Hertfordshire Police to hold meeting for Muslim community affected by the Carpender's Park Cemetery attack- Tomorrow 6pm

 Wednesday April 16th 6pm

Bushey Islamic Circle Wednesday April 16th 6pm

The Bushey Centre,

Bushey Country Club, 

Bushey High Street 

WD23 1TT

 Buses 142, 258, 885

 

The future of Islamia Primary School on the agenda for Brent Cabinet's May 19th Meeting

 From the school website

 

Readers will remember the controversy over  state-funded Islamia Primary School currently housed in Queens Park. The school was given an eviction notice by the land owner, the Yusuf Islam Foundation, as it wanted to expand the neighbouring private secondary schools.

An informal consultation was held that rejected the school moving to the Strathcona site in Preston ward. Calls for it to be housed on the site in South Kiburn set aside for the merged Carlton Vale Infants and Kilburn Park Junior schools was rejected by Brent Council. Islamia parents cited the very low pupil numbers at those schools compared with the over-subscribed Islamia Primary. Brent Council argued that the numbers at the new South Kilburn Primary would increase as the regeneration progressed and attractive new resources were offered.

My suggestion in a question at Full Council asking if the soon to be closed Brentfield Road site of Leopold Primary School could be allocated to Islamia Primary received this response from Lead Member for Schools, Cllr Gwen Grahl in November last year:

The Yusuf Islam Foundation is still considering whether it wishes to proceed with the relocation to the Strathcona site following consultation in autumn 2022. No timescale for the relocation has been agreed. Should this proposed use of the Strathcona site not proceed, the site will be used to develop additional provision for children with SEND. In this event, the local authority would continue to work with the Yusuf Islam Foundation to identify a suitable alternative site for the school.

 

As set out in the refreshed School Place Planning Strategy 2024-2028, agreed by Cabinet on 12 November 2024, consideration will be given to opportunities to use any spare capacity within the primary school sector to expand provision for children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities, given the increasing need across the borough.

 

The Gwenneth Rickus site of Leopold Primary School will continue to be used for mainstream primary provision until September 2027 and the Council has not determined the future use of the site, that could also include provision for SEND.

A new SEND school is to be be opened in London Road, Wembley.

After a long silence the issue has reappeared as 'The Future of Islamia Primary School' on the Brent Cabinet Agenda for the  May 19th meeting 'for determination'.

There is little more information except a note stating 'There could be an exempt appendix as legal guidance.'

I will update readers as soon a I have more information,

 

How many affordable homes did Brent Council deliver in 2024/25? - Was it 530, or 434, or just 26?

Guest post by Philip Grant in a personal capacity

Brent Council would like you to believe that the answer is 530 new affordable homes. That is the number they included in the leaflet they sent out to every household in the borough last month, with our Council Tax bills for 2025/26. The claim that 530 affordable homes were delivered is on a page headed “Where Your Council Tax Goes”, directly following the words ‘Here’s how we spent your council tax last year’, so there should not be any doubt that it relates to homes delivered by Brent Council itself. But that claim is untrue!

 

When I saw that figure, I couldn’t understand where all those homes had been completed in the borough during the past year, so I put in an FoI request. Here is the answer (in red) that I received to the first point, which as well as confirming that the claim relates to the year 2024/25 says that 530 affordable homes was actually 434.

 

Extract from email of 31 March 2025 from Brent’s Strategic Housing Partnerships Manager.

 

I realise that, as the leaflet had to be printed around two months before the year end, there had to be some estimating, but to publish a figure of 530, more than 22 per cent higher than the actual number at 31 March is stretching the facts. Brent has claimed, in response to being challenged on the figures by the Local Democracy Reporting Service, that 530 was ‘correct at the time of going to press’, but that can’t be true either.

 

But the situation gets worse for the Council, as the second point I raised in my FoI request was where these affordable homes were “delivered”, and whether they were built by Brent or by another registered provider of social housing (such as a housing association). This is the response I received:

 

 

So, there it is, in black and white. Brent Council did not deliver 530 affordable homes in the year to 31 March 2025, and not even 434, the revised total of all of the affordable homes completed in the borough in that year. The Council itself delivered just 26 affordable homes in the year, less than 5% of the number its leaflet to Council Taxpayers would have you believe!

