Tuesday 3 September 2024

Wembley Stadium's 9 extra non-sporting events application to be heard on September 11th. Brent Chief Planner recommends 'GRANT CONSENT'

 From Brent Council

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 (as amended) THE PLANNING COMMITTEE

Re: Wembley National Stadium, Olympic Way, Wembley, HA9 0WS

I refer to the planning application for the above site which proposes:-

Variation of conditions 1 (Event Cap) and 2 (Temporary Traffic Management) of Variation of Conditions reference 20/4197 dated 21 June, 2021, for Proposed variation of Condition 1 (event cap) of planning permission reference 18/4307 (varied permission for the construction of the stadium, dated 07/03/2019), to allow up to 9 additional major non-sporting events per event calendar year.

The current application includes the submission of an Environmental Statement.

The application will be formally considered at the meeting of the Planning Committee on 11 September, 2024 starting at 6pm.

This meeting of the Committee has been arranged to take place in the Conference Hall, at the Civic Centre.

Those who wish to observe proceedings may either do so in person or via the live webstream which we will make available on the Council’s website:

https://www.brent.gov.uk/your-council/democracy-in-brent/local-democracy/live-streaming/
 

It is possible to speak at the Committee Meeting, which can be undertaken online (or via the telephone) or in person at the meeting, subject to the restrictions set out in the Council's Standing Order. These provide for one objector and/or one supporter of the application to speak. The Chair has the discretion to increase this to two people from each side. In doing this, the Chair will give priority to occupiers nearest to the application site or representing a group of people.

To address the committee you must notify Executive and Member Services by 5 pm on the working day before the committee meeting. Please email committee@brent.gov.uk or telephone the Executive and Member Services Officer, Mrs Dev Bhanji, on 07786 681276 during office hours. Please indicate if you intend to speak at physical meeting or online.

The Chief Planner's recommendation for this application is to Grant Consent subject to Legal agreement

Yours sincerely

Sean Newton
Neighbourhoods & Regeneration

Monday 2 September 2024

Brent Council delivers ultimatum to Lime over badly parked and abandoned e-bikes: 'Respond to our requests or remove your bikes from the borough by October 31st'

 

Lime bikes outside St Andrew's Church, Kingsbury


Brent Council Press Release

Lime has been notified that it must remove its dockless e-bikes from Brent by 31 October if it continues to ignore Brent Council's safety concerns and suggestions for improvements to the scheme.

Brent has partnered with Lime since 2019 and currently hosts 750 e-bikes in the borough as part of its commitment to promoting sustainable and active travel and reducing pollution.

While the partnership has supported this ambition, e-bikes have also come with significant safety concerns, which Lime has not currently addressed to the council’s satisfaction.

Of particular concern is the already high and increasing number of incidents of inconsiderately parked and abandoned e-bikes reported to the council daily and the often slow response time by Lime to remove these.

Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council said:
 
Lime bikes left scattered across our streets are causing havoc for other road users, especially for pedestrians and disabled people. Residents have gone sour on Lime and the council is receiving repeated, regular complaints about the bikes left across paths and roads in a haphazard way. This is putting unsustainable pressure on council staff who are spending time cleaning up after Lime. Something needs to change as the current situation is unsustainable and leaves a bitter taste in the mouth.

The council has written to Lime proposing several changes to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the scheme in Brent, while also meeting its wider transport and environmental objectives of creating healthier, more resilient and more welcoming streets and neighbourhoods.

These requests included:

  • The introduction of dedicated e-bike parking bays: This would ensure e-bikes are parked safely in dedicated, cordoned-off areas which attract a high number of journeys and with high footfall, such as stations, town centres, employment areas and other visitor attractions. A ‘no parking zone’ would be introduced in all other areas of the borough with any e-bikes left in this zone removed by Lime in an agreed timeframe. This would also support a new London-wide e-mobility contract being developed by Transport for London, London Councils and boroughs to make the usage of e-bikes and e-scooters safer and more consistent across the capital. Planned to launch in 2026, a central element of the scheme is a requirement to provide dedicated, controlled parking for rental e-bikes and e-scooters.

