Free trees for Brent community groups

Trees on the King's Drive Estate in Wembley Park

From Brent Council

Community groups in Brent are being encouraged to apply for free tree packs to brighten up their local area.

In partnership with The Conservation Volunteers (TCV) the Mayor of London is making available 25,000 trees for community groups, free of charge, to plant in their London neighbourhood.

To find out more and apply for a community tree pack, visit https://www.london.gov.uk/community-trees.

Advice from our Parks Service:

• Groups or interested residents should contact Brent through the parks service to discuss where they would like to plant the trees
• Trees can be planted on private land with the permission of the landowner, which may or may not be Brent Council
• To ensure a good spread of trees throughout the borough, we would encourage local groups to apply together and share a tree pack
• Not all trees will be suitable for all locations and trees on public land will be maintained by Brent Council, so make sure to get in touch to discuss

If you have any questions, please contact the Parks Service at brent.parks.services@brent.gov.uk

Proposed new ward structure in Brent

Proposal 1

Proposal 2

The General Purposes Committee of Brent Council, which consists of Cabinet members plus Cllr Colwill leader of the Conservative Group, will be discussing plans for new ward divisions on Wednesday LINK.

The proposals are the Council's response to the Local Government Boundary Review and would reduce the number of Brent councillors from 63 to 57. There are two options on the table with the main difference being whether there should be 3 wards with 2 councillors each or 2 wards with 3 councillors each after the great majority of wards have been allocated 3 councillors each.  There is an attempt to have boundaries that reflect existing communities with their own centre.

These are the proposals:

The following ward proposals are the same for both proposals and are for 3 member wards.

Ward 1 – Wembley Central ward 
This ward is predominantly made up of the current Wembley Central ward but incorporates some of the current Alperton and Tokyngton wards. The community centre of the ward remains Wembley Central. 


Ward 2 – Queensbury ward 
The boundary for this ward remains unchanged from the current Queensbury ward. When forecasting the electorate for 2024, it was projected to be 12,906 which represents a marginal variance from the mean electorate. There is also an established local community identity in this area.

Ward 3 – Mapesbury ward 
The ward takes in the entirety of the current Mapesbury ward but takes in some of the current Dudden Hill Ward. The community centre would incorporate parts of Willesden and Cricklewood.

Ward 4 – Sudbury ward 
This ward is predominantly made up of the current Sudbury ward but takes in some of the current Wembley Central ward. The community centre of the ward remains Sudbury.

Ward 5 – Willesden Green ward 
This ward is predominantly made up of the current Willesden Green ward as it is one of the established communities; for electoral equality it would take in some of Dudden Hill ward.

Ward 7 - Northwick Park ward 
This ward is predominantly made up of the current Northwick Park ward but also incorporates some of the current Sudbury ward. The community centre remains Northwick Park. 


Ward 8 – Queens Park ward This ward is predominantly made up of the current Queens Park ward as it is one of the established communities; for electoral equality it takes in some of the current Kensal Green ward.

Ward 9 – Kilburn ward The boundary for this proposed ward remains unchanged from the current Kilburn ward. When forecasting the electorate for 2024 was projected to be 12,581 which is a marginal variance from the mean electorate.

Ward 10 – Kingsbury ward This ward is predominantly made up of the current Fryent ward but also encompasses some of the current Welsh Harp and Barnhill wards. The community centre for this ward would be Kingsbury hence the suggested a name change.

Ward 11 - Brondesbury Park This ward is predominantly made up of the current Brondesbury Park ward but also incorporates some of the current Kensal Green ward. The community centre remains Brondesbury Park.

Ward 12 – Tokyngton ward This ward is predominantly made up of the current Tokyngton ward but also incorporates some of the current Stonebridge ward. The current CST1 polling district has been moved into this ward as the North Circular Road forms the boundary for this proposed ward. The community centre remains Tokyngton.

Ward 13 – Kenton ward The ward takes in the entirety of the current Kenton ward and also takes in some of the current Northwick Park and Barnhill wards. The new boundary for this ward runs along the two railway lines thus forming a natural ward boundary. The community centre remains Kenton.

Ward 14 – Dollis Hill ward This ward is predominantly made up of the current Dollis Hill ward but would also incorporate some of the current Dudden Hill ward. The community centre remains Dollis Hill.

Ward 16 – Neasden ward This ward is made up of the current Welsh Harp ward but also incorporates some of the current Barnhill and Dudden Hill wards. As this ward covers one of the established communities of Neasden a name change for the ward is proposed.

