Navin Shah and Brent Library Campaign

My letter questioning Navin Shah's position on the local library closures and associated campaign to save them was published in this week's Brent Times (5 Jan 2012, Letters, p. 14). The position to which my comments were directed appeared on Mr Shah's website on 22 Nov 2011, 'Libraries are community hubs'. Another public affirmation of Mr Shah's position has since appeared here (6 Jan 2012). However, support for the local library campaign surely includes the key goal of over-turning Brent's closure decision - and the latest step in the legal battle means taking this to the Supreme Court (see my previous posting, 19 Dec 2011). Does Mr Shah support the campaign's aim to have this decision overturned? Support only for a contingency library facility, say, without proper public funding, is controversial for reasons of principle, precedent and strategy.

A transcript of my published letter appears below:

Unfortunately, Navin Shah finds himself in the awkward political situation of trying to distance himself from the decisions of his own party and to defend them at the same time in one of the boroughs which forms half of his GLA constituency.

In November 2011, writing on his website about the six library closures across Brent, Mr Shah says, “I’m not a Brent Councillor so as such have no powers or vote on Brent Council. Brent has been placed in an impossible position by the stringent cuts worth £60million next year alone imposed by the Tory and LibDem Government.”

Firstly, the position was not “impossible”. Nor was it inevitable. It was a political decision made in the Council chamber, specifically by the Brent Executive on 11 April 2011. That night we heard from dozens of petitioners. We heard from young, we heard from old – invariably eloquent and impassioned - exercising their speaking rights against the proposals, for two hours solid. Yet the Executive could not even bring themselves to raise their hands when voting for the Library Decimation Smokescreen, which they have the gall to describe as a “Transformation Project”.

Secondly, if the safeguarding of our local libraries does not count as a “frontline service”, that Mr Shah claims to want to defend, then what does? Young and old alike are being deprived of access to essential educational resources – and those harmed include some of the most disadvantaged in our community, looking to improve their lifechances. Nor is the erection of a new Brent HQ in Wembley at a cost of £102.4million worth foregoing frontline services for.

No, compare Brent Council’s reckless disregard for the People of Brent, continued in the Courts, to the commitment shown by Southwark Council. Southwark also had exactly 12 libraries, but instead of decimating them to six, they have just opened a new facility in Canada Water to bring their complement up to 13. Shame on Brent Council!

I can understand the embarrassment of Mr Shah’s political situation. But make no mistake, the decimation of our libraries is happening on his patch, and I think we do deserve a proper condemnation of it from him; instead of misplaced loyalty to his party and trying to pass the buck only to the Coalition government.

Shahrar Ali
Green Party London Assembly candidate for Brent and Harrow
PO Box 54785
London NW9 1FL

Picture top: part of Preston Library Wall of Shame on 7 Nov 2011 (since dismantled, see Wembley Matters).

Calling Planet Earth on Boxing Day: So Many Beautiful Things So Little Time!

Shop till you cash-or-credit-card-accepted-at-this-till drop on Boxing Day: "So many beautiful things, so little time."
So many beautiful things. So little time.
Boxed in on Boxing Day: "I didn't find it. It found me." Honest. Wow, all that lovely green foliage on the side of the building!
BBC interviewing shopaholics on Oxford Street. Camera later trains in on their shopping bags, "Wow!" says interviewer. "Hope you get some time to do some shopping later!" couple tells film crew as they leave. So little time!

New Year Message from Brent Greens

Brent Greens would like to wish the People of Brent a peaceful and productive New Year. The following is an address by Martin Francis, originally commissioned by Brent Times (22 Dec 2011 edition, p. 2):

"I hope that readers will have some quiet time to reflect over the holiday on what has been tumultuous year. The way the community has rallied in defence of libraries and other local services has been magnificent but more difficulties will face us next year. There is likely to be a big rise in evictions and subsequent homelessness in the new year which will impact on young families - they will need all the support we can give them."

"At a broader level we need to rethink the way our economy works so that basic needs of work, warmth, food and shelter are provided for all and the wants of rampant consumerism and greed are challenged. Meanwhile extreme weather events in many parts of the world remind us that Climate Change is an ever-present threat which needs unprecedented international action to ensure our children have a future."

Picture: Martin Francis in polar bear suit at Willesden Green, ahead of climate change march, Nov 2011.

Wembley Central By-election 2011: Labour Hold No Cause for Celebration

The results for the Wembley Central by-election held on 22 December 2011 are as follows:

Krupa Sheth - Labour Party - Elected with 1402 votes 48.1%
Afifa Pervez - Liberal Democrats - 1022 votes 35.0%
Madhuri Davda - Conservative Party - 349 votes 12.0%
Martin Francis (pictured) - Green Party - 130 votes 4.5%
A total of 13 votes were rejected with a turnout of 27.58% (2,916 papers).

Source: Brent Council with vote share percentages calculated by me.

The group picture shows the Labour team in jubilant spirit at the delcaration. Libdems looked particularly dejected (identifiable in foreground for that reason alone) and had clearly cottoned onto the fact, fairly early in the count, that it wasn't going to be as close as they expected. In the event the margin was quite large.

