POVERTY AT THE RBKC GOLDMINE!

reservesThere was been much talk over the past few years about the high levels of financial reserves held by the RBKC and during this time the Council have frequently been accused of hoarding tax-payers money and of being “the richest borough in the universe” . However, despite these claims, on Thursday 24th November 2016 the Council suggested that they would be forced to raise Council Tax rates by 2% or face the prospect of having to cut services for vulnerable residents.

It has long been the belief of the Grenfell Action Group that RBKC are motivated to raise Council Tax for their own nefarious ends and delight in nothing more that being able to threaten the poor and vulnerable with the removal of vital services to achieve this goal. RBKC has a long history of overtaxing residents in order to create a big piggy bank for vanity projects such as Holland Park Academy, Exhibition Road, Holland Park Opera, Leighton House Museum, interest free loans to developers for projects such as the Design Museum and the purchasing of an abundance of expensive artworks to name but a few……

In this blog the Grenfell Action Group will forensically analyse the figures surrounding the total level of investments (including reserves and cash surpluses) at the disposal of RBKC and question whether our Council has legitimate reasons to raise Council Tax.

At the end of 2015 the total investments and reserves of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea amounted to £327 million (that is just under 1/3rd of a billion pounds) while, at the same time, the Council is reputed to have long-term debts it is required to service of £154 million. To the layman this would suggest that our Council (which is currently pleading poverty and threatening to remove services from the most vulnerable) actually has a balance surplus in excess of £173 million!

It is a sad fact that the RBKC manages these reserves in the most unproductive of ways and it is quite obvious that if these finances had been invested in a more competent and professional manner then there would be no need to suggest that an increase of Council Tax was necessary at all. The majority of the Reserves are kept almost entirely in low interest funds or the Debt Management Office, and the return averages just .38% . Given that inflation is now circa 2.5% it does not take a rocket scientist to work out that the Council investment strategy is actually losing tax payers money! Further analysis of the RBKC ineptitude with handling large scale investments and the cost this wreaks on local residents can be found on a recent blog posted by the Hornet’s Nest:

http://fromthehornetsnest.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/give-us-back-our-money-says-dame.html

The RBKC claims that it is the impact of Central Government cuts to local authority funding that has provoked the current suggested increase in Council Tax but in the case of the Rotten Borough, this is simply not applicable. While Central Government have been systematically cutting back the money that they have been providing to Local Authorities the RBKC has responded by making savings of their own. In fact RBKC have been so over zealous with their cut backs to vital services that they have managed to save considerably more that the reduction of revenue imposed upon them by Westminster.

While citing ‘austerity’ and ‘tough decisions’ the Council have cut back on services so much that residents are feeling the pain – particularly the most vulnerable who can least afford such cuts. Backroom staff are cut unnecessarily, and remaining staff are often over-worked, leading to a rise in sickness due to stress. Added to this, the RBKC have been coming after our most cherished institutions, Adult Social Care and Children’s services, voluntary organisations and libraries in the name of balancing the books.

And yet, most of this is simply unnecessary. Here’s why. Below you will see a table of government funding cuts to RBKC since 2010  and how the Council has managed these cuts so they are matched by savings. So, in the second column we can see that Central Government was responsible for cutting £11.6 million from it’s grant to RBKC in 2010/11. In the third column for each year is the total of UNDERSPEND across the Council for that year. So in 2010/11 the RBKC under spent it’s allocated spending reserves by a total of £9 million. The fourth column shows how much of these under spends have been moved to the Council’s Reserves to be used as a slush fund for future spending. All these figures are publicly available and have been taken from the Council’s own documentation. What is plain to see is that despite years of consecutive Government cut backs the RBKC has systematically managed to save money and move this money away from paying for front-line services and into a fund for rainy days. The ‘usable Reserves’ from which capital and other projects are funded look like this, according to the annual Statement of Accounts:

underspendsA large proportion of the Revenue underspends every year are put into the Capital Reserve, to fund major projects. However in the past six years, the difference between ‘essential’ cuts and ‘realised savings’ is a whopping £30m. That means that c£30m has been cut unnecessarily, and added to the Capital Expenditure slush fund.