  • Dedicated in-borough resources to manage day-to-day operations: Dedicated local resources would help ensure that any e-bikes reported to be inconsiderately parked or abandoned be removed swiftly, which is not currently the case. Brent has also requested that Lime increases penalties for users who fail to leave their e-bikes in the correct location from the current fine which is set at £10 and which the council does not feel provides an adequate deterrent.

  • A commitment from Lime to give back to the local community: In line with the council’s commitment to all its partnerships adding value to the local community, the council asked Lime to consider providing local training and employment opportunities and community engagement events as part of its activities in the borough. This would include a Brent Resident Forum where users and non-users can meet with the council and Lime to share their views on how the scheme is working locally and any improvements.

 Lime’s response to Brent Council’s above requests has not been satisfactory. Muhammed Butt said:

To date, Lime has not satisfied our proposals, which we consider vital to ensuring the safe and efficient operation of the scheme in Brent. Unless Lime changes the way it works with us, we are out of road for its activities in Brent.

The council is awaiting a response to its latest letter to Lime with its position. Pending this response, Brent Council has provided formal pre-emptive notice to Lime that all e-bikes must be removed from Brent by 31 October 2024.

Councillor Butt concluded

It’s high time Lime takes responsibility for its service and users. We want Lime to take ours and residents’ concerns seriously and amend its operating model to account for the common-sense asks we have made.

Bobby Moore Bridge – formal complaint submitted over advertising lease award

 Guest post by Philip Grant in a personal capacity

 

The Question and Answer from the Full Council meeting agenda papers.

 

When I wrote my 10 July guest post “Bobby Moore Bridge murals – where will the advertising money be spent?” it was on the basis of a fairly vague answer given by Cllr. Muhammed Butt to a Full Council meeting question from a member of the public. It looked as if some or all of the rental income from the Bobby Moore Bridge advertising lease would be spent on Brent’s “communications”, which help to promote the Council Leader and his Cabinet. 

 

The Report to the 28 May Cabinet meeting, which recommended the award of a lease which provided slightly more income but left the tile murals in the subway covered up for at least another four years, had been written by Brent’s Head of Communications. That appeared to be a serious conflict of interests, but I did not think I had strong enough evidence of where the money would be spent to make a complaint.

 

I did not know the person who had asked the question, but did manage to make contact with him. As he was also keen to get a more specific answer, he agreed to ask a supplementary question, and at the Council meeting on 8 July the Mayor promised that he would receive a written answer to it. It took a few weeks, but this is the response, which he has shared with me:

 


So there it is, from the Leader of the Council himself (who is also the Cabinet Lead Member for Communications, so probably knew where the money was going when he announced, without a vote, that Option B had been accepted). ‘All of the income generated from the Bobby Moore Bridge advertising revenue is allocated to the communications service budget.’

 

Now that I had the evidence to back up the case set out in my 10 July guest post, I sent an open letter to Brent’s Chief Executive on 30 August, making a formal complaint about how the award of the advertising lease had been dealt with. I will ask Martin to include a copy of my open letter at the end of this post, for anyone who would like to read it in full, but this is the text of the email that I sent it with, which summarises the position. (I have already received an acknowledgement to it, and a promise that Kim Wright will respond to my complaint):

 

‘Dear Ms Wright,

 

I am attaching an open letter to you, making a formal complaint about bias and a conflict of interests by a Council Officer (or Officers) in the Report and Recommendations to the 28 May 2024 Cabinet meeting on the award of the Bobby Moore Bridge advertising lease.

 

I am also attaching, as it gives further background and detail on my complaint, a pdf document copy of an online article I had published on 10 July, in response to the answer given to a public question at the 8 July Full Council meeting. 

 

That answer gave an indication of where the rental income from the advertising lease would be spent, but as the Mayor said, at the meeting, that a supplementary question had been asked, to which a written reply would be provided, I have waited for further clarity on the facts before making this complaint.

 

Please see the suggested remedies section, on page 3 of my letter, as urgent action may be required if the new advertising lease from 31 August 2024 has not yet been signed and sealed by the Council. Thank you. Best wishes,

Philip Grant.’