I had spent some hours on polling day on a walkabout with the Green candidate, Martin Francis. We canvassed two streets until all the leaflets were gone, visited polling stations, shared friendly discourse with tellers from opposition parties, and solicited latest polling figures. By late afternoon we were predicting a very low turnout. In the event, turnout must have picked up in the evening rush hour better than we expected. After taking postal votes into account, I estimate that each of the four polling station venues (serving 7 polling districts between them) must have seen on average around one voter per minute pass through their entrances in the last six hours of polling. I should imagine that Labour's knocking up operation was particularly good - and we passed Cllr James Powney twice during the day.

Although Councillor Sheth and Brent Labour are to be congratulated on their win - only as a matter of electioneering - local and vocal opponents of the cuts agenda will be left wondering how they managed it - more important, politically - or what it would have taken for Labour to have lost this byelection, given how much discontent has already been caused by the local library closures, with the threat of yet more pain to come; in particular, when housing benefit caps come into force in the new year with little prospect of a fight by the Labour administration. The result is little cause for celebration but rather greater cause for trepidation that Labour might feel emboldened in its current course.

The LibDems will also be left worried about their prospects in Brent, given that they had already taken this ward at the byelection in 2009 and weren't short of leaflets this time round either.

The Greens have much to proud of in their campaign. Our aim was modest, in a part of Brent where we have not been active in the past, and we managed to increase our vote share on both the 2009 byelection (3.5%) and the 2010 local elections. We canvassed only a part of the ward, with a small team, and could see the fruit of this labour when one of the ballot boxes in particular was sorted. Martin Francis served us proud!

A word about Brent's statistical analysis. The following shows percentages rounded to the nearest integer. However, such rounding is neither de rigeur nor, in my opinion, advisable. Figures should be expressed to at least one decimal place (Brent is already calculating the turnout to 2 decimals so why the discrepancy?). Firstly, one could then distinguish between candidates getting 0.3% and 0.7%, for example, and one would hardly want to round 0.3% downwards. Secondly, totals would then come to 100%, even after taking any spoilt papers into account. Therefore, I have expressed percentages at the top of this post to one decimal place. The Greens vote share went up 1.0% in this election from 2009.

Let me take the opportunity, on behalf of Brent Greens, to thank our voters at this byelection. We will be back for your vote in the May 2012 GLA elections, and then some!

First thoughts on result on Wembley Matters by the candidate Martin Francis.

Weekly press: Brent Times edition 22 Dec 2011, reflection on the year by Martin Francis (page 2) and letters (page 14) by Shahrar Ali (on HS2) and Martin Francis (on Willesden bookshop).

Brent Libraries Decimation Smokescreen: The Fight Continues

On 19 December 2011, the People of Brent lost their Appeal in the High Court against Brent Council in their determination to see half of the borough's libraries returned to use (previous postings).

The Judge almost whisphered his verdict. Public speaking training may be required, or maybe this is the accepted technique for swallowing words for conclusions which don't follow from the arguments presented? I collected a copy of the Judgment (since available on-line) so I could convince myself that he hadn't misread the conclusion. Indeed, two of the three judges say in the report that they "would dismiss this appeal" and the third says he agreed for reasons given by the first two. However, as an example of the kind of bizarre logic presented in the Judgment:

"So that is the real question: whether the council did have due regard. This has to be decided as a matter of substance, not form. Thus in any particular case it is not necessarily fatal if there is no EIA [equalities impact assessment]; and likewise it is not necessarily conclusive if there is an EIA." (LJ Davis, para 92)

But this is to set out, in form [sic.], that an insubstantial EIA - ie. none - will not count against a consideration of whether due regard has been taken with respect to section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 (in particular, as this relates to indirect racial discrimination of a community disproportionately affected by the closures). Doesn't deployment of this bizarre substance/form distinction beg the question about what weight is to be given to such an EIA, particularly when the Appelants have contended that the Council has paid insufficient regard to its duties under the Equality Act?

The library campaigners congregated in the corridor outside to hear from their solicitor, John Halford of Bindmans LLP (pictured, with papers). He gave an account of what happened and articulated options for the campaigners to consider. An emergency motion was moved by the campaigners to continue the fight in the Supreme court and to instruct their solicitors, in the first instance, to prepare a petition to have the case heard there. I also felt as though our solicitors had public interest in their sights and the requisite, and reassuring, level of impassioned commitment to the cause - without this clouding their judgment.

The campaigners' solicitor, John Halford, of Bindmans LLP said today:

"Today's Court of Appeal ruling is very difficult to reconcile with what Parliament intended when it enacted the equality duty that obliges Brent, and all other local authorities, to properly grapple with the impact withdrawal of local services of this kind has on communities. The Court of Appeal appears to accept that there is a risk of indirect discrimination against significant numbers of people in Brent resulting from its plans to impose devastating cuts on local library services, but it has excused the Council from properly taking that risk into account before deciding to make those cuts. Our position is that this is simply wrong in principle. If the Supreme Court is willing to hear this case, we anticipate the outcome being very different."

Dr Shahrar Ali, Green Party London Assembly candidate for Brent and Harrow said:

"This is another sad day for the People of Brent in their collective aim to get the Libraries' Decimation Smokescreen exposed for what it is. In an unconscionable raid on some of our few remaining community spaces, the Council would deprive its people of the best part of their educational resources and have the audacity to pretend that we simply don't understand that this is really for our own good! The People of Brent will not stand for it; we will prevail in the Courts the third time!"

My colleague Martin Francis is posting at Wembley Matters.