Wednesday, 20 September 2023

Brent-based charity, An-Nisa Society, calls for urgent investigation into institutional Islamophobia at Brent Council

 Guest post by An-Nisa Society

 

Two weeks ago, a young Muslim mother with her baby was attacked with Islamophobic abuse on the 260 bus in Harlesden. She was called a ‘jihadi,’ referring to her faith, and was sworn at in an unprovoked incident. No one, except another Muslim woman, challenged the man. Even more shocking was that the Mayor of Brent stood right next to the abuser and did not report the incident to the relevant authorities.

 

By chance, journalist Shamim Chowdhury was on the same bus, challenged the abuser and offered support to the woman that was being attacked. She was consequently threatened by him as well. What was particularly tragic, is that several passengers on the bus, rather than support the traumatised victim, raised their voices in support of the male abuser! This, despite, judging from the image, everyone on the bus and the abuser were people of colour!

 

Shamim managed to take a photograph of the abuser and posted it onto Twitter detailing what happened and also reported the incident to the police and Transport for London (TfL).

 

 


 

The tweet went viral, reaching and surpassing half a million views. Members of the public identified that the woman in the flowery top standing next to the abuser was actually the Mayor of Brent, Councillor Orleen Hylton. The issue is not that the Mayor did not challenge the abuser there and then, but that in her position and role as Mayor and Councillor, she did not later report the incident to the police and the relevant departments within Brent Council. It was her duty and moral obligation to speedily report the incident and take action, and we cannot understand why she chose to remain silent.

 

As a Brent-based charity that works for the welfare of Muslim women and families for the past 35 plus years, we were horrified with what had happened. We immediately asked Brent Council for a response. Working with Muslim women, we know that many live in constant fear of being attacked, as Islamophobic abuse is rife in Brent. We circumscribe our lives to avoid abuse, as we don’t feel safe. However, none of us can avoid going out or using public transport.

 

Sadly, we have had several reports of attacks on Muslim women in Brent and in particular on buses and bus stops on the Harrow Road route through Harlesden. It begs the question as to why this is happening on this route and it needs to be investigated.

 

Muslims suffer the highest levels of abuse and attacks across the UK, and these are greatly under-reported and not even recorded for a variety of reasons. Muslim women especially are on the frontlines of Islamophobic attacks.

 

In Brent we have had reports of many Muslim women being attacked. Road crossings seem to be a favoured place for attacks as well as on buses. Outside Islamia School in Salusbury Road, there have been several instances of attempts at running Muslim women over, usually with children in tow! One Muslim woman at another crossing, had a woman stop her car, get out and hit her on the head with, ironically, a bunch of flowers, while shouting anti-Muslim expletives.

 

So, you can imagine our distress and horror at this incident on the 260 bus. Hundreds of people on Twitter were also enraged at the attack, with many leaving comments and retweeting. The views of the photo that the journalist posted were rapidly increasing, reaching over 630k at the time of writing. On my personal LinkedIn page post of the incident, there are over 20,500 impressions today and rising, with numerous shares and comments agreeing that such attacks were rife and expressing shock at the Mayor’s lack of action. The Muslim community in Brent were also sharing the incident on WhatsApp and in person with each other, speaking about their shock and distress. Despite the upset the incident caused and the growing comments, Brent Council remained silent for five days.

 

We expected that there would have been a deluge of councillors expressing concern about the safety of women, there are 57 of them! But disappointingly, only a couple of Muslim male councillors responded and a new female Muslim councillor, Ishma Moeen, who expressed strong concern and gave a promise to work for change. Why is a Muslim woman being attacked locally, only a concern for Muslim councillors?

 

The response that eventually came from the council was shocking in its banality, basically a ‘fobbing off’ type of classic corporate statement. Clearly, they did not give the incident any importance. The response from the Mayor, whose ward consists of 27% Muslims, sounded uncaring and inconsistent. She said she was at the front of the bus, so denied that she saw or heard anything but also contradictorily added that she was intimidated, which is why she didn’t intervene! It seems highly unlikely according to journalist, Shamim Chowdury, that the Mayor did not see and hear what was going on as such a big ruckus was created on the bus.