 

As the Chief Executive is only responsible for the actions of Council staff, not councillors, I had to restrict my complaint to that side of the award. But I also wanted to publicly express my views over the actions of Cllr. Butt, and this letter from me was published in the “Brent & Kilburn Times” on 29 August. They published my letter in full, but did not use my suggested heading for it: “Leader abused his power”!

 


Philip Grant.


Forced academisation remains a possibility but other school improvement methods may be used in the future

 The DfE press release about Ofsted changes seems to indicate that forced academisation remains a possibility when a school receives an Inadequate Ofsted rating but other methods may be used by the Secretary of State giving her more leeway. Over the summer holiday Bridget Phillipson gave the go ahead for the takeover of Byron Court Primary School by the Harris Federation. This took effect from yesterday.

The Press Release (my highlighting)

Single headline grades for schools will be scrapped with immediate effect to boost school standards and increase transparency for parents, the government has announced today.

Reductive single headline grades fail to provide a fair and accurate assessment of overall school performance across a range of areas and are supported by a minority of parents and teachers. 

The change delivers on the government’s mission to break down barriers to opportunity and demonstrates the Prime Minister’s commitment to improve the life chances of young people across the country.

For inspections this academic year, parents will see four grades across the existing sub-categories: quality of education, behaviour and attitudes, personal development and leadership & management.

This reform paves the way for the introduction of School Report Cards from September 2025, which will provide parents with a full and comprehensive assessment of how schools are performing and ensure that inspections are more effective in driving improvement. Recent data shows that reports cards are supported by 77% of parents.

The government will continue to intervene in poorly performing schools to ensure high school standards for children.

Bridget Phillipson, Education Secretary, said:

The need for Ofsted reform to drive high and rising standards for all our children in every school is overwhelmingly clear. The removal of headline grades is a generational reform and a landmark moment for children, parents, and teachers.

Single headline grades are low information for parents and high stakes for schools. Parents deserve a much clearer, much broader picture of how schools are performing – that’s what our report cards will provide.

This government will make inspection a more powerful, more transparent tool for driving school improvement. We promised change, and now we are delivering.

As part of today’s announcement, where schools are identified as struggling, government will prioritise rapidly getting plans in place to improve the education and experience of children, rather than relying purely on changing schools’ management.

From early 2025, the government will also introduce Regional Improvement Teams that will work with struggling schools to quickly and directly address areas of weakness, meeting a manifesto commitment.

The Education Secretary has already begun to reset relations with education workforces, supporting the Government’s pledge to recruit 6,500 new teachers, and reform to Ofsted marks another key milestone.

Today’s announcement follows engagement with the sector and family of headteacher Ruth Perry, after a coroner’s inquest found the Ofsted inspection process had contributed to her death.

The government will work closely with Ofsted and relevant sectors and stakeholders to ensure that the removal of headline grades is implemented smoothly.

Jason Elsom, Chief Executive of Parentkind, said:

We welcome the decision by the Secretary of State to prioritise Ofsted reform. The move to end single-word judgements as soon as practical, whilst giving due care and attention to constructing a new and sustainable accountability framework during the year ahead, is the right balance for both schools and parents. 

Most parents understand the need for school inspection, but they want that inspection to help schools to improve as well as giving a verdict on the quality of education their children are receiving. When we spoke to parents about what was important to them, their children being happy at school was a big talking point and should not be overlooked.

Parents have been very clear that they want to see changes to the way Ofsted reports back after visiting a school, and it is welcome to see a clear timetable being set out today for moving towards a report card that will give parents greater clarity of the performance of their children’s school. We need to make sure that we get this right for parents, as well as schools.

There is much more we can do to include the voice of parents in Ofsted inspections and reform of our school system, and today’s announcement is a big step in the right direction.

Paul Whiteman, General Secretary of National Association of Headteachers, said:

The scrapping of overarching grades is a welcome interim measure. We have been clear that simplistic one-word judgements are harmful, and we are pleased the government has taken swift action to remove them.

