Friday, 2 February 2024

Is Muhammed Butt's attempt at increasing the number of councillors required to call decisions in for scrutiny an abuse of democracy?

  

Brent Council Leader Muhammed Butt: Limitting 'the voices of those who do not blindly agree with him'

 

Cllr Anton Georgiou has sent the following message to Debra Norman, Corporate Director of Governace at Brent Council, after changes proposed by Brent Council's Labour leader in the number of councillor's required to sign a call-in request. The number proposed by Cllr Butt would require some Labour councillors to join the Liberal Democract and Conservative opposition to achieve the revised required number.

 

As Labour councillors are tightly whipped this would be extremely unlikely and if they did their card is likely to be marked so that they are barred from committee places and standing again.

 

To Debra Norman,

 

At the meeting the Leader of the Council asked for you to look at increasing the number of required signatures (by Councillors) for a call-in to take place from 5 to somewhere around 10. 

 

 Cllr Butt is perfectly aware that if this change were to occur, call-in’s would no longer take place in Brent as the combined Opposition (the Liberal Democrat and Conservative Group) totals 8 elected members. Labour members under the current regime, wouldn’t dare to sign a call-in scrutinising decisions by the Cabinet, for fear of retribution by their Whip. You only have to look at what happened to the Labour members who signed a call-in last term (2018-2022), related to poorly implemented LTN’s. Not one is currently an elected Councillor in Brent.

 

  If the changes suggested by Cllr Butt are agreed to, it would be a total affront to democracy in our borough. Democratic scrutiny is the pillar of healthy and functioning governance. Seeking to stifle it in this way (which is how I view Cllr Butt’s request) sets a very dangerous precedent. It would also once again expose Brent as a place where scrutiny and inclusion of Opposition voice is not welcomed, rather it is frowned upon and limited. As you are aware, following the May 2022 local elections, Cllr Butt took it upon himself to banish Opposition Councillors from Vice-Chairing the two Scrutiny Committees in the borough. The move was seen by others in local government circles as a power grab. Frankly, it looked rather petty and insecure. It also took Officers by surprise, as the move had not been cleared with anyone (not even you?) beforehand.     

                         

 Cllr Butt’s latest attempt to stifle democratic scrutiny by limiting the ability for call-ins to take place is wrong and not in the interest of our residents, who want to see Council decisions challenged forcefully when required. After all, scrutiny leads to better outcomes. Residents are clearly very engaged in local democracy, take just the recent example of a petition on the Council website regarding the blue bag recycling system, which generated close to 3,500 signatures, a record for an e-Petition of this kind in Brent  - https://democracy.brent.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=267&RPID=0&HPID=0/. If Cllr Butt gets his way, decisions like this, which are clearly very unpopular with Council taxpayers, will likely be left unchallenged.

 

I want to make clear that if Officers agree to take Cllr Butt’s suggestion forward, the Liberal Democrat Group will robustly oppose the changes and will ensure residents are fully aware of the petty dictatorship that he leads.

 

I urge you to reject Cllr Butt’s suggestion and ensure that call-ins, an important form of scrutiny, in a borough with limited scrutiny already, can continue to take place, when they are required and legitimate.

 

I will be making this email public so a debate can begin about the Leader’s latest insecure attempt to limit the voices of those who do not blindly agree with him.

 

EDITOR: Brent Council Call-in Protocol LINK  (Irritatingly Council documents are often undated but I think this is the latest).

Thursday, 1 February 2024

Octavia Housing update on Wembley fire at Petworth Court, Elm Road

 On Monday 29 January 2024, a fire broke out at Petworth Court on Elm Road, Wembley. The London Fire Brigade attended quickly and the fire was extinguished in the early hours of Tuesday 30 January 2024. All residents at Petworth Court were evacuated safely and we are glad that no injuries have been reported. The surrounding blocks were also evacuated.

The Fire Brigade is currently investigating the cause of the fire and we will continue to work with them during their investigation.

Fire safety at Petworth Court

The safety of our residents is our number one priority. Since 2020, Petworth Court, and the surrounding blocks, have had robust safety measures in place in the event of a fire. These measures include a fire marshall who patrols the blocks regularly, upgraded fire alarms and CCTV. We are pleased that these measures worked effectively, ensuring that alarms were raised quickly and all residents were evacuated safely.

