BE PREPARED FOR HUGE CHANGES: Universal Credit roll out starts in Brent on November 21st

Universal Credit, the controversial new integrated benefit system, is being rolled out in Brent. This is the Council' announcement:

The government's long-awaited Universal Credit is being rolled out in Brent from November 2018 on the following dates:

• 21 November 2018 for Harlesden Job Centre
• 5 December 2018 for Wembley Job Centre

This means that residents with a change in circumstances or those moving into Brent making a claim for the first time will have to apply for Universal Credit instead of the benefits listed below:

• Housing Benefit
• Job Seeker's Allowance (income based)
• Employment and Support Allowance (income related)
• Income Support
• Working Tax Credit
• Child Tax Credit

The six benefits above will be merged into one single payment - Universal Credit. Unlike many of the existing benefits, Universal Credit will be paid once a month, rather than weekly, fortnightly or four weekly as housing benefit is traditionally paid, and will be paid directly into the claimant's bank account in arrears. This is a change for many residents who currently have their housing benefit paid direct to their landlord.

The government wants all Universal Credit claims to be both made and updated online. If residents do not have access to the internet, they will be able to visit one of the above Job Centres for assistance. Each Job Centre will have a front of house team specifically set up to help and assist residents to make and maintain their Universal Credit claims online.

To make an application for Universal Credit, residents will need to apply directly to the Department for Work and Pensions via their website https://www.gov.uk/apply-universal-credit There is also a free helpline available for those that need any extra support: 0800 328 5644.

Councillor Eleanor Southwood, Cabinet Member for Housing and Welfare Reform said:

These are huge changes, particularly for residents who are already struggling to get by. The first port of call for formal advice is the DWP, who are implementing the changes. However, I want to remind residents that the council is here to help and you should contact us if you're worried that you might be falling into rent arrears or if you need support with your council tax.

This video tells you about the on-line process:

FURTHER INFORMATON FROM BRENT COUNCIL HERE

There is going to be a public information meeting about Universal Credit on November 23rd  at Chalkhill Community Centre:

MEANWHILE I HAVE RECEIVED THE FOLLOWING VIA THE UCU (UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGE UNION) RETIRED MEMBERS BRANCH:
 

Why Universal Credit Should Become a Core Trade Union Issue

A briefing on Universal Credit, prepared by Waltham Forest Stand Up for your Rights,

Who in the Future will be Affected by Universal Credit (UC)?

1. To date, of the 1 million households now on UC, the vast majority (except in local pilot areas), have been the unemployed. However that is about to change. From now on across the country all new or updated benefit claims (with a few exceptions) including those in work who receive Tax Credits have to be made through UC.

2.  DWP also plans to force everyone on benefits (including those on Working and Child Tax Credits) to claim UC even if there has been no change in their circumstances. DWP has refused to initiate transfers of Tax Credit claims on to a UC regime. Instead people have to initiate UC applications, a fraught and costly process. Testing forced transfers, called ‘managed migration’ by DWP, is due to start for some Tax Credit recipients in July 2019.

3.  Nationally, DWP’s plans mean 3 in 4 of the planned total of 7 million families on UC, would be in work. So of the estimated 16 million people nationally in families receiving UC, around 12 million would be in working families.

Background
4. This note outlines the Department of Work and Pensions’ (DWP) plans on UC as at early November 2018. These plans have changed many times. DWP has said they may change again if more problems with UC come to light.

5. UC has been criticised by welfare and other advice agencies after cases of severe hardship came to light and a series of analyses on the impact of UC especially after funding was cut. Arguably UC has become so discredited that what its future should be and indeed whether it should have a future is a matter for serious political debate.

Why have People found the UC Application Process so Fraught?

6. Firstly the forms are very lengthy – running to tens of pages. Secondly DWP want people to fill them in online. Even experienced advisers find the process; setting up accounts, locating and scanning in all the documents which DWP require to ‘verify’ a UC claim, often takes many hours, not counting verification visits to DWP offices.