 

The Mayor’s lack of action as a public servant is of grave concern. In our view, she displayed moral cowardice and lack of integrity. She has not even apologised at the very least for her actions. This year, funnily enough, the Mayor was appointed for her ‘service’ to the borough In her appointment statement she “assured the community that she will work tirelessly…to surpass expectations and deliver the best results for Brent’s diverse communities.” As a result of her actions, how can the community trust the Mayor to fairly represent their issues with understanding and vigour, if she ignores abuse that she’s been a witness to? She has lost all credibility. She has failed in her duty to Brent residents. The moral and right thing for her to do is to resign. Or failing that the council should sack her. 

 

However, neither has happened, she continues to be a guest of honour at events in the borough, shockingly so soon after the bus incident. There was the Mayor’s Fun Day, in Wembley on Saturday 16 September, organised by Brent Health Matters, which is a council initiative, and she was seen laughing and enjoying herself, as well as being given status and kudos.

 

On Sunday, she was guest of honour at Queens Park Day, where she was spotted by a Muslim Harlesden resident, whose daughter was performing there. The resident approached the Mayor, and politely told her that ‘her response to a woman being verbally abused was disappointing.’ She replied, that a statement had been issued. He asked if she could tell him the main points of the statement as he had not seen it, and whether she had written it herself or if was it delegated. At that point, security stepped in and whisked her away! The Harlesden resident was very disturbed by the incident and Brent Council’s lack of robust response. He told me, “The Mayor has a responsibility as a representative of the community to model the behaviour we ask of our kids.” He added, “I have a daughter, who will soon be travelling to school alone on local buses and if the Mayor can’t take action to keep the local area and buses safe, then we are very concerned.” 

 

 


 The Mayor at Queens Park Day

 

So, not only has the Mayor not resigned or been suspended, she continues to merrily carry out her duties at local community events in total disregard for the huge upset amongst the community. This behaviour is symptomatic of the lack of moral integrity in local and central government, and politics generally.  It also sends signals that Islamophobia and attacking vulnerable Muslim women is okay.

 

Meanwhile, the council’s statement did not answer any of the questions that we posed, other than it had been reported to the police (not by the Mayor obviously)!  We had asked the council for specifics to let us know who in the police is dealing with this incident; what are they doing about it; we asked for figures on Islamophobic attacks in Brent; what are the monitoring processes; how are these attacks recorded. There was radio silence and still is. We do not accept their condescending statement, and want tangible and measurable actions so that such attacks are stopped.

 

We also wanted to know what the council is doing to ensure the safety of Muslims, particularly Muslim women. Apparently, there is  a Brent Council Community Safety Team, surely, they should be aware of and have policies to deal with Islamophobia? But when we have asked for it, the council ignores the request and does not provide the information which should be readily available. Instead, the council has proposed a disingenuous offer of hosting an event for Islamophobia Awareness Month. The event was a big flop last year and had no strategic objective to deal with Islamophobia. And as far as we are concerned, without anti-Islamophobia measures being embedded in its policies and procedures, such an event is just window dressing and pointless.

 

We are convinced that if a woman had been attacked from any other community in Brent with the Brent Mayor present and ignoring the incident, it would have had a much more urgent and robust response. We feel that we, Brent Muslims are ignored and are treated with contempt by the council.

 

Institutional Islamophobia

 

Abuse and attacks and how they are mishandled by the authorities puts the spotlight once again on widespread Islamophobia in the public sphere. However, that’s not only where it exists. It is thriving in the public sector, which is supposed to cater equitably and sensitively for the needs of our citizens, who are tax payers. 

 

The way this attack has been so atrociously handled, demonstrates a clear example of institutional Islamophobia. Coincidentally, in a separate incident in a few days after the attack, a group of Muslim women set up a petition, due to institutional Islamophobia they suffered in Everyone Active Leisure Centres within Brent and Westminster, who demonstrated a complete lack of understanding or respect for the needs of Muslim women in sport. This type of insensitivity leads to Muslim women not taking part in sports, contributing to poor health outcomes.

