UPDATED Support Our West Hendon's challenge to social cleansing by Barnet Council and Barratt Homes

The Public Inquiry into the West Hendon development has started. The Guardian has carried an article outlining the arguments that Barnet Council are engaged in the social cleansing of the estate LINK

There will be a meeting at the Marsh Drive Community Centre on the estate at 2pm on Thursday afternoon and then a procession to Barnet Town Hall.

This is an update received from Barnet green party member Ben Samuel:

Now is the most crucial time to stop the West Hendon development since the "lake side" phase 2 Public Inquiry opened yesterday and will continue for 8 days.  We started with broad principles and the promoter's case.  Then objectors including myself will have the chance to read out their evidence and questions will be asked.  All the papers are on www.west-hendon.co.uk and the evening session we are told will go ahead between 6 and 9 p.m. this Thursday.

Please come to Thursday's afternoon of action starting with a guest talk at West Hendon's Marsh Drive Community Centre booked for 2 pm.  We'll then process to the Town Hall.

After the statement of case by the expensive QC Neil King, who characterised objectors as mere protesters not with a serious plan, we heard form Martin Cowie from Barnet Council, and his developer partner who seems to be his boss.  Cllr Adam clarified the Council's claim that there were no non-secure tenants in 2002 even though we'll hear next week that there were.

They cited s.13 1974 Misc provisions Act, 2004 circular on policy and Equality Act to create "an inclusive place for all sections of the community".

They explain the long delay in phase 3 as due to changes in market conditions but Adam made Barratts promise not to lower the % affordable from 25% which includes shared equity.

This is a message received later this afternoon about tomorrow's (Thursday) meeting and march:

JOIN US FOR AN AFTERNOON OF HOUSING ACTIVISM TOMORROW (THURSDAY) 2pm

Come and listen to the Focus E15 Mothers talk about their campaign 2 - 4 o clock
Marsh Drive Community Centre Marsh Dr NW9 7QE (Nearest station - Hendon Overground, on Thames Link )
15 min from kings cross
or
Hendon Central Tube - northern line then 83 bus to Hendon Broadway

buses 32, 83, 142, 183, 632, 642

- THEN

4 - 5 o clock
join us for some hot home made soup and rolls while we drop our ginormous banner

- AND THEN

5 o clock
March from the estate to the Public Inquiry at Hendon Town Hall

6 o clock
- outside Hendon Town Hall The Burroughs NW4 4AX - nearest station Hendon Central, Northern Line )
buses 143, 183, 362

we will be joined by the Women from The New Era campaign, speakers from the Our West Hendon Group, Radical Housing Network , Unite The Union and other estates in Barnet.;
where we will make a noise and voice our objections to the social cleansing of West Hendon and London wide.

Support the latest strikes of Your Choice Barnet Care Workers

From Barnet Unison
 

UNISON members working for Your Choice Barnet (YCB) have just announced their next strike dates as being 22^nd and 23^rd January. In addition the workers will be attending an event in the House of Commons 28^th January highlighting the conditions for workers in this sector. This will make a total of 6 days of strike action since the dispute began. This is in a bid to reverse the harsh 9.5% pay cut imposed on them by their employer. 

UNISON and YCB have had numerous meetings at ACAS and there has been no improved offer which has come close to being acceptable to the majority of our colleagues. The latest offer made in October 2014, was a 7.9% pay cut and this was resoundingly rejected in a ballot of the membership. The discussions have, however, revealed stark issues imposed on YCB by Barnet Council which make it difficult to see how YCB can survive financially into the future without our members constantly bailing it out through their financial sacrifice. The pensions deficit (an extra 9.8% payment) for the TUPE’d staff was transferred across to YCB, although this did not happen with other contracts in the private sector. Relieving YCB of the pensions’ deficit would restore our members’ pay at one stroke. Not allowing YCB to charge for unplanned “no-shows” (when service users are unable to attend the service at short notice) would potentially halve the pay cut to our members. However, Barnet Council refuses to participate in any of our discussions although ultimately the Council holds the purse strings.

