Brent's housing crisis in figures

Shelter has issued the latest figures on housing need which are for the third quarter of 2013. Full data is available HERE

I have made a table for the main figures for Brent below:

London Borough of Brent	Quarter 3 2013	Quarter 2 2013
Families with children accepted as homeless	72	40
Households accepted as homeless	155	113
Households found to be homeless but not in priority need	63	33
Households found to be ‘intentionally homeless’	12	18
Households in temporary accommodation	3,410	3,484
Number of children in temporary accommodation	5,729	5,837
Households with dependent children in temporary accommodation	2,640	2,692
Possession claims issued by landlords	655	535
Possession claims by mortgage lenders	83	59

Library Planning fraud investigation still awaited as developer consults in a pub

Guest blog from a Kensal Rise Library campaigner in a personal capacity

Many people are asking when the police investigation in to the fake email support for Andrew Gillck’s change-of-use planning application for Kensal Rise Library be completed. It is, after all, three months since the council was first handed evidence of online fraud - an attempt to inflate local backing for Mr Gillick’s proposals. Brent later claimed that it had passed this material to the police.

Not exactly, alas. The council had simply forwarded its findings to the civilian-run national fraud and internet-crime reporting centre, Action Fraud. True, this is the first step in reporting electronic fraud and one which Brent was obliged to follow. Why the council didn’t tell residents that Action Fraud is a holding-centre only, not itself an investigatory body, and that it would take time before the actual police inquiry got underway is another matter.

So it transpires that it’s only in the last couple of weeks that Brent’s findings have actually reached the City of London Police’s National Fraud and Intelligence Bureau (NFIB), where they will be reviewed. How long it’ll take the NFIB to decide if there’s a criminal case to answer is unknown, likewise whether Brent is proactively monitoring developments or simply waiting on events. 

A report last month by Mark Smulian in the Local Government Chronicle quotes a Brent Council spokesman: ‘It is clear that a number of the emails came from bogus email addresses but, unfortunately, it is not so clear that this necessarily constitutes a criminal offence’ LINK

As an astute observer has commented, however: ‘It should be remembered that in addition to the fake email debacle, real fraud did occur - someone generated letters & emails of support using real addresses without their owners’ permission. It is these cases that I would imagine are the most criminally damaging’. The case of Kensal Rise businesswoman Kirsty Slattery is but one example reported in the Brent and Kilburn Times  LINK

What is clear is that Mr Gillick is currently revising his plans for the historic Mark Twain/Andrew Carnegie library - his original planning application was unanimously rejected by Brent’s planning committee in September. Sensitive to accusations of previously having failed to consult them and so hoping to win over local residents to his latest scheme, the developer recently held a public ‘exhibition’ of his new proposals in a Kensal Rise pub.

To date, though, it seems he hasn’t yet submitted a new planning application to the council, nor should any be considered by the planning department until the outcome of the NFIB’s investigation is known. Unfortunately, the council’s line is to repeat, mantra-like, that it ‘has a responsibility and obligation to consider any valid planning application that is put forward from any individual(s). It must consider each on its merits in accordance with its statutory obligations’ (Christine Gilbert, acting chief executive). 

Against the ongoing police inquiry and the possibility of prosecution for planning fraud, it would be absurd for Brent to pursue business as usual with respect to any further application from Mr Gillick for any Brent development - an apparent fake email in support of the Barham Library Complex appears directly linked to the Platinum Revolver/Kensal Properties Ltd developer - or anyone else for Kensal Rise Library. Meantime, it’s good to hear that the council has strengthened its ‘procedures...to require those who wish to make comments on–line to register and provide us with their contact details’, particularly as, according to a computer expert, ‘It’s [wan’t] very clever of Brent to collect comments via a system that [was] this easy to spoof’.

Protest over London Mayor grabbing the New Homes Bonus

New Homes Bonus is granted to councils in recognition of the pressures they and their communities face when new housing is built in their borough. For example, the cost of more people using locally delivered services, such as adult care or libraries, or investment in infrastructure.

The Autumn Statement announced that, from 2015, London boroughs will face a cut of £70 million in the New Homes Bonus. It also announced that outside of London the New Homes Bonus will not be given to Local Enterprise Panel (LEPs), as had been originally proposed, but would instead continue to go to the councils who deliver local services. The government has, however, decided that in London the New Homes Bonus will be given to the London Local Enterprise Panel, chaired by the Mayor of London.

