Passport not sufficient ID to get into Brent Council meeting

Passport not sufficient ID to get into Brent Council meeting

(first posted by Martin Francis on http://wembleymatters.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/passport-not-sufficient-id-to-get-into.html)

There was increased security at last night's meeting of Brent Council and a ticket system for getting into the building. When I arrived there was a small group of lobbyists outside from the Counihan Family Campaign and Brent Fightback. Brent Fightback had been giving out a leaflet making the case for the Council to set a needs based budget. Railings had been erected at the foot of the Town Hall steps and two police cars were in attendance.

When I asked if they were going to observe the meeting one of the lobbyists told me that the council meetings were so tedious and mind-numbing that she did not wish to go in.  Others however said that they had been denied entry by an officer from Democratic Services who stood at the door with a security guard. He told them that they were going to keep out the people who had caused trouble at the previous meetings. or who might cause trouble because previous meetings had been interrupted and they wanted the business of the Council meeting to be completed that evening.

The officer's action seemed particularly targeted at the Counihan Family Campaign but was applied in a blanket way to everyone who had been lobbying.. Three women who tried to get in were asked for ID in order to gain admittance. Carol, a retired TfL worker went all the way home to collect her passport and library card but the officer refused to look at it saying, 'We know you are part of the campaign' without saying which campaign.

I was granted admittance and a woman was also allowed in but only after she had to ask that the officer to ring  Carol Shaw, her local councillor,  to check her credentials.

When we eventually arrived in the public gallery we were the only two people in attendance with 50 empty seats and more on the floor of the council chamber.  After half an hour or so two young women joined us but soon got bored and went home. Ex- Democratic Conservative Councillor Robert Dunwell, who has his moments in the Town Hall, was happily trotting around the Council Chamber.

Clearly this raises issues about democratic accountability if the public are not allowed to attend full meetings of the council.  The 'Summons to attend council meeting' clearly states 'The press and public are welcome to attend this meeting'. How can democracy be seen to be done if the electorate are not allowed to see it in action? Is it legal or moral for the council to decide which members of the public are acceptable?

A further troubling aspects is the question of how the council has identified previous and potential trouble makers?  I have never been a conspiracy theorist but is there a list or photographic record? Does the council believe in guilt by association? If you are opposed to council policy does that make you a 'trouble maker'. Would library campaigners have been asked for their ID?

Interesting Lib Dem Cllr Jack Beck who tweets as @digitalliberal tweeted during the meeting:

Brent Fightback at the Town Hall tonight, very unimaginative literature, looks like a member of the Brent Labour Party wrote it. 

So a Labour Council bars entry to a group of people, some of whom are Labour supporters, who are advocating a policy supported by many on the left of the Labour Party as well as other socialist groups including Green Left,  as well as those supporting a Brent family suffering as a result of the housing crisis.  Brent Fightback is the same campaigning group that Brent Council Muhammed Butt  leader went to speak to earlier this year LINK and stressed that he wanted to have a dialogue with them and return to 'what Labour stands for and why we are here'. Asked how he would organise a fightback against Coalition cuts he said:

Me being here is just a start. I am willing to go anywhere, whether to a warm reception or a hostile one, to have a dialogue.

In the same meeting he said that he had not ruled out a needs based budget.We are entitled to ask, what has happened to that dialogue, but more importantly, what has happened to democracy?

Recently I attended an Extraordinary Meeting of Barnet Council where the Labour group had tabled a motion of 'no confidence' in the Conservative Leader of the council calling for him to be replaced. Feelings were running high but not only was the public gallery full but the council had provided seats in an overflow room with a television link. Officers from the council politely greeted us and showed us to the viewing room. There was some spirited heckling but the Mayor was able to keep things under control and a proper debate took place.

Natalie Bennett addresses Brent Greens

Brent Greens welcomed Green Party Leader, Natalie Bennett to Wembley on 18 November 2012. Natalie was in her element talking about the Green solution to transport - ranging from how to return the railways, currently heavily subsidised by the tax payer, to public ownership to how to bring about a modal shift away from the motor car to walking and cycling. She then broadened out the theme to identify how transport affected every part of our lives and was one of the keys to building a sustainable society, such as breaking the dominance of the supermarket supply chain by a return to local, seasonal food production. We were honoured also to have Waiting for the Banjo, a local band, perform a Celtic folk set.

Natalie Bennett addresses Brent Greens, 18 Nov 2012

Waiting for the Banjo, Mark, Mary and Mike.

