Cllr Duffy calls on Brent to remove 'insensitive' littering posters from Kilburn

Cllr John Duffy (Labour, Kilburn) has written the following letter to Carolyn Downs, Brent Council Chief Executive,after a resident complained about the above poster displayed on Kilburn High Road:

Please find attached sign that has been place on Kilburn High Road.

A resident approached me claiming, in her view, that the sign was racist.

Whereas I would not go that far, until I hear the full motive behind the cabinet agreeing the signs, I would say I agree with her general concerns. 

I believe the signs are inappropriate and could be seen as an attempt to stereotype persons of colour as the culprits of crime and it is also conceivable that used a mug shot of a young black man against a background commonly used by LAPD ( who are widely believe to be the most racist American police-force) as offensive to many people. 

I am asking you to remove these signs forthwith from Kilburn - other councillors can make their own minds up. I do not wish to see rows of these along Kilburn High Road as I believe they give the wrong impression to the public about how to care for the environment and who is responsible for environmental crime.  

I am concerned this is another display of the Cabinet devotion to the failed Zero Tolerance policy, which is in fact is a reactionary policy. This policy has stigmatised many innocent residents, because of the bounty hunting approach of issuing tickets and now this dubious awareness campaign.

Bearing in mind you as the CEO accept that the Kingdom Securities contract had no negotiations, equalities training or monitoring concerning the issuing of the 6000 Fixed Penalty Notices. I again ask you to independently audit the FPNs to ensure they were issued fairly and were not issued using the person’s colour or mental health conditions as the main factor.

Ms Downs, I am sure you read the Prime Minster’s race audit, which pointed out "Black people are more than six times more likely to be stopped and searched by police than White people". I cannot help thinking this type of subliminal stereotyping being produced by Brent is not helpful to those who wish to see this figures reduced.

I hope you will confirm ASAP:

(1) Removal of these signs from Kilburn forthwith.

(2) How many of these signs went up and where they went -up.

(3) How much the signs cost.

(2) Could you furnish me with the reason behind these signs, as they make no sense to me as they do even mention the fine.

(3) Confirm you will haves an independent audit of the 6000 FPNs issued

Keith Taylor MEP: 'Airport expansion remains a climate-wrecking decision that is bad for the British people and the planet'

The World Meteorological Organization's findings that concentrations of CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere surged to a record high in 2016 must rule out any airport expansion, according to Keith Taylor, Green MEP and a member of the European Parliament's Environment and Transport Committees.

Responding to the news that last year's increase in CO₂ emissions was 50% higher than the average of the past 10 years, Mr Taylor, the European Chair of the Climate Parliament, said, in light of the Government's relaunched Heathrow expansion consultation: 

"The Government's analysis on air pollution alone must rule out a third runway at Heathrow. But before the Gatwick airport PR machine leaps into action, today's shocking news about the levels of CO₂ pollution in our atmosphere is a timely reminder that the only climate-viable option is no new runways."

"Aviation is a top ten global polluter and emissions from the heavily subsidised industry are set to balloon by 300% if action is not taken sooner rather than later. Not accounting for any airport expansion, emissions from aviation are already expected to use up more than two-thirds of the UK's carbon budget by 2050. At the same time, the Government's so-called 'Clean' Growth Strategy just this month revealed that the UK is already set to miss its legally-binding carbon targets under the Climate Change Act. Again, without building any new runways."

"Despite what the exceedingly what well-funded PR machines of Heathrow and Gatwick airports would have politicians believe, the UK doesn't have an airport capacity crisis. Britain is already amongst the most frequent flyers in the world, in fact, more passengers fly in and out of London than any other city in the world. Every airport but one is operating under capacity. And the cases put forward by Gatwick and Heathrow to solve the manufactured 'crisis' rely on vastly inflated job creation predictions and hinge on a dubious demand assumptions."

"Nine of the ten most popular destinations from Heathrow involve short-haul flights. In fact, almost half of all flights in Europe are 300 miles or less. Existing rail services could offer genuinely workable alternatives on most of these routes. As trains are less polluting than planes, by a factor ten, this would help reduce aviation emissions, and free up landing slots for longer haul flights."

