Showing posts with label Youth Parliament. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Youth Parliament. Show all posts

Monday 1 June 2015

Complacency at Cabinet as controversy swept under the carpet

Preston Community Library representatives spoke at Cabinet tonight on the issue of Brent Council's new Property and Asset Strategy.   They were concerned that the community library they now have up and running in the building, which provides many services to the local community apart from lending books,  should not be affected by the strategy which states:
Fundamentally the strategy moves away from a presumption to dispose outright of property towards one of retaining and acquiring assets with a view to maximising revenue potential.
Muhammed Butt, leader of the council said that the  council also recognised the importance of social value of property, rather than just monetary value.

Several Cabinet members praised the campaign which had been promised the Preston library building at a peppercorn rent.  However Cllr Moher indicated that discussions were taking place on the use of part of the building to provide additional school places.

Clearly there will be some difficult decisions when weighing up any conflict between monetary and social values in a period of budgetary cuts.

Ex councillor James Powney wrote on his blog:
The new strategy has two apparently contradictory aims.  One is to maximise value through renting property.  The second is maximise "social value" through renting below market rates to worthy causes.  Of course this all takes place in an environment where the Council's income from fees & charges, Council Tax and government grant will all be in decline.  Inevitably, this locks Brent Council into cutting public services to the maximum extent possible, which I suspect is not a policy that the majority of those who voted in May 2014 would support (although it is very much what the newly elected Tory government supports).
There are likely to be a number of Community Asset Transfers with voluntary organisations running services from former Brent buildings. 

Cabinet approved the Strategy Report's recommendations which Cllr Pavey claimed marked a 'massive' change in Council policy - but he does tend to suffer from superlative inflation.

They went on to approve authority to tender for a Direct Payments Service contract for adult and children's social care. Cllr Hirani argued that this would enable better working conditions and wages as it would do away with the profit requirement of agency providers.

The Council is expecting an increase of 400 people on Direct Payments over the next three years, a total of 1,127.

Cabinet approved the award of the Local HealthWatch Service contract to CommUNITY Barnet, Cllr Pavey remarked that the current HealthWatch has been well-intentioned but ineffective. It had not been successful in getting community engagement and representing patients.

There were similar remarks about the youth service when the Cabinet discussed the £1m cut it is making which will result in further demands on the voluntary and faith sectors.  In answer to Cllr Mashari who asked if this represented a move away from a universal youth service, Cllr Ruth Moher said she doubted if Brent had such a service at present and that the present service was not coherent, it had developed rather than was planned.  She remarked that that there was no point in providing a service if what it provided was not what young people wanted, so they would be consulted. She went on to say that the Coucil had never done a proper mapping of the services that were already offered acxross the borough by the council, voluntary organisations and faith groups.

Cllr Moher referred to the paragraph about the dangers for the Roundwood Centre if the strategy was not successful. Cllr Mashari said that there were many groups just waiting to get into the centre and she looked forward to it being better used and more dynamic.

There seemed little recognition of what could be read between the lines of the report and was pixcked up by the Kilburn Times - this could mark the end of youth provision in Brent.

I was shocked that there was no delegation at the council from the youth service or its users,  or the Youth Parliament which is, after all, supposed to represent young people.  Cabinet were told that their had been a question from the former chair of Brent Youth Parliament asking what a youth worker attached to the BYP would actually do - the answer was value to say the least.  However, the BYP, kept on at a cost of £60,000 may have to watch out as Cllr Moher said that they would be looking at 'different ways' of delivering that service.

Ruth Moher also presented the report on the Expansion of Stonebridge School and was equally complacent saying that most of the respondents to the consultation had been concerned about the future of Stonebridge Adventure Playground, swallowed up by the school expansion and accompanying regeneration. Referring to the 700 letters  received against the proposal she said that these had all been the same so didn't mean much and went on to say, about a 1,000 plus petition calling for the saving of the adventure playground, 'as we know you can get anyone to sign a petition.

Dear reader, I was moved to protest at this disparagement from a councillor who had never once visited the playground!

Cllr Pavey then jumped in to tell us all how big schools were great (he is chair of governors at the BIG Wembley Primary), the bigger the better ('massive' 'bigger the better' - is there a theme emerging here?) and suggested that Quintain with its BIG profits could be persuaded to add another form of entry or two at its proposed primary school.