Meanwhile our members tell us they are working harder than ever with increasing levels of stress and no prospect of a pay rise. They report the first day they have off from work is used simply to recover from the stressful week they have had. The pay cut has left many of our colleagues finding it particularly hard to make ends meet.  They have made it clear to us they want to see a substantial shift in any new proposals from YCB in order to end the dispute. 

UNISON Branch Secretary John Burgess said:

Our members held back from taking action before Christmas in order not to disrupt the service for service users and their carers at such a sensitive time of the year. This demonstrates again their professionalism and dedication but also their determination to stand up to attacks on their terms and conditions.

22nd January  & 23rd January Picket Line details 

1.Flower Lane Day Centre

41 Flower Lane
Barnet
London NW7 2JN

2. Rosa Morrison Day Centre

83 Gloucester Road
TotteridgeBarnet 

London EN5 1NA

Coming Soon Club takes over Wembley's Chesterfield House

The Coming Soon Club is taking over Chesterfield House, the previous Brent Children and Families Office, which is at the corner of Wembley High Road and Park Lane.

Ark Academy plan 6th Form building on Repton remnant

Bird's eye view of the area 

Rectangle marks the new building and red the trees to be removed (black dash is a tree protection boundary)

Ark Academy, Wembley, is applying for planning permission to build a Sixth Building on a site at the corner of Bridge Road and Forty Lane, that was retained when the original planning permission was given for the new school.

The site is thought to retain a rare portion of some of Repton's original landscape planting for the Page family at Wembley Park in the 1790s.  LINK

As well as the heritage argument campaigners also argued that this was a potential habitat for bats, hedgehogs and other animals as well as a patch of green in an area rapidly being concretised.

The Planning Application argues that most of the trees to be removed are due to their condition, rather than to make way for the building and that removal has been kept to the minimum. Some moving and replanting  of trees is proposed as well as new planting.

The application contains all sorts of ideas about the educational use of the protected area of trees and shrubs that will be left. However,  as someone who lives nearby and walks past almost daily, I have never seen it being used by pupils since the school opened in 2008 and the woodland looks quite neglected, with tin cans that have been tossed over the fence tangled in the undergrowth.

Habitat preservation and enhancement would be welcome but that should have been done anyway,

Preston Manor School is also seeking new build in order to expand its Sixth Form. The two schools are in competition with Preston Manor following the Ark by building a primary school on site and thus becoming an all-through school. It also converted to academy status. Ark plans to open its Sixth Form in September 2015 and is currently recruiting students.

The full plans can be seen HERE  The application will be decided no earlier than February 10th. Planning Officer  victoria.mcdonagh@brent.gov.uk

Leeks the most interesting item at Brent Council meeting

A satirical local activist presented Brent Council's Cabinet members with a leak each just before the formal start of last night's Full Council meeting at Brent Civic Centre.

The presentation followed mounting concern in Brent Labour Party over leaks from the Labour Group and meetings of the party to Wembley Matters.

The councillors instantly realised what was meant by the gesture and took it in good part, appearing to laugh it off:

Most of the meeting went according to the script published in my previous blog LINK with planted questions from backbench Labour councillors and pre-prepared answers from Cabinet members. There was what appeared to be a genuine question from Cllr Neil Nerva asking about the extent and quality of consultation over the Constitutional Amendments that had been tabled.  He was concerned about the impact on whistleblowers. One of the amendments, as Cllr John Warren pointed out for the Brondesbury Park Tories, bars council workers from talking to councillors about employment issues.

The report of the chair of Scrutiny Committee was noteworthy for its almost complete lack of content.

The Council approved without discussion a report on Council Tax Support. Although this put put forward only minor changes it proposed a full review before the 2016-17 financial year.

This follows a report on the same day that revealed that Brent Council had only spent 20% of its local welfare assistance fund which is meant to be crisis support for vulnerable families.

More details emerge on Brent Council's investigation into Kensal Rise Library emails

Guest blog by Meg Howarth

New information has come to light about the data Brent Council handed to the police in the case of the Kensal Rise Library alleged fraudulent email affair. In a response to a query about the five ISP addresses used to post the fake comments in support of Andrew Gillick's original planning application, a senior council officer has revealed that 'the Council did provide the Police with all the IP addresses and details of how Council officers had linked these to Mr Gillick or his company via open source research'.

