The Welsh Harp Reservoir Story – Part 3

Thank you for joining me again, on this third stage of our journey through the history of “the Welsh Harp” (our local reservoir – not the musical instrument!). In Part 2, we saw how the enterprise of W.P. Warner had made the name of his tavern synonymous with the reservoir beside it. This time we’ll explore changes, on and around the reservoir, into the 20^th century.

1. The Kingsbury dam and its overflow, c.1900. (Brent Archives online image 1341)

At first, not much changed. The area of water was mainly surrounded by the meadows of local farms, and attracted visitors to the countryside just beyond the expanding urban sprawl of London. Water flowing over the dam to feed the River Brent was a popular sight, across the fields of Gravel Pit Farm at Neasden. West Hendon had developed slightly, but there was still lots of open space nearby.

2. Cool Oak Lane, with its causeway and bridge across the reservoir's northern arm, c.1900.
   (Barnet Local Studies Centre image 3284)

The Metropolitan Railway’s Neasden Works expanded, with a new power station to supply its electric trains, which were introduced from 1905. The Canal Company, which still owned the reservoir, refused to let the Metropolitan use water from its Feeder for cooling purposes, so they had to sink two wells for that purpose. It was the First World War that finally brought more industry to the area.

The airfield at Hendon already had a small aircraft factory, run by the Grahame-White company, when the war broke out in 1914. Other companies making planes for the rapidly developing aerial warfare were soon active in the area, such as the Aircraft Manufacturing Company (“Airco”) in Colindale and Kingsbury, Handley Page in Cricklewood and later Hooper & Co in North Wembley. In 1917, Handley Page designed a prototype seaplane, hoping to sell it to the Royal Navy, and their R200 was test-flown from the Welsh Harp. They did not receive an order, so the seaplane never went into production.

3. Scale drawings of the Handley Page R200 seaplane. (Courtesy of the R.A.F. Museum, Hendon)

By 1917, the slopes of Dollis Hill down to the reservoir were also the home of the Mechanical Warfare Department. Its role was to design and test tanks, for use to try and break the trench warfare stalemate on the war’s western front. By 1918, one of the designs it was working on was a modified version of the Mark IX tank, and on a misty morning in November 1918 the world’s first amphibious tank was tested on the Welsh Harp reservoir. 

4. A Mark IX amphibious tank entering the Welsh Harp, November 1918. (Image from the Tank Museum)

Earlier this year, a friend interested in military history sent me a link to a short film that includes (at the end) footage of this test. It had been used as part of a French article on First World War tanks, and was described as a ‘Duck Tank being tested on the pond of Dolly Hill’! This “top secret” Department remained at Dollis Hill until 1921, before being moved to Hampshire. Its main buildings, surrounded by a high wall, were in the Humber Road area. It is remembered in the street name, Tankridge Road, and a section of the wall remains at Walton Close.

5. Remaining section of Mechanical Warfare Department wall, Walton Close,     Dollis Hill, c.2010.

 6. Aerial view of the reservoir in 1919, with West Hendon beneath the plane’s wing, and Dollis Hill beyond.

The local aircraft industry was badly hit when the Government scrapped its contracts for planes once the war had ended. One company at Hendon made use of the unwanted aircraft to offer pleasure flights to paying customers. The photograph above appeared with an article on the subject in “Flight” magazine, in June 1919, and shows a view across the reservoir to Dollis Hill.

 7. The railway viaduct, seen from the Edgware Road bridge, 1921. (Barnet Local Studies Centre image 871)

The 19^th century had seen first canals, then railways, develop as important methods of transport. This scene from 1921, of the Midland Railway viaduct crossing the eastern arm of the reservoir, was soon to change dramatically as the rise of motor vehicles meant a need for better roads. The North Circular Road was constructed during the 1920s to help heavy commercial traffic avoid having to drive through Central London. Its proposed route would take it just south of the Welsh Harp, and by 1926 this section of the reservoir was filled in, and the River Brent put into a culvert, so that the road could pass under the brick arches of the viaduct.