Cllr Butt followed this with his usual statement. The provision of school places was a statutory responsibility and the Council owes it to residents and children to provide places: 'We will not shy away from making difficult decisions'.

So, we have to admire Brent Council for making the 'difficult' decision to close a children's playground, even though it, as well as the school,  served families and children in one of the poorest parts of London. Campaigners were never persuaded that the Council had considered the possibility of an alternative design for the  expansion of the school that kept the playground or had even tried to find it an alternative site.

And wasn't Stonebridge Adventure Playground a community asset?

The meeting concluded with a refreshingly eloquent presentation by Cllr Eleanor Southwood, the new lead member for the environment. It was not about her portfolio but a report from a Scrutiny Committee task group that she led on the pupil premium and how it is used in Brent schools.

Cllr Southwood  said that the group had looked at case studies and talked to pupils not just about the impact on attainment but on enjoyment of school and the broadening of horizons.

The good practice described in the report will be shared with the Brent Schools Partnership.





Friday 22 May 2015

Risks involved in Brent Youth Service changes include £5m loss on Roundwood Youth Centre


The Cabinet on June 1st will consider a paper on the future of Brent Youth Service. LINK The Council has committed to cuts of 71%: £100k in 2016-17 and a massive £900k in 2016-17. This will result in a cut of  £1m compared to 2015 on net expenditure (£414,394 in 2016-17 compared with £1,414,34 in 2014-15).

They propose a 'third sector;' solution through the setting up of an independent organisation - 'The Young Brent Foundation' which would have charitable status. The Foundation would work with a range of voluntary organisations, social enterprises and charities and attempt to draw in support from grants and sponsorship.

The John Lyon Trust has told the Council it will welcome an application for a three grant of  £100k per annum to support core funding costs while the paper suggests running costs will be £177k per annum.

Although replete with vision and priorities based on the needs of the most vulnerable the paper does not disguise the risks inherent in the strategy.

The paper states that the running costs of the four youth centres (Granville, Poplar Grove, Roundwood and Wembley) cannot be met. They suggest a community asset transfer for Roundwood and activities by different providers under licenses or short-term occupation at the other centres.

They state: 'If no opportunities are identified for the Granville and Wembley youth centres, the Youth Service will have to consider vacating the premises as there will be no funding available within the budget envelope to pay for the running costs.'

Following discussion of the 'risks and delivery issues' associated with community asset transfers the report states:
In the case of the Roundwood Centre current restrictions on the hours and type of use will also limit commercial opportunities for any new provider. An obvious implication is that there is a risk that youth centre provision at Roundwood would cease from April 2016 if a transfer was not achieved.

...If the Council is not able to fund or secure an alternative provider to run youth provision at Roundwood, the Council could also be required to repay, in full or in part, the National Lottery grant of £4.997m which was used to support the development of the centre.
Readers will remember that the closure of Stonebridge Adventure Playground also involves a payback to the National Lottery.

The paper proposes the continuation of the Brent Youth Parliament at a cost of £60k per annum  because of its 'valuable role in within the Council's decision making process'  with its transfer to the corporate team in the Chief Operating Officer's department.

This is an interesting move as one would expect the Youth Parliament to be at the forefront of a campaign to save the youth service and thus assert its independence, while at the same time the proposals ensure the YP's own survival.

The Youth Parliament, if the Cabinet accepts the proposals, will be part of a consultation on the proposals that start this month and will culminate in the strategy for the future of the service to go to Cabinet in October 2015.  The paper notes that a Full Council decision may be required.

In the budget discussions earlier this year the Council managed to deflect concerns about the future of the youth service, which initially seemed to entail the total closure of the service, through this review. Although they will argue that this does not amount to total closure it clearly may eventually result in something very close to that.

Thursday 19 February 2015

Children, young people and parents will challenge Brent Cabinet over cuts on Monday

Monday's Cabinet will be approving the budget to go to the Full Council on March 2nd amidst press coverage of the row over the leadership refusing to take account of the vote of the Labour Group in favour of a Council Tax rise.

Meanwhile residents, and particularly the young and parents, have got togather to challenge some of those cuts.