7. DWP’s own research found barely half could complete the process without help. One in 4 claimants were not able to claim at all without help. Many have found applying for UC more difficult than applying for Tax Credits.

The UC application process is most intimidating and unsuitable for those with poor language, writing or IT skills.

The process especially frightens those with mental health problems eg anxiety, as DWP’s own research shows.

8. Thirdly the risks, if things go wrong, have been largely put on to the applicant. Imposing on applicants financial penalties arising from the complex UC application process, is unreasonable given the widely known problems people have faced in completing UC applications to DWP’s satisfaction. Government November 2018 changes have reduced, but not removed, risks imposed on people when those on Tax Credits are forced to apply for UC.

9. If people do not successfully apply within 1 month of a DWP deadline they risk losing ‘Transitional Protection’ which protects, for a while, their money if UC pays less than they get with Tax Credits. Further DWP only allow UC claims to be backdated by one month – less than the 3 months allowed for backdating of some benefit claims.

Do Tax Credit Recipients lose Money?
10. First of all, UC claimants face gaps in payment imposed by DWP in two stages. The UC system builds in a gap in payments, reduced in the 2018 Budget to a minimum of 3 weeks, after applying for UC. On top of that gap 1 in 5 claimants have faced on average a 4 week delay by DWP (ie on top of the 3 week gap) in receiving some or all of their money. DWP do not expect the % facing additional delays in some UC payment to be reduced during 2018.

11. Indeed there may well a big rise in the current UC claim processing delays by DWP under the strain of a six-fold increase in the rate of new UC claims planned by DWP for 2020 plus the more complicated circumstances of future UC claims with working income and child care costs, (unlike the mainly simpler unemployed cases so far).

12. Secondly amounts paid under UC differ from what working families get on Tax Credits. Some would get more money under UC. But overall working families face a net loss on average of about £250 a year on UC, after the 2018 Budget measures notably the higher work allowances. The Budget reduced, but did not end the losses.

13. UC losses are bigger for (mainly female) single parents, and disabled people loss of Severe Disability Premium.

UC hits women more. The combined impact of tax and benefit changes hits women 7 times as severely as men.

14. UC’s Minimum Income Floor has adverse impacts for many self-employed people eg taxi drivers, often BME.

15. Tax and benefit measures in the 2018 Budget only partially offset the overall losses since Summer 2015 from for instance the benefit freeze. Overall tax and benefit changes reduce income just for the lower income groups.

Does UC Contribute to a More Hostile Environment for Workers?
16. As well as financial losses, UC can intrude into peoples’ lives. Under the UC regime, workers can be pressed by DWP to job search to increase hours or earnings. This is worse for some eg single parents with child care duties.

17. For the first time workers are now at risk of ‘sanctions’ – loss of benefit. UK has the 2^nd most demanding set of ‘benefit conditionality’ terms out of 39 countries. Under UC sanctions are 4 times more frequent than pre-UC.

18. Insisting everyone has to apply for UC online is not user friendly, especially for those nervous of computers.

Is Universal Credit Actually Simpler?
19. One advantage claimed for UC is ‘simplification’ with 6 benefits rolled up into 1. The comparison is misleading: no one person ever receives all 6 benefits simultaneously. It is also partial: UC does not include some benefits.

The difficulty of making UC claims shows that any ‘simplification’ is not usually to the advantage of applicants.

20. Other aspects of ‘simplification’ may not help people. Paying UC as one payment may be convenient for DWP, but it means women will lose out when all money goes to one person, the higher earner, usually male. At the moment Child Tax Credit and the childcare element of Working Tax Credit typically go to the woman in a family.
Women with no direct access to money find it more difficult to leave when facing domestic abuse or violence.

Are there Other Benefits of UC?
21. DWP has claimed UC increases work incentives. That is so, but to a very limited extent. For the (1 in 3) people in work facing the highest effective tax rates they are cut from slightly over 90% to 85% with UC. The evidence is such incentives have little effect. Using sanctions implicitly admits that the work incentives are not effective.