Chair of London Councils, Mayor Jules Pipe, said:

All Londoners should be outraged by this move. If the New Homes Bonus is essential for councils in Leeds and Manchester to fund the pressures of growth, why should Londoners be any different? This must be reversed.

The very fact that it has been proposed raises fundamental questions about the governance of the growth agenda in London and the government’s commitment to it.

Have your say on Thursday about the future of local hospitals

Wembley residents will get the chance to air their views on proposed hospital reform in the borough which could see two hospital trusts in North West London merge.

The meeting, held by Brent Local Involvement Network (LINk) on Thursday December 12th  will discuss plans for a proposed merger between North West London Hospital Trust and Ealing Hospital Trust.

Residents are invited to air their concerns and answer any questions from experts at both hospital trusts during the meeting in the Sattavis Patidar Centre in Forty Avenue.

Although there are no concrete plans for the merger a potential scenario could see Central Middlesex Hospital in Acton Lane, lose its Accident and Emergency Department.

Ealing Hospital Trust manages Ealing Hospital as well as community services across Brent, Harrow and Ealing while the North West London Hospital Trust manages Northwick Park Hospital and St Mark’s hospitals in Watford Road and Central Middlesex Hospital in Park Royal.

The hospital trusts are planning a merger after an independent report revealed that both trusts were among 20 trusts country wide that were not clinically or financially viable.

The evening begins at 7pm. For more information contact Carol Sealy on 0208 965 0309 or email: Carol.Sealy@hestia.org

At this stage, Brent LINk does not have an opinion regarding the merger.

Vulnerable students abandoned as Copland closes Mentoring Department

Guest Blog 

Last week a special event was held at Copland Community High School to mark the closure of the Mentoring Department at the school.  The Department, which has changed pupils' lives, is a victim of the spending cuts at the school and perhaps also of the different educational philosophy and priorities of the new management.

The event attracted an audience of more than 100 in contrast with the consultation meeting on a takeover of the school by Ark academy attended hby only 15 or so. Perhaps that showed what parents and the school community really value about Copland.

The event was opened by narrators who said:

The core of the work within the Department is dealing with emotions and relating to one another. The first time you step in, you pretty much learn to acknowledge whoever is in there by greeting and acknowledging the others existence. Just from this simple ethos....the popularity of the Department grew. Student would would come down from all different backgrounds, regardless of their 'demographic label'. Whether you're African, Indian, Somalian, Polish, Romanian, English, Caribbean......a talker, are silent, a shaker, a mover or dancer..... 

The respect and love which spills through the Department is universal, indiscriminative and is available to ALL. But then.....there is your height I guess....many tall people will have learned the hard way of being greeted by the low ceiling. Most important of all....during a very unsettling time of changes within the main school structure....one core aspect if the school has been consistent and predictable....the Love and Commitment of backbones of the department.....

Our Hearts have always been open and available to serve you.....students, ex-students, university placement students, parents and carers, Copland staff and Brent external agencies.What you all would not realise is that the Team  had support for each other by meeting regularly, ritually having clinical supervision and sharing the same ethos used with service-users towards each other...which is why it all worked. 

We are not only a Team, but a family....who are....finally....flying the nest. 

To mark this 'flight' you will be mesmerised by a colourful collection of memoirs from you....the true examples of achievement and positive impact....as we prepare to leave our symbolic imprint....please ensure your mobiles are on silent, you are sitting comfortably and are ready for the curtain call performance on behalf of Copland's very Beloved Mentoring Department. 

What will happen to these vulnerable young people? Why do specialised and seasoned home-grown staff have to leave Brent and be welcomed into neighbouring boroughs? Discussion is fruitful and healthy ..., voices need to be heard because on the night of the significant news that Nelson Mandela had passed, there was a resonating message from the Lead Learning Mentor and Dramatherapist to 'fight the academy fight in order to defend what is right!'.

