Friday 9 June 2017

Brent General Election Results

Figures in brackets is for that party's candidate in 2015

HAMPSTEAD AND KILBURN


·      Siddiq, Tulip – Labour Party, 34,464 votes  (23977)
·      Leyland, Claire-Louise – The Conservative Party Candidate, 18,904 votes (22839)
·      Allan, Kirstie Roberta – Liberal Democrats, 4,100 votes (3039)
·      Mansook, John – The Green Party, 742 votes (2387)
·      Easterbrook, Hugh Laurence – Independent, 136 votes (-)
·      Weiss, Rainbow George – Independent, 61 votes (-)
Turnout for the election was 70.6 per cent which is 3 per cent up on the 2015 General Election.

BRENT CENTRAL
·      Butler, Dawn - Labour Party, 38,208 votes (29216)
·      Bhansali, Rahoul - The Conservative Party Candidate, 10,211 votes (9567)
·      Georgiou, Anton - Liberal Democrats, 2,519 votes (3937)
·      Lish, Shaka - Green Party, 802 votes (1912)
·      North, Janice Marion April - UK Independence Party (UKIP), 556 votes (1850)
Turnout for the election was 65.25 per cent which is 4 per cent up on the 2015 General Election.

BRENT NORTH
·      Gardiner, Barry - Labour Party, 35,496 votes (28351)
·      Jogia, Ameet - The Conservative Party Candidate, 18,435 votes (17517)
·      Lorber, Paul - Liberal Democrats, 1,614 votes (2607)
·      Lichten, Michaela Mary Constance - Green Party, 660 votes (1539)
·      Jeffers, Elcena - Independent, 239 votes (197)
Turnout for the election was 68.61 per cent which is 5 per cent up on the 2015 General Election.

Monday 5 June 2017

Greens: Scrap prescription charges - just what the doctor ordered!




Caroline Lucas has announced the Green Party's plans to scrap prescription charges as part of its commitment to a national health service that’s genuinely free at the point of use.

Lucas said  the Government is fining people for being sick and creating barriers which stop people accessing the medication they need.

GPs have warned that the £8.60 prescription charge in England is forcing some people to make a choice between food and medication.

Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have already scrapped prescription charges, and the Green Party wants to adopt the same scheme in England.

Caroline Lucas, co-leader of the Green Party, said:
Every day this Government is fining people for falling sick by charging for prescriptions. GPs have warned that prescription charges force some patients to choose between spending their earnings on food - or essential medical treatment. This is not acceptable. It’s also a false economy because not taking prescribed mediation can cause people to miss work and lead to additional GP or hospital appointments.
Molly Scott Cato, Green South West MEP and Bristol West candidate, added:
The NHS was founded on the principle of universal access to free, publicly funded and provided health care at the point of use. Prescription charges in England undermine that principle and the Green Party would not make people pay for access to vital medication.
Scrapping prescription fees would cost an estimated £550 million annually The Green Party argue these costs could be more than met by getting rid of the NHS internal market – a move which would save an estimated £4.5bn according to the Centre for Health and the Public Interest.

'The air we breathe' special Brent meeting on July 6th








Brent Council and new coalition group, Clean Air for Brent, are inviting everyone to a high-profile public meeting "The Air We Breathe: how  pollution is affecting us and what we can do about it" at Brent Civic Centre, Thursday 6th July, 7-9pm. Speakers to include world-renowned health expert Sir Michael Marmot and Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London. Inter-active discussion with a panel and news of what we can do locally. Please join us.

Tickets can be booked here: Tickets for 'The Air we Breathe'
or using this URL HERE  Enquiries cafbrent@gmail.com cafbrent@gmail.com

Saturday 3 June 2017

Climate Change: 3 reasons to be fearful of a Tory victory

From the Greener Jobs Alliance

 In the final days before the election the GJA is sending out a stark warning for climate change and the environment about the consequences of a Conservative victory. Their manifesto ‘’Forward Together’ makes some startling claims, as well as failing to address the key challenges facing the UK.  LINK 
 