22. DWP has argued that benefit take-up will rise under UC. But the user–unfriendly nature of UC, its toxic reputation and what an official report calls DWP’s ‘culture of indifference’, reduce the chances of higher take-up.

23. The DWP says that UC will reduce fraud and error. The NAO report refers to ‘a lack of evidence’ on this claim.

Conclusions
24. Government UC plans will increasingly affect people in work. Recent changes to UC have reduced the delays and the financial costs for workers, but not eliminated them. Reducing delays and more funding are not enough to make UC suitable. It is very user-unfriendly and intrudes oppressively into peoples’ lives. A harsh UC regime drives people into taking unsatisfactory work, putting downward pressure on work T&Cs – a core union concern.

25. There is a very strong case for Trade Unions to call on political parties to back ‘Stop and Scrap UC’ and, so long as UC continues, urging councils to minimise the impacts. Some Boroughs have set up information, advice and advocacy services eg Tower Hamlets, and others have committed to not evict tenants in arrears as a result of UC.

26. Pushing more people on to UC should be immediately halted, whilst a fundamental review considers the options.

Download a printable version of this briefing…

-->

Cllr Butt tells 'One Tonne' Walk' marchers from Sufra Foodbank that he will try and find a way of supporting their appeal for a new van to transport food collections

I joined workers, supporters and users from SufraNWLondon foodbank this afternoon as they collected food donations at Asda, Wembley Park and then pushed food bins and carrying trays of food started transporting them to the foodbank on St Rapahel's Estate.

Why were they setting out on walking that distance?

Sufra's van, used for transporting food from collection points all over the borough, has broken down and is a write-off.  They urgently need a new van but the cost is about £20,000. An on-line appeal has raised about £8,000 so far so the walk was aimed at publicising the appeal and at the same time make the point of why the new van is so desperately needed.

At Brent Civic Centre the leader of Brent Council came out to meet the 'One Tonne' marchers.  He said he would spend Monday exploring ways of helping the van appeal.

If you would like to donate on line, please follow this LINK

Polish pilots and a Jewish Cemetery – two talks at Kingsbury Library this month

Guest post by Philip Grant

Brent Libraries are putting on a good variety of events this month, but this is about two at Kingsbury Library (see poster), and especially the first talk, which I am looking forward to.

I was pleased to read two articles in the “Kilburn Times” (1^st November), which drew attention to the part played, on the British side, by Indian and Somali soldiers during the First World War. Many of us have grown up with a view of history which fails to acknowledge the contribution made by those not of a typically “British” background, and are only now learning the full picture. Richard King’s illustrated talk on Thursday 15^th November (2-3pm) is another example of this, from the Second World War.

Most of you reading this will have heard of the Polish War Memorial, but it is more than just the name of a roundabout on the A40, mentioned in travel bulletins on the radio. It is the reminder of a close link between Britain and Poland which goes back to the dark days of 1939 and 1940.

Although the prospect of war with Nazi Germany had been growing for several years, it was Hitler's invasion of Poland in September 1939 which triggered World War Two. Although their country was soon overrun, some of Poland's pilots managed to escape, and make their way to France, then Britain.

At first there was some political resistance – they were “foreigners”, they spoke little or no English. However, by June 1940 they were accepted as volunteers into the RAF, and organised into their own squadrons. 303 (Polish) Squadron, based at Northolt aerodrome, was one of the first of these.

Pilots of 303 (Polish) Squadron in October 1940 (courtesy of the RAF Museum)

It soon became apparent that the skills and combat experience which the pilots had brought with them matched, or even exceeded, that of their British and Commonwealth comrades. Many of the fighter pilots who defended the skies over West London, and beyond, from Luftwaffe bombers during the Battle of Britain were Poles, and a number of them died in the conflict. That is a story which deserves to be known, and will be told at Kingsbury Library on 15^th November.

Philip Grant.

