Cllr Lorber presses case on Barham Park Trust accounts despite CEO's 'high level' review

 Both the Barham Park Trust Committee and the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee meet on Wednesday January 24th.  The former includes the 'High Level Review' of the Barham Park accounts promised by Kim Wright, Brent's new CEO at the special call-in Scrutiny Commitee held on October 26th  to consider issues around the accounts (Minutes of the meeting).

 

Extract from CEO's Report LINK:

 

I am satisfied that the objectives and scope which I set for the review have been met. Furthermore, I am satisfied that the review did not identify any material issues relating to the accuracy of the accounts. However, there have been areas identified where the accounts could be presented in a more clear and transparent way moving forward. This is particularly in the way rental income is presented and how the netting off of income and expenditure is shown.

 

3.9 There were also some helpful observations made regarding operational practices concerning the running of the Trust which could impair, or be perceived to impair, the Council’s arm’s length relationship with the Trust. In particular:

1. The trust not having its own bank account (up until recently);

2. The award and management of NCIL funds for park improvements being managed by the Council;

3. A lack of rent reviews undertaken by the Trust owing to the ongoing feasibility study commissioned by the Council;

4. Cash advances being paid to the Trust for rents overdue.

 

3.10 I have discussed these actions and observations with the appropriate officers, and all have agreed to implement the actions. In addition, whilst the rationale for the practices set out at 3.9 is clear existing practices are neither improper nor have any impact on the accuracy of the accounts, I have asked officers to review its management of the Trust to ensure that appropriate segregation and separation is in place where appropriate to clearly distinguish between activities of the Council and activities of the Trust,

 

Cllr Paul Lorber, one of the councillors instigating the Call-in is not satisfied and requested to speak at the Barham Park Trust meeting. The chair of the Trust, and leader of the Council, Muhammed Butt refused his request.

 

Cllr Lorber then wrote to all Brent councillors making his case:

 

Dear Colleagues

 

If you see mistakes and wrong doing you should never be afraid to speak up. You should also not allow yourself to be fobbed off.

 

At successive meetings of the Barham Park Trust I highlighted the errors in the presented 2022/23 Accounts. The 1st version of the accounts went to a meeting on 5 September and had to be withdrawn at the last minute. The revised accounts presented to a reconvened meeting on 26 September did not make much sense either.

 

At a subsequent meeting of the Scrutiny Meeting I made the point that those misleading and inaccurate accounts hide the truth of how the Barham Park Trust Charity financial affairs have been mismanaged - making the point that the mismanagement has cost the Charity around £100,000 - with on going losses going forward.

 

You will see from the Agenda of a reconvened Barham Park Trust Meeting that the Chief Executive commissioned a “high-level consultancy based review” relating to the concerns and issues raised.

 

The Chief Executive then explains that the review was NOT intended to do - it “was only ever limited to a narrow scope…”

 

The aim of “high level reviews” “of limited scope” should be obvious - not to uncover anything embarrassing and to protect senior Councillors and officers of the Council at all costs.

 

The Barham Park Trust Charity exists because 87 years ago a resident of Sudbury donated his home and gardens for the enjoyment of local people in our area.

 

He entrusted the management of his gift to the local Council - first Wembley BC and later it’s successor - Brent.

 

We all - Councillors and Officers - have a joint duty to look after and protect the bequest from Titus Barham.

 

I take my duty seriously and have tried to engage both with the Trust Committee and Council Officers to help to highlight the mistakes they made so that correct Accounts are prepared and ongoing losses being sustained by the Charity are stopped.

 

I requested the right to speak at the meeting on 24 January. The Chair has refused my request to speak.

 

Prior to that refusal I prepared a written submission to assist the Committee in their deliberations on the 24th and ask some searching questions of the officers.

 

Mistakes can happen. I will not criticise Councillors or Officers for making mistakes as long as they correct them when they are pointed out to them.

 

I will not however accept or tolerate mistakes which those in power and authority then try to cover up.