Green Left: It's time to make a stand and refuse to implement Coalition cuts

As councils across the country prepare their 2014-15 budgets and are confronted by the need to make savage cuts that will  drastically affect the quality of their poorest residents' lives, Green Left has issued the following statement:

The Green party of England and Wales fought the 2010 general election in opposition to the savage public service cuts supported by the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties. The Green party offered a different approach to reducing the country’s debts, which included making the wealthy (people and corporations) pay their fair share of tax, investing in the economy to produce sustainable growth through the Green New Deal, some cuts for example to Trident and pledging to protect public services particularly for the most vulnerable in our society.

Unfortunately, we did not win the general election and so are unable to put these policies into practice, although Caroline Lucas has almost single handedly taken the opposition to the Coalition government cuts agenda. The ideologically driven shrink the state policies of the Coalition government aim to reduce public spending and turn most of the public services over to private corporations. Our elected representatives in local government are on the front line in the assault on public spending, with local authorities having their funding from central government cut by around a third since 2010. 

Councils of all political stripes are hurting and they worry about whether they will even be able to fund their statutory duties in the future. Local government is under serious threat and everyone involved in it knows this to be true, despite the blithe statements about local authorities making efficiency savings and encouraging local business growth to pay for services, trumpeted by the Coalition central government. All the easy savings and many not so easy have been made now, and a future of even more of the same is daunting.

We in Green Left say enough is enough, and call on all of our existing elected Green party local councillors and any that are elected in the 2014 local elections, to firmly refuse to implement these Coalition government cuts to essential public services. If the government sends civil servants to carry out their dirty work then the responsibility for the cuts will be firmly in the public view, and our elected representatives can be in the forefront of a popular campaign against them. The time has surely come to make a stand, in solidarity with our communities that depend so heavily on the services provided and with the local authority workforce who have endured cuts in wages if not redundancy.

Caroline Lucas is Wildlife MP of the Year

Caroline Lucas has been voted Wildlife MP of the year by readers of Mark Avery's 'Standing Up for Nature' blog.

The full results were:

Caroline Lucas 39%
Owen Paterson 23.5%
Barry Gardiner  13.5%
Zac Goldsmith 11.8%
None of the Above 5.2%
Joan Walley 4.5%
Nick Clegg 2.5%

The Tories seem to have mobilised for badger hunting, climate change sceptic Owen Paterson. Maybe they do have a sense of irony.

Greens condemn 'greenwash' in Brent Cross development plans

The proposals for the redevelopment of Brent Cross seem to have been going on since the turn of the century. Like many recent developments it is just over the border from Brent and has received opposition from Kilburn, Dollis Hill and Cricklewood residents.

This is the Barnet Green Party's submission:

Barnet Council is currently considering a massive planning application for the Brent Cross Cricklewood redevelopment, including a huge extension to the shopping centre and a whole new residential town.

Barnet Greens say the BXC plans are full of utter ‘greenwash’, seeking to create a false impression about the environmental sustainability of this multi-billion pound project.

Here are the main objections we have submitted to the council:

1.These plans must be suspended until the development partners pledge to make the whole site carbon neutral and set out measures they will take to achieve that target. Sainsbury’s has already opened its first carbon neutral store (bit.ly/1bjnRQG) and plans to open more, showing that the technologies are available to make the Brent Cross shopping centre and the housing developments completely carbon neutral or carbon positive.

The proposed buildings are likely to exist for several decades at least and there is no way whatsoever that the British government will achieve its aim of a 60 per cent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 if concrete giants like the Brent Cross shopping centre are still belching out carbon dioxide from heating, lighting and air conditioning.

This scheme is an ideal opportunity to install energy conservation measures and sustainable power facilities right from the beginning. There is plenty of scope on the site for enough wind turbines, solar arrays and ground source heat pumps to make the whole area carbon positive, never mind carbon neutral.

So why aren’t they doing it? As well as benefitting the environment, carbon neutrality would save money for the people who live in the new town and for the businesses, as their energy bills would be much lower – they might even make money by feeding electricity back into the grid.

Can it be that the developers are more interested in building cheaply than in saving on running costs for the future occupants of the homes and commercial buildings?

2. At a time when neighbourhood shopping areas are under threat all over London from post office closure, cut backs to libraries and the marginal viability of many small shops and pubs, Barnet Council should be making a broader study, paid for by the developers, of the likely impact of Brent Cross Cricklewood on other shopping areas in the borough.