The Facebook Page for Willesden Jewish cemetery which records the heritage project there can be found HERE

-->

Wembley Ark students challenge the FA to pay the London Living Wage to 2,000 contract workers

Regular readers of the blog will know I am opposed to academisation of schools on principle. I see them as backdoor privatisation and undemocratic. However, credit where credit is due, I am impressed by the campaign by Wembley Ark Academy's student campaign on the London living Wage. This is from the school's website LINK:

Ark Academy students face FA over low pay at Wembley Stadium

Ark Academy students made national news on 8th November when they delivered a sack of 500 letters to the Football Association, calling for a pay rise for workers on low wages.

In a meeting at FA headquarters, students Zainab Ahmed and Hadeal Abdelatti pressed the FA to pay the London Living Wage of £10.50 an hour to cooks, cleaners and stewards employed by third-party contractors. They handed over a petition which Ark Academy students wrote in form time.

Channel 4 News interviewed the protesters. The Daily Telegraph said the 11- to 16-year-old protesters shamed the FA.

The FA agreed this year to raise hundreds of its own employees to the London Living Wage. But it stopped short of lifting 2,000 contract workers off the minimum wage.

Zainab told FA executive James MacDougall she visited classes to collect petitions. Numerous students told her their relatives work at the stadium on low pay.

MacDougall argued that the FA is a national organisation and therefore Brent-based activists have little say.

Hadeal struck back, saying people earning the minimum wage cannot afford the London cost of living. She said the FA has a historic opportunity to set an example among major employers.

MacDougall disclosed that 2,000 of the FA’s 6,000 workers live in Brent.

The students will meet again with the FA in January.

Brent, united against racism & fascism, prepare for National Unity March on November 17th

The police appeal below illustrates how racists feel increasinglyconfident to air their prejudice even in diverse areas such as Wembley. This is happening against the background of the Trump presidency and the election of extreme right-wing parties into government in Europe and more recently in Brazil.

At the same time Brexit has fed a narrow nationalism often spilling over into racist and Islamophobic incidents and here in Brent we have seen anti-semitic graffiti in Dollis Hill. Elsewhere supporters of 'Tommy Robinson' and the Football Lads Alliance have taken to the streets to spread division.

That is why it is important to come togaeher as a community and show that we will stand together and not be divided by these forces.

Local activists from different groups came together at WembleyPark station yesterday evening to leaflet for the November 17th National Unity March Against Racism and Fascism.  We received a sympathetic response and other leafleting sessions will be held across North West London before the event.

The demonstration assembles at 12 noon on Saturday 17 November outside BBC Broadcasting House, Portland Place, LONDON W1A 1AA. It is called by Stand Up to Racism, Unite Against Fascism and the Trades Union Congress and is supported by Love Music Hate Racism and almost every trade union. Join the demonstartion to show the racists that there are many, many more of us than them.

Do you know this racially abusive man?

From Metropolitan Police

Police are appealing for assistance in identifying a man who racially abused a mother and her child on a London bus.

At around 17:20hrs on Saturday 16 June, the 49-year-old woman boarded a southbound Number 18 bus in Wembley along with her 11-year-old son.*

While on board the bus, a man, who had got on at the same stop, become abusive towards the woman and the boy. Over a period of around ten minutes, the man verbally abused the pair, using extremely abusive language and racial slurs.

Police are appealing for assistance in tracing a man in connection with the incident. The image of the man has been circulated to local officers, but, having been unable to trace him, police are asking for assistance from members of the public or for the man himself to come forward.

Anyone with information can call PC Mike Willcox of the Safer Transport team at Brent on 020 8733 3809. To remain anonymous, call Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

* Note from Martin Francis: I have since heard via social media that the boy was 8 years old not 11.

Should there be 3 options for Willesden Green's Queensbury pub?

Queensbury development Option 1

Queensbury development Option 2

Should this (retention of present building) and 'build around it') be Option 3

On his way out of the St Gabriel's Hall consultation on the Queensbury development a resident said, 'They call it a consultation but it's not really much of a choice. The two options are very similar.'

As you can see the main difference is the roof, dormer windows and the shape of the bays- the actual layout inside is the same for both options.

Others  I spoke to thought the designs 'weren't terrible' but were typical modern buildings that are in no way a match for the character of what they are replacing.