Musical Joy

Brent Green Party Submission to Ealing Council

FROM: BRENT GREEN PARTY

TO: Ealing Planning Dept, 13 November 2012

Further to the consultation letter from Ealing Council regarding the Planning Application Ref. PP/2012/3267 at Channel Gate Road, Park Royal, Brent Green Party submits this OBJECTION:

CONTEXT

Brent Green Party is concerned about the negative environmental impact of the major part of the planning application, relating to the pyrolysis plant. We do not have equal objection to the anaerobic digestion part of the plant, since we recognise the potential benefit of utilizing CH4 released by biomass for energy rather than putting it in landfill, where it would be released anyway, contributing to climate change.

However, we cannot support the application taken as a whole and state our OBJECTIONS here:

AIR QUALITY

-         Insufficient modelling of potential air quality impacts and their assessment and foreclosure of the need for additional health impact assessments in line with Environmental Agency stipulations.

-         Insufficient assessment of the need for appropriate mitigation measures in light of potential air quality impacts at the planning application stage in line with EA stipulations.

CO2

-         Pyrolysis produces bio-oil and syngas which when combusted for energy, produce vast amounts of CO2, wholly inconsistent with the achievement of EU emission targets.

WATER COURSES

-         Contamination of London canals from run off pollutants during construction, not sufficiently mitigated by drainage measures.

-         Region is water stressed in terms of supply of mains water and site water demand will exacerbate this, in excess to the rainwater-harvesting techniques designed to reduce onsite mains water demand.

PEDESTRIANS

-         During construction, adverse effects on users of playground in Harley road, residential properties and pedestrians in Old Oak Lane Conservation Area, users of the Grand Union Canal and pedestrians walking through Metro Multi Trading Estate.

CONSTRUCTION

-         Adverse noise pollution during construction.

-         Medium to low risk impact of dust generated during construction.

-         Potential for ground contamination during construction period.

-         Potential for ground contamination from storage/handling of oils, chemicals & waste materials from the new plant, not met by proposal to place in storage facilities.

For these reasons we strongly object to the proposal in its current form.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Shahrar Ali, Spokesperson for Planning and Environment
Brent Green Party, PO Box 54786, London NW9 1FL
Contact shahrar.ali@greenparty.org.uk

"austerity kills":LETTER TO THE GUARDIAN 13/11/12

The government's response to increased coverage of cyclist fatalities has been to set aside £30m for improving safety at road junctions across the UK (If Wiggins can get hit … Safety campaigners fear effect of Tour de France winner's crash, 9 November). This is far too little – it's even less than the amount the mayor of London has already cut from the capital's annual road safety budget.

We can't stop death and injury on our roads unless local authorities and the government understand the social and economic value of road safety budgets. They not only prevent avoidable tragedies for many families but also reduce NHS and emergency service costs.

London used to have an exceptional record of reducing road casualties. By 2010 there were 685 fewer children a year killed or seriously injured on London's roads than in the late 1990s. As the previous mayor's road safety ambassador for seven years, I'm sure that if we hadn't spent the money we did and made the changes we did, many of those 685 would not be walking around today.

Last year we had a 23% increase in cycling casualties and a significant jump in the number of pedestrians killed or seriously injured. This trend has quickened as the road safety budget has been squeezed down to less than a quarter of what it was. Put simply, austerity kills.
Jenny Jones AM
Green party group leader, London Assembly

Brent Civic Centre Tours: By Appointment Only

Martin Francis and Shahrar Ali: A "Green" White Elephant is Still a White Elephant, outside Brent Civic Centre

Brent Civic Centre opened its doors this weekend to public tours, by appointment only. Brent Greens joined a demonstration outside the Civic Centre, in protest at the gross implausibility of the Council claim that money would be saved through building this new behemoth - that nobody wanted or needed - in a time of fiscal crisis. We have exposed the financial unsustainability of the project before now (history) - the financing of a £100m debt over 25 years, plus interest, at a time when essential public services are being cut, with local ratepayers losing their libraries and families facing eviction in the weeks to come.

Brent Civic Centre £102m over 25 years plus intersest

Despite the requirement to pre-book, I and others were surprised not to be allowed onto a tour, given that there were plenty of no shows. I was asked whether I had "tried to register" or whether "I was with them" (the staff pointing to the demonstration). This obstructive attitude compares rather unfavourably to the more reasonable treatment one would expect of public visits to buildings. I and others were recently admitted on to a tour of the Paddocks war bunker, featuring in the Brent Open House London season, due to no-shows on the day.