate in Brent and specifically at the Willesden Centre for Health and Care. 

The CCG has continued to work to identify tenants for the void space across the Brent sites in line with its commissioning intentions . As you will appreciate our priority has to be ensuring the statutory services we commission can access fit for purpose and appropriate accommodation; however, where voluntary services are already in occupation at such sites, or where voluntary organisat ions express an interest for space, we will proactively work to establish requirements and where possible accommodate. 

There has been a long standing need to provide the Burnley Practice - at the Willesden Centre for Health and Care - with an appropriately sized and located space within the building. The practice has been successful in securing NHS England funding to support its relocation within the building to space previously occupied by the Brent Association for Disabled People. The CCG is aware that some voluntary services previously operating under the auspices of BADP continue in occupation of part of this space, albeit they are not being charged. 

The CCG has met with each of these organisations over the past few weeks to explain the plans, establish their ongoing space requirements and reassure the services it will seek to secure an alternative arrangement for them within the building. As you acknowledge, charging market rent is the policy of NHS PS over which we have no jurisdiction; but we will draw on this relationship and try and ensure the organisations can meet rental costs through the same or favourable terms. 

Brent CCG is committed to supporting the valuable work of the voluntary sector in Brent. It is not possible to develop a formal policy for the use of NHS estate by the voluntary sector, due to the CCG having no direct property interest; however we do commit to the principles set out by Sarah Mansuralli previously, and will continue to support the occupation of void space by voluntary organisations where this space is not required for the delivery of statutory or directly commissioned services. 

Yours sincerely,
Sheik Auladin
Interim Chief Operating Officer
Brent Clinical Commissioning Group

Brent Council to hold Public Meeting on asbestos controversy - February 6th

From Brent Council

Public meeting for anyone who has any concerns about Paddington Old Cemetery, where you can hear first-hand from independent experts as well as the Council. Tuesday 6 February 2018 at 7pm at Kilburn Housing Co-operative, Kilburn Square, Victoria Road, Kilburn, NW6 6PT.

Duffy asks, 'Why didn't Brent Council interview key witnesses over transportation of asbestos contaminated waste?'

Councillor Duffy has responded to Brent Council's replies to his questions about the asbestos contamination at Paddington Cemetery with this email to Carolyn Downs, Brent Council Chief Executive:

Thank you for letter you asked Mr Whyte to send on your behalf. I will study it and deal with the questions around the events of 24th June and 30th November and contamination in general in a second reply as I need to get more information. However this reply will focus on how the waste got to Paddington Cemetery, which is the most crucial issue. Firstly I am delighted you have said "I can confirm that the AAC report was initially restricted for its consideration by the Committee in December. it has been publicly available on the council’s website since the last Audit Advisory Committee on the 10^th January. I believe your decision to lift the restriction is a good decision for democracy and will allow an open debate around the report

As you know, until you published it, I was bound by the council standing orders not to reveal what was in the report. This was most frustrating as the report is flawed and omits crucial evidence. Only in Brent would a report that does not interview witnesses be acceptable. The report not only fails to interview anybody who witnessed the transportation from Carpenter Park to Paddington Cemetery (as they may tell a different story), it relies completely on what Senior Brent council officers say is true and does not seek relevant documentation.

As you know my allegations have always been the same since November 2017:

(1) The council knowingly/deliberate transported contaminated waste from Carpenters Park, putting the workforce and the public at unnecessary risk.

The report points out there were two known incidences of contamination in Paddington Cemetery. 

The first one took place in 2011, where the council received supposedly top-soil from a waste contractor. A council officer called Mr A dealt directly with the contractor named as company XX. He did not seek additional quotations as the contractor XX (this is normal for Brent not to seek best value) had previously carried out work in Willesden New Cemetery. Instead, Mr A met the contractor on site and agreed a price and raised a work order from the contractor to supply" Clean Top soil." 

While Mr A was off sick a Senior manager Mr F (rightly) challenged the workmanship of company XX and informed Mr A on his return to work that the company should not be used again. Mr F is now retired. Mr A however said the clay/soil was, he understood, to have been tested and no contamination was found. Bizarrely the investigating officer did not ask the name of the company who tested it or ask see a copy of the test results.

The second incident took place in Carpenders Park in August 2015, The work was being carried out by different contractor YY to carry out levelling work in section 3d in Paddington cemetery. Mr A was alerted to contaminated soil again .Mr A believed it to be (guessed it to be) "Asbestos cement", which he described as low risk. He removed some of the "Asbestos Cement"  and double bagged it and disposed of it to landfill and obtained a waste transfer certificate and the  remaining waste still contaminated  with asbestos fibres was transported to Paddington Old cemetery without a test being carried out to assert the level of contamination still within the soil this confirms the council knowingly transferred  waste to Paddington Cemetery knowing it to be contaminated. This is all confirmed at the bottom of page 6 and top of page 7 of the AAC report.

I assume the waste was then taken to the West London Waste Authority (WLWA) Site on Abbey road NW10 as we are a member of that waste authority. WLWA are required to keep Waste Transfer notes for a minimum of 2 years. So it is very likely they will still have copies and that information would be a basic requirement to any investigation Date, Weight, description but this obvious avenue was yet again not pursued by the investigator.

However the most bizarre thing I have ever seen in a report and after nearly forty years experience, I am still not sure I believe what i read. It was the statement from the investigating officer saying "Although dealing with contaminated land falls within the remit of the ( the council's) environment monitoring team they stated they would NOT pursue a criminal investigation against the the contractor should evidence of an offence under the Environmental Protection Act come to light." This is the Environmental team telling the investigator and the committee, whatever he then finds, it does not matter because environmental officers will not pursue it.

As I say, I welcome your decision to remove the restriction on the ACC Report and i hope it get a full airing at the public meeting, however I believe the publishing of the AAC report makes an Independent public investigation carried out by a Health and Safety expert( to reassure the public) inevitable. I believe the idea that issues in the public interest can be dealt with by a restricted special committee where the council mark their own homework and give themselves an A+  has to be challenged 

I have only one question: Are you happy that the investigating officer did not seek relevant available documents and failed to interview key witness involved in the transportation of the asbestos contaminated waste to Paddington cemetery 

An early reply will be much appreciated. I will also get back to you on the other two points later in the week. Namely, 

(2) That the council knowingly instructed the workforce to work in the contaminated ground in full knowledge that it was contaminated with Asbestos 

(3)  That the council knowingly did not follow proper H+S regulations on the 24th of June and 30th of November.

Cllr Mili Patel breaks silence on The Village School academisation

Cllr Mili Patel

Cllr Mili Patel, Brent Cabinet member for Children and Young People, yesterday broke her silence regarding the proposed academisation, via a Multi-Academy Trust, of The Village School. The MAT would consist of The Village and Woodfield School, which is already an academy. The other Brent special school, Manor, is also an academy. The three schools are involved in a project to set up a free school together.

If academisation were to go ahead it would mean special education in Brent was outside local authority oversight.

In a statement to the Morning Star yesterday she said:

The Village School and Woodfield School have worked in partnership for some time.

The education policies of the Tory government - including a 2.7billion cut to the schools budget and barriers to schools partnering up in any way that doesn't involve them becoming academies - have led to the Village School governors considering joining the same multi-academy trust as Woodfield. This is something most of the governors themselves would tell you they never thought they would be considering.

As a Labour Council we do not want them to take this step and I have been working hard to demonstrate the advantages of staying within the Brent school of families [sic 'family of schools'] to its governors.

It is encouraging the governors have taken this important decision out to consultation which will give local people the chance to demonstrate the strength of feeling there is in Brent against these plans.