Brent Conservative Group call for independent inquiry into Brent planning process

Brent Conservative Group have tabled a motion for the September 18th Full Council meeting calling for an independent inquiry into every aspect of Brent Council's planning process:

This Council notes that our residents have lost confidence in the Brent planning system.
Residents tell us that consultations are mere public- relation exercises, that decisions are often perverse and some seemingly politically- motivated. 

We note last year's damning report on the Brent planning service by PWC, and agree to hold an independent inquiry into every aspect of the planning process. This Council agrees that this is the only way that we can hope to restore residents' confidence in our planning service

Brent Conservatives misleading on Tricycle

The following motion has been submitted by Brent Conservative Group for the next Full Council meeting on Monday July 10th:

TRICYCLE THEATRE
 

This Council notes with dismay the recent awarding of £1m. to the Tricycle Theatre by Brent’s cabinet. 

This Council is particularly surprised at the decision in the light of.....
- apparent lack of monies in Brent’s coffers.
- failure to invite other community groups to bid for the available £1m.
- the artistic discrimination previously shown by the Tricycle in cancelling the Jewish Film Festival. 

This Council calls upon cabinet to allocate the £1m. through an open bidding process inviting applications from all community groups ....not just the Tricycle. 

Councillor John Warren


Leader of the Brent Conservative Group Brondesbury Park Ward

I have no problem with the Tories querying the bidding process for the grant but would point out that the claim that the Tricycle Theatre cancelled the Jewish Film Festival is incorrect. The Tricycle did not cancel the Festival - the UK Jewish Film Festival organisers withdrew the festival from the Tricycle. Although the Tricycle later changed its position this is what it said at the time LINK:

-->

We have been contacted by several patrons who have been given misleading information about the Tricycle and the UK Jewish Film Festival. We would like to set down an accurate account. 

The Tricycle has always welcomed the Festival and wants it to go ahead. We have proudly hosted the UK Jewish Film Festival for many years. However, given the situation in Israel and Gaza, we do not believe that the festival should accept funding from any party to the current conflict.  For that reason, we asked the UK Jewish Film Festival to reconsider its sponsorship by the Israeli Embassy.  We also offered to replace that funding with money from our own resources. The Tricycle serves many communities and celebrates different cultures and through difficult, emotional times must aim for a place of political neutrality. 

We regret that, following discussions, the chair of the UKJFF told us that he wished to withdraw the festival from the Tricycle.   

To be clear, at this moment, the Tricycle would not accept sponsorship from any government agency involved in the conflict. We hope to find a way to work with the UK Jewish Film Festival to allow the festival to go ahead at the Tricycle as it has done so successfully for the past 8 years.’  

Indhu Rubasingham

Details of new uplifted Brent councillor allowances for 2016-17

Perhaps it is not a great  public relations strategy to be discussing a 1% increase in councillor allowances at the same Full Council Meeting which will be agreeing a budget that cuts services, but that is what will happen on February 22nd LINK

Apart from the uplift there are other changes due to the proposed revised Scrutiny arrangements (see below). It is also proposed that councillors will be able to claim travelling and subsistence allowances for conferences they attend outside of the borough. This will be set at the same level as council officers.

In a move that might not sweeten relationships between the two Conservative Groups on the Council it is proposed to remove the  deputy leader allowance for the Conservative Group (led by Cllr John Warren) from Cllr Carol Shaw. Instead £9,000 will go to the leader of the Brent Conservative Group, Cllr Suresh Kansagra.

The report reminds councillors of the principle behind the allowance scheme:

 Members are reminded that the 2014 Report advocates the setting of allowances at a level that enables people to undertake the role of councillor while not acting as an incentive to do so. It is equally important, as acknowledged, that there should not be a financial disincentive. 
It is also worth mentioning that in 2014 Members allowances were set at a reduced, or much reduced, level than the amount recommended by the independent panel. The difficulty in increasing allowances for Members given the current financial austerity, was recognised by the independent panel

These are the proposed new allowances for 2016-17:

BASIC, SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND CO-OPTED MEMBER ALLOWANCES WITH EFFECT FROM 1 APRIL 2016

Basic Allowance

Payable to all councillors = £10,100

Special Responsibility Allowances
(No more than one allowance per member)  This is in addition to the Basic Allowance.