Now let’s look at four years of UNDERSPENDS in essential services:
underspends-2

These cuts in services have impacted on the poor and the vulnerable in a highly disproportionate manner. For example the cuts to the Council’s budget to the Homelessness Prevention Team in 2014/15 has seen a direct decline in services offered to rough sleepers and no one will forget how RBKC blamed a lack of finances for the reason behind the closure of the much loved Maxilla Children’s Centre back in 2015.

So while the Council bleat on about austerity and the need to cut vital services let’s have a look at what Paget-Brown and his cronies consider are legitimate expenditures. Over the past few years they have decided that offering cash incentives to voters at election time and the purchase of elitist Pre-Raphaelite art, is more important than providing care for the homeless or the provision of children’s services in the North of the Borough.

So, let’s look in detail at some of these so-called PRIORITIES:

In 2010/11 (election year) £4.2m was spent on an ‘efficiency dividend’ of £50 each to all registered for Council Tax.

In 2013/14 (election year) £7.5m was spent on an ‘efficiency dividend’ of £100 each to all Council Tax PAYERS (ie not in receipt of Housing Benefit).

Other so called priority’s include lending Sir Terence Conran £2 million, interest free to fund his plans for the new Design Museum, the £28 million spent on granite imported from China for the Exhibition Road and numerous other vanity projects that do nothing but massage the self aggrandisement of those occupying positions of power in Hornton Street.

Here are some more very dubious ‘PRIORITIES’:

artworkThe Grenfell Action Group believe that the RBKC are acting in a vicious and unprincipled manner as they plan to raise Council Tax by threatening that they will have to cut services to the most vulnerable if they do not do so. The information contained in this blog clearly shows that the Council have in excess of £172 million sitting in reserve and that they have managed to increase their savings despite recent cut backs from Central Government funding. The Council have accrued over £84 million into a “slush fund” by clamping down on essential services while at the same time crying poverty.

We have to ask how much money do these charlatans need to accumulate before they stop raising taxes and cutting services to the most vulnerable. It seems that the Council’s plans are not driven by fiscal concerns but rather by a seemingly endless need to hoard our money and punish the poor.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , ,

RBKC and MIPIM: the search for the truth!

magnifying-glass-Detective-India-Chennai-Mumbai-Pune-Bangalore-Goa-Chandigarh-Dubai.jpg

The Grenfell Action Group have recently exposed the unpalatable fact that the previous and current Leader’s of RBKC and the current Cabinet Member for Housing, Property and Regeneration have been caught out attending an immoral property fair known as MIPIM:

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2016/11/13/rbkc-supping-at-the-property-developers-table/

We do not believe that any good can come of the association between the Council and MIPIM and that the interests of  the residents of North Kensington are certainly not represented at an event that seeks to carve up our communities and sell our land to the highest bidder. To get an idea of the kind of deals done between Council’s and property developers our readers may be interested to click on the following link:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/14/yacht-cannes-selling-homes-local-government-officials-mipim

A member of the Grenfell Action Group has now written to RBKC under Freedom of Information legislation to try and establish more details about the exact relationship between the Council and MIPIM. We have published this correspondence in full below:

Dear ******
I am writing to you following an email that I received from Cllr Paget Brown confirming that a number of current and ex RBKC Ruling Party Councillors attended a property developer’s fair called MIPIM.

Using the legislation contained within the Freedom of Information Act 2006 I would like RBKC to provide me with the answer to the following questions:

1, Cllr Paget Brown has confirmed that ex-Cllr Cockell attended MIPIM in 2014 but that he was not representing the Council when he did so. Using Council records please can you inform me who ex-Cllr Cockell was claiming to be representing when he attended MIPIM in 2014 and who paid for his entrance fee? Please can you inform me whether ex-Cllr Cockell recorded his visit to MIPIM in his list of Councillor interests as required to do so by Council protocol. Please can you inform me of the reason ex-Cllr Cockell gave for attending MIPIM, who he had meetings with, what was discussed at these meetings and whether he recorded the minutes of these meetings with the Council? Finally, please can you inform me whether ex-Cllr Cockell received any material benefits from his attendance at MIPIM and, if so, did he record these with the Council?