 

To begin with, contrary to the incorrect popular belief, Islamophobia is not about racism (which is about colour). Islamophobia is about a hatred, prejudice and ignorance of Islam and Muslims, resulting in abuse, attacks and discrimination. It can be perpetrated by people of all colours against Muslims of all colours. Institutional Islamophobia is anti-Muslim discrimination in the public sector, both in its internal practices and service delivery, this can be deliberate or unintended, due to ignorance and lack of understanding.

 

To be clear, Muslims are a multi-ethnic, heterogenous and diverse community. We are not ‘Asians!’ Our values and most of our needs are influenced by our faith, whether we practise Islam a little or a lot. We are all as a group, also targets for abuse, prejudice and discrimination.

 

Brent is a good example, of how even in such a multi-cultural and multi-faith borough, both Islamophobic abuse and institutional anti-Muslim discrimination are thriving. As a charity that has been based in Brent for almost 40 years, widely known for being at the forefront of campaigning against Islamophobia, we have been saddened and disappointed by this council’s consistent indifference and lack of concern for its Muslim residents. We have been advocating and appealing to the council for decades to address the invisibility of Brent Muslims to the council and its own institutional Islamophobia. See our blog post on Wembley Matters about the Invisibility of Muslims in Brent.

 

Despite, the awards that Brent has won for its diversity, there is actually rampant institutional Islamophobia, which includes insensitive and discriminatory workplace practices and service delivery. Let’s just look at a few examples:


Muslims staff employed in Brent - By their own figures Muslim staff in Brent are underrepresented (10%) and are not commensurate to the large number of Muslims (21%) that live in Brent. Why is there an under-representation of Muslim council employees?  In addition, Brent Muslim employees have reported Islamophobic discrimination and abuse internally to us, which they feel afraid to report to the council due to repercussions and victimisation.

 

Public Services - The council provides a wide number of services such as child protection, children in care, health, housing, education amongst a lot of other services.  Insensitivity, outright discrimination and lack of understanding of Muslim needs are responsible for Muslim social exclusion; research and surveys repeatedly show Muslims have some of the highest levels of ill health and socio-economic disadvantage in the country, including Brent. From our own experience with Brent Council, over decades, through our interactions and the experience of our community, we believe we are ill-served by Brent Council.

 

While this was happening, the latest of numerous research reports showing Muslim specific disadvantage and inequalities, was published showing that Muslims had higher rates of death from Covid and, as significant numbers of worked in health services as essential workers, they faced greater exposure to the risks. This demonstrates that research using faith as a factor, alongside race and ethnicity, clearly highlight more accurately the true reality of the discrimination that Muslim specifically suffer.

 

We are not asking for special treatment or privileges. We are saying that the council needs to take Islamophobia seriously in all its forms. It needs to tackle Islamophobia as a priority, separate to race-based approaches. Race-based categorisations, identifying and delivering services to communities as racial groups does not work for Muslims. It has excluded us and

does not meet our faith-based needs and issues. We want Islamophobia to be recognised as a serious form of abuse that is a separate type of hate to racism, and is also a factor for institutional discrimination, although racism and Islamophobia can sometimes intersect. That is why we do not accept the toothless and incorrect definition of Islamophobia that it is a ‘form of racism.’

 

An-Nisa Society fought for decades for religious discrimination to be outlawed. Since the Equality Act 2010 came into force, Religion & Belief has been recognised as one of the nine protected characteristics; it is as important as racial discrimination. The public sector now has a statutory public sector equality duty to address discrimination based on religion and belief. By ignoring us, especially as we the community are demanding action that Islamophobia be tackled, they are effectively breaking the law.

 

 


 

 

Earlier this year, we launched our report. ‘Islamophobia - From Denial to Action’ about tackling Islamophobia in the Public Sector. The report presents a working definition of Islamophobia as a form of hate, prejudice and discrimination that emanates from a hatred of Islam and Muslims.  It goes into this issue extensively and makes practical recommendations for change. However, it was ignored by Brent Council. It might be helpful if the council would actually read it and implement the recommendations.