1. Leader of the Council = £39,354


2. Deputy Leader of the Council = £28,681


3. Other Cabinet Members (x6) = £18,898


4. Chair of the Scrutiny Committee = £14,140 (under current scrutiny arrangements until 18 May 2016)


5. Vice-Chair of the Scrutiny Committee = £5,050 (under current scrutiny arrangements until 18 May 2016)


6. Chair of the Community and Well-being Scrutiny Committee (under new scrutiny arrangements from 19 May 2016) = £14,140


7. Chair of the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee (under new scrutiny arrangements from 19 May 2016) = £14,140

8. Vice-Chair of the Community and Well-being Scrutiny Committee (under new scrutiny arrangements from 19 May 2016) = £5,050


9. Vice-Chair of the Resources and Public Realm Community and Well- being Scrutiny Committee (under new scrutiny arrangements from 19 May 2016) = £5,050


10. Members of the Scrutiny Committee (x6) (under current scrutiny arrangements until 18 May 2016) = £3,202


11. Members of the Scrutiny Committees (x12) (under new scrutiny arrangements from 19 May 2016) = £3,202


12. Chair of the Planning Committee = £14,140

13. Members of the Planning Committee (x6) = £3,234


14. Chair of the Standards Committee = £2,155


15. Co-Chair of the Youth Parliament = £2,155


16. Chair of the Pension Fund Sub-Committee = £2,155


17. Chairs of the Service User Consultative Forums (x5) = £2,155


18. Chairs of the Brent Connects Area Consultative Forums (x5) = £4,873


19. Members of the Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Committee (x15) = £2,155

20. Member of the Adoption and Permanency Panel = £3,234


21. Member of the Fostering Panel = £3,234


22. Leader of the Principal Opposition Group* = £12,913

23. Other Group Leader(s) = £9,000


24. Group Whip for the majority group with over 50% of councillors = £5,583


25. Deputy Whips for the majority group (x2) = £2,155


26. Mayor = £9,090


27. Deputy Mayor = £7,070 

*For the purposes of this Scheme this is the second largest group of the Council. If there are two or more opposition groups of the same size, it is such group as the Council shall decide.

Co-opted Member Allowances

1. Chair of the Audit Committee (non-voting) = £423


2. Independent member(s) of the Standards Committee (non-voting) = £423


3. Education voting co-opted members of the Scrutiny Committee (x4) (under current scrutiny arrangements until 18 May 2016) = £224


4. Education voting co-opted members of the Community and Well-being Scrutiny Committee (x4) (under new scrutiny arrangements from 19 May 2016) = £224

The introduction of two Scrutiny Committees is the main source of the increase in spending on allowances.  The overall budget cannot be predicted because it is not possible to forecast claims under the new conference expenses system and because only one special allowance can be paid even if a councillor takes on several roles.  The allocation of these roles will not be known until after the AGM.

The allocation of roles has been controversial in the past with accusations of unfairness to councillors with an independent mindset and favouritism towards the compliant. The increase in the number of potential roles may satisfy more of the 56 strong Labour Group.

With the leadership of the Labour Group (and therefore the Council)  to be decided at the AGM in May things could become quite interesting.

MORE BRENT COUNCIL SCANDAL! Now they ban opposition motion seeking the truth

On top of the denial of a deputation to Philip Grant (see posting below) Brent Council has now advised that a  motion for Monday's Council Meeting from the Brent Conservative Group should not be moved or accepted as drafted:

This is the message received by Cllr John Warren: 

Dear Councillor Warren

I have reviewed the Motion selected by the Brent Conservative Group.  My advice would be that it is not appropriate for individual, current employees or former employees of the Council to be named in this context in a Council motion and that the Motion should not be moved or accepted as drafted.

Kind regards,  

Fiona Alderman Chief Legal Officer Chief Operating Officer’s Department

Wembley Matters won't be silenced so here is the motion:

This Council agrees to an independent inquiry into all aspects of the Rosemarie Clarke Employment Tribunal case.

This Council agrees that the inquiry shall commence at the conclusion of the Tribunal remedy hearing. We further agree that the inquiry costs shall be funded from reserves ,and that the new Chief Executive shall be charged with setting up the inquiry panel.

The new Chief Executive will have overall responsibility for setting the terms of reference, but this Council agrees that the following questions will be included in the terms of reference...........

1. What was the rationale behind the Council initially bringing disciplinary action against M/ s Clarke.... and was it fair and reasonable?

2.Why did the Council pursue this matter so vigorously through the Tribunal ......and was it fair and reasonable?

3. What part, if any, did this case figure in the departure of Fiona Ledden from Brent?

4.What part, if any, did this case figure in the departure of Cara Davani from Brent?

5. What were the financial arrangements behind Ms Davani ‘s departure from Brent, including any Brent  indemnity given to Ms Davani in respect of Tribunal costs awarded against her personally?

6. What part, if any, did this case figure in the departure of Christine Gilbert from Brent?

7. What part did Cllr. Butt play in this case throughout its course?

8. What were the total costs in this case.......and was it a fair and reasonable way to spend Council taxpayer monies?

This Council believes this  is an important independent inquiry, and that both Brent Council staff and Brent residents would support such an inquiry