Supporting our residents

Octavia staff have been on site with Brent Council’s Emergency Response team since the fire broke out, to support residents that have been affected. All evacuated residents were provided with emergency accommodation where needed and financial support has been offered to those who need to buy essential items and food. We have continued to contact all residents to check on their wellbeing.

Following safety checks by the Fire Brigade and Octavia, residents of Goodwood Court, Sandringham Court and Kensington Court should be able to return home within the next few days. We will continue to support these residents should they have any questions or concerns.

Residents at Petworth Court, Woburn Court and Hatfield Court, will continue to be updated, and supported with alternative accommodation and access to services, wellbeing support and essential items until they are able to return to their home safely.

We understand this is a difficult time for residents. Any resident who would like to speak to us should contact us on 020 8354 5500 or contact their Housing Lead:

Gareth Armstrong's award winning Shylock! Preston Community Library February 6th 7pm

 

Review from 'Frankly, My Dear' Waterside Arts performance

Who is Shylock? A caricature? A grotesque? A construction of two thousand years of persecution? All these questions are posed and answered in Gareth Armstrong’s one man tour de force, Shylock, where using the device of Tubal, an eight line and one scene associate of Shylock, he takes us on a tour of not only the play but the systematic antisemitism that informed the play, fuelled the play and ultimately continues to contribute towards the stereotype of the Jew money lender.

Even the word “shylock” has been taken to create an insult on somebody’s character; a mean spirited individual who regards the pursuit of wealth above all. But is this a misappropriation? As the play tells us usury was one of the very few professions open to Jews as they were expelled from country after country and regarded as evil. However a reading of the play with the added background context shows that Shylock is more a creature of his own circumstances than any negative stories Shakespeare had heard; there is doubt that Shakespeare had ever met a Jew so the character is drawn in stereotype but for all this there is pathos and despair under the veneer of the hard nosed businessman.

Gareth Armstrong is a total delight in his powerful and mesmerising one man retelling of the tale. Part history lecture, part dramatic performance there is not one moment that he does not hold the audience rapt, a pin could have dropped and sounded like a tolling bell. There are some laughs, not many and mainly at Tubal’s expense, but hard historical truths are delivered both recent and over hundreds of years in the making and even the bible gets used to illustrate the first instance of antisemitism. There is no pity, no “woe is me” but a simple “this is how it is” in the telling of such facts. Along with intertwining the key Shylock moments with the reflected views of the time is an effective and compelling device which takes the audience fully inside both the character and how he would have been perceived by the audience throughout various periods in history; from Shakespeare’s original up to Nazi Germany’s love of the play, no doubt to reinforce the views of their respective time.

The Merchant of Venice is seldom seen now in its original staging, no doubt due to the problematic nature of the character of Shylock but this should not be a reason for avoidance. In this work Gareth Armstrong unboxes the creation of the character as a reflection of the continued suspicion Jews found themselves under. The writing flows seamlessly and the performance is electric, moulding and guiding the audience throughout the tale. This should be a must see for anyone who thinks critically and has ever wondered why Shylock is cast as one of the great villains of Shakespeare, when in fact he is just a man trying to do his best in a world that is stacked against him.

Share your history about LGBTQI+ experiences in Brent - February 13th 2.30-4.30pm Willesden Green Library

 


Wednesday, 31 January 2024

Clean Air for Brent unable to find enough people with enough time to continue

 It is very sad the Clean Air for Brent, a much needed organisation has decided it cannot continue. There is a final zoom meeting on February 21st.

This is their statement:

Last year we attempted to find 'new blood' to resurrect Clean Air for Brent and enable it to rise out of the doldrums. We held an enthusiastic zoom meeting and a few interested parties volunteered to take on steering roles. However we have been unable to find enough people with enough time to give to take CAfB forward in a meaningful way and, most importantly, we do not have a new chair to inject CAfB with the energy it needs. We thank those who did offer their support. Recently our chair Mark Falcon stepped down and we thank him for all his hard work and dedication in the post. Janey McAllester will act as Interim Chair while we resolve the group's future.

It was also suggested that CAfB might merge with another group but as there is not enough appetite in the current steering group to make this happen, we cannot pass on our database and have only a small amount of funds there does not seem to be a way forward in that direction.