 

Cllr Lorber sent two documents with his email that are embedded below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

A 'community impact' levy on Wembley Stadium tickets and a 'green budget' to align climate emergency measure are among 11 recommendations from Brent Budget Task Force

 

 

There is likely to be little change in Brent Council's final budget compared with earlier drafts. Wednesday's meeting of Scrutiny Committee will hear a presentation on the Budget Task Group's recommendations.

A concern repeated from previous years is around accessibility, transparency and clarity. You may recall that they had argued for calling a cut a cut, rather than a saving last year.

In all there are 11 recommendations.  ACE Brent (Action on climate and ecological emergency Brent who have been advocating for more joined up cross-department work on the climate emergency will be pleased with Recommendation 3 on a 'green budget'.  Voluntary organisations will welcome Recommendation 4 that recognises if the Council signposts the sector to mitigate the impact of cuts it should first discuss with them how the mitigations will be delivered in practice.

There is similar common-sense in Recommendation 5 that advocates a strategic approach to income generation while warning of the dangers of over-commercialisation. It  emphasises the importance of complicance with current policies on empty properties and business rates. Recommendation 6 suggests the renting out of Council meeting rooms for external use. There is still a shortage of such spaces to hire in Brent.

Campaigners for the retention of the New Millenium Day Care Centre will be disappointed that  Reccommendation 9 advocates the retention of the building for community use but not as a Day Centre.

An imaginative flourish is Recommendation 10 that suggests a Community Impact Levy on Wembley Stadium tickets.

 FULL REPORT

The Budget Scrutiny Task Group makes the following recommendations to Cabinet. Budget Presentation and Communications

 

Recommendation 1 – Improvements to budget communications:

 

The Task Group acknowledge the improvements that have been made to the consultation and engagement process following the Budget Scrutiny Task Group Review 2023/24, but believes further work is still needed to better communicate to residents what the vision, mission, aims and priority protection areas of the upcoming Budget are. This also includes ensuring communications meet agreed accessibility standards, such as writing documents in plain English in line with the average Brent reading age. These revisions will help build a greater understanding of the priority areas safeguarded in the proposals and enable residents to provide more meaningful/influential consultation feedback. As an example the Task Group received evidence that there was only one proposal from the Housing portfolio as the Council had made a concerted effort to protect housing services and the most vulnerable; Although it could be assumed that an area not featured in the proposals would be protected, such information should be made clearer in the draft Budget for the lay person. The Task Group recommend that the Council includes a concise, summary page in the Budget (and in future budgets), adopting more accessible language which makes it clear what its vision, aims, and priority protection areas are.

 

Recommendation 2 – Developing clearer and concise proposals:

 

Some of the proposals are generally vague and lack clarity around the possible impact(s) on residents and partners (e.g. 2024-25 CR02, 2024-25 FR02, 2024-25 RS21, 2024-25 CHW03, 2025-26 CHW02 etc.) The Task Group recommend that the Council review the proposals ahead of publication of the final Budget to ensure that the final proposals and their possible impact(s) can be clearly understood and are accessible to all Brent residents. This review could be actioned collaboratively with a lay-panel (e.g. resident focus group) and in future years by including additional questions in the consultation. These suggestions could also help achieve recommendation 1.

 

Recommendation 3 - Alignment with climate action commitments in Borough Plan 2023-27:

 

Building on the recommendation made as part of the Budget Scrutiny Task Group Review 2023/24, there still needs to be greater alignment between the draft Budget and the Borough Plan 2023-27, particularly in relation to climate action. The Task Group appreciates changes being made to the corporate reporting template to include a ‘Climate Change and Environmental Considerations’ section - this good practice should also be applied in the budget setting process. The Task Group recommend that the Council adopt a ‘green budget’ which clearly outlines the climate and environment implications of each proposal. This will assist the Council in its urgent climate commitments, including  the goal to become Carbon Net Zero by 2030.

