Who is responsible for maintaining the 'disgusting' canal feeder on the Hyde Housing estate in Stonebridge? Action needed.

 

Brent is lucky to have a number of waterways including the Grand Union Canal, the canal feeder, River Brent, Wealdstone Brook and Wembley Brook plus a number of others that are now mostly underground but reappear  above ground after torrential rain.

New developments often boast of the amenity value of the waterways but as the situation in Alperton demonstrates the amenity value is rapidly devalued if the area is not regularly cleaned and properly maintained.

In a guest blog a resident of the Hyde Housing Estate in Stonebridge describes their experience:

Residents of Hyde Housing estate in Stonebridge Park, NW10, are facing an issue with a canal feeder that runs along the Orchid Mews, NW10, and is inside Hyde Housing Association’s estate and next to benches and gardens where residents are supposed to enjoy the sun.  

 

The canal is not maintained or cleaned at all, and a large amount of litter and animal carcases is what we face daily. The canal’s banks are also full of rubbish. If you chose to enjoy the sun with your family using the provided benches, or if you want to open your window for fresh air, you will need to put up with the canal’s disgusting view.

 

We contacted the Canal and River Trust who confirmed that the responsibility falls with the Hyde Housing Association who took on the responsibility for 125 years (I assume under current land lease). Nevertheless, Hyde Housing have been unable to accept responsibility and maintain the canal. As a result, rubbish and dead animals is the everyday reality for us:

 

From London South East Canal and River Trust

We use three metal grates to prevent rubbish from entering the canal culverts.

However, after talking to colleagues in the area, I can confirm that the Canal and River Trust doesn't own the feeder. The feeder belongs to the Hyde Housing Association.

 

Hyde have never responded to our requests for comments or help and no any action have been taken. They are acting irresponsibly and in breach of their service agreement with the residents, who are paying service charges for cleaning. I assume they are in breach of their lease with the Canal Trust or the Brent Council as the leaseholders of the land the canal is in.  

 

 

The London Borough of Brent has also been unable to help. We have been is several discussions with Cllr Promise Knight and other councillors from Stonebridge Ward who has been unable to help. We only hear promises but there has never been a single action from them.

Why  cannot Hyde Housing Association accept responsibility and maintain the canal, keeping it in an acceptable condition? Why are residents paying service charges for cleaning but still they have to face this disgusting canal?      

 

 

Controversial Queen's Walk development one year on after Brent Council granted planning permission

 

There was a pause due to Covid19 but now the new development of flats on  the corner of Queens Walk and Salmon Street is taking shape. The flats replace a detached suburban house that was in the style of other houses in the road. LINK

Responding to criticism of the plans Brent Planning Officers said:

The building does not have a 1930s appearance but does respond appropriately to the neighbouring developments in terms of scale. The corner plot presents an opportunity for a building of a differing architectural style and slightly greater prominence to sit comfortably without detracting from the character along either of the streets it adjoins. 

 

 

 

Check air quality in your street, workplace or school with one CLICK

 

The Report for Brent Civic Centre

 

A new national website is allowing people to measure air quality on their street using their postcode. This is particularly useful when consideraing Healthy Streets/Low Traffic Neighbourhoods.

Research from the initiative shows that one in four UK addresses – almost eight million – are exposed to air pollution levels exceeding World Health Organization safety limits.

addresspollution.org offers a free air quality report for every UK address based on data from the Environmental Research Group at Imperial College London.

The work was commissioned by campaign group the Central Office of Public Interest (COPI), which wants the property sector to mandatorily disclose air quality information in the same way it does with asbestos. And it hopes this will also put pressure on governments to act.

A pop-up ‘demand action’ button is displayed to visitors using the site, which takes them through to a petition calling for estate agents and sites such as Rightmove and Zoopla to disclose air quality info at the “earliest opportunity”.

COPI founder Humphrey Milles described air pollution as a “dangerous, invisible killer” and said it would be “shameful” for the property industry not to inform people now this air quality information was so readily and easily accessible.

Legal opinion obtained by COPI goes further and suggested there is a strong legal argument that estate agents, property websites, surveyors and conveyancers will need to inform prospective buyers and renters of air pollution levels.