Therefore the remaining steering group members feel that there is no alternative but to close CAfB and allocate the small amount of its funds remaining to another local organisation who is fighting the fight, and encourage our membership to join with them. It is suggested that this be Brent Friends of the Earth. We will therefore hold a final zoom meeting to go through the formalities on 21st February at 8pm. Should you wish to join this is the link:

Join Zoom Meeting


Meeting ID: 883 8762 2726

Passcode: 016347


Thank you for all your support over the years and apologies that we have not been able to continue.

Best wishes,
Clean Air for Brent Steering Committee

How can social landlords address digital poverty - Pop Up Lab February 28th 12-12.45pm

 From Inside Housing

Tuesday, 30 January 2024

Fire union warns of “criminal complacency” after Wembley cladding fire,. Barry Gardiner slams building manager Octavia

 


Yesterday's fire in Elm Road, Wembley Central

 

 From the Fire Brigades Union

 

At least 125 firefighters and 20 fire engines were called to a cladding fire in Wembley yesterday, 29 January.

Matt Wrack, Fire Brigades Union general secretary, said: 

 

Firefighters have once again been called to cladding fire which could have resulted in tragedy. 

 

The Fire Brigades Union warned of the risks of flammable cladding many years before the terrible Grenfell Tower fire. Decades of deregulation have created unnecessary risks to residents and firefighters, and put homes and lives at risk.

 

Government ministers and building companies have been criminally complacent. We will continue to demand justice for the victims of this situation, and urgent action to ensure that buildings are safe.

 

Falling school rolls - the challenge ahead with mergers and closures possible


 In the old days of cinema the programme would be shown back to back. If you arrived late you would sit tight and after the B feature, adverts etc, watch the main film from the beginning, until one of you muttered, 'This is where we came in' and you'd scurry out.

 

'This is where I came in', is how I feel about the present school places crisis. In the mid-70s pupil numbers dropped, termed 'falling rolls', and school closures and mergers were on the agenda. I had just started at a small Church of England  primary school in North Paddington. As the 'last one in' I was selected for compulsory redeployment. This meant a transfer to another primary school and despite parental and union pressure I was moved on. There was an education authority that took in the whole of London (the Inner London Education Authority -ILEA) so there was considerable scope for redeployment. Thatcher and Tebbit abolished the ILEA on idelogical grounds so now each borough is an education authority - so narrowing the scope for redeployment.

 

Yesterday the umbrella organisation for London boroughs issues a report LINK on the crisis of falling rolls in London boroughs. London Councils explain:

 

London’s birth rate is the main reason for the decrease in demand for school places. Between 2012-2021 there has been a 17% decrease of the birth rate in London, which is a reduction of 23,225 live births across the capital.  It is not unusual for London’s birth rate to fluctuate, however it is having, and will continue to have, an impact on demand for school places which schools, boroughs and the DfE will need to manage.

 

There are further factors which affect the number of applications for school places in London. For the last few years, boroughs have also experienced shifts in their local child population as a result of families leaving London for example due to the Covid-19 pandemic, Brexit and cost of living crisis. 

 

As a result of the reduction in school places having an impact on the amount of funding a school receives, schools will have to make further difficult decisions to balance their budgets. This could mean narrowing the curriculum, offering fewer after school clubs or reducing the number of teaching and support staff. In some cases, school leaders and local authority leaders will have to make difficult decisions to merge or close schools.

 

Is closure inevitable? It is if you accept the current funding structure but it could be a rare opportunity to reduce class sizes.  Back at my first school class sizes had reduced from 35/30 to around 18. Some of the veteran teachers said that this was the first time they felt they were really teaching, rather than just performing crowd control. Suddenly class sizes were similar to those in the private sector offering similar opportunities for individual tuition. The economic arguments were the main factor behind closures etc but other arguments were deployed by the management and inspectorate: Classes of 18 didn't have the same dynamic and buzz of big classes,  there was not enough expertise across a smaller staff and therefore in a smaller school to ensure curriculum development across all the subjects. 

 

The process of closure and amlgamation has already started in Brent and a review of overall provision is in progress. The Brentfield Road Leopold site is ear-marked for closure LINK , Strathcona site of Roe Green Primary has been closed LINK, and amalgamation  of Carlton Vale Infants and Kilburn Park Juniors in a new building is planned (although there are dounts about the funding at present).