This has now been compounded on the international stage with the pathetic response to Trump’s decision on the Paris Agreement
  1. Global leader? – The Tories state in their manifesto that ‘We will continue to lead international action against climate change’ (p.38). What attempts are made to justify this claim? This leadership role is apparently demonstrated by the UK ratification of the Paris Agreement! (p.40).  In fact, we were one of the last of the countries to ratify. Hardly leadership. Another bizarre claim is trying to take credit for the introduction of the Climate Change Act. The Act was introduced by a Labour Government in 2008. In a desperate attempt to get some reflected glory we are told that the Conservatives ‘helped to frame it’ (p.40)
  2. Defending the Paris Agreement – Now that Donald Trump has withdrawn from the Agreement how has May shown her leadership? A phone call from the prime minister supposedly expressing ‘our disappointment’. Real leadership would have been to sign the protest letter making it clear that the agreement cannot be re-negotiated and condemning the decision. Theresa May’s subservience to the US has led to a failure to provide strong leadership yet again.
  3. UK domestic policy -Air Quality is the biggest public and occupational health risk and is covered in one sentence (p.25). ‘Action’ is promised with no indication what that will be. If their proposals in the consultation paper released just before the manifesto are anything to go by then we know it will be very limited. A new Clean Air Act as proposed by the Green Party and Labour Party is not included as an option even though a clear national direction is essential. Energy policy is framed in a strange assertion that it ‘should be focused on outcomes rather than the means by which we reach our objectives. So, after we have left the European Union, we will form our energy policy based not on the way energy is generated but on the ends we desire – reliable and affordable energy, seizing the industrial opportunity that new technology presents and meeting our global commitments on climate change’ (p.23). The manifesto then contradicts itself by focusing on fracking as a way of generating energy even though the reality suggests that it will not be consistent with any of the 3 ends identified.
Air quality and climate change finally surfaced as an election issue at the leaders debate on May 31st.  Between now and June 8th we must keep exposing both the Government record and their ‘vision’. We need a strong and stable environment and we’re not going to get that from the Tories.

Crunch time: 5 reasons to vote Green in #GE2017



This unofficial video by Green Party member Ousman Noor throws out a challenge to voters - 5 reasons to vote Green in the General Election.

Friday 2 June 2017

Is caste an issue in the General Election in Brent and Harrow?




A consultation is currently going on regarding caste discrimination in Britain and possible inclusion in the Equalites Act. Operation Dharmic Vote LINK is operating behind the scenes to back candidates who are opposed to anti-caste discrimination legislation. This is what they say:
Please take a few minutes to understand some very serious consequences of the caste legislation and case law. For the GE17 election, the Dharmic community needs to vote in large numbers and strategically. Political Party alliances and affiliations need to be set aside. Labour, LibDems, Greens and all the nationalist parties have supported caste legislation bare the odd MP in these parties. As you will see ALL the Prospective Parliamentary Candidates who have signed up are Conservative. Please note Operation Dharmic Vote is not being an agent of the Conservative party, as our analysis and rational for supporting the independent Candidate in Leicester demonstrates.
A Government Equalities Office report gives some background to the issue LINK.  Uma Kumaran, formerly Labour candidate for Harrow East in 2015, recently called out Bob Blackman for the divide and rule tactics based on caste politics used in the 2015 campaign.  She felt she could not expose her family to the stress caused by such campaigning by standing again LINK.


Campaign materials are downloadable from the Operation Dharmic Vote site

Locally Conservative candidates Rahoul Bhansali (Brent Central), Ameet Jogia (Brent North) Bob Blackman (Harrow East), Hannah David (Harrow West), Matthew Offord (Hendon) and Mike Freer (Finchley and Golders Green) have backed Operation Dharmic Vote's campaign to withhold legislative protection for the UK's 250,000 Dalits (untouchables).