"Three-quarters of international passengers are disproportionately wealthy and travel for leisure. The vast majority of the UK’s airport capacity, 70% of flights, is used by a minority of frequent flyers, 15% of passengers. The current taxation system means those who don’t fly and those who fly even just once a year are subsidising the jet-setting lifestyles of a privileged few. We must, instead, reject the ‘crisis’ myth, and work to reduce demand while making the industry fairer."

"Airport expansion remains a climate-wrecking decision that is bad for the British people and the planet. By continuing to back a new runway, the Government is displaying a shocking disregard for the UK’s legal and moral obligation to tackle the very worst effects of climate change. Expansion will breach Britain’s carbon budgets and make a mockery of Theresa May’s legal-binding commitments under the Paris Agreement.”

"As Greens, we support a fairer frequent flyer levy that would help reduce demand driven by the privileged few and reduce costs for the average UK holidaymaker."

Update on Stop Haringey Development Vehicle court case

Photo from Inside Housing

Update from Gordon Peters first published on the HDV fundraiser page LINK

Heartfelt thanks to all supporters who have contributed to this campaign so far and you will see that we have surpassed our current target for funds. This allows us to cover fees and court costs to date, and be ready for any appeal should that be needed.

The Judicial Review concluded on Thursday 26 October with David Wolfe,QC, summing up after the three barristers representing Haringey Council and Lendlease had opposed our four grounds of the HDV being unlawful - that it was a commercial venture and should be a company not a LLP, that public consultation had been lacking, that the Public Sector Equality Duty had not been upheld, and that as a plan or strategy it should have gone to a full Council. They further opposed the granting of Relief [a cap on awards] and said the claim was out of time. They took up the detail of expert advice given to the Council's Housing Regeneration Scrutiny Panel and the Overview and Scrutiny Committee recommendations which were strongly critical of the HDV as if to say how open and consultative the Cabinet had been, although the Cabinet had gone ahead despite these.

David Wolfe was then able to show, through their own documents and business plans - much of which, over 700 pages in fact, had been redacted from any public view - that the HDV was indeed a major commercial venture, that it put social as well as affordable housing at risk, that poorer and vulnerable people in households both in estates scheduled for demolition and in leaseholds were not protected, and that this could not be called anything other than a strategy. He asked that the HDV be declared unlawful and relief on costs granted, rejecting the defence claim of being out of time as the whole process had been left undecided and kept changing its terms until the July 2017 Cabinet decision was made.

The judge, Mr.Justice Ouseley, then straightaway concluded the hearing and said that he would make his decision as soon as he could. We understand that this could still take some weeks.

Meanwhile I am very glad to say that the HDV is going nowhere right now, and it increasingly looks like this fundamentally flawed joint venture should not proceed.

To the HDV 'we say not so'.

Blooming marvellous! Double award for Barn Hill Conservation Group



Barn Hill Conservation Group are celebrating a double award from London in Bloom.

The Roe Green Walled Garden won Gold in the small Conservation Area category.

The garden is one of the gems of Brent, lovingly tended by volunteers, and replete with vegetables and flowers and fascinating installations dedicated to giving a home to wildlife.

You can visit on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturdays between 10.30am and 2.30pm.







The second award, also a Gold, went to Fryent Country Park and was the overall winner in the Best Country Park Category.

The Conservation Group worked with Brent Council and Barn Hill Residents Association to clear rubbish and the remains of camps from the 250 acre park deposited about 2 years ago.

There is now a dedicated team of residents who collect litter whilst working in the park and leave it a collection points for the Council to collect.

The Conservation Group work in the park every Sunday not only clearing litter and flytips but undertaking conservation work including keeping footpaths clear,  carrying out new planting and surveying the park's wildlife.

Further information can be found on their website HERE

Brent Tories sink their differences ahead of May 2018 local elections and trigger Extraordinary Council Meeting

The long running feud between the two rival Conservative groups on Brent Council appears to be over with Councillors Colwill and Kansagra (formerly the Conservative Group) joining the Brent Conservative Group. Councillors Maurice and Davidson had already joined the Brent Conservatives, led by Cllr John Warren.  Carol Shaw remains deputy leader of the group.

The move necessitates the revision of committee places and as the next Council Meeting is not scheduled until the new year an Extraordinary Council Meeting has been arranged for Monday November 6th  to allocate places.  Who serves on which committee will be a test of the solidarity of the expanded group.

This is the new distribution of the main committees (Details:LINK)

I wonder how much this extra meeting will cost?