The scheme is not just about new housing and a so-called town centre, the whole thing is based on “an expanded and improved shopping centre”, with an “enhanced retail offer including new stores at Brent Cross Shopping Centre”, to cite the developers’ own documents.

3.When the council has assessed the likely impact, it should order the developers to pay whatever it costs to ensure the sustainability of Hendon, Golders Green and the other nearby centres: better street layouts, improved public transport, more greenery, more public toilets, more benches to rest on or whatever it takes to ensure that these neighbourhood areas remain available and attractive for local residents to use.

4. As for the transport issues surrounding the new plans, of course there should be a direct rail link to the expanded shopping centre rather than more car parking. The developers say they expect cars still to be the main way that people get there but why is that? People will no doubt continue to want to shop at Brent Cross but why should they necessarily go by car? Do people mostly go to Oxford Street or Westfield shopping centres by car? Of course not, because they are properly served by London Underground lines and by buses.

The Brent Cross Cricklewood developers should be instructed to provide attractive and adequate Tube/train/tram, bus, cycle and pedestrian links for there to be a likelihood of far fewer than the projected extra 29,000 car journeys per day in the area.

5.The Clitterhouse Farm buildings should be saved. Preserving them would only require minor alterations to the overall plan.

6. If waste treatment facilities are to remain part of the plan, it should be specified that the priority should be sustainable systems such as anaerobic digestion and/or other systems from the growing range of alternative technologies.

7. It should be specified that no waste incineration should take place at the Geron Way cite. A new waste plan is under consideration for North London and it would be simple and cost-free for the designers of that plan to omit any proposal for incineration at Geron Way. This would in any case match the practicalities of the site, given the current objections by Bestway and others.

Check out the plans for yourself  HERE 

    

Council responds to complaint over Council Tax Support Scheme consultation

Brent Council has responded to the complaint by Robin Sivapalan on behalf of residents that its consultation on the Council Tax Support Scheme was not advertised widely enough and gave inadequate time for responses. The council wants to keep the controversial current scheme with some small statutory changes.

Here is the Council's reply:

Dear Mr Sivapalan,

I refer to your complaint about the way we are consulting on Brent’s Local Council Tax Scheme for 2014/15. Firstly, I would like to make you aware that we have extended the consultation period to 13 December.

The consultation that is currently under way is on the proposal not to change the Local Council Tax Scheme agreed by full council last year (except for statutory changes to the prescribed scheme for pensioners and a minor amendment to explicitly include a specific group as vulnerable and therefore protected from paying at least 20% of their council tax which had not been made clear in the original scheme for 2013/14). There
is no requirement for an Authority to consult each year on its local scheme if there are only statutory changes, but we felt that we did want to give residents an opportunity to make comments so decided that we would run a web-based consultation.

Although we had made a number of stakeholders aware of the consultation process during network and partner meetings over recent weeks, we hadn’t formally written to advice agencies before this week. As you acknowledge, this was due to a genuine oversight for which I apologise, however on that basis, we have extended the consultation period for a week as mentioned above to allow those that had been unaware on the consultation an opportunity to comment.

I regret that it is not possible to extend the consultation to the end of January, as you request, as the Council is required to determine its scheme for next year before the end of January.

As your complaint makes significant reference to those affected by the current scheme, I consider it appropriate to comment on the current scheme and how we have tried to help our residents during what we all agree has been a difficult time. Firstly, I must point out that there cannot be a reinstatement of the previous Council Tax Benefit (CTB) scheme as this was a national scheme funded by central government that has now been abolished. The scheme that we are proposing to carry forward into 2014/15 was the subject of extensive publicity and consultation last year including the following::

 · Publicity on the Council’s website and a special email account set up for queries;
· Text messages to 2694 existing Benefit claimants;
· Emails to 1770 Benefit claimants;
· A leaflet issued with 13,000 Council Tax bills;
· Meetings and presentations to over a dozen organisations including Mencap, Citizens Advice Bureau, Help Somalia Foundation, Private Tenant Rights User Group, Older Persons Partnership Board, Brent Housing Partnership, Brent Mental Health User Group, Willesden Mosque and representatives from Lynton Close Travellers Site;
· Emails to 600 Area Consultative Forum members and 640 Citizens Panel members;
· Paper copies of leaflets and documentation in all Brent libraries;
· Features on the consultation in both the May and July 2012 editions of the Brent Magazine and publicity in the local media including the Harrow Times and the Brent and Kilburn Times;
· Presentations to 267 residents at the five Area Consultative Forums;
· Letters and emails to all partner organisations in the borough;
· A wide range of posters and other publicity throughout the borough.

