In August last year, South Kilburn residents received issue 1 of South Kilburn Regeneration News. A welcome sign that we might be kept informed of progress, despite the fact that `issue 1' came after regeneration has been going on for nearly 20 years, and in those preceding years there has been no attempt to let us know what is happening.
Rumours abound that the regeneration has hit the rocks and is stalling. Nothing seems to have happened with the Carlton Vale Boulevard scheme.. The medical centre promised for 2015 has yet to materialise, and in the meantime the building in which the Kilburn Park surgery was based has been declared unfit for use and then sold off. Rumours say the new medical centre will be opened early next year, but no information has been circulated, no explanation for the lateness or whether this medical centre will actually be up to the standard originally promised. A further rumour is that developers are pushing for an even smaller proportion of social housing than in earlier stages, with a preference for expensive market flats, would, if true, mean that any idea that this addresses the housing crisis is a bad joke.
Wembley Matters has carried several reports on the disgusting state of some of the blocks which tenants have been decanted to while waiting for new flats. Word has it that the stalling of regeneration means that many who have been promised new flats in South Kilburn will not be able to move into them for years.
South Kilburn regeneration has been plagued with problems throughout, with new blocks having to have scaffold up for years while cladding is removed, heating and mould issues in many new blocks and, most notorious of all, Granville New Homes blocks costing more to put right than the original cost. And the company that botched Granville New Homes given new contracts by Brent Council! On top of which many moved into new blocks find their rents and especially their service charges rising considerably. Many of the problems associated with new blocks have been denied by Brent, and there certainly haven't been issues of Regeneration News to tell us what is going on.
No-one attempts to give South Kilburn residents a truthful account of what is happening. Raising these issues at Brent Connects doesn't get any answers, let alone a commitment to inform residents. South Kilburn Trust, supposedly overseeing the regeneration of the Carlton/Granville site never reaches out to South Kilburn residents and appears to be totally unaccountable, despite claiming to represent the interests of South Kilburn residents.. Even those few who have time and ability to trawl through - often impenetrable - Council documents are often none the wiser.
Having endured 20 years of living in a building site, compounded by Brent Council persuading HS2 to build their vent shaft in the middle of the estate (with the support of South Kilburn Trust) rather than on a empty car park near Queens Park station, and facing probably another 15 years on a building site, residents really do have a right to clear, truthful information.
Pete Firmin, chair of Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenants and Residents Association, South Kilburn
The 'Gateway' to the new South Kilburn - a work with little progres so far
The South Kilburn Tenants Steering Group met inDecember so that tenants could hear an update on the South Kilburn Regeneration that started almost 20 years ago with the launch of the Masterplan LINK and may take another decade to complete.
Extract from the Masterplan
Like other council developments in Brent there is a possibility of tenure change, with more private sales, to ensure viability. There also appear to be problems with the deliverability of the planned new school that would replace Carlton Vale Infants and Kilburn Park Junion school buildings.
As
previously reported the Council is consulting on ending the South
Kilburn Promise (Landlord Offer) for new temporary accommodation
households and the use of void properties on the South Kilburn Estate
for temporary accommodation. At present the Council incurs a £0.6m
charge on South Kilburn void properties.
The South Kilburn regeneration itself is threatened by a viability crisis:
Viability is a key challenge for the remaining developments within the South
Kilburn programme. The Single Delivery Partner approach is being explored
to help provide certainty for the programme and provide economies of scale
for the delivery partner.
Negotiations are going on regarding the purchase of the Falcon and Queens Park car park pub site: LINK
The Council has
announced a decision for the Corporate Director for Comminities and
Regeneration to make an offer to Londonnewcastle to acquire the Falcon
pub site, previously seen as a key site forming a gateway to South
Kilburn. Its acquisition along with the car park opposite led to the
HS2 vent being controversially located within the estate next to a
primary school.
In the Minutes of TSG meeting below I have underlined the number of social homes expected although I suspect that figure may reduce and needs to be considered along with those being decanted from existing blocks.
The above video was posted on Twitter yesterday revealing the state of Blake Court on the South Kilburn Estate. @DCustodians said:
Welcome to #BlakeCourtThis the airy 4th floor. Recently redecorated to a high standard by squatters.
Just needs a do not disturb sign. Tenants are a bit inconvenienced, work/school
and all but who are we to complain?
A picture of an an attempted break-in and soiled lift were also posted:
I thought it was appropriate to publish these images in the light of the Housing Report going to Brent Cabinet on Monday. The report includes a section on South Kilburn where it is proposed that some voids (empty properties) on the estate are brought into use as temporary accommodation.
The fact that only 52 of 534 properties are considered suitable is in itself telling and clearly it is not just the flats themselves that need to be suitable - safe, clean - but the surrounding 'unsuitable flats', staircases, lifts and security that needs to be considered.
Wembley Matters has revealed the £13m deficit in the housing budget caused by the rising number of homeless people in temporary hotel accommodation or expensive private rented placements. LINK The council hopes to save on the average £3,000 a night for the 52 households:
There are currently 534 void
properties across the South Kilburn regeneration site as households have either
been moved into new or alternative homes, or leasehold properties have been
bought back. Due to the increased demand for temporary accommodation and rising
hotel costs, an exercise has been carried out to assess the suitability of
South Kilburn voids for use as temporary accommodation.
However, there is a fly in the ointment. Brent Council want to avoid the 'Landlord Promise' made at the time of the South Kilburn Regeneation Ballot, applying to these households (my highlighting):
Of the 534 voids, 52 have
been identified as suitable for potential use. This is based on their condition
and the impact of using them on the regeneration programme. These are based in
John Ratcliffe, William Dunbar, William Saville, and Zangwill. Historically,
those living in temporary accommodation on the regeneration site were included
in the South Kilburn Promise (Landlord Offer), which commits to re-housing
temporary accommodation residents within South Kilburn, with the option to move
outside of the estate (with the household’s agreement) along with other
commitments. This was specifically for those impacted at the time of the
ballot. If these voids are used for temporary accommodation, this report
recommends that the South Kilburn Promise does not apply going forward. This
implications of this proposal on the 2019 ballot outcome have been discussed with
the Greater London Authority and no implications were identified.
The rational[e] for the promise
not applying going forward to temporary households, is largely based on these
households bypassing the choice-based lettings scheme, where other households
have waited for years for family sized accommodation. Additionally, these
households will not have been impacted by the regeneration scheme in the way
those involved with the ballot.
This proposal does create a
risk that temporary households will need to be decanted elsewhere, most likely
away from the estate, when blocks are due to be demolished. Plus, there will be
two tiers of temporary accommodation on the site, those who are eligible for
the South Kilburn Promise and those who are not. This risk however is balanced
by the immediate reduction in pressure for the Council as moving 52 households
out of their current temporary accommodation and into South Kilburn would save
the Council approximately £3,017 a night based on the
average nightly rate paid and subsidy loss currently being covered by the
Council. The use of these void properties has wider benefits to the overall
wellbeing of households currently facing homelessness, many of whom are having
to be placed outside of the borough which ultimately affects schooling and
work.
There is another pitfall in that the council is required to consult on any change in its Lettings Policy in order to amend the Landlord Offer.:
To amend the South Kilburn Promise (Landlord
Offer) for new temporary accommodation tenants, the Council is required to
amend the Local Lettings Policy (allocations scheme) which requires
consultation. The Council is currently seeking legal advice on how to consult
and once obtained, this will guide officers to carry out the relevant
consultation ahead of any decision being finalised.
The council had to open up bidding for council properties to homeless people after a legal judgement in 2021-22 when a teenager took them to court. LINK That was the last change in the lettings policy. It is likely that South Kilburn residents, especially those waiting for accommodation on the estate, presently in accommodation outside the area, in temporary accommodation or decanted temporarily while waiting to be permanently housed in new build will be very wary of any change in the South Kilburn Promise. If it can be done once for one group, could it be withdrawn later for another group?
This will depend to some extent on residents perception of progress on the whole South Kilburn Regeneration. A letter to Wembley Matters in November outlined the problems in terms of delivery and impact on those waiting to be rehoused. LINK
There are ongoing problems with defects to properties with L&Q one of the most notable and the ongoing Granville New Homes debacle where the cost of remediation is now put at £25m (against that budget gap of £13m) having been purchased for £17.1m by the council. Still no news on any council move for compensation from the builder. LINK
A veteran observer of the South Kilburn scene was asked for their view by Wembley Matters in the light of the latest news:
If the council were were to hold another ballot, would all those in temporary accommodation still vote yes if they were told they would not be getting a new home in South Kilburn for at least 10 years and that some of them would have to move into old blocks waiting to be demolished while they wait.
Although there are 730 households in temporary accommodation, we do not know how many of them have a South Kilburn connection but at the last consultation the ones that had it were promised a new home soon if they voted yes.
There are 370 secure council tenants waiting for a new home today and we will find out soon the exact numbers in each of the 7 blocks left and when they might be decanted.
But the next batch of new homes are for secure council tenants from both Craic and Crone Court and there are none for those in temporary accomodation. Of course the council could change their allocation policy to favour those in temporary accommodation but this is most unlikely.
There should be some more new homes available in 2029 which were for those in phases 7 and 8 but now they might go to those currently in temporary accommodation. I am not sure how many new homes will be available but there will be fewer than 100 and by then because of possible financial issues, many of the homes could be sold, or become shared ownership homes.
But with only 70 new homes available in 2029 and around a 1000 households expecting to get one of them, most of them are going to be disappointed.
I wonder if Osbornes Law will be interested in the new proposals?
Coventry Close is a cul-de-sac off
Kilburn High Road, leading to the South Kilburn estate. It is not a residential
street, but one containing Royal Mail's NW6 delivery office and a car wash
(which replaced an earlier coach depot). It is a popular street for people to
park who are shopping on Kilburn High Road, and busy with foot traffic of
estate residents and pupils and parents going to and from St Mary's primary
school via the footpaths which lead on from the road. Not a very pleasant
street at the best of times, it only has a pavement on one side and the border
for the car wash is an ugly corrugated iron fence. Hardly salubrious.
Near the top of the road is the rear
entrance to what used to be the Kilburn job centre, now closed and unused for
many years. The rear entrance was to the underground car park of the job
centre. That entrance is now shuttered. Ever since the job centre closed there
has been a problem of rubbish accumulating at the back.
After previous complaints in previous
years, the rubbish got cleared, although local residents were never told by who
(which might have helped in the current situation).
To be clear, local residents (including
from the nearby Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury TRA) have always recognised
that this is not public land and it is not the responsibility of the street
cleaners to clear this. However, we have asked Brent Council to do something
about it, not least on health grounds. They must be able to take action to get
the owners of the building to clear the rubbish, not just on a one-off basis,
but also regularly. Or arrange for Brent to clear it and charge the owners.
The current version of the problem
stems from - at least - September. Despite regular pleas, accompanied by
photos, to various Council officers the pile of rubbish has just grown (see
photos from 21 September and 26th November., it was not cleared once in that
period).
It’s not that Council Officers, and a
Councillor, haven't acknowledged the problem and recognised that it is
unacceptable, but nothing ever happens.
Report it to the Council's fly tipping
app, you get the response that, since it is on private land, it is not the
responsibility of the council.
Other Council officers have referred
the issue to the `fly tip team' (same response as we had) and other Council
departments.
One reply from an officer (24/10) said
"This is
not BHM land- I have absolutely no jurisdiction over it. [which we had never
claimed] I will come back to you today establishing who we can escalate
this to directly."
One of the
more substantial communications we were copied into (between two Council
officers) (25/10) said
I
inspected the location after the last email and contacted the owners of the
building and the previous occupants (which I more recently discovered are no
longer in control of the building- sadly the Business Rates database is not
updated).
I have
made subsequent visits to the location and whilst there appeared to be a litter
accumulation in the small recess area in front of the understorey carpark, it
looked as though it was a new accumulation
to the one originally identified.
I have
contacted Rossmore Properties Ltd again by email (office@aminpatelshah.co.uk )
and now telephone (+44 20 7278 7651) . Their representative has advised that
they had originally instructed a local maintenance firm to clear the location
and this should have been done. I have requested routine maintenance; however
it is unlikely that the routine maintenance will be more frequent than our own
street cleansing or refuse collection schedules and would be unreasonable for us
to expect this. I am expecting a confirmation email with regards to remedial
works here by the end of the day.
Generally
speaking the issue is more related to litter accumulation and evidence of ASB
activities ( drinking and laughing gas evidence) as opposed to “fly tipping” of
larger items.
The last
several inspections of Coventry Close would also indicate a lack of general
street cleansing for this busy thoroughfare into Kilburn High Road, however the
road surface and parked cars may have an impact with this regard.
3
Cambridge Avenue remains empty and lends itself to ASB type issues in its
current state. This is another location of concern to add to the list of
hotspots for patrols in the Kilburn locality. Whilst there has been a planning
application submitted to convert the building into 19 flats, it appears that
this application may have already expired ( according to the agency whom
submitted the application) therefore its empty state may continue and one
wonders what the financial incentive would be to leave a building like this
unoccupied.
The
carpark area off of Coventry Close/Bristol Walk is managed by Catalyst Housing
/ Peabody Trust.
Any issues
relating to this area should be directed towards them.
Anyone
reporting issues here should be advised to send in photos which always helps to
identify and action issues accordingly.
One
solution may be to introduce Catalyst /Peabody representatives to Rossmore
Properties Ltd to see if this small tiny recess area can be maintained at the
same time as the routine maintenance for the estate; for an appropriate fee.
As soon as
I get an update from Rossmore Ltd, I will let you know.
Sound useful? But nothing
happened. And quite why Catalyst/Peabody (which now have some nearby
properties) would take any more responsibility than Brent , which not only has
nearby properties, but should also take some responsibility for obvious health
issues, is a mystery.
As you might expect by now, nothing
happened. When we pointed this out, we got this response:(30/10)
To
clarify, the email I previously sent was to explain who is responsible for the
small recess area in front of the understorey carpark for 3 Cambridge Avenue (
access area located on Coventry Close) and to differentiate the adjoining
private land managed by Catalyst/Peabody ( which also suffers from waste and
highways issues from time to time).
The litter
accumulations periodically accumulate either as a result of wind blowing it
from the public highway sections of the street or as a result of itinerants
whom congregate around here to take “rest” on the small wall away from prying
eyes.
I have
previously served notice on the owners to clear the land in question and put
measures in place to prevent future waste accumulations. As a result the metal
shutter was installed some time ago. However as a result of the angle of the
slope and the layout of the building lines, the shutter could not be installed
up to the boundary edge of the public highway and hence you have a tiny recess
that continues to suffer with this problem from time to time.
I am aware
that the owners of the property have a locally sourced private maintenance
contractor whom periodically attend the site to clear any accumulations ( as
was advised in the original Notice served on them).
I have
spoken with a representative of the company that owns the property to advise
them that there is an existing accumulation that requires attention last week.
I have
further contacted them today to insist upon action.
Unfortunately
the landlords are not based locally and are reliant on their private
contractor.
Brent
Council can pursue enforcement and issue penalties when non-compliance of a
Notice is observed, however in the initial instance would prefer to work with
private individuals and organisations to effect a solution. Previous
correspondence with the owners have generally been met with compliance whenever
this issue has been brought to my attention.
With
regards to rubbish bins on Coventry Close I am aware there are a number of
recycling bins that were positioned along Coventry Close to serve the blocks of
flats and are also accessible to anyone passing. However it is my understanding
that the Veolia Street Cleansing contract no longer accommodates litter bins on residential
streets unless there are some exceptional circumstances. Furthermore the only
section of Coventry Close covered by the street cleansing contract is between
the top block of Alpha House to Kilburn High Road. The remaining section from
the top block of Alpha House to Canterbury Road is the remit of BHM’s
maintenance regime
If you
continue to experience negative impacts resulting from waste accumulations on
private land please report these to waste.enforcement@brent.gov.uk or
via Fix My Street platform. If you can include photos at the time of reporting
will also be useful to help us identify locations and deal with the issues
accordingly.
We then had to point out that there
are, contrary to that message, no rubbish bins on Coventry Close (which is why
we have been asking for them for years.....) And Coventry Close is not a
residential street.
From what locals observe, while
obviously some of the rubbish comes from street drinkers, the majority comes
from people walking through and from those who park on Coventry Close. But it
doesn't really matter who causes the problem, it needs dealing with both in the
short and long terms and while Brent talks of doing so, the rubbish continues
to pile up.
We wonder whether this would happen
in other parts of the borough or is yet another sign of how Brent neglects its
basic responsibilities in South Kilburn. Building showcase new housing looks
nice, less so when surrounded by uncleared rubbish. And before anyone accuses
us of exaggeration, Council officers have repeatedly accepted that the area is
neglected and promised to sort it. And little happens.
Brent Council are resending the Hereford &
Exeter site, along with the Craik Court-Crone Court -Zangwill House (CCZ) site back to planning, as the new buildings
will need second staircases.
The CCZ site was due to be completed by 2029 but it
will now be much later.
This has a knock-on effect, as all those tenants
and some of those in temporary housing will now face longer waits for a new
home.
The CCZ project is in phase 6 which now means that
phases 7 & 8 will now be pushed several years forward beyond their
schedules.
Previously the council always said 'the whole 15 year (?)
South Kilburn Regeneration would be completed by 2029' but that date now looks
unachievable.
Also, the SK budget is facing financial
difficulties but for now the budget has not been changed but the council are
reducing their overall Capital programme by 25% (£103M.) covering the rest of
this year and 2024/25.
We will find out the costs of the SK Regeneration
at the meeting in February 2024 when the council sets their budgets for the
future years.
The increased costs of the SK regeneration are the result
of the higher interest rates that the council have to pay for their borrowing,
together with high inflation causing increases in the cost of building
materials and higher labour costs.
It now looks like the 72 council homes on the NWCC
site due in 2025 may be the last ones for some time and I expect that the
allocations have already been made, as all the needs assessments have all been
completed.
That leaves approximately 370 tenants and those in
temporary housing having to wait for several more years before they will be
offered a new home in SK.
Nobody seems to be bothered about this but the Peel
site LINK has only 42 homes
for social rent out of a total of 308 new homes. That is roughly 15% instead of
the usual 50:50. So far 38 of the 42 are already occupied with the remaining 4
homes not available until 2026.
The Peel site is the largest one of all the SK
sites but has the lowest number of social homes available. Many of the new
homes are both for private sale as usual but there are also several shared
ownership properties.
The 72 homes on the NWCC site will be available in
2025 with allocations given in 2024, although as I understand it the possible
tenants have already completed their needs assessments. NWCC is Neville House,
Winstanley and some of Carlton House and the Carlton Centre
This might be of interest to the tenant you
featured in Wembley Matters on the 4th October LINK.
However, it seems that anyone in SK needing a 4 bed
or higher have been offered new homes in both Stonebridge and Wembley.
All
the remaining tenants and those in temporary housing wish to remain in South
Kilburn, as their children attend school there, although some of them have been
offered a new larger home in both Stonebridge & Wembley, However, this
causes further allocation problems for Brent over who should get priority for a
new home.
The Queen's Park Cullen House site will probably
need to go back to planning, as the current one was approved as far back as
2016 with the tenants decanted in 2014.
However, the council still do not own the site.
They have been trying since 2019 to purchase the Falcon Public House but
Londonewcastle will not sell it. Londonewcastle built all the new blocks in
Albert Road and may be holding out to win the contract for the Cullen House/Queens
Park site, but the council do not want them. So will Cllr. Butt get his way or
will he be disappointed?
This is the key site, as Cllr. Butt said it would
mark the new gateway to SK with several up-market stores in the ground floors with
flats above them,
Countryside say because they are developing the
Health Centre on the Peel site, they had to reduce the number of social homes
to make it viable for them.
Back in 2004 I seem to remember there was NDC money
set aside to fund two health centres (and not just one) but the funding was
'borrowed by the Primary Care Trust' and would be made available when the
health centres were to be developed
But of course, the Primary Care Trust' closed down
and passed its assets to the Brent CCG who themselves have now closed down and
are now in the super CCG (8 CCG's)
So, I assume the money has long gone and that is
why we are having to rely on Countryside to build it and the Council to provide
the revenue to run it.
Video created from photographs provided by the letter writer
I reported on last week’s Brent Renters meeting calling on Brent Council
to take action on bad landlords, but what happens when it is the council itself that is the bad landlord? Wembley Matters has received this letter.
Dear Editor,
South Kilburn is a lively and friendly community.
My neighbours are quiet but ever so respectful.
We look out for one another.
With a predominantly Black and African community the English language is
not the first language of most residents however, it does not create a barrier.
In fact, it sometimes draws people together in support for each other, whether
it be housing, schooling, benefits, or young people’s needs. We support each
other where we can.
There is a great deal of deprivation and poverty.
With many temporary tenants living in council properties and being
charged £440pw, the cost of living crisis, is nothing new to them. Many of them
have been living in such conditions for 9+ years, hardly temporary?
They were promised that, should they vote for the regeneration bid, upon
its succession, they would be placed in new-build properties with a choice of
paint colour, kitchen fittings, flooring, and new white goods, some even a dish
washer!
However, this has not been the case. The council carried out housing
needs assessments for every individual to gain knowledge of exactly what was needed
but, they failed to deliver many of their promises and continue to do so.
Many tenants have been forced to move to new areas outside South Kilburn
despite being promised they could stay.
Not enough new-builds and not enough of the required bedroom sizes!
But didn’t the council carry out assessments? Yes they did?
What happened to the planning and the order of blocks to be-rehoused?
After the succession of the bid, it all changed – it all fell apart and
promises were broken.
So, the people moving to new-builds received the promises of flooring
and paint etc. However, the others
forced to take re-lets are being failed.
They must move urgently- within 1 week, to properties with no flooring
down, an empty shell.
Where are they supposed to find the money to start all over again?
There are disruption payments to be had according to the council yet,
many are refused and if they are lucky enough to be chosen to receive it, they must
wait up to 3 months to receive it!
Some are reimbursed for their flooring and white goods, some even for their
curtains but some are not, with the council picking and choosing who can and
can not be reimbursed. It this discrimination?
But Countryside and the Mayor’s office are providing the council with
this money to take care of the tenants. If it’s not going to tenants, where is
it going?
They are not even following their own promises and despite the tenants
complaining to heads of departments, they are simply passed from pillar to post
with no answer.
The council have no fear of breaking the law as the tenants have no-one
fighting for them. Even MP Tulip Siddiq is doing nothing to assist vulnerable
tenants.
Is it because Labour can not fight itself?
The electricity bills in the blocks are huge and the saddest part is,
regardless of how much they do spend on heating, the properties are ice cold.
The health risks to tenants living in damp and mould riddled flats are
at an all time high.
One of the residents, a mother of 4 and 3 asthmatics had pneumonia three
times in one winter and the year before 2 pneumonia and sepsis. Still, she was
afraid to put the heating on because she could not afford the bills and was
falling deeper and deeper into utility debt. How could she find a way to clear
it when all avenues seemed to be closed?
They are left in thousands of pounds worth of debt because of the
electricity bills. The properties are insufficient, no insulation and ineffective
heating units.
Go and earn more money you say?
With the majority of residents having at least one person working, it’s
impossible to up your income.
Why? As the wage increases the more hours you work, the council simply reduce
the Housing Benefit top-up that is essential to pay the £440pw rent. They trap
you into the Benefits system with no hope of getting out unless you become
secure tenants paying council rents.
The more you earn, the less Housing Benefit you receive and the family’s
chance of living better is diminished.
We have hard working families paying £440pw rent and £1000/£2000 pm
electricity! That’s without council tax, water, food etc
What happens then? The children suffer.
Less food on the table, freezing cold mould and damp living conditions, parents
constantly stressed because they can’t make ends meet and provide even
essentials for their children or themselves.
No talks of holidays, new clothes, toys or even a day out!
We have knife, gun and gang crime around every corner - but it’s the norm.
The last three to four months have taken a turn for the worst, become
more dangerous due to the high number of squatters living in the blocks.
All night long it’s screaming, fighting, cursing and break-ins.
Parents and children are fearful to step into the blocks and afraid to
open their front door! Cannabis farms growing, pipes and boilers being stolen
and sold for money resulting in tenants homes being flooded and their few
positions ruined.
Whilst we are fearful, we are concerned with the amount of squatters who
have nowhere to turn. They run their own rings, charging other squatters to
live in abandoned houses in the blocks. When they can’t pay up, they beat them
up and throw them out. It’s horrifying, the wails and screams, the sounds of
blows to the bodies of desperate and destitute men and women.
Prostitution, it’s also included in the list, men coming and going all
night because the women are being pimped out and beaten.
The council put two security guards outside for four days. Whilst they
are in their car with no toilet or place to get a warm drink, the squatters are
upstairs in the blocks and there’s no change.
Then we have the schools, they seem to run the same ethos as Brent Council,
ignore complaints and carry-on?
Despite receiving petitions and concerns of safeguarding from parents, they
simply choose to ignore it. The governors simply refuse to hold meetings with
parents?
They take the case to Brent education and the same response?
They take it to Ofsted who agree based on information received, it needs
to be investigated.Ofsted write to
Brent Council and raise concerns requesting investigation and Brent reply to
Ofsted with ... No further investigation needed!!
What do we expect to produce in South Kilburn?
The next generation thriving and positively optimistic about a bright
future?
Where would they ever get this impression from when all they see is doom
and gloom?
Parents working hard but never having enough.
Parents, that when chidlren look at them, their faces are etched with pain and
struggle.
From where are the young people given hope and is it the faults of the
parents, or the people with whom the responsibilities and power is given to
make a change?
Poor housing, poor schools and
poor finances.
No opportunities to thrive yet still, you see the smiling friendly faces
of the South Kilburn tenants toward each other, while secretly, their hearts
and hopes are broken.
I love living in South Kilburn, the residents are very special people
who deserve more.