This is the full text of the response:

Dear Ms Howarth

I write further to your previous emails resting with your email dated 16 January 2015 and I apologise for the delay in responding to you.

In response to your query,  Council officers did not obtain the ISP subscriber details. The Council does not have the power to force the ISP Providers to disclose the subscriber details. However, the Council did provide the Police with all the IP addresses and details of how Council officers had linked these to Mr Gillick or his company via open source research.

As for the Police and the CPS, you will need to raise those queries with them.

As I stated previously in my e-mail dated 23 December 2014, if you have any queries regarding the decision of the CPS not to pursue this matter, they should be addressed to the partnership Brent Borough Chief Inspector, Andy Jones.

Yours sincerely

As stated on a previous blog (No prosecution in the Kensal Rise Library case - December  23rd 2014) 'it seems that the key to ultimately tracking back an IP address to a user is to engage with the ISP and get it (or force it via a judge) to release the data showing which client was issued with what IP address at a particular time of day'.  The question is, therefore: did Brent police seek the ISP subscriber details before handing over its dossier to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS)? If not, why not? 

It was on 19 December 2014, in the run-up to the Xmas holidays, that the CPS advised Brent's Audit and Investigation Unit that 'there is insufficient evidence to proceed against Andrew Gillick'. In a New Year's Day interview with the Brent and Kilburn Times, a CPS spokesman elaborated: 'Having carefully considered all the material supplied we have decided there was insufficient evidence to support a realistic prospect of conviction in this case. The evidence did not prove this to the required standard and we therefore advised the police that no further action should be taken'.

So if Brent police didn't seek the ISP subscriber details, did the CPS do so instead? If it didn't, how could it conclude that the 'required standard' of evidence for a prosecution in the fraudulent email affair was unproven? A reply from Brent's partnership borough chief inspector and the CPS is awaited. 

Seething behind the scenes at Brent Council's meeting tonight

The format of Brent Council meetings these days is pretty predictable.  LINK The Leader makes a speech extolling the virtues of Labour members, outlines the difficult conditions caused by Coalition cuts and berates the opposition and then reaffirms the administration's commitment to protecting the vulnerable. Often adding that none of us became councillors to make cuts but we have to obey the law'.

The Tories refer to the mess left by Labour, wastefulness of the Council and go on about parking charges.

Questions to Cabinet members now have to be sent in advance so answers are carefully crafted. Backbench councillors ask prepared questions (often read out in stilted fashion) to Cabinet members that enable the latter to preen themselves and boast of their achievements with the opportunity for an additional swipe at the opposition.

Towards the end of the meeting Motions are put by Labour, Conservative Officials (Kenton) and Conservative Provisionals (Brondesbury Park). There's some Punch and Judy exchanges with the lone Lib Dem councillor looking a little lost; and then the Labour motion is approved and the Conservative motions defeated.

The unpredictability lies mainly with the voting of the Conservative groups and whether the Officials support the Provisionals or remain loyal to the Labour Group who granted them official status.

Tonight Cllr John Warren is moving a motion that regrets the fact that Standing Order changes mean that they cannot propose a vote of 'No Confidence' in Councillor Butt.

Warren will not have endeared himself to the Kenton councillors with the tweet he sent out in the early hours this morning:

 Kenton Conservative Councillor Bhiku M Patel died recently while on holiday in India.

Hardly tasteful tweeting.

Underneath all this there are real issues that could be raised. One is an update on the progress of appointing a new Chief Executive Officer. The Minutes of the September 2014 meeting record:

The Leader referred to the decision taken in June 2013 regarding the appointment of a new Chief Executive.  He stated that the external auditors were reporting back on how the Council was operating and whilst there was progress being made, stability within the Council would enable further progress to be made.  The current arrangements would therefore remain in place until a recruitment process began in the new year which would tie in with the launch of the new Borough Plan.

There has been little sign of any recruitment process and it now looks as if there may be an argument that Christine Gilbert should stay on until after the General Election because of her role as Returning Officer.  The fact that her partner Tony McNulty is actively campaigning for a Labour victory in Brent is not seen as a conflict of interest.

