Tuesday, 12 July 2022

How to turn a bi-partisan motion into party political propaganda

Yesterday's Full Council meetin was a curious affair, not least because although the Council recommend the public view on a live stream a technical problem meant that proceedings were all but inaudible. A long-distance static camera means that it is often impossible to know who is speaking (even if you could hear them).   There are no captions identifying the speakers.

Not transparent.

An audible recording is promised which will help to clarify what exactly was said by Brent Council Labour, Muhammed Butt, to so anger Conservative councillor  Suresh Kansagra.

A Liberal Democrat motion on Refugees, that sough cross-party support was amended by the Labour Group.  Some of the amendments were sensible but others inserted statements of self-praise for the Labour Party. Am amendment on Morland Gardens seemed to have been inserted just to make propganda for the Council's controverial proposal for the building.

Despite the propagandist elements of the amendment the motion is very welcome.

Here is the motion, Labour amendment in red. The motion as amended was passed.


Click bottom right for full page

Monday, 11 July 2022

Motion on Support for Refugees and Asylum Seekers - to be heard shortly at Brent Full Council

 

Support for Refugees and Asylum Seekers

 

Liberal Democrat Resolution for tonight’s Full Council.


This Council notes:

Liberal Democr
That refugees and asylum seekers are human beings who deserve our full respect and support.


The way in which Boris Johnson’s government talks about and presents refugees, who face their plight through no fault of their own, is deeply un-British, offensive and shameful.


Our own borough is home to people from all corners of the world and all wish to make a valuable contribution to our international community.


Brent must remain welcoming of refugees and asylum seekers and offer required leadership from a local government level by ensuring refugees who arrive in our community have access to needed support and are given the basic opportunities afforded to all in order that they can make a contribution to society.


Organisations like Care 4 Calais, English for Action, Salusbury World, Young Roots, amongst others, are doing crucial work in our community to help settle refugees and offer basic support, whether through English classes that they run or by seeking to address the immense mental trauma many refugees have and are experiencing.

This Council therefore calls on the government to:


1. Drop its shameful, un-British Rwanda policy.
2. End the hostile environment that seeks to criminalise people who have been forced to flee their homelands through no fault of their own.
3. Acknowledge asylum seekers are making dangerous, tragically, all too often, fatal journeys across Europe to seek sanctuary and safety and therefore must allow asylum seekers the legal right of passage into the UK.
4. Give refugees and asylum seekers the ability to play a full part in our society and economy by giving those who arrive in the UK a right to work quickly under defined and reasonable terms.

 

This Council also resolves to:
1. Immediately establish and publish a directory of ESOL provision within our borough on the Council website and also provide easy access benefit and other advice to those who need it.
2. Extend free bus travel to asylum seekers through the existing payment card system.
3. Organise a Brent Refugee Summit by the end of this year (2022), bringing together organisations, mainly in the voluntary sector, who are currently working to support refugees and asylum seekers locally. This will show a united and concerted effort from this Council that people who arrive locally are welcome here and that Brent will play our part in helping to settle people who given the tools will make hugely valuable contributions to our borough - as those who came before them always have.


Councillor Anton Georgiou
Alperton Ward

 

Brent Council announces it has to cut a further £28 million from its budget

 In a press release published today, just fefore Full Council, Brent Council warns that it has to cut an additional £28 million from its budget:

Rising costs aren’t only hurting ordinary people. Most organisations are also feeling the strain of inflation, especially after the financial shock of the pandemic and Brexit.

 

The things that Brent Council needs to deliver – from building new council homes and maintaining the borough’s roads to statutory services like adult’s and children’s social care – are all becoming more expensive.

 

With the prices of basics, from food to fuel, rapidly increasing – many more families are also being pushed into poverty, meaning there are more people asking for both financial help and other forms of support from the council.

 

At the same time that demand for council services is rising, the money Brent receives directly from central government has been falling. 

 

In the 12 years since April 2010, Brent Council has needed to save £196million from its budget – as the money the council receives directly from central Government has been cut by 78%. 

 

Now, to make matters worse, the Government has said it will only confirm the money it plans to give local authorities for the next two years in December 2022, which makes it difficult for councils to plan. 

 

All of this means Brent now needs to save even more money in order to balance its budget. It is estimated that an extra £28million needs to be saved by 2025, according to a report that went to the council’s Cabinet in July.

 

 

Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council, said:

 

The problems with the UK economy and the cost of living crisis are hitting hardworking people in the pocket and councils are no different.


Massively rising costs, increasing demand for what we do and less money from central government means we now need to make cuts. There is no doubt that finding £28million in savings on top of the £196million we have already saved will not be easy.

 

We are in a better position than many councils thanks to the massive strides we have taken over recent years to modernise and transform the council. We have recently saved money by streamlining senior management but there is more to do.

 

We will need to change how we work in many areas while trying to protect the frontline services that you or your mum, dad, grandparents or children rely on as much as possible.

 

In the autumn we will be launching a full budget consultation and we will need residents to be active participants in helping us to make the tough choices facing us.

 

Sunday, 10 July 2022

LETTER: Lack of information on Brent Council's Gauntlett Court plans is unacceptable

Gauntlett Court, Sudbury 

 

Dear Editor,

Gauntlett Court in Sudbury is a 1950s/1960s development consisting of a number of 3 and 4 storey blocks with grassed communal areas. There are 102 flats within Gauntlett Court and another 12 flats in two 3 storey blocks on the Harrow Road frontage.

Around 50% of the units have now been sold to Leaseholders - many of these are sublet. 

Prior to the most recent local elections the Council published its NCHP (Brent's New Council Housing Programme). This included Gauntlett Court and stated the ambition to add 120 units to the existing number. There was no information as to how this was to be achieved - although the density of units on the site would more than double if 120 was added to the existing 114.

Prior to the elections I challenged the Council information and asked that the residents are advised what the Council was intending. When residents approached their then Labour Councillors they were told that this was all "just speculation" and they had nothing to worry about.

The Council never provided the answers I asked for before the election (and they still have not) They have however reissued the document after the election, with the same ambition for extra 120 units - but still without any meaningful information and detail. I think the residents have the right to know what the Council is intending for their Estate and what implications this will have on their quality of life for many years.

To achieve the target of 120 extra units the council would need to:

* Demolish the estate and rebuild it it a much higher density.
* Build extra flats on top of the existing ones
* take away all or most of the grassed areas to build on

or a combination of the above.

The officer sending out the publication has an interesting job title "Community Consultation and Engagement". Would it not be nice if the Council actually communicated and engaged properly on these kind of important issues?

Issuing a document stating that the Council has a plan to build extra 120 units on the site, without further information, creates confusion, concerns, and potentially blight - especially any leaseholder in the process of selling up and moving on. Those unlucky being caught up by this announcement will either not be able to sell at all or having to accept a substantially below market price. Council tenants living in the blocks also face years of uncertainty and the prospect of living on a building site for many years or being forced to move.

Other residents whose blocks are on the Council NCHP list will of course face similar uncertainty and issues.

So - besides issuing an out of date map - the Council should now explain clearly what the extra new build units mean for each location, how they expect to achieve their target number and over what timescale. Keeping local people most impacted by these ideas in the dark is no longer acceptable.

Paul Lorber
9 July 2022

Fruition return with new proposals for Mumbai Junction - Exhibition July 12th, St Cuthbert's Church 4pm-7pm

 


Fruition have returned with new revised proposals for the site of the Mumbai Junction at 231 Watford Road.  The developer's application was refused by Brent Planning Committee in December last year. LINK

 

To be replaced?

 

Fruition claim to have worked with Brent planning officers on the revised plans and are mounting an exhibition at St Cuthbert's Church, 214 Carlton Avenue West, HA0 3QY on Tuesday July 12th 4pm - 7pm.

They claim they have reduced size and massing of the block of flats, improved cycling provision and improved the frontage. 

CAUTION: Fruition say there is further information on the website www.231watfordroad.co.uk  but both Firefox and Chrome browsers issued warnings that the site was unsafe when I clicked on it.

Wembley Park road closures on July 31st to 'facilitate a sports procession' likely to create more controversy

 Following the controversial use of Fryent Country Park for car parking during the Ed Sheeran concert weekend recently, sharp eyed Philip Grant has spotted this notice in the Brent and Kilburn Times.


Philip commented:

One of the big events coming up at Wembley Stadium is the Women's EUROs football final at Wembley Stadium on 31 July. Will Fryent Country Park, or Fryent Way itself, be used as a car / coach park for that event?

Did anyone else see Brent's notice of a temporary prohibition of traffic, in the Legal Notices section on page 21 of last Thursday's "Brent and Kilburn Times"?

In order 'to facilitate a sports procession' (people having to walk from Fryent Way to the Stadium?), Brent proposes to close the following roads to traffic on 31 July:

'Fryent Way (between Broadview and The Paddocks)
The Paddocks (between Fryent Way and Forty Lane)
Forty Lane (between The Paddocks and Bridge Road)
Bridge Road (between Forty Lane and Brook Avenue)
Brook Avenue (between Bridge Road and Olympic Way)'

There is precedent for closing Fryent Way so that it could be used as a coach park for an international football match LINK.  So far Brent Council has not explained why Fryent Country Park was used as a car park recently and fears have been voiced that this set a precedent for similar future action. The action was particularly controversial because it was on the weekend of RMT strikes and appeared to seek to undermine the effectiveness of the action.

I will ask Brent Council for an explanation.

Saturday, 9 July 2022

Cllr Tatler responds to challenge over Brent Council's support for tall residential blocks across the borough

 

Brent's Local Plan incudes designated areas for tall buildings as well as intensification corridors  based on the assumption that given the shortage of  land in the borough the only way to address the housing crisis is by building up and maximising high density housing on a small footprint. 

Shama Tatler, Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Planningm recently short-listed to be Labour's parliamentary candidate for the Watford constituency, has been a strong advocate of such a response, even though Labour in Watford has campaigned against the Liberal Democrat Mayor's support for tall buildings.

Covid lockdown revealed problems over contagion of the virus in lifts, staircases and shared landings, as well as the lack of amenity space in which to get socially-distanced exercise in fresh air.

Problems were even worse for families with small children socially isolating in small flats, particularly on upper floors.

Alongside this has been the post-Grenfell cladding crisis which has plunged many into debt as well as anxiety, paying not only for repairs but also for fire-watches. People with disabilities have found themselves in the middle of conflicting advice over 'stay put' policies as well as the difference of opinion over the efficacy of PEEPs (Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans) supported by the London Fire Brigade but opposed by the government. Readers may recall the long-running saga of South Kilburn resident John Healy's attempts to get a PEEP from Brent Council.

Then there is of course the problem of the amount of truly affordable housing in new developments with Brent Council's insistence on terming Shared Ownership affordable. 

Finally academic reports question the energy efficiency of tall buildings when many local authorities, including Brent, have declared a Climate Emergency.

Not limited to tall buildings is the emerging issue of uncapped energy prices for residents whose homes are connected to a District Heating Network. Some relief was promised while all eyes were on Boris Johnson wriggling on a hook of hs own devising, when the government announced. 'We will ensure families living on Heat Networks are better protected. By appointing Ofgem as the new regulator for Heat Network in Great Britain, we will ensure customers get a fair price and a releaible source of heat.' 

Hear Martin Lewis' alarming Channel 4 piece on likely fuel bills in October HERE .

Whether this will be progressed amidst current political turmoil remains to be seen. The government has published a Fact Sheet HERE

It is against this background the the Liberal Democrat councillor for Alperton, Anton Georgiou, ask Shama Tatler a written question ahead of Monday's Council Meeting.

Readers can judge for themselves the adequacy of Cllr Tatler's written response and hear any further discussion on the Council's livestream starting at 6pm on Monday LINK:

 

Question from Councillor Georgiou to Councillor Tatler, Cabinet Member for Regeneration & Planning.


Five years on from the Grenfell Tower disaster, which highlighted to many the safety issues associated with tall buildings, developers with issues in their existing stock (including in Brent) continue to be let off the hook. With building regulations still nowhere near clear enough, what assurances can the Cabinet Members for Regeneration & Planning, give to residents that:


· Tall buildings are safe for local people?
· Tall buildings are suitable as family homes, particularly for young children?
· About the number of families (including how many) Brent currently place in
flats above the 5th floor?
· In view of the 2019 UCL (University College London) study into the energy efficiency of such buildings that allowing so many buildings, higher than 6 storeys, is not making the Climate Emergency in Brent much worse?


Response:


Safety of Tall buildings


The Building Safety Act 2022 contains a series of reforms to building safety and is the most substantial legislative response to the Grenfell Tower fire of 2017.


A Building Safety Regulator (BSR) has been established within the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Their role relates to buildings with 7 or more storeys or that are 18 metres high and have at least two residential units, or are hospitals or care homes. These are known as higher risk buildings (HRB).


The BSR is likely to rely relies (sic) on council building control services (and fire and rescue services) to deliver the building control regulations for HRBs, which is expected to involve multi-disciplinary teams.


The BSR has three main functions:


(1) To implement a new regulatory regime for higher-risk buildings, and
to be the building control authority for these buildings. This includes
building work on existing HRBs and enforcing the regime in terms of their occupation, as well as new HRBs. The BSR looks at all aspects of the Building Regulations not just fire related provisions. The BSR uses a multi- disciplinary team, which is likely to include local authority building control teams. There are three gateway points where details must be approved before progressing to the next stage:


· planning gateway (in place since August 2021); the planning application must demonstrate that fire safety requirements have been considered and incorporated into the construction proposals;

· construction – pre construction, the regulator must approve the design as compliant with the building regulations;


· completion – at pre-occupation stage, a completion certificate will only be issued by the BSR once they are satisfied that the work is complaint with the building regulations.


Only once Gateway three has been passed (either for partial or full completion) can the new building be registered with the Building Safety Regulator for occupation. The BSR will then be responsible for carrying out checks to ensure that the people responsible for managing HRB’s are managing Building Safety risks, complying with their duties and keeping residents safe through the Building Assessment Certificate process.


(2) To oversee the safety and performance of all buildings. This involves collecting data on the performance of local authority building control services, and external approved inspectors.
(3) To support the competence of those working in the built environment industry, and to manage the register of accredited building inspectors. This involves establishing an industry led competence committee and establishing competence requirements for building control professionals (who need to be in place when the system becomes operational). Brent Building Control will ensure it complies with the requirements.


The BSR will be responsible for holding local authorities and building inspectors to account, with the power to suspend or remove inspectors from the register where necessary.


The Fire Safety Act 2021 became law in April 2021. It introduced changes to fire safety law for buildings containing two or more sets of domestic premises in England and Wales. The aim of the Fire Safety Act is to clarify who is responsible for managing and reducing fire risks in different parts of multi occupied residential buildings. It has introduced new fire safety obligations to some leaseholders, building owners and managers for the building structure, external wall, common parts and doors between domestic premises and common parts.


Suitability of Tall buildings as family homes


Fire safety requirements are for all people and types of household not just families with young children. The above sets out details on the changes that are being implemented.


Number of families Brent currently place in flats above the 5th floor


According to our household records there are 179 children across 108 households living on the fifth floor or above. These 108 households sit across 31 blocks.


Energy efficiency of buildings and impact on Climate Emergency in Brent

 

Both the London Plan and Brent Local Plan have been the subject of Sustainability Appraisals and in themselves include a range of policies to ensure that development including tall buildings respond to climate change and environmental efficiency requirements. Brent Policies for example include minimising greenhouse gas emissions, energy infrastructure, urban greening and sustainable drainage. Tall
buildings allow for an effective use of land in highly accessible locations and have advantages of minimising car travel and support infrastructure being delivered in a sustainable way such as waste management and energy.