 

Stronger Partnership Working with the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS)

 

Recommendation 4 - Shared Outcomes Framework:

 

Although the Council has understandably prioritised protecting the VCS and frontline services over other areas in its proposed budget, there is scope for stronger partnership working with the sector. During the Stakeholder Session (please see section 3), VCS partners expressed concerns that mitigations proposed in the draft Budget were centred around signposting to the VCS, however there had been no discussion or collaboration around how these mitigations would be delivered or achieved in practice.

 

The Task Group recommend that the Council explores a shared-outcomes framework with the voluntary sector for the benefit of residents/service users. As part of this work, the Council should urgently discuss and collaborate with the VCS in relation to budget proposals that involve them and/or may have an impact on their service provision.

 

This discussion could build on the Task Group’s recommendation from the Budget Scrutiny Task Group Review 2023/24 which suggested a collaborative strategy with the VCS to enable these organisations to identify and secure new income streams.

 

A shared-outcomes approach could avoid future service cuts, avoid service duplication and save the Council money long-term. Additionally, it would ensure that a consistent dialogue is maintained with the VCS throughout each financial year around issues like council budgets rather than the current approach which has meant budget discussions with the sector take place after proposals have already been drafted.

 

 

Income Generation

 

Recommendation 5 – Establishing a strategic approach to income generation:

 

The Task Group commend the Council’s creativity/efforts to generate additional income to bolster its finances, and particularly welcomes proposals such as 2024-25 FR01, 2024-25 RS13, and 2024-25 RS14. However, more could be done to generate even more income.

 

The Task Group recommend that the Council develops a longer-term, strategic approach to income generation (accompanied with yearly action plans) rather than focusing on piecemeal proposals year to year. The strategy should include a robust monitoring process that enables holistic working across all departments to create synergies for income generation. Specifically, allocating a dedicated, cross-  departmental resource to work across the Council to investigate and identify additional opportunities for income generation e.g. compliance with mandatory HMO licensing, compliance with council tax on empty properties, and business rates evasion.

 

Establishing a longer-term approach will help the Council to be more resourceful and self-sufficient in the absence of large central government funding pots. Strategic interventionscould enable the Council to address areas of improvement in its operations and recoup income that would have been otherwise due, as well as identify new creative ways of generating income. The Task Group however recognise a balanced approach must be adopted that ensures the Council does not become over-commercialised and learns from local authorities that have experienced financial difficulties (i.e. entered s114 territory2) due to certain commercial choices.

 

Recommendation 6 – Renting out Civic Centre meeting rooms:

 

The Task Group acknowledge the efforts the Council has made to rent out spaces in the Civic Centre to generate additional income, however believes there are additional opportunities that can be realised. The Task Group recommend that additional space, specifically meeting rooms, in the Civic Centre are made available for external hire given that staff no longer work 5 days per week in the office. To complement this suggestion, some council meetings could be moved outside of the Civic Centre to be held in other community assets in the borough.

 

Not only could this recommendation generate additional income, but it could provide residents and businesses with office space and workspace solutions in the heart of the borough. It could also encourage members/officers to increase their use of other community facilities in the borough and spread the Council’s visibility more equally throughout the borough.

 

Recommendation 7 – Implementing additional shared service arrangements:

 

The Council’s efforts to generate additional income by offering shared services to other local authorities are welcomed. Notable examples include proposal 2025-26 CYP04 which intends to sell additional respite bed nights to other local authorities at the Ade Adepitan Short Break Centre. Another instance is the formation of the Shared Technology Services (STS), an IT shared service for the councils of Brent, Lewisham and Southwark, whereby Brent is the host borough for the service. The Task Group recommend that the Council explores further opportunities for shared service arrangements, learning lessons from its current arrangements and from good practice of the shared service models that already exist across the country.

 

It is acknowledged that there is not a single model that suits all councils, localities, or types of service provision, and that this recommendation will take time to scope out. However, if delivered effectively, the Council would be able to generate additional income, reduce duplication, potentially increase investment in services, and reimagine services to better meet the needs of residents.