 

When Brent set out its five-year New Council Homes plan in 2019, it promised to deliver 1,000 new homes at “genuinely affordable” rents between 2019 and 2024. It failed to do that, and quietly changed the target to 1,000 “affordable” homes by 2028, just one example of the misleading information they have given over affordable housing. In the third part of my FoI request, I asked for a breakdown of the different types of affordable housing included in the 530 (or 434) figure, This was the answer:

 

This shows that only 101 out of 434 of the new affordable homes was at the “genuinely affordable” London Affordable Rent (“LAR”) level, that is just over 23% of the total. Brent Council has a planning policy which states that at least 70% of affordable homes provided (and 50% of new homes in developments of 10+ homes are meant to be “affordable”) should be genuinely affordable, so our planning system is clearly failing to deliver on what is an identified need for the people of Brent.

 

More than half of the affordable homes delivered were not even homes for rent, but shared ownership (45% of the total) and discount market sale (14%). ‘Discounted market sales housing’, which like shared ownership technically counts as “affordable housing”, even though it is not affordable to most people in housing need in Brent, is defined as homes which are sold ‘at a discount of at least 20% below local market value.’

 

The other claim over housing in the Council Tax leaflet is that ‘1,000 new council homes [are] being built this year.’ I asked for the details behind that claim as well, and this is the answer I received:

 

You will note that, again, between sending the leaflet to the printers and 31 March, the Council had to revise its figure down from 1,000 to 899. These are ‘expected completions’, and who knows how many more of these will not actually be completed by 31 March 2026? 

 

From the names and addresses of these ‘new council homes’ being built, at least three large sites, Alperton Bus Garage, Fulton Road and Quay Walk, amounting to 564 homes (62.5% of the total) are private developments, where Brent is borrowing large amounts of money to buy flats from the developers, rather than building new homes itself.

 

And this is the odd thing. It is (or should be) much cheaper to build new homes on land that you already own, but instead of building all of the homes on the Council owned former Copland School site at Cecil Avenue for rent (at the genuinely affordable rents which local people need), Brent has agreed that Wates, the contractor building them for the Council, can sell 150 of the 237 homes there privately. Only 56 of the new homes there (just over 23%) will be for renting to Brent families at the “genuinely affordable” LAR level.

 

Brent also owns all of the blocks of housing, and the land on which they stand, which are part of its long-running and much delayed South Kilburn Regeneration programme. In the latest deal for this, with Countryside, the developer will get more than half of the homes to be built on the site of Neville and Winterleys, to sell privately. The homes retained by the Council will all be for social rent, which sounds like a good thing, but that is because they will all be for existing Council tenants, being rehoused so that their homes can be demolished. There will be no new homes available for rent to families on the Council’s waiting list.

 

These dishonest housing claims, which have gone out to every home in the borough, give the impression that Brent Council is providing much more affordable housing itself than is actually the case. Who benefits from this deception? The principal beneficiaries are Cllr. Muhammed Butt (whose “Dear Resident” letter is on page 3 of the leaflet, saying what a good job his Council is doing, despite the huge cuts to its Central Government funding since 2010) and his Labour councillors. This propaganda on their behalf is in an official Brent Council leaflet, paid for out of our Council Tax, as they sent us the bill for this year’s increased amount!

 

The back cover of the leaflet contains an advert about Brent’s campaign against fly-tipping, featuring a photograph with “the usual suspects”. As the leaflet contains the lies I’ve exposed above, I will end this piece with an amended version of that advert.

 

Parody of the back cover advert. (Image by Brent Council, amendments by the author)

Philip Grant.

 

 

 

Volunteers in buckets for Brent River Catchment pollution project - hoping to start work tomorrow

 

Some of the volunteer 'samplers' at Imperial College Training Session

Teams of volunteers have been anxiously watching for rain during this dry period - not for the allotment or garden, but to get started on one on the biggest hands-on outdoor citizenship science projects of its kind.

The  Brent River Run-off project is a partnership between  CURB (Clean Up the River Brent), Brent Catchment Partnership (Thames 21) and Imperial College.