8. New housing at Dollis Hill, and over the reservoir at Kingsbury, late 1920s. (Brent Archives image 570)

The construction of the North Circular Road opened up the northern slopes of Dollis Hill for development, and by the late 1920s new streets were appearing between Brook Road and Links Road. These can be seen in the photograph above, together with what must be the start of the Post Office Research Centre at the top of the hill. Across the reservoir, new suburban homes were also being built in the Church Lane and Wood Lane areas of Kingsbury. In 1928, Willesden Urban District Council bought 40 acres of land on the Kingsbury side of the Welsh Harp, planning to use it as a cemetery, which would lead to disputes that lasted until 1965!

The rapidly growing population at Neasden and Dollis Hill prompted Willesden Council to open a recreation ground on their side of the Welsh Harp. They also built a Neasden branch library, overlooking it, at the corner of Aboyne Road and the North Circular, which opened in 1931. In keeping with a growing fashion for open air activity, this had a reading terrace at first floor level.

 9. The reading terrace at Neasden Library, 1931. (Brent Archives online image 2926)

One of the open air activities which had grown in popularity at the Welsh Harp during the 1920s was “sunbathing”, although it was not popular with everyone. By 1930, there was growing opposition among local residents to the visitors who came to the reservoir’s banks to bathe in the nude. One man complained to the Council that, while walking home to the Edgware Road from Old Kingsbury Church on a Sunday evening, they had come across ‘a bunch of stark naked men…. Hardly a pleasant sight for a man to have to pass with his wife!’

Matters came to a head one weekend in June 1930, when 40 men and women of the Sun-Ray Club (‘some wore no clothes, others wore slips or bathing drawers’) were confronted by a crowd of around 200 local people. Despite the presence of four policemen, who told them that the sunbathers were on private land, with permission from the owner, and that they had no right to interfere, the crowd attacked the bathers and drove them away. Kingsbury Council dealt with the issue in a more dignified way, when they received a deputation (not a new idea) from the National Sun and Air Association in May 1931, although they also decided against sunbathing!

10. Extract from the minutes of a Kingsbury Urban District Council meeting on 6 May 1931. (Brent Archives)

On the reservoir itself, the Brent Sailing Club was formed at the Old Welsh Harp Inn in 1930. A less tranquil use of the water also began the same year, when the London Motor Boat Club held its first speedboat racing event at the Welsh Harp. Larger speedboats were also used to give thrill rides for paying customers, as shown in this newsreel film from 1932.

 11. A motor boat race on the Welsh Harp reservoir in 1937. (From the collection of the late Geoffrey Hewlett)

The 1931 speedboat racing season had celebrity guests at its opening, the aviator Amy Johnson and actress Anna Neagle. Amy had lived at Roe Green for nine months, before the solo flight to Australia that made her famous, and then had a flat at Vernon Court in Hendon Way. By coincidence, it was Anna Neagle who starred as Amy Johnson in a film about her life, after her tragic death in 1941, while flying as a wartime pilot in the Air Transport Auxiliary.

12. Anna Neagle and Amy Johnson at the Welsh Harp, April 1931. (From: ‘Amy Johnson – Queen of the Air’)

The south-east corner of the reservoir saw rapid industrial development along its main roads, and on the reclaimed land, in the late 1920s and through the 1930s. One of the factories by the junction of the North Circular and Edgware Roads made mattresses. The company was Staples, and the busy corner was soon known by that name. The traffic lights here became well-known for the jams that built up, as seen below in 1937.

13. Staples Corner in 1937, with the mattress factory bottom left. (Barnet Local Studies Centre image 4920)

When war came again in 1939, Dollis Hill again had a part to play. Secret underground bunkers were built for the Admiralty at its Citadel office building, on the corner of the Edgware Road and Oxgate Lane, and for the Cabinet at “Paddock”, beneath the Post Office Research Station in Brook Road. It was rumoured that a flying boat was moored on the Welsh Harp, ready to fly Churchill and other key leaders to safety from their reserve War Room if necessary, but I have no proof for that story. It was the research station that developed the first electronic computers, used at Bletchley Park for code-breaking during the war, and Tommy Flowers, who led the team that made them, is remembered by the modern street name, Flowers Close.

14. The aftermath of the West Hendon bombing, February 1941. (Barnet Local Studies Centre image 5105)

It was not those key targets that were hit during the Welsh Harp’s worst bombing raids of the Second World War. Early in 1941, Germany was testing new designs of high-explosive bombs, and dropping a single bomb in a raid, so that its effects could be seen afterwards. One of these exploded above the Ravenstone Road area of West Hendon on the evening of 13 February 1941, flattening 40 homes, killing more than 80 people and making around 1,500 homeless. At the opposite end of the reservoir, a V2 rocket hit one end of Wykeham School in March 1945. Luckily no children were there at the time, but seven people were killed in nearby homes.