 

Lobbying and Advocacy

 

Recommendation 8 - Housing Subsidy Loss:

 

Although the Task Group welcomes the increase to Local Housing Allowance rates via the Autumn Statement 2023, further pro-active work could still be carried out with neighbouring local authorities, London Councils, and the Local Government Association (LGA) to seek reform to the Housing Benefit Subsidy rules. The Task Group recommend that the Council works with the above mentioned associations to lobby for positive change to the Housing Benefit subsidy rules which currently caps the amount the Council can claim back from the Department of Work & Pensions (DWP) to 90% of the 2011 LHA rates per household for TA provided, and which places financially onerous restrictions on the types of TA the Council can provide to be eligible for housing benefit subsidy. Such reform would enable Brent to significantly reduce its overspends, and to have access to a wider pool of affordable temporary accommodation to deal with increased demand in homelessness.

 

Recommendation 9 – Retaining use of New Millennium Day Centre

 

The Task Group accept that alternative provision will be put in place to mitigate the impacts of ceasing use of the New Millennium Day Centre. It would nevertheless be disappointing to lose a vital space in the borough that brings local communities together and which allows the Council to achieve its 'Borough of Culture' legacy ambitions. The Task Group recommend that the Council explores options to retain the building for community use.

 

Recommendation 10 – Wembley Stadium: 'Community Impact' Ticket Levy:

 

The Task Group welcome the financial contributions made by Wembley Stadium towards the Council’s event day management costs (e.g. cleansing and waste management, highways management, enforcement etc.), however recognise that these contributions do not cover the full extent of the costs incurred by the Council for its operations on event days.

The Task group recommend that the Council explores options with the Stadium for a ticket levy, whereby the Council receives a proportion of each ticket sale in order to fully recover costs incurred or to provide for further enhancement of the Council’s event day operations.

 

Recommendation 11 - Delegation of budgets and decision making to Brent Integrated Care Partnership (ICP):

 

The Task Group note that the success of many of the proposals are dependent on effective partnership working with health partners (e.g. 2024-25 CHW01, 2024-25 CHW03, 2025-26 CHW03, 2025-26 CYP06 etc). It was heard that the established working arrangements and governance in the Brent ICP provide opportunities for closer working between the Council and NHS partners. These working arrangements have enabled health funding to be transferred to Adult Social Care to support residents and the local health and care system.

However, the Task Group understand that the centralisation of decisions on NHS budgets away from the borough to North West London Integrated Care Board (NWL ICB) has reduced the ability of the Brent ICP to address local needs and may have increased future demand on the system. For example, in accordance with ICB processes, the ICP has submitted robust business cases for paediatric continence services, nursing provision for children in special schools, and to manage pressures on CYP and adult mental health services. All of these business cases are still awaiting a decision after many months, while need continues to increase.

 

The Task Group recommend that the Council continues to advocate and make the case to NWL ICB for both a better alignment of NHS resources to population need and for an increased delegation of budgets and decision making to Brent ICP.

 

Not only would devolution to place allow for more effective collaboration between the Council and local health partners but it would also allow for implementation of service change at greater pace. Additionally, the Task Group is of the view that the ICP is better able than NWL to tailor services to the needs of Brent’s diverse communities with greater flexibility to respond to changing needs or circumstances.

35,000 incidents of flytipping in Brent in 2022-23 makes it the highest of all English Boroughs

 The BBC yesterday LINK  published government data which showed that the London Boorough of Brent had the highest number of flytipping incidents of all Ennglish boroughs. 

The news that there were 35,000 incidents of flytipping in Brent in 2022-23 was greeted with a distinct lack of surprise on local social media.

Willesden Green councillors call for LINK to open banking hub in the area in the wake of bank closures

 The Kilburn Times has followed up LINK the letter published last week on Wembley Matters about bank closures in Willesden Green and the impact on the elderly, disabled and those without a smart phone or internet access LINK.