Avoid Wembley during November! Deep excavation works will close High Road east bound and have severe impact on wider area

Hot on the heels of my story about concrete blocking the main sewer in Wembley High Road LINK  comes a warning about major works resulting from the blockage circulated by Rubie Charalambous, Wembley and Ealing Road Town Centre Manager.

Click on image to enlarge

URGENT WORKS -High Road, Wembley - Blocked Sewer - Eastbound Road Closure 2/11/17 to 30/11/17

The Sewer on High Road, Wembley is blocked near the junction of Ecclestone Place and unfortunately deep excavation works are required to rectify the problem. 

High Road, Wembley will be closed to eastbound traffic from the junction of Park Lane. Traffic will be diverted via Park Lane and Wembley Hill Road, a signed diversion will be in place for the duration of the works.

Westbound traffic will continue to use High Road, Wembley as normal.

The impact to the road network in the Wembley area is expected to be severe, especially in peak times. Where possible please avoid the area.

Unfortunately this period coincides with a number of events at Wembley Stadium although Spur's Real Madrid fixture at 90,000 capacity just squeezes in the day before the works start:
 

-->

Wednesday  1/11/2017     19.45  Tottenham Hotspur v Real Madrid (UEFA Group Stage)

Sunday         05/11/2017   12:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Crystal Palace

Friday           10/11/2017   20.00  England v Germany (Friendly)

Tuesday        14/11/2017   20.00  England v Brazil (Friendly)

Saturday        25/11/2017   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v West Bromwich Albion

Wembley Park: The Money Under Our Feet

There have been many postings on this website about Quintain's Wembley Park 'regeneration' and even more comments, particularly as the development has accelerated recently eating up warehouse and industrial units and apparently squeezing tower blocks into any spare space. In this guest posting Dilan Tulsiani stands back and considers the implications for local people as well as the locality itself.
 

On the 29^th of August 2017, Quintain, a property investment and development business, announced via its website that it was ‘spending £1m a day on construction making Wembley Park one of the UK’s biggest construction sites’. According to Quintain, there will be over 8,500 jobs created, with a further 3,000 homes under construction ‘delivered at a pace not seen at any other London development site’. The construction framework consists of six contractors, the notables being: McLaren, Wates, Sisk and Carillion. Quintain have recently shifted their construction policy from ‘build to buy’ to ‘build to rent’. They aim to build over 7,000 new homes, with 5,000 labelled as ‘build to rent’, and a further 2,300 as “affordable”.

 

Quintain and Brent Council have both resisted using the term ‘gentrification’ to describe their partnership in transforming the area. Instead, you’ll see ‘regeneration’ on practically every website or poster promoting the ongoing process. This is understandable, as the critics of any form of gentrification, are quick to label the selective description by property developers as deceptive and dishonest. Technically speaking, regeneration is embedded within the process of gentrification. The Cambridge Dictionary defines regeneration: ‘to improve a place or system, especially by making it more active or successful’. Gentrification is defined as: ‘the process by which a place, especially part of a city, changes from a being poor to being a richer one, where people from a higher social class live’. Wembley Park’s ‘regeneration’ process factually falls under both definitions (for the remainder of this article I will use the term ‘gentrification’ instead of ‘regeneration’, as it is more accurate to my subject matter). Although, to prevent an ethical breakdown, new tenants would probably cling to ‘regeneration’ as an ontological justification for staying in Wembley.

 

Residents who have lived in Brent for more than a decade will remember the industrial abyss that used to exist just a short walk from the station. In this sense, the gleaming metallic towers, illusory designer outlet and newly placed pavement are well relished. However, there are a few fundamental concerns that have simply been swept aside. Firstly, the effect on the surrounding areas. There is no surprise, that most, if not all the flats in Wembley are not “affordable”. In fact, that term is usually used to provoke a narrative of relativity concerning financial status. Quintain has invested £900 million into Wembley Park, without careful consideration and evaluation from the residents of Brent, this could lead to some serious socio-economic disparities. David Fell, a research analyst at Hamptons International states that property prices in HA9 “have risen by 14% in the last year [2016], compared to a London average of 10%.” Just down the road from Wembley Park, a two-bedroom flat is valued around £335,000. A flat of the same size, less than 10 minutes’ walk away, is valued at £450,000 - £500,000. Recently, Alto has sold two-bedroom flats in Wembley Park for £800,000.