In their opinion Jessica Simor QC and barrister Neil Fawcett refer to the ground-breaking recent ruling on the re-opened inquest into the death of nine-year-old Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah, which found her death was “contributed to” by exposure to excessive air pollution. Previously, deaths were only "linked" to exposure to air pollution.

Mark Cunningham, chief executive and co-founder of Whenfresh, which provides property data to major lenders, said that if the problem of air pollution isn’t dealt with, “it will clearly have an impact on the saleability and value of properties in high pollution areas”.

He added: “So like asbestos, radon, flood risk and Japanese knotweed, if data is available the mortgage lenders will want to understand it. Lenders take any environmental issues that might impact the value of the properties they effectively co-own very seriously."

The website’s national roll-out – it was previously available in some London areas – follows a report published in the journal Environmental Research last month that concluded that 99,000 early deaths across the UK are due to dirty air.

Another piece of research published by the European Society of Cardiology in October 2020 found 15% of COVID-19 deaths globally could be attributable to air pollution.

Earlier this month the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the UK has “systematically and persistently” exceeded legal limits for dangerous nitrogen dioxide (NO2) since 2010.

The UK has agreed to abide by court decisions initiated before it left the European Union. It could therefore face fines if it continues not to comply, and has been ordered to pay the European Commission's legal costs.

Imperative that Brent Scrutiny Committee seeks answers on US takeover of Brent GP surgeries at Wednesday's meeting

 

 

The main agenda items tabled for Wednesday's meeting

This blog has reported the huge concerns of local councillors, Barry Gardiner MP, Brent Patient Voice  and Patient Participation Groups over the takeover of two GP surgeries in Brent by a US company. The concerns have been echoed across London in a joint letter by London borough chiefs to Matt Hancock.

One of the main issues is the alleged lack of due diligence by Brent CCG in coming to the apparent decision to back that takeover and the fact that the decision (it it wasa decision) being made in a private session.

Surely then it is incomprehensible that the only vehicle that the Council has to holding the Brent CCG to account, the Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee, does not have  this as an item on its Agenda (above).

One can only hope that councillors will put such an item on the Agenda under Any Other Business in accordance with Standing Order 60.  

Many questions were left unanswered or unsatisfactorily answered at  Wednesday's meeting of the PPPG LINK this is a chance for Scrutiny to really do its job.

Amazon Fresh in Wembley: 'Just Don't Walk In'? - a personal view

 

 'Just Walk Out' or 'Just Don't Walk In'?

 Gaynor Lloyd has written, in a personal capacity, about her thoughts on Amazon opening its Amazon Fresh cashier-less store store in Wembley Park, following concerns expressed by other councillors.

Dear All,

 

I totally understand from the below there is nothing the Council can do about choice of tenants by a commercial landlord (I assume not Council property!)

 

I hadn't heard about the store: Amazon Fresh. I've just had a quick look on  the net – though not sure where it actually is. LINK

 

I suppose what I'd be worried about  - apart from all the really important things [another Councillor]  highlights, as to the operation behind any Amazon outlet -  is it seems to be a store with potential for fewer front facing staff.  Certainly no check out - which is where we were going with self-service checkouts (sadly  - IMO -  for all sorts of reasons - but other views exist) – but thinking of reduced employment opportunities. Yes, I know we have COVID but we already have enough stuff introduced under COVID regs altering our society and there are cases already being made at Government level as to whether they will/should stay in place.

 

I suppose the practical thing is to make clear (as I am sure the Council does do) its support for unions as well as London Living Wage, etc in the workplace in our businesses - but how many staff does it employ?

 

But on the  wider issue of looking after those of our local businesses who are still able to operate (where local residents work their guts out for long hours in just this sector) -what sort of competition does this provide to those smaller retailers and take-out food/meals providers- again competing with Amazon's power and tech and resources to "price"? (Their hours are 7 days a week,7am-11pm).

 

As to Amazon's background operation, it's so good to have the GMB petition ; it'd be good to know what progress the GMB is making with Amazon; their "intention to go to the Health & Safety Executive" highlighted in this article links to a fairly old (aargh) Daily Mail article. LINK    Does anyone know?