It reports that Willesden Green councillors have written to both National Westminster Bank and Lloyds Bank about the impact on residents:

In a joint letter to Lloyds and NatWest, Willesden Green ward councillors Saqhain Choudry, Janice Long and Tom Miller called the closures "deeply disappointing" and asked for cash machine operator LINK to open a ‘banking hub’ so customers of all banks have a physical premises.

The councillors said: “Willesden Green has now fallen victim to the surge of branch closures that is blighting local small businesses, the elderly, and other vulnerable groups.”

Big Garden Birdwatch – sharing our space with feathered friends is fun!

 Guest post by Philip Grant

1.     Goldfinch eating sunflower seeds.

 

Next weekend (26 to 28 January) is the RSPB’s Big Garden Birdwatch, and a chance for us all to take part in the world’s largest garden wildlife survey. I’m lucky enough to live in a house with a garden, but you don’t need one to take part. You can watch, and count, on the balcony of a flat, or in a local park or other open space that birds visit. It just takes an hour of your time, plus a bit more reporting your results, and you can find out how on the Big Garden Birdwatch website.

 

2.     Greenfinch and Goldfinches around a seed feeder.

 

You are likely to see more birds if you are able to provide them with some food during the winter. Some types of small birds seem to gather in small flocks at this time of year, and recently we’ve enjoyed having a mixed group of Goldfinches and Greenfinches coming to our feeders. Although we have a nest box each for Blue Tit and Great Tit pairs (at opposite ends of our back garden), they also sometimes come to the garden with Coal Tits and the beautiful little Long Tailed Tits (I’m sorry that I don’t have a photograph of these to share – they are rather shy!).

 

3.     Great Tit eating seeds, with inset showing its front markings.

 

4.     Blue Tit and Goldfinch near fat ball feeder.

 

5.     Goldfinches waiting while a Starling feeds on fat balls.

 

A garden bird that isn’t shy is the Starling, and they will make smaller birds wait while they feed. Occasionally only a single Starling will arrive, but usually they appear in a posse – I think the most I’ve counted at one time during a birdwatch is seventeen. They may look black, but up close, their markings and colours are amazing, with greens, purples and lots of little white speckles across their breasts. 

 

As you can see from some of the other photos, many small birds have some intricate and colourful markings too. That even goes for the Robin (only one pair in the garden, as they are very territorial!) and the occasional Sparrow that we see, usually on the ground under the feeders, picking up what other birds drop.

 

Although we had seen Ring-necked Parakeets flying around the area (particularly on Barn Hill) for a number of years, it was only in 2020 that the first one landed briefly on a tree in our garden. Now they are regular visitors, often arriving in pairs, and the most we have seen at one time is six. They seem ready to wait patiently for their turn, unless something scares them away first. Sunflower seeds are more popular, but some will also peck at the fat balls.

 

6.     A pair of Parakeets feeding, while another waits.

 

7.     A Ring-necked Parakeet on the fat ball feeder.

 

The Parakeets are very agile for their size. The Feral Pigeons and Wood Pigeons that visit our garden usually can’t get at the feeders, unless there is a conveniently located branch next to the fat balls. But when other garden birds are busy feeding, we often see pigeons on the grass underneath, eagerly making the most of the seeds or bits of fat ball that are dropped. 

 

One Feral Pigeon, who like the others was too big to use the small bird perch on the seed feeder, was so keen to get at the food there that it tried to fly up from the ground and hover. Over a number of days, it gradually developed this “skill”, until it could spend a few seconds beside the feeding hole. I doubt whether the seeds it got were worth the energy used in getting them, but it was interesting to watch this “humming bird” pigeon!

 

8.     The “humming bird” pigeon in action.

 

Our local Kingsbury Feral Pigeons usually spend their time, and get their food, in Kingsbury Road and Roe Green Park. However, one thing we do provide for the birds all year round is their other vital need, water. I think all the different types of birds that visit our garden have drunk from our water bowls, but that is not all they need them for. And when fresh water is put out, it is often Feral Pigeons who arrive to enjoy it first.

 

9.     Feral Pigeons drinking and bathing in fresh water.

 

 

10.  A Jay, with its crest up, enjoying a bath.

 

Jays are not the only less usual “garden birds” that we are lucky enough to see. We also have occasional visits from Green Woodpeckers and Great Spotted Woodpeckers. Water is especially important during dry periods, like those we often get during the summer, or when the ground is frozen. One of the first jobs in the morning, in weather such as we’ve had last week, is to put some extra water in the kettle, when making a cup of tea, so that there is some available to remove the ice from the top of the water in our bowls. Having water to drink, when none is available elsewhere, was probably why we had a rare visit from a Pied Wagtail, last time we had snow lying.

 

11.  Pied Wagtail walking through the snow, after drinking some water.

 

I would not have thought of Crows as a garden bird, until one started visiting us five or six years ago. Within months, the male’s mate was also coming, and since then they have been a regular part of our garden bird life. Watching their behaviour has given us a fascinating insight into crow family life, and I will share a little of that with you.

 

12.  Mr Crow having a bath.

 

Crows like to have a bath, sometimes coming back into the bowl several times and splashing about. On some summer days, Mr Crow gets so wet that he cannot take off, so hops down the garden and up into our apple tree to preen and dry off, before flying away. But drinking and bathing is not all that Crows use the water for.

 

They have a varied diet, including making use of dropped takeaways, and food found (from bins?) behind shops and restaurants. Crows can carry surprisingly large items in their beaks. Sometimes they bring food to wash if they don’t like something on it (such as peri-peri sauce on their chicken), or if they have buried it and then dug it up again. At other times, it is to soften up the food - bread, pizza, meat on bones and dog biscuits (stolen from a neighbour’s garden) are some examples.

 

13.  Mr Crow with a chip that needs softening.

 

14.  A Crow washing and breaking up a cooked chicken leg.

 

Softening food is particularly important when there are young to feed. Bread or meat needs to be broken up at the bowl, then swallowed into a pouch in their throats to carry back to the nest. The young Crows, usually two each year, are dependent on food provided to them for many months. When they do start flying, we often see them first in a nearby tree. It will be weeks before they are finally confident enough to come to the garden, still begging food from their parents.

 

For the rest of their first year, the young Crows are steadily educated (and disciplined, when necessary, to know their place in “the pecking order” over food). They must learn the skills of preparing food, bathing (watching their first attempts can be amusing), and what the various calls mean, and how to make them. Mr Crow is a very patient teacher. 

 

Each year, one of the young Crows, it can be either a male or a female, is trained to be a helper. While the other one (or occasionally two) are made unwelcome by the end of their first year, the helper stays as part of the family, to assist Mr Crow in bringing food while Mrs Crow is on the nest, and in looking after the next year’s young Crows during their early months.

 

15.  Mr and Mrs Crow having breakfast, January 2024.

 

Although the Crows can usually find their own food, and come to the garden mainly for the water, we do provide some for them during the winter. As Starlings would take the opportunity to gobble up any food, if the Crows were not quick enough to arrive, we’ve started putting it on a plastic plate, with a bowl over it. Mr Crow has the guile and strength to tip up the plate, so that the food is there on the grass for the family to eat.

 

16.  A squirrel eating from the Crows’ plate.

 

While there are few garden birds who would dare steal the Crows’ food while they are there, a cheeky squirrel will sometimes have a go (the local squirrels visit all of our feeders!). While most of the family would not take on a squirrel, we’ve seen Mr Crow creep up behind one, and dash in to peck its tail! Our garden is certainly part of this Crow family’s territory, and they can often be seen and heard, cawing as a group from trees or rooftops to warn neighbouring crows away from it.

 

I hope this article has encouraged you to take part in the Big Garden Birdwatch, but more than that, to spend more time watching, and feeding if you can, the garden birds where you live. They can be a great source of natural beauty, interest and fun.

 

Philip Grant.

 

A copy of this article can be downloaded from HERE

 

If Philip's article has encouraged you to take part see the RSPB video below or visit the website HERE 

 

 

 

 

Katharine Birbalsingh statement on current Michaela School Prayer Room High Court case

 The case reported yesterday on Wembley Matters continues today. Katharine Birbalsingh has issued the statement below:

Leasehold Advisory Service chief on commonhold and ban on further leasehold build

 The replacement of leasehold by commonhold came up yesterday when Martin Boyd, chairman of the Government's Leasehold Advisory Service appeared before the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill Committee LINK.

Asked about the risks in the switch Boyd said:

Yes, there are risks. Currently, we do not have a viable commonhold system. Even if the Government were to come forward with the full Law Commission proposals, those had not reached the point where they created all the systems necessary to allow the conversion of leasehold flats to commonhold flats. I see no technical reason at the moment why we should not move quite quickly to commonhold on new build for extant stock. I think it will take longer—and, at the end of the day, conversion will be a consequence of consumer demand. People would want to do it. On my side, I would not want us to convert to commonhold, because I could not yet be sure that it would help to add to the value of the properties. It would make our management of the site a lot easier, but I could not guarantee to anyone living there that it would add to the value of their property—and that is what people want to know, before they convert.

Later in the session he added:

I am proud to say that it was LKP that restarted the whole commonhold project in 2014. At the time, we were told, “The market doesn’t want commonhold.” The market very clearly told us that it did want commonhold; it was just that the legislation had problems in 2002. One of our trustees, who is now unfortunately no longer with us, was part of a very big commonhold project in Milton Keynes that had to be converted back to leasehold when they found problems with the law.

I think the Government have been making it very clear for several years that they accept that leasehold’s time is really over. I do not see any reason why we cannot move to a mandatory commonhold system quite quickly. What the developers had always said to us—I think they are possibly right—is that they worry that the Government might get the legislation wrong again, and they would therefore want a bedding-in period where they could test the market to ensure that commonhold was working, and they would agree to a sunset clause. They had fundamentally opposed that in 2002, and we managed to get them in 2014 to agree that, if commonhold could be shown to work, they would agree to a sunset clause that would say, “You cannot build leasehold properties after x date in the future.” I think that that is a viable system.

 Earlier in the Committee hearing Barry Gardiner, MP for Brent North, had asked about a potential right of leaseholders' right to withhold service charges:

You nicely lead me to my other question, which concerns something else that was in the 2002 Act but was never brought into effect: the provision that, if the landlord had not complied with the rules around service charges and the charges were unfair, leaseholders should be able to withhold their service charge. I have no idea why that was never brought into effect, but would it be a good idea? The Bill sets out extensive obligations that have to be followed in relation to service charges. If those are not followed, should leaseholders have the right to withhold the service charge?

Martin Boyd replied:

 I can tell you why it did not move forward. One of the reasons it did not move forward is that, when there was a consultation, the organisation that I now chair argued very strongly against the implementation of that section. That was one of the things that annoyed me when I found out about it over a decade ago. It is not something that we would argue for now.

Asked by Gardiner if this would be a good clause to insert into the Bill, Boyd replied,  'It was a very good provision, yes.'

 

Judge rules that Michaela School can be named at High Court hearing on alleged prayer ban

 Schools Week LINK reports today the Michaela Free School's request that the school not be named was reject edby Judge Linden in today's High Court hearing regarding a Judicial Review requested on behalf of a pupil.

The Judicial Review is over the alleged banning of Muslim pupils from taking part in prayer rituals at the school that resulted in a public petition with more than 4,000 signatories in March 2023. LINK

Judge Linden said:

I do not accept the that the evidence in this case shows a risk to the lives or safety of members of the school staff or its wider community which would justify holding this hearing in private.

The petition is no longer on the Change.org website but said in part regarding the alleged ban:

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.

 Judge Linden accepted the application for the claimant, a pupil, to be referred to as “TTT”  and another person involved in the litigation, to be referred to as “UUU”.

 

As the hearing is in progress I will not publish any comments until the case is over.