The project needs heavy rain to cause 'run-off' from roads and other pollution sources into the River Brent, Mutton Brook, Silk Stream, Wembley Brook, Wealdstone Brook and other tributaries.  Volunteers will be positioned along the waters to dip buckets ino the water to take samples, preferably before, during and after the rains.

These will be transferred into bottles, labelled and taken to local freezers before being collected by Imperial College for analysis in their highly advanced labs.

At present it looks as if the rains may come at dawn tomorrow so look out for volunteers in high viz dangling buckets from bridges and footways as you go off to work or enjoy your breakfast.

Volunteers will be positioned all the way from Edgware to Brentford where the Brent joins the Thames. 

 

UPDATED with statement by Leader of Brent Council. Muslim community upset over desecration of Muslim graves at Carpenders Park Lawn Cemetery in Islamophobic attack

 

 

 

Thanks to Khalid on TikTok for sending this video via Twitter 

 

Muslim graves at Carpenders Park Lawn Cemetery in Hertfordshire were reported to have been desecrated at the weekend with memorials and plaques damaged including those for children.

 

The cemetery is owned by Brent Council and has a separate Muslim section. As this section was singled there is little doubt that the attack was Islamophobic and should be treated as a hate crime against Muslims.

 

 

 

For the police  Inspector Will Rogers-Overy said:

 

Enquiries are ongoing to further establish the circumstances, and extra patrols have been deployed in the area to reassure the community. Senior officers are working closely with local community leaders, to identify those family members who will be most affected. In the coming days we will engage further with the Muslim community who will have been particularly impacted by this horrendous crime.

 

If anyone has information or witnessed the criminal damage take place, please contact police.

 

Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council, said:

 

Our thoughts are with the families of those whose graves were desecrated, I cannot imagine how they must be feeling at this moment.

 

This is a very serious incident, and we continue to work closely with Hertfordshire Police to inform family members and bring the perpetrators to justice. I encourage anyone who thinks they have information that will help the investigation to call the Police on 101.

 

It looks as though Muslim graves have been targeted, in what appears to be an Islamophobic hate crime. There is absolutely no place for hate or discrimination of any kind anywhere, but particularly in London – a city where everyone is welcome and our diversity is one of our greatest strengths.

 

We will reinstate the damaged name plaques and return Carpenders Park Lawn cemetery to a peaceful, quiet place of remembrance as quickly as possible, once the Police have finished their investigation.

Further information from Brent Council:

  • Up to 100 graves were desecrated, including the graves of children and babies. We understand this happened on Saturday.
• Brent Council has been working with the police over the weekend to make sure everyone who needs to be is contacted, and that work will continue today.
• Hertfordshire Police are treating this as a hate crime.
• Carpenders Park Lawn cemetery is located in Watford but owned by Brent Council.
• Given this horrific incident, Brent Council will now be working closely with the Police to put in place any extra security measures needed to protect the area.

 

A relative affected writes;

 

After hearing the news of graves being desecrated at Carpenders Park cemetery, it was the most gut wrenching feeling. My husband is recently buried in this cemetery and the anxiety and feeling of nausea till we reached the cemetery I can’t begin to describe how my family and I felt. Thankfully my husband’s grave was unaffected but to see the destruction of children’s graves was callous and pure evil. How are these people allowed to get away with this? It’s incomprehensible. My husband is buried there I was too upset to write this till I saw from my own eyes.

 

In a statement released this afternoon Brent Green Party said:

 

Carpenders Park Law Cemetery Desecration of Muslims Graves. 

 

Brent Green Party express our  solidarity with the Muslim community  and call for a full investigation on the basis that is an Islamophobic hate crime totally alien to Brent's values as an inclusive community.

 

The Lawn Cemetery is a general burial place with different sections and non-Muslims have also been affected by the news and have expressed sympathy.  This is one comment in reaction to  this article beig posted on Next Door.

 

This is terrible. Carpenders Park Cemetery is a peaceful resting place for our loved ones of different faiths. I hope they catch the people that did this. Unfortunately it does not have cctv. Both my parents and family friends are buried there. It has a calming feel to it. I have been visiting for over 30 years and I have never heard of this happening before.