School leaders recognise the need for accountability but it must be proportionate and fair and so we are pleased to see a stronger focus on support for schools instead of heavy-handed intervention.

There is much work to do now in order to design a fundamentally different long-term approach to inspection and we look forward to working with government to achieve that.

Where necessary, in cases of the most serious concern, government will continue to intervene, including by issuing an academy order, which may in some cases mean transferring to new management. Ofsted will continue to identify these schools – which would have been graded as inadequate.

The government also currently intervenes where a school receives two or more consecutive judgements of ‘requires improvement’ under the ‘2RI’ policy. With the exception of schools already due to convert to academies this term, this policy will change. The government will now put in place support for these schools from a high performing school, helping to drive up standards quickly.

Today’s changes build on the recently announced Children’s Wellbeing Bill, which will put children at the centre of education and make changes to ensure every child is supported to achieve and thrive.


2nd Brent Reggae Album Covers Exhibition Curator's Talk tonight: Harlesden Library - drop-in for free from 6.30pm - 8.30pm

 

Highly recommended, The first one was informative. hilarious at times and very, very friendly.

Brent Property Strategy moves closer to market rents and terms, impacting on affordability for voluntary organisations

 There was a time when Brent Council was not entirely sure of what property it owned - surprises kept popping up. They even found they were paying bills for properties that were leased to other organisations.

Now with the Council hit by financial problems their property strategy is seeking to maximise rental income based on market conditions. They already have problems collecting current rents so it appears likely that some organisations will not be able to pay the increased rate. In Quarter 2 2024/25 the outstanding debt across the borough totalled £824,090.  Repayment plans covering £450,453 have been established, with a maximum repayment term of two years. 

Brent Council report:

Efforts are actively being made to address the remaining balance of £373,637, including legal action, rigorous enforcement of rent repayment schedules, and the write-off of irrecoverable debts.

The tough, market-led approach is also being applied to lease renewals:

There are currently 48 outstanding lease renewals, managed through negotiated agreements and the issuance of formal Section 25 notices, which enforce statutory lease renewal timelines. So far, 14 Section 25 notices have been served, with the remaining renewals set to receive notices to ensure leases are renewed within the required timeframe. To be effective, the Council must fully leverage available legal tools, including Section 25 notices, Section146 notices, and forfeiture proceedings, to regularise leases, recover debts, and ensure compliance. Current analysis suggests that tenants who fail to comply in one area are likely to also show non-compliance in other aspects.


Rents will be based on current market conditions: (my emphasis)

 

Following a comprehensive lease review, ten out of fourteen outstanding rent review memorandums for non-expired leases have been prepared, with notices issued to initiate the rent review process. The remaining memorandums will be completed shortly. This review is expected to increase rent by approximately £60,000 per annum. Rent reviews for expired leases are strategically aligned with the lease renewal process, where final rents will be determined through independent market valuations and negotiations. This approach allows us to negotiate terms that reflect current market conditions and support long-term strategic interests, supporting sustainable outcomes.

One North Wembley voluntary organisation that was served a Section 25 notice has been in touch with Wembley Matters. They were given just 6 months to try and negotiate a new tenancy. The increase Brent Council wanted was from £1,500 per annum to £75,000 per annum. The organisation will not be able to afford that and will likely have to close. Early indications of the approach were seen in proposals for the Barham Park buildings LINK (there is a Barham Park Trust Committee meeting on Tuesday 10th September. No agenda has been published as yet.)

Given that level of increase  many other organisations would have to close and presumably the property will go to commercial interests.

Cllr Mili Patel's Cabinet Member Forward to the Agenda item states: 

The property strategy sets a course for adaptation, evidence-based decision- making, embracing change, and reimagining the potential of our property assets. Central to this strategy is a proactive approach to asset management, ensuring every decision supports our Borough Plan 2023-27 and paves the way for a more equitable future for all of Brent.

The Council’s budget and the Medium-Term Financial Plan (MTFP) for future years depend on rent income from the assets. Therefore, the assets must generate sufficient income for maintenance and upgrading, which ensures the successful delivery of Council services from the assets in the long term.