Just as it had during the First World War, the reservoir played its part between 1939 and 1945. A Hendon Sea Training Corps was formed in 1941, and its young volunteers learned some boating skills on the Welsh Harp, as well as on land at a school in Algernon Road. Production at many factories was changed, to produce equipment for the war effort. Hickman’s works on the North Circular Road had been shopfitters, but by 1943 their carpenters were building wooden landing craft, which were tested on the reservoir before being handed over to the Royal Navy. LCAs were “Landing Craft, Assault”, which carried a platoon of up to 36 soldiers, from ships around ten miles offshore, onto the beaches of Normandy on D-Day.

15. The Hickman's workers aboard a completed landing craft, 1943/44. (Image shared by the son of a worker)

Next weekend we’ll visit the Welsh Harp in more peaceful times. I hope you will join me then, for the final part of this series.

Philip Grant

MP and Assembly Member join battle against the Jubilee line screechers

Barry Gardiner MP and Navin Shah London Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow have backed local campaigners whose lives have been blighted by a loud screech made by Jubilee line trains at a curve in the track in Kingsbury.

For over 2 years, houses that back onto the Jubilee Line’s Kingsbury Curve and farther afield have been affected by the increase in noise levels from the passing trains.

Residents are unable to socialise or relax in their gardens.  People cannot sleep.  Those working from home in the heat of the summer are unable to open their windows due to the noise disturbance.  The Jubilee Line is on the Night Time network so on Friday and Saturdays, when it starts running again, there will be no let-up through the night.

In desperation, two neighbours from either side of the tracks, Anne Bovett and Karen Flaum, met by chance and decided to take action.  Having written to TfL on a number of occasions and urging neighbours to do the same, they have now presented their MP Barry Gardiner with a petition of over 200 signatories asking him to take up their request for the speed limit on the Curve to be re-introduced, believing this will curb the noise.

Quotes from neighbours:

•  The noise is affecting my ability work from home as I can’t open the window.
•  We can hear the noise from our house 200m away
•  Cannot hear anybody in garden or hear TV or phone when train passe
•  We are long overdue for some peace
•  The frequency of the trains results in a continuous barrage of noise.
•  I cannot stay in the garden for any length of time.

Due to the pandemic, rather than go door-to-door with the petition, Anne Bovett and Karen Flaum posted individual copies into homes in Ravenscroft Avenue, Uxendon Hill and surrounding roads and hoped that neighbours would sign.  They did!

 The campaigners sent the petition to Barry Gardiner who wrote to Andy Byford, Commissioner at Transport for London asking that he:

• provides an update regarding the progress that has been made to investigate possible solutions and take readings at affected properties
• passes on the documents provided which sets out the concerns of residents so that they can be reviewed and assessed by the appropriate team when investigating the solutions available.
• ensures the request of the 205 signatories for a reduction in speed to 20mph on The Kingsbury Curve is appropriately considered as a possible measure to improve the noise pollution that residents are having to endure.
• ensures that affected residents are consulted throughout this process and they are provided with assurances that the necessary steps are being taken by TfL to address their concerns.

Navin Shah went as far as to threaten to pick up a banner and join the campaigners when he wrote to Heidi Alexander, Deputy Mayor for Transport:

Over two years TfL’s efforts at lowering noise levels at the above location(s) have failed and local residents are seeking renewed and urgent action to get their quality of life back from the persistent intrusive noise. I am writing to you to express my strong support to their concerns and help my constituents to regain the ‘quieter life’ as they put it.  

FYI in early June this year, grease output of the track lubricant on Kingsbury curve was increased to reduce the screeching of rails but this has failed. Recently Mr Barros the TfL Noise and Vibration engineer visited the locality and confirmed the noise levels had increased. His report is awaited to confirm the current situation 

I am hugely disappointed that despite so many investigations, inspections, email writings not a hint of the progress of equal to a tip of a pin can be presented to the residents of the area. I feel ashamed because this is the only task I have failed for residents. Please note I want to see demonstrable progress and want it as soon as possible otherwise I will have no alternative but to pick up the banners along with others and start campaigning with the local  residents without any ifs or buts. There must remain the urgent need and genuine desire for bringing back noise level to a bearable level for residents any further delay would be unacceptable for the goodwill and respect we have for each other.  TFL must act now, please.