2, From information we have received from Cllr Paget Brown we have learnt that he attended a MIPIM dinner in 2015. Please can you inform me if the Leader of RBKC was attending this MIPIM dinner as a representative of the Council and who paid for his ticket (ie was his dinner paid for out of Council funds or was it paid for by a property developer)? Please can you inform me whether Cllr Paget Brown declared his attendance at this dinner in his list of Councillor interests as he is required to do so by Council protocol? Please can you inform me the reason the Leader of the Council gave for attending this dinner, who he had talks with, what matters of Council business (or private business if Cllr Paget Brown claims not to have been representing the RBKC) where discussed at the dinner, whether these discussions were later minuted and recorded with the Council? Finally, please can you inform me whether Cllr Paget Brown received any material benefits as a result of his attendance at this MIPIM dinner and, if so, did he record these with the Council?

3, Cllr Paget Brown has confirmed that the Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Housing, Property and Regeneration, Cllr Feilding Mellen, attended MIPIM in Cannes, France earlier this year. Cllr Paget Brown stated that “Cllr Feilding Mellen attended MIPIM at his own expense to explore matters of relevance to his own company”. Please can you confirm that Cllr Feilding Mellen declared his attendance at MIPIM in his list of Councillor interests as he is required to do so? As Cllr Feilding Mellen is claiming that he acting independently from the RBKC while attending MIPIM I am unsure of what information the Deputy Leader of the Council is required to disclose but I would like to request that the Council provide me with any information they hold with regards to Cllr Feilding Mellen and MIPIM?

4, In my recent correspondence with Cllr Paget Brown I requested that he inform me whether any RBKC Councillors or Officers were attending the MIPIM property fair that commenced on the 19th October and took place at Olympia in London. Cllr Paget Brown failed to answer this entirely legitimate question to my satisfaction. So, I will try again. Using Freedom of Information legislation I would like you to inform me whether any RBKC Councillors, any RBKC Officers or anyone connected to the Council attended MIPIM? If so, please can you provide me with a list of the names of attendees, inform me who paid for their entrance fee to MIPIM, what business they were involved with while attending MIPIM, who they had meetings with, what was discussed at these meetings and whether the contents of these discussions were recorded and minuted with the Council?

Thank you for your assistance with this matter and I shall look forward to hearing back from you with the information that I have requested in due course.

Kind regards,
*********

The Grenfell Action Group do not believe that the RBKC will furnish us with the information that we have requested and we fully expect that we will have to refer this matter to the Information Commissioner to get to the bottom of this sordid affair.  However, the Council can rest assured that we will keep digging until the facts behind why senior RBKC Councillors think it is okay to sup with international property developers are revealed. The likes of Cockell, Paget Brown and Feilding Mellen were elected to safeguard the interests of all residents of the RBKC and we believe that their attendance at MIPIM is a betrayal of this ethos and is nothing short of scandalous!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

RBKC, NHPS And Their Classroom Deals!

14721742_10155297263469386_3975916055017737893_n.jpg

Supporters of the North Kensington library gather at the RBKC Town Hall.

In our last blog on the subject of the disposal of our much loved North Kensington Library (entitled Smoke and Mirrors- RBKC and NHPS) published on 27th September 2016 we highlighted our belief that the top two floors of the new municipal building in Lancaster Road will be designated as classroom space and rented out to either Notting Hill Prep School or to their local rival in private education, Chepstow House.

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2016/09/27/smoke-and-mirrors-rbkc-and-nhps/

The Grenfell Action Group make it our business never to deal in rumour and everything that we blog is carefully sourced to ensure it is based entirely on authoritative information. Therefore, the assertion that we have made regarding our belief that the RBKC are using public money to provide educational space for private education comes not from mere rumour, or a will to paint the Council and the Prep school in a bad light, but from facts that we secured using the Freedom of Information Act in Feburary of this year.

