Together, BP and Shell made almost
£24 billion in profit last year. In just the first three months of 2022, they
made more than £11 billion. North Sea oil and gas bosses got a combined
£25m pay rise in 2021.
FPA’s co-founder Ruth London
comments:
“These massive excess profits are
not earned. Nobody worked for them. Nobody took a risk for them. And they
didn't fall from a tree like a windfall apple.
They come from our bills, and from
the pennies customers are forced to put aside to top up prepayment meters,
while children go hungry.
And they go into the pockets of
private individuals who are often obscenely rich to begin with. Or they get
invested in extracting more and more of the oil and gas that are wrecking the
climate we all depend on, while renewable energy would cost only a quarter as
much, and while the government could invest in insulated homes so we don't need
so much energy in the first place.
A windfall tax should take every
penny of the extra money that these huge international corporations have been
able to demand just because the market changed and they could get away with
higher prices.
The energy market is upside down,
with the poorest customers paying the most.”
Fuel Poverty Action's proposal for
Energy For All [1] would turn energy pricing on its head, providing a free band
of energy to ensure that every household can keep warm and keep the lights on.
It would be paid for by a windfall tax, an end to fossil fuel subsidies, and a
higher price on wasteful use of energy by wealthy consumers who can well afford
to pay more."
An attempt to loosen the grip of the Buttocracy on Brent Council failed tonight when Labour councillors voted down an amendment that Scrutiny Committee chairs should come from the opposition councillors so as to provide great transparency and collaborative work. Leader of Brent Council, Muhammed Butt, went further in undermining the opposition by springing a surprise decision that he would appoint the vice chairs of the scrutiny committees (from his own party) rather than the custom and practice that these should come from the opposition.
Hithertoo that has been the case as Roxanne Mashari, former Chair of Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny said on Twitter:
Alarmed to hear of changes brought in at Brent Council to make vice chairs of scrutiny members of the majority party rather than opposition parties as has previously been the case.
This change weakens democratic scrutiny with no tangible benefit to residents.
Unfortunately the legislation around local authority scrutiny is woefully lacking and allows councils to effectively mark their own homework and cut back and control the scrutiny function. It’s truly absurd.
Legislative change is very overdue in this area.
Cllr Connely (Labour) will chair Resourcs and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee with Cllr Janice Long (Labour) vice chair. Cllr Ketan Sheth (Labour) continues to chair Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny with Cllr Diane Collymore vice chair.
Paul Lorber, a previous leader of Brent Council and newly re-elected this time round, made the case for greater participation by opposition councillors. He said scrutiny should come before decision making, not after decisions had been made by Cabinet. Effective scrutiny needs real teeth and power. He said chairing of scrutiny committees by opposition councillors happened in other council. He was backed by Cllr Kasangra for the Conservatives.
This is the moment when Cllr Butt seized more power:
Cllr Butt was having none of it. Such loss of power and patronage was unthinkable. In fact he was actually extending his patronage.
Clearly when there is heavy domination by one party a case can be made on democratic and representative gounds for enabling the opposition to be as effective as possible by appointing them as chairs or vice chairs of scrutiny.
The Centre for Governance and Scrutiny (202-21) Annual Survey of Overview and Scrutiny in Local Government LINK found that in 49% of councils all chairing positions are in the hands of the majority party, and in 17% most chairing positions are in the hands of the majority. In only 20% are chairing positions occupied in a politically balanced way and in just 14% are chairing positions mostly in the hands of the opposition. Importantly it did find that scrutiny in councils where oppositon councillors hold some chairing positions tended overall to be more effective.
Shouldn't we all be in favour of more effective scrutiny?
It is worth remembering what Barry Gardiner told the Kilburn Times in 2014 after Labout won 56 out of 63 council seats on 53% of the votes LINK:
Barry Gardiner MP for Brent North, who attended the vote count, said he was delighted
with the result but issued a stern warning to the group’s councillors.
He said: “I’m thrilled, of course I’m thrilled but we need to be very
careful.
“It is a huge responsibility because a majority this big for any party means
that we have to look within ourselves for the sort of scrutiny that we need of
the policies that we ourselves are proposing.
