LETTER: 11 letters from Brent this year demanding cumulative annual rent for an allotment plot vacated in 2015

Dear Editor,

Brent Council has been pursuing me for seven years for payment of a series of invoices which it knows perfectly well were issued in error. This year I have received eleven - yes, you read that right, eleven! - demands for payment of a debt of £93.80. The two reminders which arrived in the post yesterday threaten me with "legal proceedings ...... without further notice". I want to emphasise that I do not owe Brent Council any money, and they know that I don't.

The background to this is that in 2015 I decided to give up my tenancy of an allotment at Kinch Grove. I believe the plot was re-let the following year, but I continued to receive invoices for the rent which - perhaps foolishly - I ignored. In 2020, having received a cumulative bill for several hundred pounds, I spoke to a helpful officer in Debt Recovery, and then to the Allotment Service who confirmed that every invoice since 2015 had been issued in error. I hoped that would be the end of the matter.

This year I returned from holiday at the beginning of February to find four demands for payment of a new invoice issued in 2021. I spoke to the same  - very helpful - officer in Debt Recovery, who told me that mine was by no means an isolated case. The Allotment Service, he said, "know about this, and keep on doing it". After I received a further three reminders, the Allotment Service claimed on February 28 that they would issue a credit note, but yesterday I received another two letters, now threatening immediate legal action, at which point I made a formal complaint to the Council. Unfortunately I have no faith that this will resolve the problem, but I do hope that publicising this on Wembley Matters might help others who find themselves in a similar position.

 

Philip Bromberg

(Address supplied)

NAHT takes first step towards judicial review proceedings against Ofsted following its failure to pause inspections

From the National Association of Headteachers

Yesterday school leaders’ union NAHT wrote to His Majesty’s Chief Inspector to demand a suspension of Ofsted inspections while steps are taken to address the risk to the mental health of school staff and enable suicide risk prevention to be put in place.

The letter is the first step in judicial review proceedings and cites Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which imposes obligations on public authorities to take reasonable steps where there is a real and immediate risk of a loss of life.

NAHT argues that the recent death of Ruth Perry, and the citing of Ofsted inspections as a factor in the deaths of 10 teachers*, indicates the human rights of school staff are not being protected by the current Ofsted regime and that immediate action is needed to minimise harm and protect lives.

NAHT has called on Ofsted to pause inspections whilst a review is carried out to identify and put in place immediate measures to minimise the risk of harm to school staff.

Paul Whiteman, general secretary of school leaders’ union NAHT, said: 

The tragic death of Ruth Perry has shone a light on the intolerable pressure placed on school leaders and their staff during Ofsted inspections. It shouldn’t take a tragedy to force change, but Ofsted has shown no inclination to change on its own.

We have requested that Ofsted works with NAHT, as recognised representatives of school leaders, to identify and agree immediate actions that can be taken. It is essential that these actions are discussed and agreed with NAHT if it is to make any meaningful difference. It needs to be done with us, not to us. Up until now those requests have been ignored. As such, we have no alternative but to go down this route.

Whilst Ofsted have issued warm words, that is simply not good enough and it has shown nothing like the understanding or urgency that this situation requires.

School leaders are determined that this should be a watershed moment and that such a tragedy can never be allowed to happen again.

NAHT have demanded a reply from Ofsted by Thursday 6 April.  

* As revealed in a recent Observer article. The underlying academic report cited by The Observer can be found here.

TfL proposals for a new high-quality Cycleway between Wembley and Willesden Junction

 From Transport for London

Since April 2019, we have been working closely with Brent Council to develop a scheme that would make it easier for local people to walk and cycle between Wembley and Willesden Junction.

Our proposals for a new high-quality Cycleway between Wembley and Willesden Junction would make streets in the area safer and more pleasant by enabling people to walk and cycle more and drive less. This would help us to reduce air pollution, carbon emissions and congestion in the area.

The proposals would support local businesses by keeping existing loading and parking bays and introducing new and improved pedestrian crossings over Harrow Road. Better street lighting and more trees and plants will help make the area feel safer and more welcoming.