Another issue is of course that around the Employment Tribunal case and the finding that Brent Council racially discriminated against a council worker, victimised her and constructively dismissed her. Christine Gilbert will not countenance any disciplinary move against Cara Davani who was the second respondent in the case. Cara Davani, head of Human Resources. Cara Davani drew up Christine Gilbert's contract when she replaced Gareth Daniel  as Acting CEO, that included payment into her private company Christine Gilbert Associates. At the time Davbani wa sbeing paid a daily fee of £700 into her private company.

It would be interesting to have an update from Cllr Michael Pavey, Deputy Leader, on his internal review of Human Resources policies and processes. Two issues came up during the debate about his review including whether workers would have confidence that there would be no retribution over what they said and whether they could communicate with councillors over their concerns.

In Item 13 (Constitutional Amendment) a new clause has been added:

So Councillors approached by workers with concerns about racial discrimination, victimisation or constructive dismissal have to report them to Cara Davani, Head of Human Resources, who was the second respondent in a case where Brent Council was found to have racially discriminated against an employee who was victimised and constructively dismissed.  Cara Davani will be managing the redundancies consequent on the latest round of cuts.

Cara Davani is of course leading on the senior management restructure which has seen packages agreed for Fiona Ledden (former head of Legal and Procurement) and Ben Spinks (former Assistant Chief Executive Officer who was only appointed in 2013).

I understand that there has been one slight change in Gilbert and Davani's proposals. The original consultation ring-fenced the post of a senior legal officer to replace Ledden. Cara Davani's partner, Andy Potts,  was one of three employees thus eligible for the post. It was the only ring-fenced post in the whole reorganisation. Now the post will not be ring-fenced but only advertised internally. This seems to make little real difference in terms of who might be qualified for the post, so may just be a cosmetic change.

The Labour Group has its own internal tensions and a Labour councillor recently suggested to me that Muhammed Butt's support had declined to about 50% of the group against 75% a few weeks ago. It does not seem to be political opposition so much as distrust following recent machinations.


In the same week Pavey's Review will be put before the General Purposes Committee.

So if you have the staying power to watch the Council meeting on livestream tonight, just remember what is seething beneath the surface. Livestreaming failed last time but is supposed to have gone through an upgrade. To view from 7pm follow this LINK

Brent North CLP want to see rethink of Ed Balls' austerity-lite strategy

Ed Balls reacts to the Brent North motion (not really!)

As the Green Party positions itself as the only anti-austerity party in the forthcoming General Election, and recruits hundreds of  ex Labour voters, many in the Labour Party are dismayed that Ed Balls seems to be painting them into an 'austerity-lite' corner.

Locally this has emerged in a motion tabled by Labour veteran Colin Adams at Brent North Labour Constituency Party General Meeting last Thursday.

The motion claimed that Balls' approach is 'hardly designed to  win over any of our potential voters who may be wavering, as it send a message that there is not much to choose between the main parties in their approach to austerity and its impact on the welfare state.'

I couldn't have put it better myself.

This is the full text as tabled:

Brent North CLP is extremely concerned that the Coalition government`s cuts to public sector spending are causing huge damage to the fabric of the welfare state. The Coalition parties have shown that their policies are not governed by economic necessity but by ideology. They are committed to shrinking the role of the state and allowing public services to be taken over by the market. In Brent, as in other councils, impossible decisions about which services should be prioritised for cuts are being forced upon local politicians.

Labour must go into the upcoming election with policies that show clear differences with the Coalition parties, otherwise there is a grave danger we will not win an overall majority. In particular we need to show that we are prepared to fund local services adequately.

We were thus dismayed at the recent statement by the shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, that the election of a Labour government would not necessarily lead to an easing of the pressure on public services. This approach is hardly designed to win over any of our potential voters who may be wavering, as it sends a message that there is not much to choose between the main parties in their approach to austerity and its impact on the welfare state. It is electorally damaging to say we are going to stick with the existing government`s spending plans.

We call on the Labour leadership to rethink this strategy and state that, upon  the election of a Labour government, a new budget will be drawn up for immediate implementation with the aim of reflating the economy and protecting public services.