 Brent Council chart from Strategy document (Brent Council spelling)

The Council's property is varied and excludes schools etc but as can be seen in area office accommodation, presumably in Brent Civic Centre, is largest in area. The Council has been trying to let out two floors but recognise that the changed working environment (working from home) means that there is less demand for office space.


 The Property Strategy sets out its approach to the review:

Appraise every asset on its own merits for efficacy.

Segmenting the portfolio allows us to tailor strategies to maximise value and reduce risks associated with different asset types. Our approach revolves around four pivotal themes. This methodology categorises properties based on similar characteristics into distinct segments to

allocate resources efficiently. The four segments and their strategic focus are shown below.

•• Strategic Hold

•• Actively Manage

•• Invest

•• Dispose

By adopting this segmentation approach, we are not just managing properties; we are strategically stewarding assets to serve the aims of our Borough Plan. Properties will be placed into strategic themes using a thorough asset review process and scoring methodology. The stages of this process include reviewing the following:

•• Strategic relevance

•• Financial and social benefits

•• Condition and energy efficiency

•• Accessibility

•• Risks

•• Opportunities

 The full 24 page Property Strategy can be read HERE

Saturday 31 August 2024

The Pageant of Empire, 1924 – Part 1: Wembley and Westward Ho!

 Guest post by local historian Philip Grant

 

 

1. Extract from the programme cover for Part 1 of the Pageant. (Source: Brent Archives)

 

Today, we are used to Wembley Stadium staging spectacular shows (most recently Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour), but 100 years ago another huge entertainment event had just ended. It was part of the British Empire Exhibition, and this is the first of two articles which I hope will give you a taste of it, starting with the leading role played by the ordinary residents of Wembley.

 

The Pageant of Empire was described as ‘an historical epic’, setting out to portray the history of the British Empire. It was performed in three parts on successive evenings, twice each week, during late July and August 1924. I have not written about it before, partly because I feel uncomfortable about how that history was told, but in this centenary year of the Exhibition, I felt that I should “bite the bullet” (and many of those were fired as Britain’s Empire was built!).

 

Plans for this Pageant at the Exhibition had been drawn up by senior representatives of Britain and its Dominions (principally Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa) for many months, and the Government had promised £100,000 towards its cost (through the Department for Overseas Trade). The first that most people in Wembley heard about it, however, was in April 1924, less than two weeks before King George V opened the Exhibition.

 

2. Front page article from “The Wembley News”, 17 April 1924. (Brent Archives – local newspaper microfilms)

 

Wembley Council had been asked by the Exhibition organisers to set up a committee, which would undertake to stage one of the major episodes in Part 2 of the Pageant (to be performed on Tuesday and Friday evenings). It was chaired by Dr Charles Goddard, Wembley’s Medical Officer of Health, assisted by R.H. Powis, a local contractor and County Councillor, and included a group of local councillors. Their task was to recruit around 2,000 volunteer performers, and get them ready, within three months, to take part in the Pageant. 

 

3.  Article from “The Wembley News”, 12 June 1924. (Brent Archives – local newspaper microfilms)

 

4.  Article from “The Wembley News”, 26 June 1924. (Brent Archives – local newspaper microfilms)

 

In return for giving up much of their spare time to take part, performers were offered free entry to the Exhibition throughout the weeks when the Pageant would take place, and six free tickets for reserved seats in the stadium, so that their family and friends could watch the show. An added attraction, perhaps negotiated by Dr Goddard, who was the prime mover behind the project, was that a share of any profits made from the Pageant of Empire would go towards funds being raised for a proposed Wembley Hospital.

 


5. Pageant of Empire performer’s certificate, given to Miss E. Rogers. (Source: Brent Archives)

 

By the middle of June, Wembley had set up a Pageant of Empire office in the High Road, to deal with recruiting performers, and all the administrative details required to organise their participation in the event, which would have an Elizabethan theme. School teachers and organisers of local Societies were asked to offer contributions to the performance, such as folk dancing or a “mystery play”. Ladies who did not feel able to take part in the Pageant itself were encouraged to spend any available morning or afternoon at St John’s Church Hall, to help Mrs Bannister, Mistress of the Robes, create the 2,000 costumes which were needed.