Brent resident Sujata Aurora said:  
Caste discrimination is endemic within parts of the Hindu and Sikh communities in the UK - there have been instances of doctors refusing to give medical treatment to Dalits and others where Dalit couples have been refused venues for weddings. It is a discrimination which remains largely hidden to wider society and its defence is usually cloaked as a way of preserving traditions. We have laws against discrimination on the basis of race, sex, sexuality and disability and it is frankly appalling that some candidates in this election are seeking to prevent the implementation of laws against caste discrimination. Voters should question their candidates about their stance on this issue and ask why, in 2017, it is legally acceptable to treat Dalits as inferior subhumans.
Green Party candidate for Harrow East, Emma Wallace recalled the 2015 election:
When I stood as Green candidate in Harrow East in 2015 I could not believe that Bob Blackman and his team had employed such a religiously divisive tactic as 'divide and rule' caste politics to ensure that he retained his seat.  It was especially shocking in light of the fact that Bob Blackman had been elected to represent all his constituents since 2010, in what is the most ethnically and religiously diverse constituency in the country.  It is beyond reprehensible that there are a number of candidates standing in this election backing a campaign to prevent legislation that protects caste members from discrimination. There is absolutely no place for caste discrimination in the UK. 
Liberal Democrat candidate for Brent Central, Anton Georgiou said:
My party's constitution is unequivocal, it says, we exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society in which no one shall be enslaved by ignorance or conformity. Caste discrimination does not belong in the UK's modern society. I am disturbed that some candidates in this election are supporting efforts to maintain it and prevent legislation that would ensure Dalits are treated as equals in our community. Brent's representatives should be leading the way to end this discrimination, not seeking to safeguard it.
Jaiya Shah (Chair Harrow Council for Justice) and Dr Pravin Shah (Coordinator Harrow Monitoring Group) have issued a joint statement on Bob Blackman's candidature  LINK
We can’t support Bob Blackman because we strongly believe that an MP should represent all constituents on equal footing without taking sides, stirring up religious emotions for votes and dividing the communities in the process.

College fraud a test case for mergers scrutiny

-->



The Guardian in its recent editorial LINK on the Government's newly introduced Apprentice Levy stated:
The biggest flaw is that, like so many other government initiatives, this latest attempt to boost the number of apprenticeships could have been designed to be gamed. Experience has surely shown by now that setting a target, generating the cash, and launching the scheme before systems of monitoring and assessment are up and running is an open invitation for employers to cheat.
I can reveal that a KMPG report into the College fraud has exposed serious deficiencies in the so called tightened monitoring system LINK in place, and in my view, provided sufficient evidence backing up the Guardian Opinion of 17 April April 2017 

The KPMG report which focused on the apprenticeship training provided (or rather, it appears, not provided) by Keyrail LINK was limited in scope and provided 'for information purposes only', however, beneath the bland account's language, KPMG reveal some pretty devastating deficiencies: 

•   Despite assurances that due diligence had been performed and a contract given to Keyrail Training Solutions for signing KPMG had been unable to find the majority of due diligence paper work or a signed contract
•   An increase in approved apprentice numbers from 20 to 90  was not underpinned by documentation or risk assessment
•   Learner evidence was requested from Keyrail but was delayed or not completed meaning the the College failed to comply with Skills Funding Agency's funding rules regarding ongoing monitoring
•   The College did not have a formal policy regarding monitoring of subcontractors prior to July 2015.
•   Out of a total of learner 40 files reviewed KPMG considered all were ineligible for funding as there were multiple compliance issues, including no achievement evidence
•   Of the 79 apprentices for whom funding was claimed, only 7 were recognised by the employer with whom they were supposed to be placed, Specialised Engineering Services Limited (SES)

KPMG summarise by stating they did not see sufficient evidence to demonstrate that valid learning took place in relation to the Keyrail apprentices
 
The Report went on to observe the following risks:

The College’s current subcontractor procedures are insufficient to demonstrate            compliance with the SFA overall subcontracting requirements.
The College is unable to demonstrate compliance with the SFA overall subcontracting requirements.
The College is unable to demonstrate it complies with the SFA Selection and Procurement and Entering into a subcontract rules and requirements
The College has reduced assurance over the completeness and accuracy of enrolment documentation relating to subcontracted provision. This increases the potential for errors within the subcontracted population on the ILR not being identified. In turn, this could detrimentally affect the College’s funding claim should enrolment issues be identified by any external audit of the College’s ILR
The College is unable to demonstrate sufficient controls over the monitoring of apprenticeship subcontracted provision. The inability to determine the level of outstanding review/contact evidence for all apprenticeship subcontracted learners increases the risk of ‘gaps’ in a learners on-programme activity and therefore the risk of an incomplete and inaccurate ILR, resulting in a misstatement of the College’s funding claim. This will directly impact on the College’s decision making process over the determination of monthly payments to its subcontractors. 
 If a learner is not registered or incorrect registered, then the College is at risk of not being able to substantiate a learner achievement. This will impact on any achievement funding claimed, as well as success rates.
The College is unable to demonstrate it complies with the SFA Monitoring of Subcontractors rules and requirements, and has increased risk of data completeness and accuracy issues relating to subcontracted provision
The College is unable to demonstrate it complies with the SFA Fees and Charges rules and requirements
The College is unable to demonstrate it complies with the SFA Monitoring of Subcontractors rules and requirements.

In addition, as KMPG only had available documentation going back to March 2015, it made further comments as to the implication of what it found having looked at the available documentation. However, because of the lack of documentation it was unable make recommendations:

During the course of the substantive testing, a number of observations have been identified which are recorded below. No recommendations are made to the College as Keyrail ceased trading in May 2016. The documentation retained by the College in relation to Keyrail is considered as final as there is no scope for additional evidence to be provided.

1.     Where learners are enrolled onto apprenticeship programmes that do not meet the funding eligible rules and criteria, all funding claimed is deemed ineligible
2.     There is a risk that funding claimed and/or data held in the ILR cannot be substantiated to underlying records
3.    There is a risk that where no underlying records are retained, funding claimed is deemed ineligible
4.    Where underlying records are incomplete or potentially contradictory, there is a risk that the learners English and maths enrolments on the ILR cannot be substantiated
5.    There is a risk that the funding claimed is not supported by documentation signed by the learner.
6.    There is a risk that the funding claimed is not supported by underlying records

CNWL made total payments to Keyrail for what appears to be non existent apprenticeship training of £214,572. The College discovered in early summer 2016 that the company had been dissolved.

One learner in a College telephone interview in April 2016 put it succinctly:

The course no longer going on and this was all a scam. The staff forced to go in and do the course; if not they were sacked (sic). 

In a further twist, highlighting the growing concern over apprenticeship, UCU at its annual congress adopted a resolution calling for an apprenticeship charter LINK

The TES quoted Peter Monaghan, regional secretary of the UCU Eastern and Home Counties Committee:

Certainly I would support the fact that apprenticeships shouldn’t be at the expense of a wider, broader curriculum, most definitely...and also I would say the key to the success of apprenticeships in the future is our involvement, not employers’ involvement, our involvement as unionists and educators. 

In my view, the UCU Congress motion on Apprentice charter as well as Guardian leader comment, lends strong support to the UCU branch at the College who are calling for an independent public enquiry into the admitted subcontractor fraud LINK

Backing the unanimous decision of his branch members for an independent inquiry, Indro Sen, suspended Branch Secretary at CNWL, said.
 
When students are 10 minutes late, managers instruct the class teachers to monitor their attendance. When teachers do not cross the "t) and  dot the"i" in their marked work, they are monitored by their managers and some end up under capability procedures, but when a fraud as large as £356K can take place under the very nose of SFA auditors, borough police chief, Governors and senior management teams, who monitors their performance?

Only an independent public enquiry can get to the bottom of this. Can any students' life chances be said to be in safe hands unless each and every sub-contractor is thoroughly checked out on the Government declared Sub contractor list and those checks are made public for students to see what they are getting into. Until such time, Mr. Boles should consider putting the levy scheme into abeyance.

It is not known how SFA and the college have reacted  to this call for an independent public inquiry, however, it is clear the KMPG report itself is not such an inquiry.  It is to be hoped that CWC undertook due diligence prior to the merger decision.

Greening would be wise to delve a little deeper into the merger between College of North West London and City of Westminster, before rubber stamping it. LINK   If she did so, she would only be carrying out her boss, May's manifesto promise of greater scrutiny over mergers, a bit earlier and proactively. This related to commercial mergers but should also apply to corporations as they move closer to commercial models.