The Cabinet will be receiving an unusually high number of petitions, accompanied by speeches from the petition organisers, which indicates the strength of feeling in the borough.

I am sure they will welcome support from the public at the meeting which starts at 7pm in the Civic Centre.

These are the petitions:

Cabinet – 23 February 2015

Petitions have been received in the following terms in response to the budget proposals:
1) Keep Stonebridge Adventure Playground Open “We the undersigned insist that the redevelopment of
Stonebridge School and the new housing, includes keeping the Stonebridge Adventure Playground open.”
From:         Brent Play Association

2) Keep Welsh Harp Environmental Study Centre open This petition comprises numerous letters from individual children at Chalkhill Primary School.
From:         Chalkhill Primary School

3) Save our youth service (paper and e petition)
“Youth services are vital for young people as well as the community and we
believe there will be an adverse effect if the service no longer exists. This will
put added pressure on statutory services such as the Youth Offending
Service, the police and social care. We call on Brent Council to consult with young people effectively before making any cuts to any youth provision in the borough.
We call on Brent Council to scrutinise existing provision to ensure that these
resources are appropriate and effective. The young people of Brent are willing and able to assist Brent Council with this important task. We call upon Brent Council to consider the voice ofyoung people in the light of these savings!”
E-petition: started by Roisin Healy (Brent Youth Parliament)
4) Save School Crossings Patrols
“Brent Council is under a legal duty to promote road safety and to promote sustainable transport, such as walking and cycling.  Road traffic accidents are the biggest killer of children in the UK (they peak when children start primary school and secondary school). 2011-2020 is the United Nations Decade of Action for Road Safety. School Patrol Officers are an integral partof the community, ensuring the safety of our children and they encourage children to have independence. Many schools in Brent are on busy roads (e.g. Salusbury Primary School and Islamia on Salusbury Road in NW6) which are only going to get busier with new housing developments with a new influx of cars and residents. Our roads should become safer places for our children, not more dangerous. And children should be encouraged to walk and cycle to school rather than be driven.”
E petition started by: Michelle Goldsmith on behalf of local residents .
5) Leopold Primary School - save our School Patrol
Officer
“Brent Council is considering removing our Lollipop crossing patrol at Hawkshead Road. The School is surrounded by several busy roads. We believe this is unacceptable and will directly put our children in danger of a road traffic accident.”
From:         the Parent, Teachers and Friends Association of Leopold Primary
                   School

6) Keep Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre Open

“The centre provides a venue for many members of our  local community and plays a vital part in our leisure time. Many of us use the facility on a weekly basis to play football, use the gym, relax in the steam and sauna and meet friends. The centre hosts children education, courses and activities th at are beneficial to their development. The centre serves as a venue where rooms can be hired to many different groups who hold meetings, training and celebrations. Closing Bridge Park would affect all of us in different ways. We need this Centre to remain open so that our young people have a place to meet and do sports in a safe environment.
Stonebridge is a deprived area and we feel that crime and unsocial behaviour will increase if the centre is closed. Unlike a few years ago the centre now is used by men and women of all ages and faith. People come to Bridge Park to get fit and improve their health. Although we understand that the council funds are limited, the cost of dealing with health and antisocial behaviour will far outweigh the cost of operating our leisure centre. We have signed below to show our opposition to the closure.”
From:         Mr Adam, Tordjok, local resident.


Saturday 13 December 2014

The proposals that could wipe out Youth Provision in Brent


The possible cuts in the Youth Service in Brent are causing great concern.  As you can see above there are two alternatives but in essence the first (CYP3)  postpones most of the cuts until 2015-17 and the second (CYP17) make them in 2015-16.

The report (below) suggests looking for alternative sources of funding but this would need to be fully explored to ensure that it is sustainable and would make up for the Council's cuts. (Unlikely in my view)

THE PROPOSALS

Proposed savings (cuts)
CYP3: The first tranche of savings (£100k) would be achieved for 15/16 by deleting a managerial post and an operational post as well a s reducing the budgets which support activities, such as printing and publicity. From November also the Youth  Service is part of a Cabinet Office ‘Delivering Differently for Young People’ Programme. This funds a rapid process of developing a set of options for a new delivery model. In particular, officers have proposed exploring through this programme the development of a ‘youth trust’ for Brent which could access funding which currently neither the council nor Brent’s you h voluntary sector organisations are able to access. This could put Brent’s youth provision on a more sustainable footing, with the ‘youth trust’ able to act as a consortium lead and enabler for local organisations as well as being a delivery vehicle, using the expertise of Brent’s experienced and skilled youth workers. As part of this process, alternative funding sources could be identified to mitigate the loss of services from the budget reduction of £900k in 16/17.