 

6. The Day and Robinson families in their Pageant costumes. (Brent Archives online image 2684)

 

By July, rehearsals for Wembley’s section of the Pageant, “The Days of Queen Elizabeth” (remember, there had only been one English Queen of that name in 1924!), were taking place. The stadium could not be used for these, so they were held in King Edward VII Park. When the 2,000+ Wembley cast members finally got the chance for a single dress rehearsal in the Empire Stadium, the local newspaper reported that: ‘Owing to its immensity, many of the performers themselves feel that at times there is considerable confusion.’ 

 

The Pageant was meant to start its six-week run with Part 1 on Monday 21 July, with Wembley performing the opening scene of Part 2 the following evening, but because of bad weather preparations in the stadium were delayed. The first night was actually on Friday 25 July, and it was Wembley’s performers who stepped out into the stadium to open the show. One critic wrote: ‘The costumes in the Elizabethan Episode are most gorgeous, and from the seats in the Stadium the effect is wonderful.’

 

7. Article from “The Wembley News”, 31 July 1924. (Brent Archives – local newspaper microfilms)

 

The pageant scene performed by Wembley residents represented a festival day in London in 1588, culminating in Queen Elizabeth arriving at St Paul’s Cathedral for a service giving thanks for England’s victory over the Spanish Armada. The action is described in detail in the programme: ‘The life of a Tudor feast day is shown in dances, quarter staff, the joust of knights ….’  After all these crowd scenes, a trumpeter and herald announce the Queen’s procession (hence the ‘300 Horsemen Wanted’, although a few of them were horsewomen in disguise!) with various lords and other dignitaries. ‘…and lastly, in her chariot, THE QUEEN ELIZABETH, followed by the ladies of her court on horse, and her Yeomen of the Guard.’

 

8. Scenes from Wembley’s Elizabethan Episode. (Screenshots from a British Pathé newsreel film)

 

I only have the names of a small number of the around 2,300 local residents who took part in the Pageant, either as performers or members of the choir. However, it was reported that Dr Goddard had the role of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and one of the “stars” at the climax of the drama, Sir Francis Drake, was played by R.H. Powis!

 

As the 31 July article above records, the following Tuesday evening’s performance of Part 2 ‘was abandoned owing to the rain’. However, weather permitting, the Wembley cast performed at the Pageant each Tuesday and Friday evening through to the end of August (except when they gave two shows, at 2.30pm and 7.30pm on Saturday 16 August, rather than one on the previous evening). And as a thank you, for all who wished to take part (tickets cost just 2s/6d!), a ball, in their Elizabethan costumes, was held from 11pm to 5am in one of the Exhibition’s Amusement Park dance halls, immediately after their final performance on 29 August.

 

That is my “local history” story, and I’ll move on to the history of the British Empire, as portrayed in the three parts of the Pageant. The events included in it, and the dates they occurred, are correct, as you would expect when the Pageant’s historical adviser was Sir Charles Oman, a distinguished military historian and Professor of Modern History at Oxford (as well as being the Conservative Member of Parliament for Oxford University from 1919 to 1935!). 

 

It is how the stories of those events were told, and what was omitted from the history, that I am not comfortable with. That will not come as a surprise, because the British Establishment wanted to paint a picture of the Empire being “a good thing”, as I showed in my earlier article on why we should commemorate the British Empire Exhibition in its centenary year, The Government was keen to ensure that this message reached all levels of society, so 19,000 free tickets (mainly for standing on the terraces) were available to the public for each performance.

 

Part 1 of the Pageant, which finally premiered a week late, on Monday 28 July, was entitled “Westward Ho!”. It opened (as did the other two parts) with “The Empire March”, specially written for the Pageant by Sir Edward Elgar, who had also composed musical settings for a series of poems by Alfred Noyes, played by 110 musicians drawn from three top London orchestras.