 

And thank goodness we are not America (yet) in Amazon's union thwarting activities! LINK  

 

For employees, though, like every other business, what we need to ensure is that more people know about the employer's responsibility for Health & Safety. The Brent website is clear LINK  , and there's an email address (would be good to have a phone number too, advertised by poster campaigns - so not limited according to access to digital) LINK  

 

HSE website is clear on managing risks at work LINK .    (Warehouse example at  LINK 

 

The Council – OF COURSE - showed an excellent example, when schools were first going back and many people had real anxieties; it liaised with the Unions and there was a dedicated team who cared about getting the risk assessments right. I know we don't have that control over businesses in our Borough but we can still make it clear what the Borough expects. It's not as though Amazon doesn't have the money to provide top end solutions to whatever a proper risk assessment has revealed as necessary. Hopefully, as in the case of the store, as Amazon did their fit-out, all this will have been at the top of their agenda. We are entitled to assume it was.

 

Not everyone will use Amazon of course! ( I was sharing ideas with a pal only yesterday evening about how to avoid but that is a matter of personal choice. )

 

 

Gardiner lambasts US takeover of GP surgeries and London boroughs protest to Matt Hancock

 Brent has joined 11 other London boroughs to question Centene's take-over of GP surgeries:

 Meanwhile Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North) has published an article in the current Brent and Kilburn Times LINK about the issue. Unfortunately it was not published until after the Brent CCG meeting that rubber-stamped the decision to approve the takeover. (Click bottom right to enlarge to full size):

Brent public not allowed to see report of investigation into Brent Council leader's conduct

 

 Cllr Muhammed Butt (Photo: London Councils)

 

I thought the Brent electorate would like to know (be entitled to know?) the outcome of the recent complaints about Brent Council leader's conduct.  I requested a copy of the report on the investigation by Brent Monitoring  Officer, Debra Norman.  The investigation would have sought to establish if the behaviour cited infringed the Members Code of Conduct.

My request received this terse response:

Decisions notices relating to complaints under the Brent Members Code of Conduct are only published by the council where a serious complaint has been upheld and the sanction of public censure has been imposed.  That is not the case in respect of the complaints to which I believe you are referring.  I am therefore not able to provide you with a copy of the decision notice.

This suggest the complaints were not upheld but we, the electorate, cannot see the evidence that was presented and the response of Cllr Butt himself.

Clearly we are not thought capable of reaching our own conclusions based on the evidence that Debra Norman collected.

Without seeing the Decision Notice I cannot be certain of the basis of the complaints but I assume they were connected with the articles posted on this blog:

https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2021/02/lib-dem-councillor-complains-to-brent.html

https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2021/02/cllr-butt-leader-of-brent-council.html

Brent Council Leader Muhammed Butt claims 'Levelling Up' funding criteria discriminates against London

 This is an unedited press release from Brent Council published today:

 

The funding formula for a £4.8billion package of infrastructure investment has been criticised as it does not use standard measures to assess levels of need and has led to London boroughs like Brent missing out on the top priority list.

The Government’s ‘Levelling Up Fund’ details how local authorities can bid for cash to pay for projects that can help boost the economy such as transport improvements, town centre regeneration, culture and heritage.

Every local authority in England has been put into one of three tiers – with tier 1 being those areas deemed most in need of investment. Only two London’s boroughs are in the top tier that mainly contains authorities from northern England. 

Out of the three tiers, Brent has been marked down into the second group. This is despite Brent having a relatively high level of unemployment – with 23,160 residents out of work and more than 10 percent of the borough’s working age population claiming unemployment benefits. The average claimant rate across the areas first in line for cash from the Levelling Up Fund is 7 per cent, three per cent lower than Brent. 

The Office of National Statistics also shows that Brent is the 38^th worst area for average income deprivation out of 314 local authorities in England.

"If the Covid crisis has taught us anything it has proved beyond doubt how unequal our society has become,” says Cllr Muhammed Butt, Brent Council Leader. “We have all been in the same storm but we’re not all in the same boat. Inequality costs lives and prevents people in less well-off areas from reaching their full potential. 

“Even when the pandemic is over, the legacy of job losses, reduced hours and poor mental and physical health are all issues that need urgent action. No one should be left behind and levelling up parts of northern England should not be at the expense of diverse boroughs like Brent. The council is determined to make Brent better, fairer and greener but we cannot do this alone. The council is concerned that the criteria used to assess the funding needs of different areas seems to discriminate against London. We are lobbying the Government to change the funding formula and make areas like Brent a priority for investment too.”