The Director of Assets for London Underground told the Kilburn Times LINK that they were aware of the concerns of residents who lived around the Kingsbury Curve and had been told that recent work on the track had not reduced noise sufficiently.  They will investigate additional measures including alternative lubrication for train wheels. 

A wider solution which would require more fundamental change was suggested by Cedric Lynch who commenting on the story said:

Train wheel treads used to be machined to a slightly conical shape that allowed them to roll quietly round curves because the flanges did not have to touch the rails to make the wheels follow the curve. This wheel shape was found to cause "hunting" (a rapid oscillation) at high speeds on British Rail trains and was changed to a perfectly cylindrical shape that stopped the hunting but caused screeching on curves. Perhaps the solution is to go back to the conical shape on Underground trains, which do not go fast enough for hunting to be a problem.

CMA: Mis-selling or unfair contract terms on leasehold homes will not be tolerated.

In the light of our recent coverage of leasehold issues in South Kilburn and the number of new developments across Brent it is welcome that the Competition and Markets Authority is opening enforcement cases against developers.  Please note that apart from the named developers letters are also being sent to others.

This is the CMA's Press Release issued yesterday:

As part of its ongoing investigation, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is today opening enforcement cases focusing on certain practices of:

• Barratt Developments
• Countryside Properties
• Persimmon Homes
• Taylor Wimpey

The move comes after the CMA uncovered troubling evidence of potentially unfair terms concerning ground rents in leasehold contracts and potential mis-selling. It is concerned that leasehold homeowners may have been unfairly treated and that buyers may have been misled by developers.

The CMA’s action relates to the following areas of concern:

Mis-selling

• Ground rents: developers failing to explain clearly exactly what ground rent is, whether it increases over time, when increases will occur and by how much.
• Availability of freehold: people being misled about the availability of freehold properties. For example, the CMA found evidence that some people were told properties on an estate would only be sold as leasehold homes, when they were in fact later sold as freeholds to other buyers.
• Cost of the freehold: people being misled about the cost of converting their leasehold to freehold ownership. When buying their home, the CMA found evidence that some people were told the freehold would cost only a small sum, but later down the line the price had increased by thousands of pounds with little to no warning.
• Unfair sales tactics: developers using unfair sales tactics – such as unnecessarily short deadlines to complete purchases – to secure a deal, meaning people could feel pressured and rushed into buying properties that they may not have purchased had they been given more time.

Unfair contract terms – ground rents

• The use of unfair contract terms that mean homeowners have to pay escalating ground rents, which in some cases can double every 10 years. This increase is built into contracts, meaning people can also struggle to sell their homes and find themselves trapped.

 

Alongside these issues, the CMA will also be looking further into ground rent increases based on the Retail Price Index (RPI) and may take enforcement action should it find evidence of unfair practices in relation to these. In particular, the CMA is concerned about the fairness of escalating ground rent terms linked to RPI and that these are not always effectively explained by developers when discussing RPI-based ground rent with prospective homeowners.

 

The CMA will also be investigating certain firms who bought freeholds from these developers and have continued to use the same unfair leasehold contract terms.

 

The CMA has now written to Barratt, Countryside, Persimmon, and Taylor Wimpey outlining its concerns and requiring information.

 

How the case proceeds will depend on the CMA’s assessment of the evidence. Possible outcomes include legal commitments from the companies to change the way they do business, or if necessary, the CMA could take firms to court.

 

Andrea Coscelli, CMA Chief Executive, said:

It is unacceptable for housing developers to mislead or take advantage of homebuyers. That’s why we’ve launched today’s enforcement action.

Everyone involved in selling leasehold homes should take note: if our investigation demonstrates that there has been mis-selling or unfair contract terms, these will not be tolerated.

 

Alongside its enforcement action, the CMA is also sending letters to a number of other developers, encouraging them to review their practices to make sure they are treating consumers fairly and complying with the law.

 

For people who own, or are looking to buy, a leasehold property, the CMA has produced written and video guidance, which offers advice on a number of issues, including what people can do when faced with fees and charges they consider unjustified.

 

The CMA will continue to work with the Government on its reform plans for the leasehold market, including supporting the move to ban the sale of new leasehold houses and reduce ground rents for new leases to zero.

 

It's the London Borough of Butt! Leader sees off challenge & strengthens his position

The first part of Brent Labour Group's AGM saw Cllr Muhammed Butt easily see off a challenge from Cllr Abdirazak Abdi. Butt got more than twice as many votes as his opponent with fewer than a handful of abstentions.

With the Labour Group officer positions going to members friendly to Butt and appointments for particular Cabinet positions under his control, Labour insiders interpret the result as consolidating Butt's power and patronage, leaving him in perhaps his strongest position  yet since he replaced Ann John in 2012.  

By the next Local Council elections in 2022 he will have been Leader for 10 years having been Ann John's deputy previously.

With only one Liberal Democrat and 3 tame Conservatives in opposition and firm control of his own party, Butt is now likely to lay claim to an outstanding record of political and electoral success.

Perhaps that record will help him move on to other political pastures...

Brent Standards Committee upholds councillor's freedom of speech

The Audit and Standards Committee has published a 2 year record of its decisions. LINK

I was particulalarly pleased to see this decision:

23.10.18

Complainants

6 Councillor(s)

Complaint

Complaint regarding comments made, and published on social media (blog) by a Cllr about his removal from a committee.

Outcome

Decision under Initial Assessment Criteria:

Complaint was not considered to disclose sufficiently serious potential breach of the Code to merit further consideration as the Cllr was entitled to express the views he did as a matter of freedom of speech.

Brent & Kilburn Times saved by takeover

 

Some of the many Archant titles

Brent's only surviving local paper, the Brent and Kilburn Times, which during the Covid19 crisis has been asking readers for support has been saved from bankruptcy and potential closure along with other Archant titles. Readers will have noticed how thin the paper has been recently.

The Eastern Daily Press, lead title of the 150 year group, explained the acquisition by Rcapital.

Norwich-based Archant - which publishes EDP, Norwich Evening News and many newspaper and magazine titles throughout East Anglia and beyond - has been acquired by new investors who will provide funding to continue its transformation into a successful modern media company.

The announcement also gives security for many hundreds of Archant pensioners and their families, and protects the hundreds of local businesses Archant trades with, who may otherwise have suffered losses 
had the business, hit hard by Covid-19, been forced into bankruptcy.

Simon Bax, Archant’s Executive Chairman, said safeguarding the interests of local suppliers and customers, and its near-1,000 employees had been his priority.

Archant and our newspapers and magazines are an intrinsic part of East Anglian life. Not only do we employ hundreds of people in the region, but we are also an important part of hundreds of other local businesses who supply us, or depend on us to help grow their business.

Like so many other businesses, Covid-19 threw us into a very difficult position. Naturally, I am very sad this deal marks the end of ownership of the local families who founded our company all that time ago. But equally I am happy we have found a new partner who respects our heritage and is able to nurture Archant’s future.

I would also like to thank the Colman and Copeman families who have been the custodians of quality journalism in East Anglia for so long – their legacy is a modern media company that will continue to proudly serve the region.

The new owners, family-based firm Rcapital, specialise in backing companies with immediate financial challenges but who otherwise have ambitious and compelling plans for commercial success.

Chris Campbell, partner at Rcapital, said:

We are incredibly pleased to have worked alongside Archant’s management team and KPMG to put forward a plan that will restructure finances and inject fresh capital into one of Britain’s oldest local newspaper brands. We are hopeful, that with the support of its creditors, Archant will emerge from this challenging period as a stronger business that continues to provide a vital service to its clients and readership. Today’s announcement marks an exciting next phase for both Archant and Rcapital - I am looking forward to working with Simon and his team to deliver on the transformation plan.

Like many other businesses in the UK, Archant had become increasingly hamstrung by multi-million payments required to pay down the large deficit in its long-defunct company pension scheme.

Under the deal, that pension scheme has been transferred to the Pension Protection Fund, a public body responsible for managing almost a quarter of a million pensions in the UK.

Shareholders in holding company Archant Limited, which has been placed into administration as part of the change of ownership, have been informed their shares are now of no value.

There is no interruption to publishing in the business, which continues to trade as before.

Clearly it is early days and we will have to wait to see what the 'transformation plans' will mean in terms of jobs and the survival of titles. Closure or transfer to on-line would be a blow against local democracy. The group have this week launched a campaign backing local councils' demands for adequate post-Covid funding.

Brilliant work on River Brent off Blackbird Hill by Thames21 and volunteers

 

Some of the volunteers

The walk through the urban orchard and St David's Open Space and along the River Thames appears on my Green Walk (see side panel) and is a great off the road route from Blackbird Hill  (Quainton Open Space) to Wembley Park Station.

If we want to reduce car trips to schools it is a good route for young children accompanied by parents or independent older pupils. I was using the route the other day to get from Chalkhill School to Birchen Grove allotments and notice two extensive heaps of rubbish that had been collected in a Thames21 cleanup of the area which is part of an ongoing project.

The route of the river can be seen in the line of trees below.  The river disappears under the railway line to re-emerge behind Wembley Stadium where there is another walking route to Stonebridge.

Brent Rivers and Communities Project Officer, Carolina Pinto, sent this report of the clean up day:

Last Saturday volunteers arrived on time, and the event started at 10.30am with a safety talk and instructions.

It is worth mentioning the important participation of our partners Ashford Place. We also counted with the presence of a representative from Extinction Rebellion Brent.

Everyone geared up, the group was divided to either litter pick or help to clean some duckweed from the pond. *Duckweeds are small, free-floating aquatic perennials that combine to form a green 'carpet' on the surface of the water. At Quainton we saw a thick mat covering the surface of the water, hard to remove, therefore a task to be continued.

During the break, we had surprise. The singer Maria Costa performed a song called the ‘River Brent’, a song she composed last year for the volunteers that joined forces in this initiative, to help the river Brent.

The result from litter picking: 40 full black bags of litter, a baby buggy, and a few other items.

Most volunteers mentioned coming back to the next events.

The next steps of the Brent Rivers and Communities project are to improve the park area (informal paths and more vegetation management now that the bird nesting season is coming to an end), and to start the river restoration activities- pre-booked for the beginning of October.

Come join us in the next events that will happen on Saturday 19^th September 2020 (Please remember to book in advance).

Carolina.Pinto@thames21.org.uk

Auditor: Brent better placed than most London councils to survive the financial challenges of the Covid-19 pandemic

The Audit Findings for the London Borough of Brent, to be considered by the Audit and Standards Committee on Tuesday September 8th are rather better than might be expected. LINK

The report by Grant Thornton  states:

 

.....To put this in further context, Brent Council could receive no RSG, council tax or business rates in 2020/21 and still balance the books using reserves. This is a much stronger position than virtually all other councils, however it must be noted that the reserves are earmarked to support strategic projects outlined in the Council’s capital programme and many of these reserves cannot be used to support revenue costs.

 

The report looks forward to 2020/21 and the impact of the Covid19 measures taken by the Council during lockdown and the impact on income.  Having had shaky reserves in the past the Council has been reluctant to eat into reserves but may have to as a consquence of a £29m funding gap, as well as reducing demand for services and 'efficiency'  cuts:

If there is a shortfall the Council has contingency plans to keep it on a sound financial footing. The Council will use the full range of options available, including (but not limited to) taking steps to reduce demand for services, implementing further efficiency savings, streamlining processes, and as a last resort re-diverting earmarked cash reserves as a one-off measure. The Council holds general reserves of £15.1m and £146m in earmarked reserves (excluding Community Infrastructure Levy funds and other ring-fenced reserves) which are held to meet specific identified purposes or future expenditure commitments, a large proportion of which are for financing the capital programme.

A review of the capital expenditure plan seems inevitable. Budget planning and consultation will take place soon.  One of the key issues will be what happens to Council Taxat a time when many residents will be strapped for cash as a result of unemployment resulting from the economic downturn.

 

EXTRACT FROM THE AUDITOR'S REPORT

2019/20 Financial Return

 

In a year where March saw the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Council has performed well to achieve a breakeven position for its service area budgets. The Council responded to the pandemic situation quickly, making critical decisions in response to constantly moving government guidance. With only 2 weeks remaining of the 2019/20 financial year with the outbreak of the pandemic, impact on the financial outturn was minimised for 2019/20 but will be a larger impact on 2020/21.