 

We understand, there is a review of Brent’s Diversity, Equalities and Inclusion (DEI) strategy underway right now. This seems an ideal time to overhaul the outdated DEI race-based classifications in identifying communities and strategies that are no longer, if they ever were, fit for purpose. It needs to ensure its own policies and procedures and service delivery meet the needs of all its communities, which means factoring in faith in such a faith-dominant borough.

 

Islamophobia is not harmless. We know that Islamophobia kills! Unless the council uses this opportunity to take Islamophobia seriously, we demand an independent investigation into institutional Islamophobia within Brent Council. If this tragic incident triggers a will from the council to address Islamophobia, then it will be something.

 

An-Nisa Society

LETTER: Barham Park new covenant mystery

 

Dear Editor.

 

This is very interesting and odd.

 

On the face of it while I was fighting for a covenant on Barham Park development through the meetings process, the idea was ultimately rejected.

 

So why did the Covenant still end up in the sales documentation?

 

Was it a rogue lawyer who inserted it?

 

Or was it just a cock up that no one noticed (it is normal when drafting a legal document to use a standard pro forma which includes everything under the sun and as part of the process the lawyer strikes out any paragraphs not required or requested).

 

The answer may be important especially if the Council was forced to include it by any of the outsiders?

 

The next meeting of the Trustees Committee to approve the corrected account sis on September 26th.

 

I have written to Debra Norman seeking clarification before the meeting:

 

One key issue outstanding which requires a clear answer is the question as to why the Covenant was put in place.

 

If you review the Barham Park Trust Minutes when the decision to sell the two houses was made you will notice that I argued that a restriction on further development on the site should be out in place. The Trust Committee rejected my proposal.

 

That decision was called in went to Scrutiny. If you check the minutes of that meeting, you will note that I argued the case and that Scrutiny agreed that a restriction should be put in place.

 

The recommendation from Scrutiny then went back to Cabinet but the Scrutiny recommendation was not accepted.

 

On the face of it the proposal for a restriction or covenant was not to be pursued.

 

So how did it come about that such strongly worded restrictive covenant ended up in the sale document relation to 776/778 Harrow Road houses?

 

Approval for the sale was required from the Charity Commission. Did the Charity Commission insist on the restrictive covenant before approving the sale?

 

Did the District Valuer insist on this and approve the valuation on this basis?

 

Was there subsequent advice from the Brent solicitors?

 

Was there a political change if heart because of pressure from within the Labour Party?

 

I would like this to be fully investigated as the reason is crucial to understanding whether the covenant can now be negotiated away or whether there are compelling reasons why it needs to be retained.

 

I would appreciate your answer on this before 26 September.

 

Cllr Paul Lorber

 

 

Monday, 18 September 2023

Relief that no injuries at Kilburn Square tower block fire

From X (formerly Twitter) @IvorRBFCosta 

 

From London Fire Briagde

Eight fire engines and around 60 firefighters were called to a flat fire on Kilburn Square in Kilburn.

Half of a flat on the 13th floor of a 15 storey building was alight. Thankfully, no injuries are reported.

It was a very visible fire and the Brigade's 999 Control room received 78 calls alerting them to the fire.

The Brigade was called at 1843 and was under control by 2009. Fire crews from Kentish Town, Kensington, Park Royal, Hendon, Chelsea, Euston and Soho fire stations were in attendance.

The cause of the fire is under investigation. 

Saturday, 16 September 2023

QUEENS PARK DAY TOMORROW (SUNDAY) NOON - 5.30PM: SOMETHING FOR EVERYONE! FULL PROGRAMME

 


From QPARA

Queen’s Park Day: Sunday 17th September 2023

12 p.m. to 5.30 p.m.

 

This year, as well as all the usual events and stalls to enjoy, QPARA will be celebrating its 50th Birthday in style. Come to the 50th Anniversary tent to see a special exhibition of our achievements in continuing to make Queen’s Park a great place to be. Buy a 50th mug and obtain a copy of our mini-history “50 Years On”.


Queen’s Park Day – fun, friends and food – is the highlight of the year for families from miles around.  Part village fête with makers and bakers, live music and exhilarating arena acts, the day is a full-on celebration of our local community.

 

The complete programme is below. You can download it if that makes reading it easier for you.

We have exhilarating feats of derring-do in the main arena, where we kick off the day with an expanded dog show (with two extra classes). 

 

Our two stages feature local (and not so local) music, dance and performance, with the addition this year of a fabulous sustainable fashion show: handmade, homemade and locally sourced haute couture, modelled on our very own Park runway.

 

Puppet shows, donkey rides, climbing walls and inflatables will keep the youngest folk amused, while a range of 20 street food stalls featuring flavours from round the world ensure no one needs go hungry.

Ever fancied riding a reclining bicycle? You’ll have a chance!

 

Aspiring Bake Off contestants, bring along your zestiest lemon meringue pie to be judged, or let your crafty ingenuity shine in one of our ‘making’ competitions. (Full details on the competitions page.

 

And there will be a smorgasbord of local traders, businesses and services on show among our 120 stalls.

 

Queen’s Park Day is organised by a team of volunteers on behalf of QPARA. Big thanks to all who 

support us and make it possible to keep the day free and inclusive. Blue skies!

 

 

PROGRAMME - Click bottom right square to enlarge 

 

 

DON'T MISS!

 

See special production by the Brent Friends of the Earth Theatre Group on the Community Stage at 3.20pm (watch out for the polar bear!)

 

HOW TO MAKE FRIENDS WITH THE EARTH AND INFLUENCE CREATURES:

What YOU can do about COP 28 and the Climate Crisis 

  

AND DON'T FORGET TO VISIT THEIR STALL (A9) NEAR THE QPARA MARQUE


 

Friends of Barham Park formed ahead of 1,000 plus petition to Brent Council on Monday

 Supporters of Barham Park have formed a Friends of Barham Park Group in the face of what they see as threats to the continuation of the park as left as a bequest to the people of Wembley by Titus Barham.


EMAIL: friendsofbarhampark@gmail.com

Homes and Our Health: Renters and Refugees in Brent - Chalkhill Community Centre today 2.30pm - 5.30pm

 

Homes and Our Health: Renters and Refugees in Brent 2.30pm - 5.30pm

The London Renters Union and English for Action are hosting this Public Education event to raise awareness of the housing and public health issues facing renters and refugees.

With experts by experience from our organisations, campaigners, and experts in health, law and journalism - this event is open to all Brent residents and those working on these issues elsewhere.

Speakers include:

Vicky Spratt, Housing Journalist at the Guardian and author of 'Tenants'

Jordi López Botey, Economic Justice and Health campaign lead at Medact

Renters and Refugee representatives from LRU and EFA

There will be workshops on two campaigning issues:

1. # Not Another Winter with Damp and Moulde Brent branch of the LRU's campaign is aimed at educating local renters about their rights when facing disrepair, and pressing the council to step up to the scale of the problem with an enforcement regime that holds landlords responsible.

With housing solicitor, Samantha Lewis from Anthony Gold

2. Homes Not Hotels

Around 500 new refugees in Brent are real difficulty finding homes - and street homelessness - in many cases. After waiting years for a decision on their asylum claim, they have a matter of days notice to leave their Home Office accomodation. The Council takes no action until the day of eviction, and only with support (and the threat of legal action) are the most vulnerable housed. This workshop - with asylum seekers, charities and campaigners - will discuss the situation and what next steps we can take.

Address: 113 Chalkhill Road, Wembley Park, HA9 9FX

Whether you are a renter or a refugee, a concerned community member or representaive, a professional working in the fields of housing and health, this event is for you.

Together, we can make an impact on the lives of those facing housing challenges in Brent.

We look forward to seeing you there!

 FREE ADMISSION

Friday, 15 September 2023

Post-Grenfell crucial information for Brent Council tenants in buildings higher than 18 metres

In my capacity as a Brent resident I asked Brent Council a written question for Monday's meeting on the actions they have taken to comply with the Building Safety Act. This followed concerns expressed by tenants who suggested that Brent was lagging behind other London boroughs. It would be interesting to hear from tenants whether the answers allay their fears.

The questions and responses are below.

 

Question from Martin Francis to Councillor Promise Knight (Cabinet Member for Housing, Homelessness & Renters Security)

 

The following list of questions pertain to the Building Safety Act that received Royal Assent in April 2022 and the requirements for landlords, including local councils, therein. ‘Buildings in Scope’ refers to those buildings under the Building Safety Act, that are high-rise residential buildings that are 18 metres tall or higher, or at least seven storeys, with two or more residential units that are defined as ‘higher-risk’.

 

Across England there are approximately 12,500 of these buildings and the new regulator required all of them to be registered from April 2023, with a named person responsible for maintaining their safety. The registration process is a crucial stage in setting up the new building safety regime.  Registering buildings in scope will be a legal requirement and owners and managers who fail to comply by October 2023 will be investigated and may face prosecution.

 

On this basis, could the Cabinet Member for Housing, Homelessness and Renters Security address the following questions in relation to the Council responsibilities:

 

1.     Does the council know the details of the residents who cannot evacuate without help, or those whose first language is not English as part of any emergency arrangements in each of the 40 buildings in scope?

The council has previously undertaken work to proactively identify tenants living in our high-rise blocks who cannot evacuate without assistance in event of an emergency. The information the council received as part of this work is currently being reviewed. When tenants whose first language is not English are identified, the council records this and will make reasonable adjustments.

 

 

2.     Can you describe the details of the construction methods in each of the buildings in scope?

The construction method for each of the High Rise blocks is in the Fire Risks Assessment (FRA) for the property and is included in the Building Registration information provided to London Fire Brigade (LFB) and the Building Regulators. Furthermore, this information is contained in our asset database.

 

3.     Can you provide the access and means of escape, including travel distances, in all the buildings in scope?

The access points and means of escape are clearly set out in all of the buildings. Travel distances in the buildings complied with the Building Regulations current at the time the building was constructed. We also have wayfinding information conspicuously displayed in all our blocks that provide access and means of escape information as well as direction/fire escape routes out of the property.

 

4.     Can you identify all the Building Safety risks in each of the buildings in scope?

The Fire Risk Assessments for each building identifies all safety risks which are being actioned in the required timescales.

 

5.     Can you provide the maintenance and inspection schedules for every building in scope using The Golden Thread of information? LINK

All maintenance and inspection schedules/records are on our New Compliance asset compliance management database. All new build blocks in scope are following the Gateway process.

 

6.     Can you set out the emergency plan for each building in scope, including their evacuation strategy?

 All information in regard to emergency plan and strategy are provided as part of the building registration with LFB and the fire strategy for each block is displayed in the lobby area in each block.

 

 

7.     Please set out your complaints system and that how you will operate an effective mandatory occurrence reporting system?

The Council’s principal accountable person for our occupied higher-risk buildings is working on establishing and operating a suitable system for the investigation of relevant complaints. Mandatory occurrence reporting is designed to help report structural flaws and fire risks that might arise at any point throughout the life cycle of a building and can cause catastrophes.

 

We are working to develop a suitable system(s) that will cover the following requirements:

·             Introducing a more reliable reporting system that complements RIDDOR and voluntary occurrence reporting regimes.

·             Strengthening the golden thread (or the digitally stored collection of information about a building and its safety).

·             Boosting residents’ engagement to improve the accuracy and frequency of fire and structural risks.

 

 

 

8.     Are you now able to publish a risk assessment for each of the buildings in scope?

All our Fire Risks Assessments are available for each resident upon request

 

9.     Do all fire doors in every building in scope meet the full standard of fire prevention?

 We carry out quarterly inspections of all the communal doors as well as service cupboard doors in each block, and a yearly inspection of the flat entrance doors to ensure all doors meet the full standard of fire prevention. 

 

10.   Do you know if any of the buildings in scope have any structural issues and can you provide full details of the utilities they use and if any of them impact on common parts of the building, or evacuation plans? Does fire stopping meets the appropriate standard so that compartmentation is not compromised?

We have carried out FRA4 inspections on all of our buildings in scope and we have identified any structural defect or issue in our buildings and we are confident that the fire stoppings in all our High-Rise properties meet appropriate standards of compartmentation.

 

11.   Have you identified the 'responsible person' for each block? 

All our FRAs has the detail of the responsible person for each block.