Ward 17 – Wembley Park ward This ward is predominantly made up of the current Barnhill ward but also incorporates some of the current Tokyngton and Stonebridge wards. As this ward covers one of the established communities of Wembley Park a name change for the ward is proposed.

Ward 18 – Alperton ward This ward is predominantly made up of the current Alperton ward but also incorporates some of the current Wembley Central ward. The community centre remains Alperton.

Ward 19 – Preston ward This ward is predominantly made up of the current Preston ward but also incorporates some of the current Tokyngton ward. The community centre remains Preston.

The following are for proposal 1 and are for 3 member wards

Ward 6 – Stonebridge ward 
This ward is predominantly made up of the current Stonebridge ward but also incorporates some of the current Tokyngton and Harlesden wards. The community centre remains Stonebridge. 


Ward 15 – Harlesden ward 
This ward is predominantly made up of the current Harlesden ward as it is one of the established communities for electoral equality it takes in some of the current Kensal Green and Willesden Green wards. 


The following are for Proposal 2 and are for 2 member wards

Ward 6 – Stonebridge ward 
This is predominantly made up of the current Stonebridge ward but also incorporates some of the current Tokyngton ward. The community centre remains Stonebridge.


Ward 15 – Harlesden ward 
This ward is predominantly made up of a more concentrated area of the current Harlesden ward as it is one of the established communities for electoral equality it takes in some of the current Kensal Green ward. 


Ward 20 – Church End ward 
This ward is made up of the current Harlesden and Stonebridge wards in equal measure but also incorporates small parts of the current Kensal Green and Willesden Green wards. The community centre would focus around Church End which could suggest a name change. 


 

2024 Electorate

DETAILED MAPS

Local councillors kept in the dark over South Kilburn evictions

117 families have been given eviction notices in just two buildings in South Kilburn, Hereford House and Exeter House.  Most of the families have lived on South Kilburn for some time and a few more than 5 years.  There are 92 tenants at Hereford House and 25 at Exeter Court.

Local councillors were not told of two meetings that were held in Kilburn about the evictions.

Bremnt Council's Housing Needs Service held a meeting at Granville Centre on September 25th to inform non-secure tenants of their options regarding moving on. They said the Regeneration Team needs vacant possession for the next stage of  development and they have been asked to relocate all tenants by July 5th 2019.

Residents were told that the options available depended on their circumstances such as the number of bedrooms needed and the length of time they have been accepted as homeless. Options included relocation into alternative temporary accommodation, the private sector or social housing.

The Service apologised for  not inviting any local councillors to the meeting. They said they normally invite the lead member for housing to User Forums and she can pass on the invitation to other councillors.

NEVER AGAIN! Social & private tenants demand immediate recladding of flammable homes & protection from fire and cold

An Open Letter to James Brokenshire, signed by over 100 organisations, MPs, councillors, architects and other relevant experts, and by residents of blocks affected by this national disaster, will be delivered with a demonstration at Ministry for Housing Communities and Local Government between 1 and 2 pm on 17 October.  The letter will demand immediate recladding of flammable homes, and that residents must be kept safe both from fire and from cold, until this work is completed. During the re-cladding process tower blocks can be left freezing without cladding and insulation for months or even years.  

The letter will be delivered by tower block residents from both social housing and private blocks, including residents of social housing blocks in Salford that have been denied access to government funding. 

They will be supported on the day by Fuel Poverty Action, who initiated the Open Letter and organised this Day of Action,and by members of the Grenfell community, trade unionists, housing organisations, and many others who fear more deaths this winter.

Demonstrators will then go on to an event at the House of Commons from 3 - 5 pm hosted by Grenfell MP Emma Dent Coad.

Also part of the Day of Action are a solidarity demonstration outside the UK embassy in Brussels, organised by the Right to Energy Coalition, and a public meeting organised Southwark Group of Tenants Organisations focusing on how residents’ organisations are being bypassed and disempowered, even as everyone acknowledges that residents’ voices are key to keeping buildings safe.   

Ruth London from Fuel Poverty Action says:

No one can claim that tower block residents are responsible for the cladding on their buildings, yet they are the ones who are paying for this disaster in UK housing, with their health, with their food money or savings, and with their lives.  No wonder so many people are saying ‘No - never again! No more deaths from fire, no more deaths from cold!.’ The pressure on the Secretary of State will only increase until the government fulfills its promise to keep people safe in the homes where they live and put their children to sleep.  