An update on previous engagement

From January to March 2020, we spoke with communities in the Wembley, Stonebridge, and Harlesden neighbourhoods to help us develop our proposals so that they meet local priorities. We have now published a detailed report on this engagement. The report details who we spoke with, what we found, and includes actions and recommendations that we have taken forward. The pandemic delayed the publication of this report and the project overall until now as we were forced to pause work on some of our walking and cycling schemes.

Phase 1: Wembley Central station to Harlesden station

In Autumn 2022, vital investment was secured as part of TfL’s funding agreement with Government to take forward our key priority Healthy Streets schemes to make the capital's roads safer and more attractive for those walking and cycling.

We and Brent Council have since agreed to progress the first phase of walking and cycling improvements between Wembley Central station and Harlesden station. 

 Frequently Asked Questions

Why have you chosen this area of Brent for this scheme?

Cycling in London has grown significantly over the past 15 years. There are now more than 670,000 cycle trips a day in London, an increase of over 130% since 2000. 

In 2017, TfL published its latest Strategic Cycling Analysis (SCA) - the latest datasets, forecasts and models showing potential locations across London where cycling demand, current and future, would justify investment.

The SCA identified the Wembley to Willesden Junction corridor as being on one of the top six routes in London with the greatest potential future demand for cycling, but only if we provide new facilities to help and encourage people to cycle.

A fully segregated cycleway was originally considered on main roads between Wembley and Willesden Junction. In light of local concerns around road congestion this has since been scaled back to a less intrusive scheme based mostly on quiet residential back streets, with some main road segregated sections where impacts on traffic are expected to be low.

Work on this scheme was paused in March 2020 due to the pandemic and resumed in autumn 2022 following our financial settlement with Government, which provides us with funding to spring 2024. 

What benefits does this scheme aim to bring to the local community?

Seven people tragically lost their lives while cycling in London in 2022. That is simply unacceptable.

Between 2015 and 2018, 24 collisions on between Wembley and Willesden Junction involved cyclists. In the same period 93 collisions involved pedestrians. One person sadly lost their life. 

Between 22 January 2018 and 28 December 2020, 90 collisions occurred on Harrow Road (where we are proposing to build a section of segregated cycle track and improve pedestrian crossings) resulting in 109 casualties. Nine of these casualties were cyclists. Fourteen were pedestrians, two of which sadly suffered serious injuries.

We would improve this by providing a safe cycle route connecting Wembley Central and Harlesden stations. Crossing the A406 north circular is particularly perilous and puts many would-be cyclists off getting on a bike in the first place. 

Our proposals will provide a fully segregated cycle track over the north circular, giving cyclists of all confidence levels a safe route between communities on the north and south of this busy junction for the first time. Making cycling a safe, attractive, genuinely viable alternative to completing local journeys by car would decrease the reliance on driving, reduce congestion, make the area more walkable, and improve air quality.

What is Vision Zero for London?

Vision Zero represents our aim to eradicate deaths and serious injuries from our roads and make London a safer, healthier and greener place by 2041.   

Major cities around the world are taking a stand to end the toll of deaths and injury seen on their roads and transport networks by committing to Vision Zero. London is at the forefront of this approach and the Mayor's Transport Strategy sets out the goal that, by 2041, all deaths and serious injuries will be eliminated from London's transport network. 

It is neither inevitable nor acceptable that anyone should be killed or seriously injured when travelling in London. When we leave our homes each day, we should feel safe and confident about the journey ahead. 

The proposals for a safe walking and cycling route between Wembley Central and Harlesden stations are part of the work we are doing towards meeting the Vision Zero.

Will this scheme cause more congestion in the area, especially on Wembley Stadium event days?

The first phase of the scheme - between Wembley Central and Harlesden stations - will run mostly along quiet residential streets. The only section of the scheme currently proposed on main roads is the section on the A404 Harrow Road/Brentfield which crosses the north circular between Sylvia Gardens and First Drive. 