Following the consultation period and full council’s agreement for the scheme, we wrote to all our customers in advance of the start of the scheme, and included a special advice leaflet in all our year end bills where CTB was in payment. Officers embarked on an extensive exercise to speak to as many of the customers affected as possible especially those who were likely to have to pay something towards their council tax for the first time. Where we were unable to contact the customer by phone, we wrote to residents affected inviting them to contact us so that we could explain the scheme and how it affected them and also to discuss how best they could meet their financial obligations. We also made arrangements to allow council tax to be paid in 12 instalments rather than the normal 10 to help spread the cost.

We have continued to try and engage with residents since the introduction of the scheme and take a sympathetic view with customers who are trying to pay their council tax.

Where residents are also affected by other aspects of the government’s Welfare Reform programme – the overall benefit cap or the bedroom tax restrictions - we have often been able to offer assistance with their housing costs.

Finally, in respect of the current consultative exercise, I do not believe that the process has been unreasonable and certainly meets or exceeds our statutory obligations.

We shall treat all responses seriously but will be subject to both time and financial constraints when considering any proposals for changes.

Yours sincerely,

Andy Monkley
Subsidy & Policy Manager

 

A perfect late autumn day on the allotment

Sunset over Birchen Grove allotments (St Andrew's Church and the Stadium Arch on the horizon)

It was a perfect late autumn day down at Birchen Grove allotments today and I made the most of it.  It was pretty amazing to be entering the second week of December and still able to harvest the last aubergine and chillies as well as the more seasonal parsnips and broccoli.

Even the couch grass was cooperative, slipping easily out of the soil with just a slight jerk of the garden fork. Often the London clay is much harder to work at this time of the year and it was satisfying to get a lot done before it adopts its usual heavy, gloopy, saturated, winter state.

However, allotment holders should know that Brent Council is expecting plots to be dug over between now and March. The regulations on non-cultivation have been changed and the Council now expects 75% of each allotment to be dug over or have crops on by March 2014. In fact they will inspecting allotments before March to see if progress towards the 75% target has been made with the possibility of issuing Non-Cultivation Orders, and the potential ending of the tenancy, if progress has not been made. Anyone who cannot comply because of personal circumstances should contact the Council.

The change reflects both the large number of people on the allotment waiting list and the difficulty some people have in finding time to cultivate their allotment in these times of long working hours or several part-time jobs.

Increasing number of allotment holders are sowing over-wintering 'green manure' which is dug in just before the plant flowers and I assume council officers will count that as cultivation - digging in may well take place after March depending on which green manure is used.

Brent Greens: Butler is a 'New Labour blast from the past'

Dawn Butler and Shahrar Ali at the Friends of the Earth Hustings, General Election 2010

Reacting to today's news that Brent Labour Party had selected Dawn Butler to fight Brent Central in 2015, Shahrar Ali, The Green's candidate in  2010, said:

Labour's selection of Dawn Butler to fight the Brent Central seat is as if they are proposing a blast from Blair's New Labour past. Let voters be reminded where Butler stood on a whole raft of hugely consequential issues.

In 2007, Butler voted against a motion calling for a new sense of urgency on climate change, and, in 2009, against our becoming a signatory to the 10:10 climate change campaign. On Nuclear deterrence, Butler voted ambiguously on the renewal of a Trident system (2007). On anti-terror legislation, Butler voted reliably with her Government throughout, and, in 2009, voted to keep the maximum period of detention without charge for terrorist suspects at 28 days (instead of a lower period).

On such fundamental political issues of the day, Butler's priorities were wrong or muddled. Labour Party members may be prepared to forgive her past mistakes but I doubt if the electorate will be quite as tolerant. Greens stand for a radical break from the barely distinguishable politics of the three main parties and we shall fight the General Election on that basis.

Labour selects Dawn Butler for Brent Central

Uniting behind Dawn?