“All of these people got elected because they managed to persuade voters
they wanted to represent them in the civic centre on the council. They must remember
their job is to represent the people to the bureaucratic of the council and not
to represent the council bureaucrats to the people.
“We are here to be a critical voice to say where things are wrong and to set
policy to change Brent for the better.”
You don't have to look just 'within ourselves' for effective scrutiny if there are opposition councillors also able and willing to do it.
Full details of Cabinet, Committee chairs and Committee members in the new Brent Council adminstration should be released later today before the Council Annual General Meeting takes place at 5pm. You can view the meeting HERE.
Meanwhile following the election of 5 Conservative and 3 Liberal Democrats the allocation of seats has been agreed and published on the agenda. These are:
There are now single Liberal Democrats on the two key Scrutiny Committees alongside single Conservatives which should strengthen scrutiny if a good working relationship is established. However, Lib Dems are not represented on Planning Committee which given the prominence of a critique of new developments in their election campaign is a pity. They also have one seat on the General Purposes Committee which in the last adminstration consisted of Cabinet members plus one Conservative. That arrangement has been criticised as being a Cabinet committee in all but name, thus centralising power, and it will be interesting to see how that situation developes.
The allocation of Liberal Democrat councillors is:
General Purposes: Cllr Lorber
with Cllr Georgiou as first alternate and Cllr Matin as second.
Licensing: Cllr
Georgiou with Cllr Lorber as first alternate and Cllr Matin as second.
Resources and Public Realm: Cllr Georgiou with Cllr Lorber as first alternate
and Cllr Matin as second.
Community and Wellbeing: Cllr Matin with Cllr Lorber
as first alternate and Cllr Georgiou as second.
It is worth noting the difference between allocation of seats in the council as a pecentage of the total and the proportion of the total vote that each part achieved (latter in brackets).
Labour 85.97% (58.60%)
Conservative 8.77% (21.99%)
Liberal Democrat 5.26% (13.52%)
Other constitutional changes are made in the light of the election result. With Liberal Democrats now recognised as a group alongside the Conservatives. Each opposition group will have the right to ask a question at Council and to put a motion.
Philip Grant sent the following Open Email to Brent councillors, Cllr Muahmmed Butt and Cllr Shama Tatler ;and Brent Officers Alan Lunt, Debra Norman and Martin Neil yesterday.
THIS IS AN OPEN EMAIL
Dear Mr Lunt,
I have seen online today that you have
made a key decision to award a contract for the construction of Brent Council's
proposed development at 1 Morland Gardens.
You may remember that in June last year
you wrote to me to confirm that no work would commence at 1 Morland Gardens
until all of the necessary legal requirements for the planned development (such
as stopping-up orders and appropriation of land for planning purposes) we're in
place.
Although the report on which you based
your decision does not appear to have mentioned those legal requirements, I can
inform you that the stopping-up order for the highway in front of 1 Morland
Gardens has not been made. You can check this with Brent's Head of
Healthy Streets, Sandor Fazekas, who will tell you that the period for
objections to the proposed order does not expire until 26 May, and also that
objections have been received, so that there is no certainty that the order
will be made (and even if it is, when that will be).
In these circumstances, it would be a
very big risk to the Council's finances to enter into a contract for nearly £38
million when you do not know whether the planned development will be able to go
ahead.
I also note that the councillors
consulted before your decision was made were Cllrs. Butt and Tatler. As the
decision was required to be made in consultation with the Lead Members for
Education and Regeneration, and there does not appear to be a Lead Member
for Education (the previous holder of the post having lost his seat on the Council
on 5 May), I am not sure how your decision complied with that requirement.
I hope that you, and Brent Council,
will not proceed with the award of the 1 Morland Gardens contract until the
necessary legal requirements have been complied with. Best wishes,
Quintain Ltd have written to the residents and leaseholders of Forum House to annouce that the second tranche of funds for remedial works to the facade of the the Wembley Park building has been refused.
They wrote:
Our priority has always been to ensure that you as residents remain
safe in your homes and that leaseholders of Forum House you receive the
appropriate financial support from the Government’s Building Safety Fund (BSF)
where required.