 

9.  Sheet music for The Empire March, and the music programme for Part 1 of the Pageant.
(Source: Brent Archives, ref. 19241/PRI/3 – BEE primary source material)

 

Part 1’s opening prologue is set in 1496, and shows King Henry VII and his court approached by a deputation from Bristol. The Mayor of that city introduces John Cabot, who gives the King a gift of furs brought back from a voyage across the Atlantic. King Henry agrees to give him a Royal commission, urging him (and this may be poetic licence) to ‘go forward in his quest of the new found land.’  This is the event credited as the beginning of the British Empire. That scene is followed by a parade of “Pioneers”, described as merchant adventurers (although the victims of their activities might have called some of them robbers and pirates!).

 

10.  Postcard of the Newfoundland Pavilion at the British Empire Exhibition.
(Brent Archives online image 0988)

 

The small Dominion of Newfoundland (it did not become a province of Canada until 1949) staged the first Pageant scenes in Part 1. Cabot landed there in 1497, and had some contact with the indigenous people already living on the island. Because of the huge stocks of fish found in the seas off Newfoundland, fishermen from several European countries came to work there. It was not until 1583 that Sir Humphrey Gilbert was sent to take possession of the island, in the name Queen Elizabeth, ‘lest it should be forgotten that Newfoundland was English soil ever since the day that the Bristol adventurer landed there.’

 

On that basis, Newfoundland should have belonged to Iceland, because the Norse navigator, Leif Erikson, landed in Vinland, as he called it, nearly 500 years before Cabot! But at least the Pageant scenes staged by Canada begin with that country being claimed on behalf of the King of France in 1534 (that is, if you ignore the claims of the existing inhabitants who had been living there for several thousand years before then).

 

Canada was part of the French Empire for more than 200 years before scene 4 of its Pageant portrayed the British military campaign in 1759, which saw victory over the French at Quebec, and the land become part of the British Empire. Then comes scene 5, from which the following description is taken:-

 

11.Extract from the programme for Part 1 of the Pageant. (Source: Brent Archives)

 

‘When the thirteen original Colonies of North America seceded from the British flag ….’ That is the only reference, in this section of the Pageant about the western hemisphere, to the fact that British people had colonised parts of what is now the United States. And there is nothing at all in the Pageant of Empire about the British colonies in the West Indies, or the trans-Atlantic slave trade that was the foundation of much of the wealth that flowed, to a few, from the British Empire.

 

That is all I will write about Part 1 of the Pageant of Empire. However, I should mention that, even though it was seen by nearly one million people, the Pageant made a loss, so that Dr Goddard’s Wembley Hospital project received no funding from it. One reason for the loss was the bad weather for much of the five weeks that performances ran, and it is perhaps fitting that one of the advertisers in the programme booklets was Burberry, “The All-British Weatherproof Worn in All British Possessions”!

 

 12.  One of the advertisements pages from the Pageant programmes. (Source: Brent Archives)

 

If you have found this article of interest, please look out for the second part of it in around ten day’s-time, when the Pageant heads Eastward then Southward, before a grand finale.


Philip Grant.

 

Friday 30 August 2024

LETTER: Cllr Butt, this is no laughing matter. South Kilburn residents held in contempt

 

Alpha House, South Kilburn

Dear Editor,

The Brent and Kilburn Times recently splashed an article about conditions at Alpha House in South Kilburn LINK. I wrote a letter to them about the way Brent Council treats its residents but unfortunately it was not published.

This is what I wrote:

Thank you for highlighting the scandal of how Brent Council treats residents of our flats. The fact that Council leader Mohammed Butt can say that grass and bushes have now been - badly - cut does not alter the fact that residents were given several different dates when it would happen and it didn't. On other occasions we got no response at all to queries, as was the case when we asked about the scaffolding on Alpha House. Numerous enquiries by TRA officers and residents simply went unanswered. 

 

Councillor Butt's comment that we should make a complaint is ridiculous when we have already made known our concern to numerous council officers, councillors and our new MP with no substantive response. Indeed, when I saw Cllr Butt recently and raised the issue with him, he just laughed.

 

Such is the contempt with which Brent Council holds residents of its properties.

 

Pete Firmin, chair, Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenants and Residents Association.