Former Brent South MP Dawn Butler has been selected by Labour for the Brent Central seat, winning in the third round of voting. Butler lost to Sarah Teather in 2010.

Clearly more people like Marmite in Brent that I thought!

According to reliable sources Butler won narrowly from Sundar Thava, tipped by me as a possible outsider winner yesterday. There was only a handful of votes in it at the end of the day in which Sundar performed impressively but Dawn Butler was ahead on postal votes. Parmijit Dhanda and Sabina Khan were knocked out in the early stages.

With such a narrow margin the question is whether activists will line up behind Dawn Butler and get out on the streets for her. The prospect of another Tory or Coalition government may be enough to do the trick.

Lib Dem's shortlist for Brent Central

As Labour votes for its Brent Central parliamentary candidate I understand that the Lib Dem shortlist for Sarah Teather's seat is:

Lauren Keith, a member of Mapesbury Lib Dems who works in Public Relations
Ibrahim Taguri who is the Lib Dem's chief fundraiser
Anuja Prashar, a lecturer in economics
Ajmal Masroor, a broadcaster and London based Imam

Runners, form and a tip for Labour's Brent Central race as it nears finishing line

So very soon Brent Central Labour Party members will be free of the emails, circulars, texts, and knocks on the door from the five hopefuls for the Brent Central parliamentary candidate nomination.

It's quite hard to tip a winner because my sources are all over the place and more keen to say why a particular candidate is unacceptable rather than who will make a great MP.

Even the LRC appears to have decided that none deserved a collective vote of support so individuals are going their own way. In the Green Party RON appears on all ballot forms. RON stands for re-open nominations and is chosen  if you feel none of the candidates are suitable or a wider field is needed. If Ron was standing in the Brent Central Labour ballot I think he may do quite well

Dawn Butler seems to be the Marmite candidate but some have been won over by her skills as a speaker and in debate. Sabina Khan has been working extremely hard, personally lobbying many individual members, but has also attracted quite a lot of background criticism. Parmijit Dhanda although plausible on the surface has a substantial number of detractors based on his record. Zaffar van Kalwala has his fans but apparently did not come over well in the interviews.  Sundar Thava was somewhat undermined by his own decision to put a photograph of himself wielding a machine gun  on his campaign website.

I can claim no inside knowledge but if I was to tip an outsider who may come through the field it would probably be Sundar Thavapalasundaram. He impressed at the Labour Party public meeting on Syria which seemed to allay some of the concerns over his military background and that photograph. His job as an NHS doctor has gained him respect as well as his position on the Fabian Society National Executive.  He appears to be a 'slow burner' who has gained ground over the last few week.

The Fabians are quite influential in Brent and amongst some of the Council Executive. Thava's Operation Black Vote mentor, Sadiq Khan, has also been a presence in Brent since Muhammed Butt's former political adviser, Jack Stenner, a Young Fabian, went to work for him.

Council Tax Consultation extended after complaints

The Brent Council consultation on Council Tax Support due to end today,  has been extended for a week after a posting on this blog, Twitter campaign and an official complaint that it had not been widely enough advertised.

Threatened Queensbury pub wins Community Asset status

Brent Council has issued the following statement. Well done to the Queensbury Campaigners and all, including some councillors, who supported them and the Council for listing it:

We are pleased to announce that the Queensbury Pub has been added to our list of assets of comuunity value.

Leader of Brent Council, Cllr Muhammed Butt, said:

I am very pleased that the Queensbury Pub has been listed as an asset of community value.

As well as providing a home away from home for Brent residents to meet their neighbours and gather as a community, pubs such as the Queensbury generate jobs for local people and inject hundreds of thousands of pounds into our economy every year.

Community assets are locally nominated public or privately owned buildings that have furthered the social wellbeing or social interests of the community and can continue to do so.
Assets stay on our list for a period of five years.

Contribute your experience on secondary schools' socially selecting their intake

Brent parents and practioners may be interested in contributing to this research

The Office of the Children’s Commissioner (OCC) has been told that some secondary schools in England are attempting to socially select their intake by reducing the admission of children with Special Educational Needs (SEN), from minority ethnic groups, with English as an additional language (EAL), and from families on a low income.