 

The outturn for 2019/20 highlights the effective management action taken to address the pressures throughout the year. The £1.5m overspend in Children and Young Persons (CYP) (in part offset by contingency funds within CYP reserves) and £0.6m overspend in Community Well Being were offset by underspends within Regeneration and Environment.

 

The use of CYP earmarked reserves illustrates that the Council does have ongoing financial pressures which need to be addressed. However, this needs to be put in the context of income growth opportunities the Council’s reserves position. Brent has over £134.8m of usable reserves, excluding capital reserves, which can ultimately be deployed to address in-year shortfall. To put this in further context, Brent Council could receive no RSG, council tax or business rates in 2020/21 and still balance the books using reserves. This is a much stronger position than virtually all other councils, however it must be noted that the reserves are earmarked to support strategic projects outlined in the Council’s capital programme and many of these reserves cannot be used to support revenue costs. It is also worth noting that the Council is very clear about finding solutions in CYP going forwards.

 

The Council’s MTFS set in 2019/20 identified £11.4m savings required for 2020/21 and a best estimate budget gap of £20m for 2021/22-2022/23. In the November 2019 MTFS update a comprehensive review of technical budget assumptions took place, including a review of the 2020/21 savings plans and estimated savings of £4.28m to be delivered in 2021/22 and £1.77m to be delivered in 2022/23.

 

As a result of the pandemic it is expected that service departments will experience income and expenditure pressures in 2020/21. The magnitude of the pressures will depend on the severity and length of the pandemic. The Council has modelled the financial impact based on lockdown periods of 3 and 6 months and has a cost tracker to estimate and record the additional pressures relating to additional expenditure, loss of income, impact on savings and capital programmes, and treasury management issues. The Council estimates the 2019/20 impact to be £0.4m while for 2020/21, a 3-month lockdown period has an estimated lost income impact of £19.8m, with another £14.9m on top of that for a 6-month lockdown. The Council reports these figures to MHCLG fortnightly.

 

The net cost of Covid-19 to the Council is expected to be £47.6m (£42.7m of additional income and expenditure pressures and £4.9m of slippage in savings plans), which is far in excess of the £21.2m funding to be received from central government. The cost estimates are considerable, and the Council has been working to the assumption that costs will be fully reimbursed. Central government recently announced a new package of support which includes provision for some income losses to be reimbursed where losses are more than 5% of a council’s planned income from sales, fees and charges, with central government covering up to 75% of the remainder. Also, any deficits on council tax and business rates income will be allowed to be spread over 3 years rather than 1 year. Detailed workings of the scheme will be confirmed as central government drafts the statutory instrument that will effect the changes. This leaves the Council with an estimated gap of £26.4m before support for income losses is taken into account. If there is a shortfall the Council has contingency plans to keep it on a sound financial footing. The Council will use the full range of options available, including (but not limited to) taking steps to reduce demand for services, implementing further efficiency savings, streamlining processes, and as a last resort re-diverting earmarked cash reserves as a one-off measure. The Council holds general reserves of £15.1m and £146m in earmarked reserves (excluding Community Infrastructure Levy funds and other ring-fenced reserves) which are held to meet specific identified purposes or future expenditure commitments, a large proportion of which are for financing the capital programme.

 

The Council has modelled indicative forecasts of the council tax base and business rates income going forward. Modelling is challenging for the Council given that the Council receives c£50m (approx. 40% of net rates payable) of additional relief from central government to further discount the bills of businesses in retail, leisure and hospitality sectors, as well as small businesses:

• the Council received c£64m from central government to provide grants (between £10k-£25k) to support the above businesses; and

• all other business rate payers having difficulty in paying were offered payment deferrals in line with central government guidance.

Due to the above, the amount of NDR income collected to date compared to budget has changed significantly, and forecasting future collection is dependent on how long different business sectors take to recover, if at all. The Council has modelled business rates collection forecast for 2020/21 for the amounts collected and to be collected over a revised collection profile, against a reduced collectible debit, to support future business rates income projections. However, the amount of business rates the Council is allowed to retain is largely dependent on the future business rates regime and the amount of section 31 grant for certain business sectors. Also, the Council is part of the London business rates pool in 2020/21. London Councils will be modelling the potential impact of a deficit on the pool and individual boroughs and the results are expected later in the year. This exercise along with other intelligence and data gathering exercises on collection rates will be critical to better understand the potential impact on the 2020/21 budget and future budget assumptions for business rates income.