 

 

 

 

 

 

All routes Wembley High Road and Wembley Triangle to re-open Friday April 19th as upgrade completed ahead of schedule

 From Brent Council

Wembley Triangle – 1 month ahead of schedule

We are pleased to inform you that the works are progressing really well and we should be opening all routes on Friday, 18 April 2025.

Please find below summary timeline for the remaining works:

• Saturday, 12 April. Wembley High Road will open on temporary road surface from 5am. Access to Wembley High Road from Wembley Hill Road and Ecclestone Place will remain closed.
• Monday, 14 April. Wembley High Road will be closed for road resurfacing from 8pm to 5am. Access to Wembley High Road from Wembley Hill Road and Ecclestone Place will remain closed.
• Friday, 18 April. All routes will be open as usual as our upgrades will be complete.

Signals installed and working at Bridge Road/North End Road junction but there's a small problem

 Bridge Road/North End Road Junction when it opened in June 2021

 

When the junction oof North End Road and North End Road was finally opened in June 2021 it is was immediately obvious that traffic signals were needed for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles. Wembley Matters, Brent Cyclists and others pointed out the dangers.

 

 The new layout

It has taken nearly four years for signals to be installed. A reader pointed out a problem, with the installation so I went to look for myself this morning. I saw someone wanting to cross North End Road towards Olympic Way looking for a button to press.

The control box is actually fitted away from the edge of North End Road on a post, and is partially oriented towards Bridge Road and Wembley Park  station.  It is no wonder that he could not find a button and that the reader had told me there was not one.

Even worse there were people trying to dash across Bridge Road there, in both directions, despite the railings on the station side. The new pedestrian crossing at Bridge Road is on the other of the yellow box.

A minor adjustment is needed that should not take 4 years to complete.

 

 

Neasden Shopping Centre Bingo Hall application to be heard next week - opposed by Dawn Butler MP and councillors on behalf of residents

 Tuesday's Licensing Sub-Committee will hear an application from Merkul Slots to open a Bingo Hall on the former premises of Santander in the Neasden Shopping Centre,

The application is the first since Brent Council launched its campaign for the government to change the law which they claim does not give local authorities enough power to turn down such socially harmful applications.

This application has attracted submissions from Dawn Butler MP fore Brent East, Cllr Liz Dixon and another elected representative who is not named.

Dawn Butler MP:

Dear License Committee, 

 

I am writing to formally respond to the Merkur Slots Application at 263–265 Neasden Lane application number 33757 for a Bingo Club Premises Licence/Gambling Premises Licence New Application.

 

My constituency of Brent East has been disproportionately impacted by problem gambling with betting shops and adult gaming centres planted amidst our most vulnerable and deprived communities, impacting those who can least afford it. According to Brent Council’s Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA), the borough’s problem gambling rate is 6.2%, which is over double the national average. Additionally, gambling-related harm costs the borough an estimated £14.3 million annually. Anti-social behaviour linked to loitering outside gambling shops is extremely problematic and I see this in casework I receive year-round.

 

The liberalisation of gambling legislation as introduced in the Gambling Act 2005 has been a serious failure for communities and this application just highlights the serious problems and I implore the Planning Inspectorate to take serious action and refuse the application. There is already a proliferation of gambling shops and adult gaming centres in my constituency, with three betting shops already within 100 metres of the proposed site. We know already that they have a propensity to cluster in poorer communities, which are more susceptible to gambling harm due to the hope that a big win will help them out of their situation.

 

It is deeply concerning that further details regarding the building have not been supplied. This is a strong community, and it is being blighted by these shops, whose owners hold the area in complete contempt and disregard. The fact that the application contains few details does not surprise me. I wrote to 7,000 households in Brent, to ask them for their own experiences of gambling and the betting shops in Brent.

 

This was going to form a response to the Government’s Gambling Review, the response to my call for evidence has been stark:

 

 • 97.5% were opposed to betting shops

• 80% questioned why more shops were being given permission

• 75% called for the number of stores to be limited

• 62.5% detailed experiences of anti-social behaviour in the locale of these shops.

 

I have heard from families who’ve faced financial ruin because of gambling  and from so many people for whom their daily lives are blighted by the associated anti-social behaviour, in particular street drinking and drugs, which circulate in close proximity to these gambling establishments.