The OCC has commissioned NFER to gather the views of parents and carers from these key groups who have recently gone through the admissions process for secondary school in England. They would like us to examine whether parents and carers feel that certain schools either encouraged or discouraged them from applying for a place for their child.

The OCC, which works to make sure all adults listen to the views and experiences of children and young people, wants to find out more about the admissions process so that they can shine a light on the situation and share these findings with decision-makers, like the Government.

You have been directed to this website because you are either a parent or carer, or because you have worked with families who have recently gone through the school admissions process. If you are interested in talking to us about your views and experiences, please click on one of the links below for further information.

I am a parent or carer...

I am a practitioner who supports families...

We look forward to hearing from you.

The Research Team

Fiona Walker

Kerry Martin

Richard White

.

Greens: Autumn statement based on short-term politics not the long-term challenge

CHANCELLOR of the Exchequer George Osborne’s Autumn Statement was dominated by short-term political considerations and a failure yet again to either address the underlying, structural problems which weaken the health of the British economy or move us to a low-carbon, affordable energy future, says the Green Party. Nothing has been done to prepare for the economic storm on the horizon.

In the Autumn Statement, Osborne insisted that “Britain’s economic plan is working” and that the Coalition Government is overseeing a “responsible recovery.”

In response to the Autumn Statement, Natalie Bennett, Green Party Leader for England and Wales, said:

"Mr Osborne was so keen to claim that this was an Autumn Statement for the long term, yet on this issue, as others, he is clearly a man who protests too much.

"Our current economic position is based on high and growing consumer indebtedness, as households are forced to borrow to cover basic costs, and a government-supported housing bubble. The Chancellor says that the sun is shining. Well that proves he hasn't looked out the window today, or looked into the lives of millions of Britons who are struggling to pay the bills, in far too many cases forced to resort to extortionate payday lenders or foodbanks to get by.”

"Instead of working to restructure our economy, to rein-in our reckless, fraud-ridden financial sector, to boost manufacturers and the real economy, to create stable, decent-paying jobs that workers can build a life on, Mr Osborne's focus is instead clearly short-term - to inflate the economy for the mere 18 months to the next General Election."

Caroline Lucas, Green MP for Brighton Pavilion, said:

“The Autumn statement was yet another missed opportunity to take the action that we need that will genuinely move us to a low-carbon, affordable energy future.

“The Chancellor has done nothing to tackle the root causes of fuel poverty or soaring fuel bills. Instead of watering down energy companies’ obligations, he should have announced a major programme to make all homes super-energy efficient. If funded through recycled carbon taxes, this could bring an estimated nine out of ten homes out of fuel poverty, quadruple carbon savings, and create up to 200,000 jobs across the UK.” [1]

“The Chancellor has delivered a lavish Christmas gift to fracking companies – giving them tax breaks to support an irresponsible and dangerous dash for gas that will undermine the urgent action we need to reduce our carbon emissions.

“It’s ironic that a Chancellor who talks about going green is quite happy for the UK to continue to fund massive subsidies for both nuclear and fossil fuels. Taking real action to tackle climate change would create jobs, transform the economy, and help us meet our duty to secure a safe and habitable climate for future generations."

[1] http://www.energybillrevolution.org/whats-the-campaign/

Young Greens support ULU and Sussex University protests

Near Senate House, Bloomsbury, London this evening

The Young Greens have strongly condemned the ‘brutal’ treatment of protesters by police at the University of London on Wednesday, as well as the suspension of five students at the University of Sussex following a campus occupation.

The Young Greens National Committee, which represents thousands of Green Party members, has written to Sussex Against Privatisation in support and will be writing to the Vice Chancellor today, as well as to the University of London Union activists and management.

The Sussex campaigners were fighting the outsourcing of Sussex services to private companies and in support of fair pay following a national strike by university staff, with the suspensions taking place after an occupation of Bramber House.

At the University of London, students were occupying Senate House on Malet Street against the forced closure of the students’ union by UoL management, as well as pushing for decent conditions for outsourced cleaning staff. Three students at were arrested after more than 100 officers armed with batons broke up the sit-in.

Siobhan MacMahon, Young Greens Co-Chair, said:

 “The heavy-handed actions by police against University of London students standing up for their union are a disgrace. Punching and dragging young people to the ground over a peaceful occupation must be utterly condemned as wholly disproportionate, brutal and wrong.