 

Over the past 2 years, the Council has been addressing historic overspends and undertook a comprehensive review of demographic pressures and other expenditure pressures, ensuring the Council could move to a more sustainable financial position. Following the Covid-19 outbreak the Council’s financial position has changed significantly. The impact of the loss of fees and charges, and emergency costs have had an immediate effect on all local authorities. In the longer term there is likely to be further squeeze on public spending, which could impact future funding settlement allocations.

 

The 2020/21 budget agreed in February 2020 included savings of £7.4m to deliver a balanced budget. Analysis shows that £0.3m of the planned savings are at risk of not being delivered at all, £2.5m of the planned savings have already been delivered, and £4.6m of the planned savings will not be delivered in 2020/21 (the Council will look to make these savings in 2021/22 instead). The 2020/21 budget also agreed business plans which included savings of £4.3m. Along with review and tracking of Covid-19 cost pressures, the savings position is being monitored daily and monthly monitoring reports and forecasts are reported to the Departmental Management Team. At this stage, all indications are that the 2021/22 savings (including the £4.6m of planned savings for 2019/20) will be achieved. Looking ahead, the savings forecasts will be reported quarterly and challenged and CMT and Cabinet, as well as the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee. As well as reporting progress of savings delivery the update reports will include mitigating actions or other interventions if there are delays in implementation or risk of delivery.

 

Proposed budget setting for 2021/22

 

Based on information available to date, the Council estimates that ongoing and recurring pressures will be in the region of £11m to £29m from 2021/22 across all service areas and council tax collection. At this stage, the estimates excludes future losses on business rates whilst further modelling is undertaken. Therefore, without additional funding or relives from central government the budget gap is likely to increase further. The Council’s estimates will be refined over the summer and are a major factor in the construction of the 2021/22 budget. Robust and credible plans will need to be developed and agreed in February 2021 to deliver a legally required balanced budget. At this stage, it is not clear when the Spending Review will be announced, or what the LG Finance Settlement for Brent in 2021/22 will be. The lack of clarity means that the Council will need to continue to plan with little or no funding certainty over the medium term. The Council expects to need to take difficult decisions about which services to prioritise and protect, and which to reduce in order to continue to deliver affordable and sustainable budgets.

 

To close a gap of this magnitude and in a relatively short space of time there are 3 main options:

 

• Further savings – options are limited given the current savings programme already includes a significant number of efficiencies and new income generation options are likely to be limited.

• Reduce growth assumptions – the current MTFS includes £13m of annual growth but there is a risk that reducing growth assumptions will store up pressures in future years.

• Scale back the capital programme – pausing or stopping specific capital schemes funded by borrowing would free up corporate revenue budgets set aside to provide capital financing.

 

A further consideration is if central government introduces new interventions specifically for long term Covid-19 related pressures, such as a multi-year minimum funding guarantee to compensate local authorities for income losses beyond their control. Another option may be to allow the capitalisation of losses, which would ultimately be funded by increased borrowing. The options will be further examined to ensure their consequences are properly understood and set out for members and the outcome of the review will be presented to Cabinet as part of the draft 2021/22 budget in October 2020.

 

The Council continues to maintain reserve levels much above those of its peers, but it is recognised that of the £398.4m total usable reserves and capital receipts reserve, £249.3m relates to reserves built up to help to finance the Council’s £1bn capital expenditure plans. 

 

Excluding the capital reserves, HRA and schools’ reserves leaves general fund reserves of £134.8m, which is close to the average level of reserves for London boroughs. However, the Council must carefully consider the use of its reserves to support revenue shortfalls as it is a non-recurrent source of funding, and use of reserves on a large-scale risks creating structural overspends if the Council’s finances do not recover quickly and income is reduced long term. 

 

From an audit point of view, the Council has managed its revenue reserves in a way that makes it better placed than most London councils to survive the challenges of the Covid-19 pandemic from a financial perspective. This prudent approach to reserves must be continued to address the risk of future pandemics, recessions and other issues or events that may impact on the Council’s financial sustainability.