 

Meanwhile the impact of reduced funding has been seen at Lyon Park Primary with the strike by teachinng support staff in the face of compulsory redundancies and worsening conditions.  LINK 

 

These are the September 2023 Reception intake figures for some of our Brent schools. As funding is per pupil, lower numbers mean less funding for the school and thus staff costs. PAN - Planned Admission Numbers

 

The Planned Admission numbers of some schools will be reduced to match the actual number of applications leading to staff losses. One form entry schools (PAN of 30) have reduced in number over the years but have proved popular with parents.  At present only Donnington and Our Lady of Lourdes are officially one form of entry but there are quite a number of potentials above that could reduce by one or even two forms.  The same arguments about curriculum and higher costs of one form entry schools may again be deployed and mergers advocated instead.

The crisis is not only in Brent but also in our neighbouring boroughs with North West London, of which we are a part, the worst affected in primary schools after Inner London:

 

 

The secondary figures are only a little better but it is important to note that as the sector is academised Brent Council has no direct influence in determing intake numbers.


 This is an extract from the main London Councils Report. Highlighting mine.

 


In some instances local authorities will have to take forward plans to close schools that have become financially unviable and there are no forecast increases in the local child population, and keeping these schools open will have a detrimental impact on the wider sustainability of other local schools.

 

Local authorities recognise the disruption to a child’s education that a school closure can create, so they work very closely with affected families and other local schools mitigate the impact on children’s education.

 

However, this needs to be managed carefully and in partnership with other local partners, including the Diocese, where appropriate, and DfE.

 

Boroughs make decisions about where to close schools based on a range of key factors, including the popularity of schools, Ofsted ratings, travel routes, demand forecasts and budget deficits. They want to ensure that local areas have choice in the system and don’t disadvantage particular groups of children as a result of school closures.

 

However, these strategic decisions need to be made in agreement with partners and local authorities should be able to consider all local state schools, including academies, as part of a fair and transparent process.

 

Currently academies do not have to be part of a local authorities’ school places strategy and local authorities have no statutory duties over academies in terms of places planning.

 

Therefore a local authority can’t direct an academy to reduce PAN even when other local good schools are struggling and might need to close if all local schools don’t work together. In some cases academies work well with local authorities, recognising the local challenges and voluntarily reduce their PANs, but without levers this happens on an ad hoc basis and does not allow for any choice in the system.

 

Local authorities are also constrained in how they work with neighbouring local authorities due to data restrictions. It would be helpful if neighbouring local authorities could have access to pupil census data to be able to better plan provision across borough boundaries. The DfE could help support a more strategic cross-borough approach by considering the implications on the wider sub-region in its decision-making, particularly around new free schools.

 

Protecting the school estate and funding model

 

With school closures on the increase, London Councils is concerned about the loss of educational assets for future generations. London’s birth rate has historically ebbed and flowed, and London is likely to become a more popular place to raise a family at some point in the future, leading to renewed demand for school places. To avoid the DfE from having to purchase land and build new schools in the future it is vital that we are able to keep current educational assets in use for educational purposes, such as nurseries, family hubs, special schools, which creates more flexibility going forward. Many local

authorities are looking at these options but would welcome more support from the DfE to ensure empty schools can be protected for educational purposes.

 

The DfE’s Falling rolls fund is welcome to schools experiencing a short term drop in demand. However, many schools in London will not be able to access this as they can’t demonstrate an increase in demand in the next four years. It would be helpful, given the scale of the challenge, number of schools currently facing falling rolls and the further forecast drops in demand, if the DfE could make this pot of funding more flexible in recognition of the need to protect vital education assets across London.

 

Special Educational Needs (SEND)

 

London has been grappling with a steady increase in the number of children identified with SEND in recent years. In the last year alone, the number of children with an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCPs) in London has increased by 9% from January 2022 to January 2023. Some local authorities are reporting that the increased budgetary pressure facing schools is leading to a decrease in additional support available and this is leading to some schools to be less inclusive than previously. We think it is vital that the DfE works with local authorities and schools to promote more inclusion in schools, and that schools receive consistent and appropriate levels of funding to enable more children with SEND to access mainstream school places.


The question as a General Election comes closer is will any incoming government grasp the nettle and increase the funding of schools so that we can take advantage of falling rolls for a generation of pupils that has been so affected by Covid and its consequences.