The documents that we obtained at that time show very clearly that there had been private conversations between Notting Hill Prep School and RBKC dating back to September 2014 regarding the future use of the space being created above the new library and youth centre that would also include the access to a mutli-use games area. At the time we published this information in a blog entitled “What future for North Kensington Library”:

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2016/02/27/what-future-for-north-kensington-library/

The documents that we obtained using the Freedom of Information Act reveal that a private meeting was held between the Council and Notting Hill Prep School attended by senior managers at the RBKC and Mark Nelson Smith and John Mackay who were representing Notting Hill Prep School as we have shown below:

NORTH KENSINGTON LIBRARY AND YOUTH CENTRE SITE

Summary notes of meeting held at RBKC Offices on 17th September 2014

Attending: Richard Egan: Head of Investment and Development RBKC Danielle Torpey: Senior Development Surveyor RBKC Guy Parks: Project Manager, Capital Projects RBKC Freddie Murray: Asset Management, RBKC Martin Mortimer: Senior Development Surveyor RBKC John Mackay: Co Chair Notting Hill Prep School Mark Nelson Smith : Finance Director Notting Hill Prep School Caroline Armstrong : Bursar Notting Hill Prep School Andrew Hanson: Hanson Architects ( NHPS) Stephen Hodgen: Hanson Architects ( NHPS)

“NHPS confirmed that they are interested in securing additional accommodation in the existing North Kensington Library and also in the new building which is proposed to accommodate both a new Library and a replacement Youth Centre. This would be on the basis of a long term lease of circa 25 years with rent reviews on an RPI adjusted basis……….NHPS indicated that they would be prepared to enter into an Agreement to Lease for both the existing North Kensington Library building and also for the new accommodation to be developed”.

north-kensington-library-and-youth-centre-site-notes-of-meeting-with-nhps-17-september-2014-pdf

The Grenfell Action Group, therefore, find it extraordinary that when we attended a Factual Briefing concerning the plans for the proposed new library building at the Small Hall in Hornton Street on the 18th October the Council denied that they had entered into any discussions with third parties regarding the future use of the new space that will be created above the new library and youth centre.

The Project Manager at RBKC, Helen Edmondson, was asked directly on three occasions by members of the public whether there had been any talks between Notting Hill Prep School and the Council about future use of the new built space. On three occasions Ms Edmondson categorically stated to those attending the briefing that there had been no such talks and that this space would be put out to public tender.

The Grenfell Action Group believe that the notes of the meeting between Notting Hill Prep and the Council on 17th September clearly show that the Project Manager was either lying to those present at the briefing or that she had not done her homework correctly. We believe that the class room space in the new municipal centre was always intended for the Notting Hill Prep School and only became unattractive to them when they realised that they could gain access and spread their tentacles into the nearby Westway Information Centre. It is the belief of the Grenfell Action Group that the space above the library and youth centre is still destined for private educational use with Notting Hill Prep School’s rivals, Chepstow House, the most likely beneficiaries of the RBKC’s largess in providing private educational space with our public money! Only time will tell!

Posted in Uncategorized

KCTMO – Playing with fire!

fire

It is a truly terrifying thought but the Grenfell Action Group firmly believe that only a catastrophic event will expose the ineptitude and incompetence of our landlord, the  KCTMO, and bring an end to the dangerous living conditions and neglect of health and safety legislation that they inflict upon their tenants and leaseholders. We believe that the KCTMO are an evil, unprincipled, mini-mafia who have no business to be charged with the responsibility of  looking after the every day management of large scale social housing estates and that their sordid collusion with the RBKC Council is a recipe for a future major disaster.

Unfortunately, the Grenfell Action Group have reached the conclusion that only an incident that results in serious loss of life of KCTMO residents will allow the external scrutiny to occur that will shine a light on the practices that characterise the malign governance of this non-functioning organisation. We believe that the KCTMO have ensured their ongoing survival by the use of proxy votes at their Annual General Meeting that see them returned with a mandate of 98% in favour of the continuation of their inept and highly dangerous management of our homes. It is no coincidence that the 98% is the same figure that is returned by the infamous Kim Jong-un of North Korea who claims mass popularity while reputedly enslaving the general population and starving the majority of his people to death.