 

To conclude, I strongly urge the Licensing Authority to reject this application. The people of Neasden deserve a vibrant, diverse high street that supports the well-being of all residents, not another exploitative gambling venue that deepens existing harms.

  

Anonymous representative:

 

Dear Sir / Madam,

 

This constitutes a formal objection to the proposed Merkur Slots application at 263- 265 Neasden Lane. As an elected representative and a voice for deeply concerned residents, I vehemently oppose this application due to its detrimental impact on the community and the area. City Hall has provided significant funding to Neasden and allowing this application to proceed would work completely against the efforts that all partners are making to improve the Town Centre and the area.

 

A Plague of Gambling Establishments:

 

Brent already suffers from an oversaturation of gambling venues. With 81 licensed gambling establishments, our borough boasts a higher concentration than  supermarkets, banks, or even schools – a truly alarming statistic. This over- proliferation, particularly in areas like Neasden, directly contradicts the principles ofm nresponsible community planning.

 

Fuelling Addiction and Social Harm:

 

The Brent Council Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) paints a grim picture:

 

 Epidemic of Problem Gambling: 6.2% of Brent residents grapple with problem gambling, a staggering figure twice the national average.

 Economic Devastation: Gambling-related harm costs Brent a staggering £14.3 million annually.

 Predatory Targeting: Operators like Merkur Slots exploit vulnerable communities, with Neasden, Harlesden, and Willesden bearing the brunt of this exploitation.

 The Deadliness of FOBTs: Fixed Odds Betting Terminals (FOBTs) and online slots, despite being utilized by a mere 3% of the population, are the primary drivers of problem gambling. The addiction rate of FOBTs surpasses even heroin and tobacco, highlighting their devastating impact.

 

These stark realities underscore the urgent need to curb the proliferation of gambling establishments, especially in areas like Neasden Lane, to safeguard our communitynfrom the devastating consequences of gambling addiction.

 

Eroding the Vitality of Neasden Lane:

 

The proposed Merkur Slots development poses a grave threat to the vitality and viability of Neasden Lane as a thriving commercial centre.

 

 Anti-Social Behaviour Hotspots: The existing concentration of betting shops within a mere 100 metres of Neasden Lane already contributes to significant anti-social behavior. Adding another gambling establishment will only exacerbate this problem.

 Undermining Community Development: This application directly undermines the substantial investments made by City Hall to revitalize Neasden Town Centre.

 Deterring Diverse Businesses: The oversaturation of gambling establishments discourages other businesses from establishing themselves, hindering the development of a diverse and vibrant commercial landscape.

 

 Unsightly Development: The proposed design lacks the vibrancy and aesthetic appeal necessary for a thriving town centre. Instead of fostering a welcoming and engaging atmosphere, it will detract from the pedestrian experience.

 

Size, Location, and Nuisance:

 

The scale and location of this proposed development are entirely inappropriate:

 

 Residential Intrusion: The continuous operation of this gambling establishment will inevitably lead to increased noise, disturbance, and anti- social behaviour, severely impacting the quality of life for nearby residents.

 Ignoring Community Concerns: This proposal blatantly disregards the Brent Local Plan's emphasis on protecting residents from the negative impacts of commercial activities.

 

Exacerbating Social Inequalities:

 

This application raises profound concerns about its impact on the most vulnerable members of our community:

 

 Preying on Financial Desperation: Many individuals, particularly during times of economic hardship, turn to gambling as a desperate coping mechanism.

 Targeting Young People and Ethnic Minorities: Young people and ethnic minorities are disproportionately impacted by gambling-related harm.

 

This development directly contradicts the principles of creating healthy and inclusive communities. Instead of fostering well-being, it will deepen existing inequalities and exacerbate social challenges.

 

Conclusion:

 

The proposed Merkur Slots development at 263-265 Neasden Lane is an affront to our community. It represents a threat to the health, safety, and well-being of our residents.

 

I urge the Licensing Authority to categorically reject this application and prioritize developments that contribute positively to the economic, social, and cultural fabric of Neasden.

 

 Cllr Liz Dixon: