Is Big Really Beautiful?

As Cllr James Powney has recently accused me on his blog of trying to wreck the expansion of primary school places in Brent I thought it it might be useful to if I outlined some of the issues that concern me so that readers can make up their own minds.

There are currently many 4 and 5 year olds without school places in Brent and the borough has received 'safety valve' money to provide extra places. This money has to be spent by the end of August 2011 or it will be lost. As a result there are a number of schemes under-way to add extra classes to some primary schools and a proposal for a 2 form entry primary school at Preston Manor High School, creating an all-through 4-19 school of more than 2,000 pupils.

It is the Preston Manor expansion scheme and associated secondary expansion schemes that concern me. The Preston Manor proposal for a 420 pupil primary provision only emerged during August and the consultation has been 'stream-lined' because of the need to spend the money by August 2011. The quality of the consultation has been affected by the need to meet the deadline but also by the impact of staffing cuts in the department concerned and the restructuring which has transferred the department from Children and Families to Regeneration and Major Projects. These factors have resulted in one consultation meeting for residents being held at a time when most residents were still at work; local residents only receiving consultation documents after vociferous protests; a 'consultation' at the Wembley Area Consultation Forum where after a PowerPoint presentation by seven project managers and council officers, only three questions from residents were allowed; and documentation that has already had to be revised twice.

A major weakness has been the lack of educational input into something that represents a major change in local education provision. Instead it has been seen as simply an exercise in creating extra classes or buildings to house children. The Ark Academy in Wembley will eventually provide 'all-through' education from 4-19. Preston Manor is five minutes away from the ARK and in competition with it and now consulting on offering the same range of provision. In addition, Alperton High School, Wembley High School and Capital City Academy have all expressed an interest in expanding to include primary provision and others may follow. Nowhere in the consultation has there been a thorough discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of such all-though schools which will each have a total pupil population of  1,600-2,000 or more.

Nor has there been proper consideration of the impact of such provision on nearby 'stand alone' primary schools. Preston Manor intends to give preference for admission to its secondary school to pupils who attend the primary school. This would represent 25% of their Year 7 intake. If you add preference given to siblings already at the High School this reduces the chance of children from stand alone primaries gaining admission to the High School significantly. Canny parents will want to send their children to the primary school in order to secure admission to the secondary school. In effect this means choosing your child's high school at the age of four. There is a real danger that stand alone primary schools will be destabilised as a result, losing pupils and experiencing high pupil turnover as they cater for an increasing proportion of pupils in short-term transit through the borough. A major consideration should be how this will affect equal opportunity for access to quality secondary education in the borough.

A further consideration is that the proposed expansions, with the exception of Capital City, are all in the North of the borough while much of the demand is in the South. The Harlesden/Stonebridge area lacks a community secondary school and there have been moves by parents to set up a 'free school' there. 'All through' schools in the north will reinforce that basic inequality and further shift the centre of gravity of the borough to Wembley.

To its credit the council has recognised that the rush to expand may affect the quality of the new provision. They should also recognise that the quality and viability of existing primary provision will be put at risk in the long-term if all-through schools become the norm. A further imponderable is the impact of the housing benefit cap on local families with the Council's own senior housing officer predicting that many may be forced to more out of the borough. Indeed there has already been an increase in evictions resulting in more families moving out of London or into short-term bed and breakfast accommodation. If that trend continues we may see a reduction in the number of pupils seeking school places.

The Green Party is in favour of genuine all-through schools which would be smaller and where the form of entry would be the same throughout.  Small schools where the headteacher and staff  know all the pupils have huge advantages in terms of creating a caring, family and community centred ethos. Large schools may be able to offer a wider curriculum and more shared resources as well as economies of scale but lose a lot in the process and I question whether large institutions are good places in which to care for and educate young children.

Brent used to offer a range of sizes of primary schools from one to three form entry but the number of one form entry schools (210 pupils from Reception to Year 6) has been reduced as a result of expansion plans and there are now some four form entry schools (840 pupils) which are bigger than many secondary schools. This process has been taking place over several years and there are legitimate  arguments for and against  which deserve a public airing before 'In Brent Big is Beautiful' becomes our borough slogan.

It may be inconvenient to ask these questions but it is not a wrecking tactic. Important decisions are being made and parents, teacher, governors and residents deserve to be part of the discussion.

'Super primaries' behind 'village' free school proposal

Mary Seacole celebrated on a Jamaican stamp

 Another free school proposal is being pursued in the Queen's Park, Kensal, North Kensington area. This school, Seacole Primary Free  LINK, presumably named after the Jamaican nurse heroine of the Crimea War, is being marketed as a 'A Village School in the heart of London'.

Although the shortage of primary places in the area is cited as making a new school necessary there are links to parental criticism of the increasing number of very large primary schools, some of which will have more than 1,000 pupils:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-17012972

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-17273218

On this blog I have predicted that Brent Council's expansion of primary schools into much larger units could produce proposals for smaller primary schools where children feel secure in a family atmosphere and parents find staff readily accessible. My arguments against free schools are set out HERE but I have sympathy for those who find 'super primaries' alienating. The answer should be the building of more community local authority primary schools of a modest size but this is made almost impossible by Coalition policy.

The Seacole Primary proposal is set out below:

SEACOLE PRIMARY SCHOOL will strive for academic excellence and an all-round education that allows every child to flourish. Here’s how:

Class sizes: small classes – no more than 24 pupils – so that each child is supported to achieve their full potential.

Curriculum: a strong foundation in core subjects like maths and English complimented by art, music, drama and regular sport.

Collaboration: we believe that a good education is built on a partnership between teachers and parents. We will aim to assist working parents with breakfast and after-school clubs.

Community: each child should feel happy at school to instill a love of learning, confidence and good behaviour. We want to build a school that is a community.

In the Queen's Park, Kensal Rise and North Kensington area there is an acute shortfall of primary school places. A group of local parents are applying to open a mixed, 4 to 11 free school.
We are applying for permission to start with classes from Reception up to Year 4. If our application is approved the school will open in September 2014.

Evening Standard report on hungry children reinforces need for free school meals for all

Following on from my posting earlier this month accusing the Coalition of knowingly increasing child poverty LINK and reporting being accosted by a hungry child in a local school. the Evening Standard has published this story: LINK:

Thousands of London children are going to school hungry because their parents are too poor to afford breakfast.

A harrowing investigation reveals today that scores of children have even passed out in class due to lack of food.

Three quarters of teachers interviewed by the London Assembly in a snapshot survey said they had personally taken action to help hungry children. Of those who said they had “taken action” to feed pupils, 60 per cent said they provided food at their own expense.

Almost 20 per cent of those interviewed who regularly gave food to hungry children did so up to four times a month.

Fiona Twycross, who is leading the study, said:

It’s heart-breaking to think that children are going to school hungry. Some kids have told us there’s no food in the cupboard at home at all. The problem might be even more widespread than we think. There are probably thousands going hungry.

You can’t see a hungry child, you just see a child who is listless or a bit ratty and lacking concentration, so unless a teacher spots it and asks the right questions we just don’t know.

Thank goodness for caring teachers who pay for food for hungry pupils out of their own pockets – although it is scandalous that they have to in this day and age.  What worries me even more is what is happening during the school holidays when this extra help isn’t available.

The Assembly member added:

We’ve heard really devastating stories about pupils passing out. It’s a dramatic illustration of the problem and hopefully not very widespread but it does happen. Even if it’s just one child going hungry and we don’t do anything about it that’s a scandal.

More than 95 per cent of teachers interviewed said there were always a few pupils in their class were starting the day on an empty stomach.

Almost 20 per cent said as many as 15 pupils went without breakfast.

Half of the respondents from primary and secondary schools across the capital said the children went without because their parents could not afford it.

And almost all of the teachers interviewed - 97 per cent - said hunger impacted negatively on their pupils’ concentration in lessons.

The Assembly’s health committee, which publishes its full report in March, spoke to 164 head teachers and other staff across 21 different boroughs - including Lewisham, Lambeth and Tower Hamlets - to establish the scale and impact of hunger.

There are just over 2,000 primary and secondary schools in London educating around 1.25 million pupils so the scale of the problem is likely to be more widespread.

The study found there was a growing demand for food banks, breakfast clubs and free school meals as the economic downturn takes effect.

Investigators have uncovered harrowing tales. One teacher came across a child standing outside a cookery class sniffing the air as cakes were baked inside.

She described the scene as “like something out of a Dickens story” as the child had not eaten breakfast or lunch because he couldn’t afford the food.

It would be good if the Evening Standard took up the Green Party policy of free school meals for all children. It would end the bureaucracy  associated with applying for free school meals and ensure that, at least during term time, all children got a decent hot meal, impacting on health, behaviour and educational achievement. Many parents find applying for free school meals difficult and there are also families who do not qualify as their immigration status means they have 'no recourse to public funds'.

Village School strike intensifies as NEU complains about Butt's 'hypocrisy'

From the National Education Union in Brent
 

-->

Teachers and support staff at The Village School in Kingsbury, North West London, are increasing their action to prevent the academisation of their special school. Following their two days of strike action on 16^th and 17^th January members of the NEU* have upped their level of opposition to three days of strikes as management refuses to pause the consultation. 
 

They will be on strike on Tuesday 30^th, Wednesday 31^st and Thursday 1^st. Picket lines outside the school will be in operation each strike day from 7.30 till 9.00.

On Tuesday members and supporters will then take placards and songs to the civic centre for a visible protest from 10.30-11.30.

After Wednesday's picket 35 members will travel to Parliament for a scheduled meeting with Barry Gardiner, MP for Brent North. 

At Thursday's picket, members will be joined by Louise Regan, NUT NEU section National President, who is bringing prizes for best contributions to the protest. This will be followed by a big breakfast in the local cafe.

Further, members also voted at a very well attended union meeting on Friday 26^th to strike again on the mornings of February 20th, 21st and 22nd.

Brent Labour Councillor Jumbo Chan said, “I give my full, wholehearted support to the outstanding hardworking and passionate teachers and support staff at The Village School, who work tirelessly every day to nurture the school’s young students and maximise their potential. Like them and many other members of the local Labour Party and trade unions, I strongly oppose the wholly unnecessary, unhelpful and misguided proposed plans to academise such a valuable local asset, and urge others to do the same”.

Members have signed letters of complaint to the Chair of Governors and Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council. In a letter to all staff Muhammed Butt has attacked the staff of The Village and the Union Reps saying that their action is ‘to punish these children’ and of being irresponsible by taking strike action when the truth is staff are seeking to protect it. He recognises the fact that is it the work of the overwhelming majority of staff who oppose academisation who have raised the school to outstanding. Yet he discounts the fact that, as at Copland, if its staff are forced against their will into academisation very large numbers will leave. Thus, as occurred at Copland when it became an ARK academy with experienced and able staff leaving, education will be adversely hit for these very vulnerable children. ARK Elvin is yet again at the bottom of the league for Brent secondary schools, this year well below the others with only 31% A to Cs.

His own constituency Labour Party have unanimously opposed his stance of supporting the move for the school to be turned into an academy. The London Regional Labour Party also oppose academisation. Barry Gardiner, MP opposes the academisation of The Village. Muhammed Butt’s own Union the GMB opposes the move to academisation. The Headteacher and Chair of Governors, shamefully the Brent Council Labour Whip, are arguing that the school has to become a privatised academy despite the huge opposition to this of the staff and increasingly parents. 

Muhammed Butt wrote to all LA schools in December 2015 saying, “The only way to ensure that our schools remain communities, and do not become businesses, is for them to remain under the control of Brent Council. On behalf of Brent Labour’s leadership, I urge you to do all you can to ensure that they do.”

The only clear tangible outcome of academisation has been shown to be vastly increased salaries to those at the top and a wider pay gap between those at the top and the overwhelming number of staff. Muhammed Butt has said that it is his aim to seek to ‘reverse the outsourcing of services’ that Brent has done previously and bring them back in house as a way of providing a better and more economical service which we applaud. But at the same time, in complete contradiction, he is proposing support for the running of yet another Local Authority school to be outsourced. Utter hypocrisy.

A week ago, many members at the school dressed in black symbolising the death of local authority schools. On Friday, they again dressed in black and added red to show their anger. They will continue to wear black on Fridays and the NEU would encourage anyone to join in wearing black too as a show of solidarity. Please send us your photos and we will pass them on to the NEU Reps at The Village

Brent Council Risk Register reveals potential impact of the cuts

The Corporate Risk Register is an important document that highlights the risks of Council services not being delivered effectively and the actions taken to overcome that risk.

As the budget is reduced and cuts in staffing take place, as well as out-sourcing of services, it is important to keep an eye on the Register which flags up potential issues.

The full document is available HERE but below I have set out some of the main areas. The wording is from the original, except for the correction of some typos and spelling mistakes, with my comments in red.

Under each heading the risk is set out, the impact, and (in italics)  the most recent action undertaken to reduce the risk:

Brent children agreed with Unicef 8 years ago

I was not surprised by Unicef's report published yesterday which concluded that UK children were caught in a 'materialist trap' in which parents felt pressurised to buy goods for their children. Children themselves said their their happiness depended on having more time with their families and having plenty to do outdoors.

I was involved in a consultation in 2003 on the Green Paper called Every Child Matters. The paper followed a number of high profile inquiries into the deaths of children, including some which took place in Brent. We brought together children from primary schools across Brent to hear their views on what would make them feel safe, secure and enable them to develop fully.

One of the most striking comments, that received support from pupils irrespective of the schools from which they came, was a concern that their parents had to work long hours and thus had less time to spend with their children. More than that the children also reflected on the quality of the time they they did have their parents. They described their parents as exhausted when they did get home and often irritated or short-tempered. One child said that this was when their mum or dad ended up hitting them when they did eventually get back from work.

Unicef suggest that the buying of branded goods is a way of parents compensating for the lack of time they spend with their children. In 2003 those children, now teenagers, had a simple solution. They said that wages were too low and that their parents had to work long hours or have several jobs in order to pay the bills. They said wages should be higher so that their parents could work a shorter day. They said that they would prefer to have fewer toys and gadgets and more quality time with their parents.

We are caught up in a long working hours, low wage economy with many parents working at several small jobs to earn enough to care for their family. I know of women who clean before school, work in a school in the kitchen or as a dinner lady during the day, and do an evening shift on a supermarket till in the evening. In some ways this low wage-long hours economy is supported by the tax and benefit system so that low wages are 'topped up'. Private companies are in effect subsidised and so can continue to pay low wages and maximise their profits.

As a headteacher I was always ambivalent about extended school hours that were seen as 'working parent' friendly but could see children in a school from 8am at a Breakfast Club until 6pm at an Afterschool Club - a 10 hour days for children replicating the parents' long working hours. Such provision is being eagerly advertised by academies and free schools - but at what expense to the child?

This is why the Green Party's policy on a Living Wage is so essential as a way of beginning to break out of the cycle. However Coalition policies are worsening the situation for children in many ways with cuts impacting on everything from play facilities to the ability to stay on at school to study. The housing benefit cap will have a major impact on low wage families and in Brent we are already seeing private landlords giving families notice to quit and an increase in the number forced into bed and breakfast accommodation.

Back in 2004  in reaction to the Green Paper the Mayor published a strategy document entitled 'Making London Better for All Children and Young People' - the 'All' is vital. It included the following aims:

All London’s children should have opportunities to:
• influence decisions about their city
• express their opinions on the kind of city they want
• participate in family, community and social life
• benefit from good quality, child-focused services such as health, education, social care, and housing
• be protected from exploitation, violence and abuse
• walk safely in the streets on their own
• meet friends and play
• enjoy green spaces for plants and animals
• live in an unpolluted environment
• participate in cultural events
• live as equal citizens of their city with access to every service,regardless of ethnic origin, race, religion, income, gender, disability or sexuality
 In the light of the discussions taking place in the wake of the riots we could do worse that revisit this document and renew the dialogue with children about their experiences and aspirations. As Kate Mulley, head of policy development and research at Action for Children said in reaction to the Unicef report 'The government needs to stop just hearing young people and actually listen to them'.

A child-friendly version of the Mayor's strategy is HERE

'Out of borough' Brent housing placements increase by 426% as housing crisis deepens

The report on Housing Supply and Demand LINK going to the Brent Cabinet on Tuesday 26th August starkly sets out the extent of the housing crisis in Brent.

AST= Assured Shorthold Tenancy DV=Domestic Violence

Homelessness is on the rise and largely attributable to the ending of Assured Shorthold Tenancies in the private sector.  It is particularly high in Brent compared to other West London boroughs.

The Local Housing Allowance (LHA) cap has seen landlords withdrawing from renting to those families in receipt of benefits. It also means that the Council is unable to procure properties in that sector for homeless families.

The report says that the caps make it unaffordable to rent in the South of the borough for families who require two bedrooms or more, unless they are in receipt of Working Tax Credit and therefore exempt from the Overall Benefit Cap. Lack of supply means that there are not properties available in the South for working families and landlords in the North of the borough are unwilling to let to people on benefits.

This has meant that the number of private rented properties the Council has been able to find to prevent homelessness has fallen from 548 in 2010/11 to 164 in 2012/13.

The Overall Benefit Cap (OBC) introduced in August 2013 for workless households limits the benefit payable to families to £500 per week and £350 for a single person.  Brent has been one of the boroughs in the country most affected with 1,340 families capped by the end of 2013-14.

Approximately 950 had the cap removed during the year, predominantly through securing employment and qualifying for the Working Tax Credit.

Because of the high rents in London, the reports says that the Council will not be able to procure affordable housing to meet the demand from homeless households in Brent. They are instead looking for accommodation which 'is most likely to be outside of the borough and to a significant extent outside of London'.

The report states categorically:

If a household refuses an offer of suitable accommodation in the Private rented sector (under the provisions of the Homelessness [Suitability of Accommodation ](England) Order 2012) in the private rented sector the Council will consider that it has met its duties under homelessness legislation, and if the household are being accommodated in Bed and Breakfast accommodation, they will be given a reasonable period in which to make their own housing arrangements.

Couched in official language this seems inoffensive but it is the provision that sees families separated from relatives, friends and community and moved miles away with the resulting disruption to support networks and schooling. But see 4 below.

However households with children can then ask for help under the Children Act, which then puts the pressure on the Children and Young People Service. During assessment under the Act the family will be kept in emergency bed and breakfast accommodation. The report notes that if applications increase 'additional assessment resources' may be required by the Children and Young People department,

At the end of March 2014 Brent had a total of 3,341 households living in temporary accommodation, a 3% increase during 2013-14.  Currently the Council is retendering the Housing Association Leased Scheme (HALS) which expires in February 2015. This currently provides 1,800 units of temporary accommodation, primarily in Brent.

The Council is also working with 18 private sector accommodation providers to provide housing units in 'cheaper parts of the country'. This has resulted in increased out of borough placements, particularly for larger households.

Out of borough placements have risen from 120 households in February 2012 to 632 in May 2014 (a 426% increase).  The report states:

This figures is expected to rise further due to the increasing demand pressure and the shortage of affordable supply in the borough.

All these pressures means, as local newspapers have reported LINK, that Brent is not compliant with legislation which restricts a family's stay in Bed and Breakfast accommodation to 6 weeks.  The number of households in B&B has increased to an average in 2013-14 of 299 per month. The report says this is due to the 'rising number of newly accepted homeless households and existing homeless households evicted from leased temporary, predominantly because the Landlord wants the property back.'

Another financial pressure on the Council is the 460 households living in temporary accommodation who are affected by the Overall Benefit Cap. This means their current accommodation is unaffordable and the Council has to make it up with Discretionary Housing Payments (DHP).

The report states: 'This is not sustainable position for the households or the Council, with no guarantee that the DHP budget will remain at the current high level in 2015-16 and beyond.' The Council is looking to address the issue through helping householders find work, securing affordable housing or 'by sustainably being able to cover the shortfall.'

As you read the report you cannot avoid feeling angry at the dire housing situation successive government have left us with. The selling off of council housing, the failure to build new social housing, the house price inflation induced by banks, estate agents and governments have combined to leave many families facing an impossible situation. I have seen at first hand in the schools where I am a governor what this means in real terms. Some of you may have seen the families, complete with suitcases, sitting in the glitzy foyer of Brent Civic Centre waiting to hear their fate.

Faced with this impossible and deteriorating situation, exacerbated by another round of severe cuts to come in the next few years, Brent council puts forward some ideas to address the problems. These include:

1. The Council will use 'proxy bidding' for capped householders who have been waiting longer than average for social housing to maximise their opportunities.   This means bidding on their behalf when possible housing comes up.

2. Consultation has begun on the possibility of making direct offers to those affected by the Overall benefit Cap provided they have been waiting longer than average.

3. Households affected by OBC in temporary accommodation and who have not secured employment will be relocated to more affordable and suitable accommodation as 'it will not be possible to sustain them in their current temporary accommodation using limited DHP funding.'

4. Before households with children are located outside the borough there will be a review of each individual case.'If a household is identified as having to remain in Brent due to exceptional social care, welfare, medical or other exceptional circumstances, then DHP funds will continue yo be used to meet the shortfall in rent while a longer term solution is sought.'

Clearly 4 leaves a substantial area of potential debate over what constitutes 'exceptional needs' with budgetary constraints always lurking in the background.

The report states that in 2014-15 there will be a projected 673 lettings into social housing (Council and housing association) but this will meet only around 14% of the current total demand from Bands A to C on Brent's Housing Register.  The majority will be through re-lets of existing  social housing stock but the Council expect another 180 to be delivered via the new build programme.

The Council plans to increase the numbers of lettings to homeless households to 80% of the total. They say this is necessary to mitigate the impact of the OBC on households temporarily in homeless accommodation that is no longer affordable, and to reduce the number of households in temporary accommodation generally.  40 units have been set aside for the decant needs of South Kilburn regeneration.

The Council will be consulting over a 4-6 week period on the following amendments to its Allocation scheme:

1, Auto-budding - which would set the system to automatically to bid for property, at the council's discretion, once the  households falls into a target group, for example, the top 10% by waiting time, per property size.
2. Restore household's right to retain their Band C Housing register status and continue to bid in Locata, after accepting a Qualifying Offer in the private sector.
3. Increase Council and housing associations' ability to make direct offers.
4. In homeless households adult children (over 21) will be expected to share a bedroom with a same sex sibling of any age.
5. Possibility of including adult children  as part of a transfer/down sizing incentive package.
6. Acceptance of change of circumstance through starting and sustaining work (9 out of 12 months) to be given additional waiting time.
7. The residency criteria ('continuously lived in Brent for the period of 5 years or more prior to joining the housing register') would also apply to households in temporary accommodation. This would 'dis-incentivise homeless approaches'.
8. Over-crowding to receive equal priority as homelessness.

(Full version in Appendix D of the report)

Some of these proposals are bound to be controversial but whatever one thinks of them, they can only nibble at the edge of the problem - the Council, and local authorties in general, do not have the resources to dealwith such an enormous and escalating crisis.

The housing crisis outlined by the report makes it essential to tackle the housing crisis at national level and increase the amount of social housing new build.  Locally surely it should mean no more new developments with luxury house aimed at overseas investor but instead the provision of properly affordable housing.

Still time to comment on Wembley French International School plans for the Town Hall

School plan with Annex

Plans for the Wembley French International School which will occupy the redundant Brent Town Hall have largely met with approval from heritage organisations as they preserve many of the features of the Grade 2 listed building.

The prefabricated buildings and garages  at the back of the Town Hall will be demolished along with the print room, a former mortuary which was added to the original building. A new L-shaped annex to the north east (dark orange on plan) will be constructed with a canopied link to the main building and entered via The Paddocks.

Changes of use include the Mayor's Parlour becoming the headteacher's office, the Paul Daisley Hall a gymnasium, the Council Chamber a lecture theatre, the stage a drama studio and the committee rooms a study and exam space. Th retractable walls and parquet flooring of the committee rooms will be retained.

Two MUGAs (Multi-use Games Areas) are planned for the area north of the building but what is likely to be controversial is a running track in front of the Town Hall. Also controversial the plans will  require the removal of some trees. Some of the trees at the front of the Town Hall  have been planted as memorials and have plaques attached, It is not clear whether these will be retained or transferred to another site.

The small primary school (one form entry) will be in the East Wing and will largely be segregated from the secondary school sharing only the dining room, sports hall, studio and adminstration.

The secondary school of 900 pupils (11-18) will be in the West Wing.

The current Town Hall Library will be retained as the school library and it is proposed that it could be used by neighbouring schools. It will retain its Kings Drive entrance.

The existing bar will be demolished to expose the walls but the glazed roofing pavilion will be retained after a plea from English Heritage. The refreshment room will become a cafeteria.

It is envisaged that Institut Francais will provide after hours language classes for local schools and adult learners at the school.

The school will be fee paying and run by a board of trustees.It will follow the French curriculum and pupils will be taught in French and English.

The hours will be from 7.30am until 6.30pm with sports activities restricted to 8.30am until 6.30pm. A breakfast club will run from 7.30am.

Car parking will b reduced from the current 107 spaces to 46 with 78 cycle places.

The Planning Application can be found HERE It will not be decided before August 22nd, 2013

Chalkhill kids get on their bikes as school invests in cycling

With safe cycling in Brent under scrutiny at the Brent Cyclists hustings tomorrow I though it  might be worthwhile to look at some positive things happening on the Chalkhill Estate.

Chalkhill Primary School has used 'Healthy Schools' money to buy bike and scooter storage:

There are two of these covered bike racks with helmet storage

Scooter rack

Sustrans have used their police connection to get some unclaimed stolen or abandoned bikes for the school and the school has spent a grant of £2,000 to buy 10-12 bikes for use by children without bikes.

The teacher in charge has trained in Cycling Profiency and there train chldren and others. He works with Sustrans on bike safety and there is a Dr Bike safety and repair service.

 Cycling Club runs before school every Wednesday. Children can use the large playground to improve their skills and control before other children arrive, The children who attend have named themselves the 'Bike-it Crew',

The school runs a special Bikers' Breakfast with a free breakfast, film and other events.

Cycling is also integrated into the sports and PE curriculun with children taking the bikes out for on and off road training.

Meanwhile 5 minutes up the road from the school additional cycling facilities are taking shape. The children were consulted by the designers of the facility which consists of a BMX track, family cycling track and a scooter course.

BMX track under construction in St David's Close

Part of the circular Family Bike Track

I accuse the Coalition of knowingly increasing child poverty

Blurb of 'Born to Fail?' 1973

A month or so ago during morning play at a local primary school a 5 year old boy came up to me, rubbing his stomach looking at me with pleading eyes, and saying 'I'm hungry'.

Sympathetic school staff  found some biscuits and fruit to keep him going until dinner time. Apparently it wasn't the first time he had made that appeal. 

Inevitably schools are the first to see the direct impact of economic pressure on families, not just hunger but inadequate clothing, worn out shoes, tiredness caused by lack of sleep through living in one room in a bed and breakfast or shared housing. We are also seeing children disappearing from the school roll as they are rehoused out of London away from family and support systems.

Although the Coalition is keen to shift the blame on to 'work shy' families, fecklessness and dependency culture in an effort to divide and rule the working class, the truth is that 62% of children currently in poverty have one working parent. However the Coalition  seem determined to punish children for the perceived sins of their parents.

Coalition policies including the Housing Benefit cap, the Universal Benefit cap, and the move to restrict child benefit to the  first two children, will reduce disposable income and thus amount available to buy food.

The Coalition are taking food out of children's mouths.

There has been some progress recently in closing the gap in educational achievement between the poor and the rich, a gap so vividly illustrated by the National Children's Bureau in 'Born to Fail' in 1973. More recently the Child Poverty Action Group has listed the impact of child poverty:

• There are 3.6 million children living in poverty in the UK today. That’s 27 per cent of children, or more than one in four.
• There are even more serious concentrations of child poverty at a local level: in 100 local wards, for example, between 50 and 70 per cent of children are growing up in poverty.
• Work does not provide a guaranteed route out of poverty in the UK. Almost two-thirds (62 per cent) of children growing up in poverty live in a household where at least one member works.
• People are poor for many reasons. But explanations which put poverty down to drug and alcohol dependency, family breakdown, poor parenting, or a culture of worklessness are not supported by the facts.
• Child poverty blights childhoods. Growing up in poverty means being cold, going hungry, not being able to join in activities with friends. For example, 62 per cent of families in the bottom income quintile would like, but cannot afford, to take their children on holiday for one week a year.
• Child poverty has long-lasting effects. By 16, children receiving free school meals achieve 1.7 grades lower at GCSE than their wealthier peers. Leaving school with fewer qualifications translates into lower earnings over the course of a working life.
• Poverty is also related to more complicated health histories over the course of a lifetime, again influencing earnings as well as the overall quality – and indeed length - of life. Professionals live, on average, eight years longer than unskilled workers.
• Child poverty imposes costs on broader society – estimated to be at least £25 billion a year. Governments forgo prospective revenues as well as commit themselves to providing services in the future if they fail to address child poverty in the here and now.
• Child poverty reduced dramatically between 1998/9-2010/12 when 1.1 million children were lifted out of poverty (BHC).This reduction is credited in large part to measures that increased the levels of lone parents working, as well as real and often significant increases in the level of benefits paid to families with children.
• Under current government policies, child poverty is projected to rise from 2012/13 with an expected 300,000 more children living in poverty by 2015/16.This upward trend is expected to continue with 4.2 million children projected to be living in poverty by 2020.

The last Labour government pledged to reduce child poverty with some limited success and the goal was supposed to have cross-party support. Clearly the Coalition is going in the opposite direction.

'Born to Fail' in 1973 concluded:

...if it is accepted that many parents are expected to cope with impossible burdens and that their material circumstances provide a major contribution to those burdens then there is much to be said for tackling  more earnestly the poor housing and low income that our study has revealed, Arguably it could eliminate a large part of many families' difficulties. And on humanitarian grounds alone large numbers of children need a better chance to grow, develop, learn and live that they currently received...

Are we more interested in a bigger national cake so that some children get a bigger slice eventually - or are we ready for disadvantaged children to have a bigger slice now even if as a result our personal slice is smaller. 

How many of our pleasures are bought at the expense of the disadvantaged.

It is not just the immediate hunger that a child might feel today but the way that will affect their life chances in terms of education attainment, health and income. For society it raises questions about polarisation, alienation, disaffection and conflict.

In 2011 the Institute for Fiscal Studies in Child and Working Age Poverty 2010-2014 modelling the changes ahead in welfare and fiscal policy concluded:

The results therefore suggest that there can be almost no chance of eradicating child poverty - as defined in the Child Poverty Act - on current government policy.

 

Although this project did not assess what policies would be required in order for child poverty to be eradicated, it is impossible to see how relative child poverty could fall by so much in the next 10 years without changes to the labour market and welfare policy, and an increase in the amount of redistribution performed by the tax and benefit system, both to an extent never before seen in the UK. IFS researchers have always argued that the targets set in the Child Poverty Act were extremely challenging, and the findings here confirm that view. It now seems almost incredible that the targets could be met, yet the government confirmed its commitment to them earlier this year, in its first Child Poverty Strategy, and remains legally-bound to hit them.

There is no shortage of evidence about the damage that is currently being done and that will increase over the next few years.  The only conclusion I can reach is that the Coalition  is prepared to see children suffer as they pursue their aim to destroy the welfare state.

Budget pressures: homelessness and school places shortage

The pressure on Brent Council's budget and particularly those regarding the shortage of schools places and the impact of the local housing allowance cap were revealed at the Budget Overview and Scrutiny Committee of January 11th, the Minutes of which have just been published:

Andy Donald (Director of Regeneration and Major Projects) circulated a Powerpoint presentation outlining the context in which the department's budget was set, the budget pressures and other issues facing the department and the major capital projects underway.  Andy Donald explained that because the department had only been formed in October 2010 the current year was one of transition.  The year ahead was the first chance to view the department's budget as a whole and plan for the future.  The biggest pressure on the current year's budget was the level of spend on temporary accommodation which was forecast to overspend by £928,000. 

Andy Donald explained that the main reason for the overspend was due to the Local Housing Allowance cap introduced in April 2011.  The service had in the past been managed largely as a demand led service but with a rise since 2010/11 of 38% in the number of homeless applications received and an 86% increase in the placing of families into hotels and bed and breakfast accommodation, a different approach was needed. 

Actions being taken to mitigate the overspend included the provision of advice, strategies to prevent homelessness and encouragement to take housing out of the borough.  However, Andy Donald stated that the situation was only likely to get worse as Housing Benefit and wider welfare reforms were implemented.   The committee noted that a contingency budget of £1M was being held centrally to fund any final overspend in this area for the current year.  The department's agreed savings of £3.8M remained on track with £1.2M coming from the supporting people budget, £440,000 from the staffing structure review and a collection of smaller changes to the housing service. 

      

Andy Donald drew attention to the budget issues for the future.  By 2014/15 the borough would need the equivalent of 70 additional classrooms to cater for the increased demand for school places.  A sum of £25M had been secured from the Government to help address this but a figure in the region of £60-65M was needed.  Therefore work was underway on reviewing the Council's entire portfolio of school buildings to assess how best to use the funding secured and meet the demand.  The New Homes Bonus would appear in the Council's budget for the first time in 2012/13 in the sum of £1.068M.  It had been decided that this money would be used to support the Council's capital programme.  Andy Donald reported that it was anticipated that new rules would be passed to allow Councils to recover the total cost of their planning service which would lead to an increase in income during 2012/13.  He further explained that presently planning fees were set nationally, but if the Council was allowed to recover its total cost it would generate an additional £800,000 approximately. 

  More savings were to be taken from the supporting people service and from the housing needs transformation project.  There would also be revenue savings taken from capital projects.  A big change to the Housing Revenue Account would take place on 1 April 2012 following the Government making a one-off settlement to the Council of £197M to pay off a proportion of the HRA debt and no longer provide subsidy of £8.5M in return for the Council taking responsibility for the remaining debt and retaining the rental income. 

A business plan for how the Council would in future manage, maintain and improve the housing stock was being developed but one risk already identified were the proposed changes to Housing Benefit which would result in benefit being paid direct to the tenant rather than to the Council with consequences for rent collection levels.  It was pointed out that the national rent convergence scheme would continue and so rent levels would still be determined by the Government.

Andy Donald outlined the major capital projects included in the Council's programme, including South Kilburn, the new Civic Centre, the Willesden Green redevelopment and the schools programme. 

In answer to questions asked by members of the committee concerning housing and homelessness, Andy Donald explained that when someone first presented themselves as in need of housing the first action was to see if they could be prevented from becoming statutorily homeless but if this was not possible the Council then had a duty to house them.  If there was no permanent accommodation available then temporary accommodation was used.  The Council provided advice to people in an effort to support their housing needs before they were determined statutorily homeless.  Reference was made to the rent deposit scheme and Andy Donald stated that further details on this could be provided to members.  In answer to a question about enforcing standards, it was explained that the Council could only use housing legislation to take action against sub-standard housing if it was at least three storeys high and was only resourced to carry out its statutory role, although action could be taken using planning laws.  A review of the Council's private housing service was to be carried out.

Addressing questions around the provision of school places, Andy Donald stated that, whilst there were a number of variables that would need to be considered including land availability and building types, at best the £25M would only meet between one third and half the anticipated increased demand for primary school places. 

Regarding the New Homes Bonus, Andy Donald explained that this money was provided by the government effectively matching the Council Tax for each new property built for a period of 6 years following completion and so was based on the number of new homes provided within the borough and distributed according to a formula.  Therefore the £1.68M would continue to be received over the next five years with additional funding arising from new homes subsequently built within the borough.  He stated that more detail on this could be provided if necessary.

Andy Donald explained more fully the new arrangements for managing the HRA but pointed out that financial rules relating to the HRA remained so it would continue to be ringfenced.  Clive Heaphy (Director of Finance and Corporate Services) added that as a result of the rent convergence scheme the average rent increase in Brent for 2012/13 would be 7.2%. 

The committee had previously been informed of the new arrangements proposed for retaining business rates.  A question was therefore asked as to how competing land use would be managed with the pressure to attract new businesses into the borough to increase the level of business rates and to build new houses to benefit under the New Homes Bonus.  Andy Donald acknowledged that both would generate income but would have to be managed according to planning policy and complex modelling arrangements for different parts of the borough. 

A question was asked on whether the Council was working with any neighbouring boroughs on joint projects.  Andy Donald replied that there were some discussions taking place but that Brent was generally making the running on these.  They included the potential to share some facilities management functions, housing management services and some other service provision.   

   

Andy Donald was asked to explain more fully the demand on temporary accommodation.  He stated that for the year November to November just gone the number of households in hotels and bed and breakfast had increased from 139 to 250.  It was expected that by the end of the year 1635 new homeless applications would have been received of which 580 would have been accepted.  There was a need to understand what was driving this increase but it was already known that a significant number came from landlords evicting tenants. With regard to the supporting people budget, it stood at £10.8M but £1.2M savings had been made during the current financial year with an additional £600,000 being made next year and £900,000 the year after taking the budget to £9.3M by 2013/14.  The service worked with the most vulnerable people through a raft of support mechanisms all of which were now commissioned out.  This expenditure was no longer ring-fenced.  A review of the housing needs service would result in an additional 20-25 posts being deleted but Andy Donald was confident that an effective, efficient service would continue to be delivered.  He offered to forward members more detail on the restructuring if they wished to receive it. 

Bleak Winter for Housing Benefit Families

Estate agents in Brent are already taking action

The Winter Bulletin from the Brent Citizens Advice Bureau has two pieces of worrying news.

The first concerns the impact of changes in Housing Benefit, which although not in force until January 2012 is already having an impact, with private landlords taking drastic action. I have already seen this in a primary school where I am a governor with tenants receiving notice to quit and families having to move into bed and breakfast hotel accommodation.

Brent CAB say:

Although the government has delayed the changes, evidence is emerging of the impact of the proposed housing benefit cap.

We are receiving a mounting number of enquiries from prospective tenants, who are being rejected by landlords because they rely on housing benefit.


We are also seeing many residents whose tenancy agreement is not renewed because of the HB changes. In other cases, landlords are simply issuing Section 21 notice to evict tenants.


The full implementation of these proposals, next January, is bound to have a devastating effect on Brent residents - of the 10,225 families receiving LHA in Brent, 1,988 are receiving LHA above the cap - and it may be compounded by the pressures on accommodation and other basic services - such as schools and health, as a result of families being displaced from more affluent central London boroughs.


We are already working with Brent Council to look at ways of easing the impact of such changes.


We have also raised our concerns with local MPs. Brent CAN attended a meeting of the Work and Pensions Select Committee to make the case against a cut in housing benefits.

Brent CAB is looking for a multi-agency partnership to support people affected by these changes. We are also trying to secure extra resources to deal with housing benefit cases and displaced families.

If you would like to know more about working in partnership with Brent CAB, please contact Jacqueline.carr@brentcab.co.uk

UNCERTAINTY ABOUT THE FUTURE

Ian Brownhill, Chair of Brent CAB, warns that they have already lost a quarter of their total funding and that more cuts are on the way. The reorganisation of Children's Centres may result in a significant reduction in the service that Brent CAB offers at the Centres. Last year they helped 2,820 families and since April 2009 have gained £3.7m for parents.

He says:

It is alarming to see funding being reduced as part of a budgetary drill, paying little or no attention to outcomes or impact on vulnerable people.

He goes on to welcomes the Council's decision to protect the most vulnerable people from cuts and says:

I trust this policy to be fully implemented, when it comes to deciding on essential advice services for Brent residents and the future of Brent CAB.

He is absolutely right and that is why Brent Fightback is so essential to monitor cuts that the Council is making and ensure that the policy is being followed.

How I Saved Our Local Nursery

This is a guest post on UK Uncut by Lucy Reese, mother of Angus (6), Stanley (2) and Max (6 months)
A few years ago, like all good New Labour voters, I was obviously all for public services, but other than the bins and the NHS had very little need for them. Then I had kids. And everything changed. I’d always worked and was determined to do so after I had kids. My job as a TV producer paid quite well, but even so forking out nearly £400 a week in childcare – for a fairly bog standard private nursery – was pretty eye-watering. It was much more than my mortgage. By the time my lovely son was two and a half I knew I couldn’t carry on working the hours I did without going completely bat-shit mental. A ghastly programme about The Spice Girls was the tipping point. I had no work life balance and had to change the way I worked.

Fortunately, by this time my son had moved to a brilliant council run nursery called Caversham Children’s Centre, in Kentish Town, North London. I loved everything about it and it was affordable – the fees were about half what we’d been paying before. It gave me the breathing space to work out how I could change direction. I found I could do some TV stuff from home and also began to pick up work in F.E colleges, which I loved. I had another baby, started a PGCE and got more hours in the college. Throughout all these changes the nursery was a constant – our second boy went there too.

Since both my husband and I are self employed – he makes websites – we can’t afford to turn down work just because it doesn’t fit in with school holidays. I got work teaching summer schools so we started using the brilliant holiday play schemes run out of Camden Square Playcentre. It may sound cheesy, but these services are like extended family for millions of people like us. We can’t plead abject poverty, but to keep working, we need good quality affordable childcare. We want to spend some time with our kids and provide them with emotional security – we just couldn’t do this and pay private sector childcare fees.

Fast forward to the 2010 election. THEY got in and I remember saying to my husband that I reckoned the nursery and the playcentre would be for the chop. People like Cameron have never needed public services and think only lazy scroungers use them. By the end of 2010, it was announced that the playcentre would close in 2012 – then we found out in January of this year that the nursery would be closing in August.

When I got the letter about the nursery closing I burst into tears. Pregnant and hormonal, I just couldn’t handle the news. But I refused to go down without a fight. Fortunately all the other parents felt the same and to cut a long story short we worked together and although the nursery did close in August, it has recently reopened as the Caversham Community Nursery after we convinced the council to transfer management to a local community association.

The campaign was draining and involved dozens of meetings, hassling local councillors, standing in the street outside the Co-op and making a series of deputations to Camden Council. I gave birth in the middle of the campaign – baby Max has been to more council meetings than you could care to mention, both in and out of the womb.

So why did the campaign work? First off, we decided to work with our local Labour councillors, rather than harangue them for closing the nursery. We also pooled our skills. One of our group was a management consultant and produced an amazing business plan. Another mother is a PA and a brilliant organizer – with access to free printing facilities for leaflets! I used my contacts in local politics and media and gave the campaign focus with a Facebook group. The group’s leader, another TV producer, created amazingly convincing documents and sat up till the early hours refining our deputations to the council. It was bloody hard work but it paid off and though the process was at times frustrating, it was also incredibly empowering and shows what can be done if you work collectively. It made me understand the importance of local government and the experience has made me keen to stand as a local councillor – something that previously would have had about as much appeal as drinking a bucket of cold sick.

I’m now back on the campaign trail again and have started an action group to save Camden Square Playcentre – yes, it is just down the road from the Amy shrine. This is a truly amazing place that provides holiday play schemes, after school clubs, breakfast clubs and under 5s drop ins. Black kids play with white kids, posh kids play with poor kids and disabled kids play with able bodied kids. The brilliant staff are trained in everything from child protection to child psychology – the idea that they could be replaced by some “Big Society” volunteers is frankly insulting. The playcentre keeps single parents off benefits and keeps stay at home mums with toddlers sane. It gives boisterous six year old boys somewhere to let off steam after school and kids in wheelchairs the chance to make friends with kids from mainstream schools. If this sounds like utopian bullshit, sorry, but it’s the kind of service that actually makes the world a better place.

We’ve had our first meeting and are hopeful that there is a chance that we can do what we did with the nursery and get a voluntary sector provider to take over the running of the service.

Please sign our petition - http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/save-camden-square-playcentre.html - we still need all the help we can get. Thank you for reading.

This post represents the views of the writer and does not necessarily reflect my views or those of Brent Green Party. It is posted as clearly of great interest in light of the closure plans for Treetops and Harmony nurseries.

Protest against dirty Donoghue of Cricklewood

There was a good breakfast time turnout yesterday when residents gathered to protest against the dirt and air pollution that comes from the Donoghue waste and skip hire site in Cricklewood.

Green Party activist Adele Ward tweeted that  she registered high NO2 at the site, which is near homes and schools, on her air monitor.

Protesters want the site, which has recently expanded, relocated.

Preston Manor Travel Plan Deficient

The Travel Plan for the proposed primary school  submitted to the Council by Preston Manor High School ahead of the Planning Committee to be held on Wednesday was given a 'FAIL' by the council officers. Apart from missing detail there is some uncertainty about the geographical source of pupils. If the majority of pupils come from the local area this may have a destabilising impact on existing local primary schools. If they come from further away increased car traffic and congestion may be involved.

The Travel Plan is very light on detailed information for the school (e.g. general

background, assessment of existing transport network, policy review, detailing of the Travel Plan Co-ordinator’s role and detail around the implementation of the Travel Plan, such as an Action Plan and details of how it will be secured and funded). It is also missing some key measures, such as the operation of breakfast and after-school clubs to assist in staggering arrivals and departures and an on-site car parking management system (such as giving priority to car sharers).

A further major issue that has not been addressed in the Travel Plan is the proposed catchment area for the school. The Transport Assessment alludes to the shortage of school places for children in the southeast of the Borough, which could result in a large proportion of the future school roll initially coming from areas some distance from the school. This would make implementation of a number of the key travel plan measures, such as promotion of walking, very difficult and would require consideration of alternative measures, such as dedicated school buses from key population centres.

The Travel Plan has been assessed by the Council’s Highway officers using TfL’s ATTRIBUTE  programme and has scored a “FAIL” (29/83).

The applicants consider that although initially there may be a higher than usual percentage of children travelling to the site, this will balance out over time as the school's criteria for attendance becomes applicable. The applicants have therefore not anticipated that a dedicated bus route is necessary.