CYP17:This option terminates all Youth Service spend for 15/16. This would involve making all the staff redundant (full time and sessional workers as well as managers). The services terminated would be: 

Outreach and Detached Team and Youth Bus – which has a key preventative role in relation to youth disorder and gang violence Poplar Grove Youth Club – year round provision targeting young people from Chalkhill and surrounding areas. 

Mosaic LGBT Project – award winning provision for a key group of young people
liable to risk and discrimination Duke of Edinburgh Award – Brent is a very successful provider with a high success rate


Granville Youth Arts Centre – youth arts provision which supports re engagement in education and work 

Brent in Summer – the youth contribution to this programme has good attendance

Brent Youth Parliament

Wembley Youth Centre – high quality provision 

Funded with £5m from the Big Lottery - opened November 2012
Roundwood Youth Centre LINK would have to be transferred to an organisation willing to meet all running costs and TUPE relevant staff since closure would require very large scale repayment of government grant.  Some of the above services have partial external funding and with alternative funding sources being found, some provision could remain and officers would work with partners to ensure this. 


The council has a statutory duty to provide sufficient activities for young people but does not have to provide them itself. Some councils have almost terminated their youth offer and simply put a signposting page on their website. 

How would this affect users of this service?   

Young people in Brent experience high levels of deprivation, high levels of gang and serious youth violence, high levels of youth offending (especially more serious offences), high levels of mortality in the under 17 age group and high levels of sexually transmitted diseases. 

The current youth provision is located in areas of highest deprivation and is able to target crime hotspots, including key estates. It also supports young people who have arrived as unaccompanied minors, LGBT young people who are at risk of mental health issues and homelessness as well as young people who are at risk of radicalisation and involvement in gangs. There is significant work with young Afghani males and young males from Somali communities. There are also programmes targeting young females.

Young people involved in our provision, especially the Duke of Edinburgh award, contribute at least 5,000 hours of volunteering to the local community. 

The loss of Brent Youth Parliament would reduce young people in Brent’s opportunity to participate not just locally but nationally through the UK Youth Parliament.

Key milestones 

CYP3:
Consult on staff reorganisation in December 2014 to deliver savings for April 2015 Options appraisal from Delivering Differently for Young People – February 2015, with report to Cabinet on proposed option for future delivery of youth provision – March or April 2015.

CYP17:

Consult with local communities (especially Brent Youth Parliament) on cessation of youth services/closure of youth facilities – January and February at the same time as consulting staff on redundancy/redeployment. 
Approach schools and other organisations for buy back of youth services

Key consultations 

Whatever option is taken forward, there will need t o be extensive consultation with young people and service users including groups who may be particularly affected. 

Young people, especially those from BME groups, will be disproportionately affected as well as LGBT young people and young people with special educational needs.

Key risks and mitigations 

The council will need to be mindful of the November2013 ruling by the Court of Appeal that North Somerset Council acted unlawfully when it cut its youth service budget by 72 per cent. The learning from this is that there must be adequate consultation and consideration (through equality impact assessment etc) of the needs of vulnerable users. 

Youth services are essentially part of the council’ s ‘early help’ offer and therefore contribute to preventing young people causing spending down the line through crime, anti social behaviour, social care, poor mental health etc. 

There is also potential for ‘capital clawback’ on certain buildings e.g. Roundwood Youth Centre was built with Big Lottery funding.  

The Council Equality Impact Screening lists the following groups  to have a 'disproportionate adverse impact' From the proposals:

Disabled people, particular ethnic groups, men or women, people of particular sexual orientation, people undergoing gender reassignment, particular age groups and those with particular faiths or beliefs.

The proposal go first to Cabinet on December 15th and then follow the timetable set out in the side panel