 

A similar problem was highlighted in 2014 during gentrification processes in South Kilburn, where a member of the Residents’ Association claimed: “Those who have been living in the area are essentially being driven out. This all amounts to a social cleansing of South Kilburn.” Moreover, Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenants’ and Residents’ Associations emphasised that the residents who have lived in South Kilburn for generations could no longer afford to live in their homes. These are not trivial or isolated matters. They’re simply the effects of gentrification. Wealth concentrated in one single area in this manner, will have drastic consequences. The surrounding populations will be allowed to use facilities, shops and walk the newly paved streets, but there is a cap on their indulgence of this ideology. Consider what the residents of Chalkhill think when their homes are (literally and metaphorically) overshadowed by the new apartment towers. When they, like so many other communities, have a lack of funding within their own neighbourhoods, along with other serious social issues. To name one, in Brent and Hounslow 34 high-rise buildings failed fire cladding tests issued after the horrendous disaster at Grenfell Tower. In contrast, I think it would be perfectly safe to assume that the newly built apartments in Wembley Park have some of the best fire safety systems available.

 

 Attached to this disparity of wealth is the subsequent problem of crime. There is no doubt that the new properties will have a well-maintained police presence, due to the proximity of the stadium, along with security guards for each building. Due to the disparity, crimes in the surrounding areas may increase. Let’s take some of surrounding areas as examples (take these as approximate averages): From January - August 2017, Alperton has had the average total crime rate of 118/month, Dollis Hill’s average total crime rate was 137/month, and Tokyngton stands at an average of 188/month. Tokyngton is the closest of the three areas to Wembley Park, and in recent years it has had a subsequent increase in total crimes committed. If the investment in selective industries and areas remains or increases in the next decade, there should be no surprise at the increase in crime. This correlation was well represented in gentrification processes in New York, especially Harlem. As living standards get higher, the price of property increases, more people will forcibly turn to crime – both petty and serious. The socio-cultural divide will only widen.

 

One last fundamental issue is an assessment by The FA (for those like myself who are not sport literate: The Football Association). In May 2016, The FA complained that Brent Council was considering those who visit the stadium “an afterthought”. The recent constructions sites, which appear directly outside the stadium, could present potential hazards to fans, according to the FA. In fact, these new apartments would present the highest, and thus the most expensive flats, with their own personalised view of the games below them. Wembley is already set to be overcrowded, yet with ongoing construction, and busy venues/rush hour, there should be an effective policy by the council to counter this.

 

Ultimately, I see no realistic counter-movement to what seems to be an unchecked gentrification process at Wembley. In the next decade, Wembley, just as many other towns in Greater London, will be injected with huge sums of money, none of which will aid ingrained social issues, but will make these issues less noticeable for those living in the newly ‘regenerated’ areas. In the meanwhile, surrounding populations will attempt to readjust and comfort themselves from their high price of living with the luxurious shopping outlets built on the borders between their areas and the ‘newly regenerated Wembley Park’.

 

Ark Pioneer school gets planning permission despite massive local opposition

Artist's impression of the new school (Barnet Times)

Wednesday's Barnet Planning Committee approved the building of a new school on the former Underhill Stadium despite 500 objections to building on the undeveloped Green Belt of the former football ground and opposition from Andrew Dismore, Labour London Assembly Member for Barnet and Camden. Around 150 local people attended the Planning Committee.

All six members of the Committee, including the chair, voted for the proposal. Observers commented on the low level of questioning by councillors and their reluctance to engage with objectors. At least two were said to be disparaging towards the improving nearby Totteridge Academy which may well be detrimentally affected by the new school.

Objectors had argued that Totteridge could have been expanded on its current footprint for any increase in secondary pupil numbers as an alternative to building a new school. They felt, in any case, that misleading figures had been given on future need. New housing was mainly one and two bedroomed rather than family three bedroomed and that any bulge in the eight wards surrounding the Green Belt site would peak by 2025 at the latest.  Local children who attend faith primary schools tend to move on to faith secondary schools and a significant number go to private or selective schools. Saracens is opening a new all-through school in Colindale in Graham Park.

All this means that the new school's intake is likely to come from further away and there will be increased traffic congestion as public transport to the site is poor.

Perhaps most galling was that the CEO of Ark was allowed to give a promotional speech extolling the merits of the proposed Ark Pioneer with its controversial methods.