When it comes to the pub there was little more than a floor plan and an artists's impression.(above) The function room  would be next to the bar and managed by the pub. Apparently Brent Council thought they did not have the resources to manage such a small unit as a community room. The function room would have its own outside area, making it suitable for children's activities such as Busy Rascals, and its own external entrance.

The developers argued that taking into account the bar, the function room, the outside area and the basements to both rooms, the total area was more than the present pub.

The developers said that a lease agreement has been made with the publican of the Queensbury although it wasn't clear to me whether this meant the publican supported the particular designs being exhibited for the site.

I was concerned that the plans showed the existence of 'poor doors' - separate entrances for private and social/affordable flats.  The developers argued that there was a common entrance from the street (top left) but I pointed out there were separate entrances once inside the development (in the plan top left, next to the blue line of the pub and on the right,  below the two green rectangles which represent outdoor space. They said this was necessary for the convenience of what will be two separate management companies/agencies.  The outdoor space will be communal.

Of the 48 flats 10 will be social rent and 5 affordable rent. The developers said the actual rent level was a matter for Brent Council or the agency letting on their behalf. Of the total number of flats 70% will be rented and 30% shared ownership. The developer said that 35% of all habitable rooms were at social /affordable rent. This is because of the 3 bedroomed social rent flats included in the scheme.

The Feedback form asked attendees for personal details (name. phone, address, email) and there were just 2 questions: 'How did you hear about this exhibition?'  and  'Which design option do you prefer?' plus space to say why you prefer the design option. If you missed the consultation you can still write or email:

 Initial reaction on Twitter was not very impressed by the design:

Brent Council hails estate redevelopment ballot of St Raphael's residents

Brent Council has issued the following press release on their plans for the St Raphael's Estate. See article on Wembley Matters HERE

Muhammed Butt is quoted in the PR as saying he is 'committed to putting residents in the driving seat, making decisions about where they live.'   This may ring hollow to residents elsewhere in Brent who have found their voices ignored when they oppose redevelopment they felt detrimental to their neighbourhood.

BRENT COUNCIL'S PRESS RELEASE

Residents on St Raphael’s Estate could be among the first in London to be balloted on proposals to build new homes and community facilities in their neighbourhood.

This is a ‘once in a lifetime’ opportunity for the community of St Raphael’s Estate, local partners and Brent Council to shape the area for future generations. To kick off the process Brent’s Cabinet will be asked to give the go ahead to a full resident-led master planning process at its meeting on November 12.

The report, which is set to be considered by Cabinet, identifies two options as a starting point to be refined and developed by residents. One option would see the existing buildings refurbished with possibly limited new build on green space. If this is the final preference there would be no requirement for a ballot. The other option is for a comprehensive redevelopment of the whole estate which would be subject to a public vote of people who live there. 

Local people would design the area including the number of new homes, what community facilities are needed and where, and the layout of the roads. This plan would be put to a public vote on the estate, which would make Brent one of the first boroughs to action the Mayor of London’s ballot policy on regeneration.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s new policy requires major estate regeneration schemes to have residents’ backing before they can receive City Hall funding, a policy which Brent fully supports. 

Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council, said:

 “We are committed to putting residents in the driving seat, making decisions about where they live. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for residents to redesign the estate they love. People have told us they want to live in modern homes in a safe, crime-free neighbourhood. 

“Tackling the housing crisis is a priority for Brent and this is a unique opportunity to build brand new homes that meet the needs of the families who live on St Raph’s. I’m proud that Brent residents could be some of the first to have the chance to participate in a ballot before anything goes ahead.”

James Murray, London’s Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, said:

 “When estate regeneration is done well, it can improve homes for existing residents and see more social housing built for local people.

“The Mayor wants residents to be confident they will have a real say over the future of their estate when regeneration is planned, so he has put ballots at the heart of his approach for schemes where demolition of existing homes is involved. We very much welcome Brent Council’s clear commitment to giving residents at St Raph’s a vote on their plans and look forward to continuing to work together to build more of the council homes that Londoners so desperately need.”

-->