“At the same time, we wholeheartedly back those protesting as the University of Sussex in opposition to outsourcing of services and staff and in support of fair pay for staff who have faced years of real-terms pay cuts.

“The suspension of five students over their involvement in the occupation is a shocking and unjustifiable decision by management and we call on them to reinstate those suspended immediately, joining with the hundreds protesting for justice for the ‘Sussex Five’.

“The Young Greens express our total support and solidarity for students defending their right to protest across the country and oppose the worrying trend in recent months towards disproportionate action against peaceful protest on campuses.

“We have seen police attempting to recruit students to spy on each other in Cambridge, the arrest of Michael Chessum – the President of ULU (as well as the arrest of Vice President Daniel Cooper) and even violent police responses to students using chalk to spread their message. Young people must resist the clampdown on democratic dissent.

“The Greens are the only party standing up to these attacks and are proud to back actions everywhere against the education system being run as a private enterprise instead of a public good.”

Council MUST extend Council Tax Support consultation deadline

With just one day before the closure of Brent Council's consultation on the Council Tax Support scheme, the Council has only just this afternoon sent out notice of the consultation to Forum and Panel members,

Clearly this is not long enough to consider the quite complex issues involved and with such inadequate publicity and notice the Council must end the consultation.

Any other decision would reveal the consultation as a travesty.

How much has Brent House lost council taxpayers?

Brent Council purchased the leasehold of Brent House in Wembley in 2008 for £17.1m. Shortly after due to the financial collapse and the resulting property crash it was revalued in 2010 on an 'owner occupier use value' at £8.375m. The current depreciated  Net Book Value on the Council's Asset Register is £4.519m.

Brent House is now surplus to requirements following the move of council staff to the Civic Centre but Air France still occupies part of the building and it has Vodafone and Airwaves masts on the roof. The combined income stream for the council ois£363k. This is likely to be lost on sale of the leasehold as Air France will have to vacate the building.

Brent Council borrowed £17.695m for the leasehold purchase with an annual debt charge of £1.031m. This combines principal and interest and was forecast for repayment over 40 years. (I'll leave you to work out the total cost!) The outstanding principal of the original borrowing  is £16.886m - more than 3 times the Net Book Value.

The council now proposes to dispose of the leasehold but has not released the purchase figure. They do state however that the capital receipt offer is in excess of the 'property's Net Book Value on the Council's Asset Register but lower that the outstanding principal on the unsupported borrowing'.

We are left to work out that the bidder's unrevealed purchase  figure is between £4.519m and £16.886m. A wide range by any stretch of the imagination and surely residents ought to be told the extent of any loss on the sale? Details are restricted and the relevant Appendix to the report no published.

The Brent Executive will decide on Monday their preferred bidder  for the leasehold sale. Officers are recommending one from Stoford Ltd.

Stoford intend to convert and extend the premises to provide a 158 bed hotel, (Premier Inn) 66 homes of which 'around 22' would be affordable and 465m2 of retail with 165 parking spaces.

If that does not progress the reserve bidder recommended is Henley Homes which officers, whilst impressed by Henley's track record,  questioned deliverability'.

This is a new build bid with 269 homes of which 80 would be affordable and with a bigger retail space of 1,580m2 but no hotel.

Anong the rejected bids were:

• One Housing Group, rejected as too low financially.
• Bellway Homes - scheme for 327-346 homesm rejected as over-development
• Criterion Capital - unconditional bid for conversion of exisiting building to 135-140 homes, Theye did not submit a second bid.
• Quatar Property Group - conversion of existing building to an unspecified number of homes, rejected due to relatively low value.

Although the Council claim that a hotel meets with the Wembley Plan I would question whether the borough needs yet another hotel and most of the new Wembley hotels are closer to the Stadium, Arena and Wembley Park station.

It does seem to me that the Council has missed yet another opportunity to build affordable homes. A hotel is also planned at Bridge Park on the other side of the North Circular with a minimum affordable home quota of only 5%.

The retail fits in with the Council's plan to have a retail corridor all the way from Wembley Central station down to the Stadium, incorporatng the London Designer Outlet.  The redeveloped Elizabeth House, next to Brent House, already includes retail space which as far as I know has not yet been let. The jury is still out on the viability of the LDO.