We continue to engage with Brent Council and The Football Association / Wembley Stadium about post-event traffic arrangements. As we are not proposing to reduce road capacity on Harrow Road southbound towards the north circular (which is the main exit route for most traffic after events) we do not anticipate the scheme will increase congestion. This is something that we, The FA and Brent Council will continue to monitor very closely.

Will the residential streets you are proposing to run the scheme along be able to cope with the predicted number of cyclists using the scheme?

• North side of A406: London Road, Tokyngton Avenue, Sylvia Gardens
• South side of A406. First Drive, Stonebridge Park, Albert Terrace, Milton Avenue, Shelley Road, Mordaunt Road

We are confident that these streets will provide more than enough safe space for cyclists without impacting on residents who will continue to be able to access and park outside their homes.

In the future, should the scheme prove popular enough that cyclist numbers increase to a level where these streets can no longer safely accommodate them, we will consider bringing forward  proposals for a fully segregated cycle track along main roads between Wembley Central and Willesden Junction stations. 

In spring 2023 we plan to launch a public consultation on proposals for this first phase.

If you want to find out more about this project, email us at: localcommunitiesandpartnerships@tfl.gov.uk(External link) and quote “Wembley to Willesden” in the subject line.

 

Nearly 50 years on, time for a new 'Great Debate' on education? Ofsted, high stakes testing, narrowed curriculum and a devalued profession all features of the current crisis

 

I was in my first year of teaching, as a mature entrant, almost 50 years ago in 1976 when the Prime Minister James Callaghan launched the 'Great Debate' on education in a speech at Ruskin College. LINK

That speech was the launchpad for the many changes that followed implemented by both Labour and Conservative governments, some good, some bad and often with unexpected consequences.

Today government attitudes towards teachers exemplified by the derisory pay offer are clear and contribute to low morale, demotivation and a recruitment and retention crisis. The role of Ofsted is under scrutiny as never before following the tragic death of a headteacher in the wake of an expected poor Ofsted judgement on the school that she cherished. Ofsted itself, despite claims of its independence is linked to Government policies including the high stakes testing found in primary schools, which in turn contributes to a narrowing of the curriculum and the loss of arts  subjects.  This is compounded by a school funding crisis that means such subjects are a low priority when it comes to allocating the school budget.

It is worth quoting Callaghan:

Everyone is allowed to put his oar in on how to overcome our economic problems, how to put the balance of payments right, how to secure more exports and so on and so on. Very important too. But I venture to say not as important in the long run as preparing future generations for life. RH Tawney, from whom I derived a great deal of my thinking years ago, wrote that the endowment of our children is the most precious of the natural resources of this community. So I do not hesitate to discuss how these endowments should be nurtured.

 

Let me answer that question 'what do we want from the education of our children and young people?' with Tawney's words once more. He said: 'What a wise parent would wish for their children, so the state must wish for all its children.'

The campaign group 'More Than a Score' has undertaken research to see what parents wish for in terms of their children's education and their report concludes LINK:

It is wrong to use SATs results as shorthand for high standards in primary education. While test data may generate easy headlines, parents and school leaders understand that an 11-year-old’s tests results cannot provide an accurate picture of their overall academic abilities and should not be used as a blunt tool to measure standards.

These views — held by an overwhelming majority — are not reflected in current policy. Everyone who values children’s education believes in high standards, but it is time to change the language and shift the debate so that children’s learning, not data, is prioritised.

The report is extremely important at a time when government ministers justify their education policy, including Ofsted and SATs with the mantra 'we know this is what parents want' backed up with very little evidence. Callaghan called for a 'rational debate based on the facts' - More Than a Score's effort to intruduce some evidence into the discussion is very welcome.

Reacting to the report Rosamund McNeil, assistant general secretary off the National Education Union, said;  

The views of education staff and parents have been made clear in More Than a Score’s research – primary school SATs are not an indicator of educational standards, or whether a child is ready for secondary school.

Both parents and educators feel standards should be measured in better ways, such as engagement with a broad and rich curriculum, not limited to English and Maths. This is a standard our high-stakes system is failing to meet. Schools face incredible pressure from government to prioritise tested subjects which mean the arts, humanities, and sciences are being squeezed from the school week.

Children’s mental health should also be an indicator of standards. Engagement with, and excitement about learning is not well served by SATs preparation or the SATs pressure. Children deserve a fairer system which captures more of what they achieve and they contribute. Children should be looking forward to another day of primary school, where they feel inspired and happy to learn.

The NEU wants to see an assessment system that supports children's learning and gives meaningful information to parents and educators. The system needs to be redesigned to meet those standards, not the ones set by government to hold schools to account.

High Stakes Testing is just one aspect of the current crisis and the report (below) perhaps will start a process of evidence gathering that will contribute to a new debate.

Brent Private Renters Union: Brent should follow Hackney in funding rnforcement action on damp and mould in private accommodation

Recently Wembley Matters carried the news that members of the London Renters Union in Hackey had won £400k from Hackney Council to address issues of mould and damp in privately rented accommodation.

Asked for a comment the Brent branch  of London Renters Union said:

 We say well done to Hackney Council - they will invest a further £400,000 in the housing standards enforcement team to crack down on mould and damp. Stronger enforcement means that is harder for landlords to get away with forcing renters into dangerous conditions. This will hopefully improve the health and well-being of tens of thousands of people and raise standards of accommodation.

We hope Brent will follow. 

Although Brent agreed to our demand to try to bring in borough-wide licensing, this on its own won't be sufficient - just look at the level of dangerous hazards in areas that already have licensing, like Mapesbury and Kensal Green. In addition to this, we trust they'll continue to lobby energetically the national government for the protections that private renters deserve. After all, most private renters are handing over a huge percentage of their income to property owners! https://haveyoursay.brent.gov.uk/en-GB/projects/selective-licensing-of-private-rented-housing/1 [ go to pg 29]

Michaela petition now at 4,323 signatories. No comment from school or Brent Council yet. Petition call for Michaela School to provide a Prayer Room for students amid allegations of 'disturbing' treatment of Muslim students

A petition has been launched calling for Michaela School in Wembley, where Home Secertary Suella Braverman was one of the founders and the first Chair of Governors, to provide a Prayer Room for students. By noon Thursday the petition had 4,323 signatories.

The petition makes a number of allegations about the treatment of Muslim pupils in the school and claims that this is disturbing 'Islamophobic' behaviour: 

A school that prides itself on being “multi cultural” and “multi faith” is treating their Muslim students in this way?? What’s worse is that this school is majority Muslim students and there is no prayer room designated for them. Students have requested for a prayer room which has  been refused by the school and so they have to pray on the floor outside.

The petition asks students who have experienced such treatment and concerned parents to get in touch because the petitioner wants to escalate the issue to the 'school board' (Board of Governors) and the local council.

Michaela is a free school so not under the direct oversight of Brent Council, but the local authority does have responsibility for the safeguarding and wellbeing of all children in the borough.

You can read the Petition in full HERE

 Both Michaela Community School and Brent Council were asked for a comment yesterday but neither had responded by the time this was published today.

UPDATE: No comment from either by noon today despite social media commentary.

NEU Executive recommends rejection of derisory unfunded Government pay offer

 20,000 teachers took part in a National Education Union on-line meeting this evening to hear the Government's pay offer after 6 days of intensive negotiations. As the meeting progressed, on-line comments showed teachers' anger at the offer and Co-General Secretary Kevin Courtney had to reassure them that the NEU was recommending members  reject the the ballot - which was to be sent out after the meeting.

The pay offer averaging 4.5% itself was poor but worse was it going to be unfunded apart from a Government contribution 0.5% thus creating a financial crisis for many schools, leading to potential redundancies, particularly in support staff.

The Government attempted to impose a condition that the offer would only stand if all four unions involved either recommended acceptance or were neutral, otherwise the offer would be witdrawn. The NEU will recommend rejection.

Clearly the ball is now in the Government's court.

The slides below give some headlines but you can see the full meeting HERE

 

THE GOVERNMENT REJECTED THESE DEMANDS

THE GOVERNMENT OFFERED

THE GOVERNMENT'S ATTEMPT TO SET CONDITIONS REJECTED BY NEU

Vix Lowthion, a high school teacher and Green Party spokesperson on education said this morning:

Could teachers feel any more let down, abandoned, insulted, angry and hated by government than we do this morning? 

We don't do this for them. We do it for our young people. We keep going. 

I can only conclude that the govt despise the entire profession. 

The feeling's mutual.

A useful campaigning summary of Part A of the very disturbing latest IPCC report on climate change

 

I, and many others, are grateful to Tahir Latif of the Greener Jobs Alliance for this summary of the latest IPCC Report

This piece provides a summary of the latest IPCC synthesis report based on their sixth Assessment Report (AR6).

Given that even the relatively short ‘summary for policy makers’ is not an easy read, here we attempt to draw out the basic information about where we currently are. None of these points will surprise anyone but having them to hand in this way will we hope be useful. Note that this piece deals only with section A of the report, covering the current state of the climate. A further blog will cover parts B and C, which are about modelling to project likely scenarios for the long and short-term respectively.

Headline figure

Average global temperature for 2011-2020 is 1.1 deg C above that for 1850-1900.

IPCC is unequivocal about the primary role of human activity in this increase; the contribution ascribed to ‘natural’ drivers is between -0.1 deg and +0.1 deg C.

Emissions since 1850 = 2400 gigatons CO2; 42% of that figure has been emitted since 1990.

CO2 parts per million in the atmosphere is 410, the highest for 2million years.
Methane and NOx levels are highest for 800,000 years.

GHG emissions in 2019 are 12% higher than in 2010, and 54% higher than 1990.
The decade 2010-2019 has the highest absolute emissions, but the growth rate has been lower than for 2000-2009.

2019 emissions were

79% from the energy, industry, transport and building sectors.

22% from agriculture, forestry and other land use.

Emissions reduction efforts were outweighed by increases during the last decade.

Global distribution

(on a CO2-equivalent per capita basis)
Global average = 6.9t per person
35% of population = above 9t
41% of population = below 3t
Least Developed Countries populations = 1.7t
Top 10% of global population contributes 34-45% of emissions.
Bottom 50% = 13-15%

Changes in sea level rise

1901-1971 = 1.3mm per annum
1971-2006 = 1.9 mm p.a.
2006-2008 = 3.7mm p.a.

Highly vulnerable to mortality and illness attributable to climate change = 3.3-3.6 billion people.

Covers Africa, Asia, Central and South America, Least Developed Countries (LDCs), Small Islands, the Arctic, along with indigenous people and low-income households everywhere.

Ecosystem degradation approaching irreversibility in a number of regions, particularly permafrost thaw in the Arctic.

Reduced food and water security is hindering efforts to meet UN Sustainability Development Goals. Half the world experiences severe water scarcity for at least part of the year.

Extreme heat has led to increased food-borne and water-borne diseases, mental health issues and trauma, loss of livelihood and culture.

Adverse impacts, unequally distributed, include damage to industry and services, destruction of homes and infrastructure, effects on gender and social inequalities.

Adaptation

Planning and implementation has progressed, and shown benefits, but with varying effectiveness. Gaps exist and will grow at current implementation rate. Limits of adaptation reached in some regions.

Global financial flows are preventing implementation, especially in Less Developed countries (LDCs) due to:

• Insufficient funds,
• Low climate literacy,
• Lack of political commitment,
• Low sense of urgency.

Gap between cost of adaptation and finances allocated is widening.

Green energy is technically viable and reducing in cost. In some regions transitioning to green energy is cheaper than maintaining emissions-intensive systems. A shortfall in meeting commitments made at Kyoto, Paris and Glasgow make keeping to 1.5 deg C unlikely.

Deep reductions in emissions are required during the 2020s to keep below 2 deg C by 2100. Median scenario, if all pledges are kept, is 2.8 deg C by 2100. Net zero pledges have limited policies to deliver on them. The implementation gap suggests a median scenario of 3.2 deg C by 2100.

Tahir Latif
Secretary, Greener Jobs Alliance
March 2023