Since applying to the dedicated Building Safety Fund on your behalf
and submitting the required evidence in December 2020, we were informed in May
2021 that Forum House is eligible to receive financial support from the BSF. We
received the first portion of this funding in September 2021 which allowed us
to align a team of designers and contractors with a trusted supply chain to
plan and prepare the works. We submitted our final application to the
Department of Levelling Up, Housing, and Communities (DLUHC) in October 2021
for the remainder of the funding we sought on your behalf in order to begin
construction.
Unfortunately, we have received notice from the DLUHC that our
application for this crucial second portion of funding has ultimately been
declined, prohibiting us from continuing with the project at this stage.
Although full funding for the project was not formally guaranteed by the DLUHC,
we were not expecting this decision. Since receiving the first portion of funds
to finance the initiation of the project, we received no indication that our
application for further support from the BSF would be unsuccessful.
Throughout this process we have worked closely with a dedicated case
officer at the Greater London Authority (GLA) and BSF since May 2021, both of
which have advised our team and worked with us to ensure our application
followed the requirements set by the DLUHC.
We will now be appealing this decision with the support of industry
consultants and will advise you on any further updates.
Quintain have also put on hold work on the timber decking in the building pending assessment of new guidance.
They conclude:
We would like to re-enforce that Forum House was constructed to meet building regulations at the time it was
completed in 2008. An independent fire officer, who undertook an intrusive survey on the building in late 2020,
deemed Forum House safe and not in need of further fire safety measures that other buildings have had to
implement throughout this remediation process, such as additional fire alarms or a waking watch.
Our priority remains to ensure that you as residents remain safe in your homes and are receiving the
Government support that we believe Forum House is eligible for, should façade remediation be required.
We want to hear your ideas to
improve your neighbourhood. You only have two weeks to apply for the
£2.25million that is available for your community projects.
YOU Decide is a new initiative that gives local people the final say on how to spend cash locally.
£2million*
will be divided equally across the borough for physical improvements to
local neighbourhoods, from painting and refurbishing a local community
centre, improving children’s play areas, painting a mural, or installing
public water fountains. The money will be split equally between the
five Brent Connects areas.
A
further £250,000** will be given out to fund health and wellbeing
projects across the five Brent Connects areas. If you have ideas to help
people take up outdoor gym sessions, walking groups, health screenings,
vaccinations and mental health services, as well as projects that help
people live happy, healthy lives for the future.
If
you are a resident, community group and voluntary organisation, come
together and apply for either fund through a simple application form.
Applications close on 31 May.
YOU
Decide is our new approach to “Participatory Budgeting” which puts you
at the heart of decision-making. A series of Decision Day events where
you decide on the projects that you feel would make a real difference in
your communities.
Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council, said:
How would
you spend more than £2million to improve neighbourhoods and health and
wellbeing across Brent? This is your opportunity to bring your ideas to
life. Building on the success of the CO2GO fund, which focused on green
improvement projects, we’re now encouraging everyone in Brent to come
forward with other creative and positive ideas that can get off the
ground with the cash available. We’d love to hear from you so start
submitting your application today. All ideas are welcome and the process
is simple and easy to follow.”
Now a local resident has launched a petition to Brent Council calling for improvements LINK:
THE PETITION
We the undersigned petition the
council to Regenerate the open space by removing existing playground
and modernising/ redesigning. Include an enclosed dedicated dog run.
Green the space as much as possible and add more seating please. The
current artwork needs replacing as it has graffiti on it and is now
looking tired.
There is a fantastic opportunity to enhance one of the few green
spaces in the Harlesden & Kensal Green Ward. A re-design would
help to make the open space more welcoming especially with the
current structure obscuring the raised beds from the surrounding
roads. Safer equipment for the children is necessary. At present,
dog owners utilise the space the most consistently out of the local
community throughout the day so a dedicated space would be great
for them.
Greening the space would help to reduce carbon emissions, would
give some shelter for those affected by urban heat island effect
and increase the health and wellbeing of the local residents and
community. Additional tree planting would help to reduce associated
flood risk for the area.
Started by: Yolande Dasouza (Bramshill Village & Open Space)
This ePetition runs from 11/05/2022 to 31/05/2022.