Matt Wrack, of the Fire Brigades Union has supported this initiative:  

The Fire Brigades Union called for a universal ban on these flammable materials. Many firefighters and residents of high rise residential buildings wanted more comprehensive action taken against flammable cladding.  Flammable cladding needs to be removed and banned. But it also needs to be replaced before winter. If insulation is removed without being replaced, some of the most vulnerable members of our society will be left freezing, in poor health or in poverty due to extortionate heating bills.  That’s why this Open Letter is so crucial.

Elizabeth Okpo from Spruce Court in Salford says:

We still have the cladding on our building and other issues just the same as Grenfell Tower and we are living in terror.  I look at the children in our block, and I can’t bear to think of what could happen.  I go to bed with a bible, and wake up thanking God I am still alive.  They have only taken the cladding off the bottom three floors, and on those floors people were freezing last winter because there was no insulation.

The Open Letter can be seen online here; the final list of signatories will be available on Tuesday 16 October.  

Children's half-term activities at Welsh Harp Centre

Brent Council brickwalls Cllr Abdi's second complaint against Muhammed Butt

Brent Council's Chief Legal officer, Debra Norman, has turned down Cllr Abdirazak's reformulated complaint against Labour Leader, Cllr Muhammed Butt.

Norman refused the first complaint, breach of Members' Code of Conduct, on the grounds that Butt's actions were a Labour Party issue. Cllr Abdi then issued a second complaint, this time of political interference in the planning process, and Norman again says this is not a Council matter as Butt was operating in his party role:

Your complaint is in essence the same complaint as the previous one.  It remains the case that decisions about nominations to the Labour Group’s allocated seats on the Panning Committee are a party group matter.  Involvement by Cllr Butt in that process was a party group activity and not activity in his capacity as a councillor. 

I can only consider an allegation of political interference in Brent’s planning system by Cllr M Butt on the basis of evidence of actions in his capacity as a councillor.

As indicated in my decision in respect of your complaint, my decision on it was final, as provided for in the council’s procedure for dealing with such complaints.  There is no available appeal or complaint mechanism in relation to that decision.

It now appears that the only route open to Cllr Abdi is through the Labour Party's own disciplinary and complaints procedure.

This may seem to be a storm in a Labour Party tea cup but it has great significance for Brent residents who feel the planning system is out of control with high rise blocks being approved across the borough, often not complying with the borough's own planning guidelines, and in the teeth of opposition from local people.

-->

Brent Disability Forum 6-8pm tonight Harlesden Methodist Church

Book: sophia.thompson@brent.gov.uk

Cllr Abdi escalates complaint, alleging Cllr Butt's political interference in Brent Council's planning process

Cllr Abdirazak Abdi has been told that his complaint against Cllr Butt does not come under the members' Code of Contract. Debra Norman, Brent Council's Chief Legal officer said:

The decision by the Labour Group to nominate another member of your group to the Planning Committee was entirely a political group matter. The handling of complaints relating to political group activities, especially the alleged failure to comply with the Labour Group’s standing orders or the rules of natural justice, is a political group disciplinary matter. It is not a council matter and the obligations set out in the code do not apply.

Cllr Abdi replied:

Thank you for your response about my members’ code of conduct complaint against Cllr M Butt.

I would like to make an explicit allegation of political interference in Brent’s planning system by Cllr M Butt.

Cllr M Butt concealed the real reason for his decision on 09 July 2018 by providing an explanation which seemed plausible without scrutiny but which he later changed on 27 July 2018, to provide an alternative basis. 

On 27 July 2018, Cllr M Butt conceded that the reason for his decision on 09 July was due to my voting record, ‘In taking unsubstantiated positions on numerous applications’ excerpt from Cllr M Butt’s e-mail on 27 July 2018. 

I assert that Cllr M Butt interfered with Brent’s Planning system and then tried to make false accusations in regards to my competence, preparedness and conduct in the planning committee. These accusations were not put to me at the time and I wasn’t given an opportunity to challenge.

Again please get in touch, if you decide to investigate this complaint, so I can provide the relevant information I hold. Please use the information I provided in my earlier correspondence as basis to assess the merits of this complaint.

If you decide, to not investigate this complaint under members’ code of conduct.  I’d like to make a formal complaint against the council for not taking my allegations seriously.