It is our conviction that a serious fire in a tower block or similar high density residential property is the most likely reason that those who wield power at the KCTMO will be found out and brought to justice! The Grenfell Action Group believe that the KCTMO narrowly averted a major fire disaster at Grenfell Tower in 2013 when residents experienced a period of terrifying power surges that were subsequently found to have been caused by faulty wiring. We believe that our attempts to highlight the seriousness of this event were covered up by the KCTMO with the help of the RBKC Scrutiny Committee who refused to investigate the legitimate concerns of tenants and leaseholders.

We have blogged many times on the subject of fire safety at Grenfell Tower and we believe that these investigations will become part of damning evidence of the poor safety record of the KCTMO should a fire affect any other of their properties and cause the loss of life that we are predicting:

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2013/01/28/fire-safety-scandal-at-lancaster-west/

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/more-on-fire-safety/

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2013/02/21/another-fire-safety-scandal/

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2016/01/24/grenfell-tower-still-a-fire-risk/

In October 2015 a fire ripped through another KCTMO property, the 14 storey Adair Tower in North Kensington, causing mass panic and resulting in a number of residents taken to hospital suffering from smoke inhalation. It is reported that had it not been for the swift actions of the London Fire Brigade the consequences of this fire and potential loss of life could have been much worse.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11967592/50-rescued-from-burning-flats-in-Kensington.html

In the aftermath of the Adair Tower fire the London Fire Brigade found that the KCTMO had not been looking after the safety of residents properly and issued an Enforcement Order compelling them to improve the fire safety in the escape staircases and to provide self closing devices to all the tower block’s front doors. A further audit by the London Fire Brigade of the neighbouring Hazelwood Tower (located alongside Adair Tower) found similar breaches of health and safety legislation and an Enforcement Order was also issued for this property forcing the TMO to address the serious concerns of the Fire Brigade’s inspectors. What is shocking is that a decade ago a fatality occurred due to a fire at Hazelwood Tower and the Fire Investigation Team ordered that the grills on the fire escape staircase be covered over. This never happened and it is believed that the uncovered grills at Adair House (Hazelwood Tower’s twin block) acted like a chimney and were responsible for the accelerated spread of the fire and smoke damage.

In the last twenty years and despite the terrifying power surge incident in 2013 and recent fire at Adair Tower, the residents of Grenfell Tower have received no proper fire safety instructions from the KCTMO. Residents were informed by a temporary notice stuck in the lift and one announcement in a recent regeneration newsletter that they should remain in their flats in the event of fire. There are not and never have been any instructions posted in the Grenfell Tower noticeboard or on individual floor as to how residents should act in event of a fire. Anyone who witnessed the recent tower block fire at Shepherds Court, in nearby Shepherd’s Bush, will know that the advice to remain in our properties would have led to certain fatalities and we are calling on our landlord to re-consider the advice that they have so badly circulated.

The Grenfell Action Group predict that it won’t be long before the words of this blog come back to haunt the KCTMO management and we will do everything in our power to ensure that those in authority know how long and how appallingly our landlord has ignored their responsibility to ensure the heath and safety of their tenants and leaseholders. They can’t say that they haven’t been warned!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

RBKC- Supping at the property developers table!

pigsatroughIn a recent Grenfell Action Group blog we highlighted our concerns that high ranking Councillors from RBKC have been sticking their noses into the filthy trough of property development by supping at the MIPIM table.

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2016/10/04/rbkc-snouts-in-the-mipim-trough/

For the benefit of the uninitiated MIPIM is the world’s biggest property fair, where our cities and our land are grotesquely put up for sale to the highest bidder. It takes place annually in Cannes, France and at Olympia in London, bringing together about 20,000 investors, developers, local authorities, and banks to figure out how to carve up our cities and sell off our land.

The Grenfell Action Group well understand that the companies which attend MIPIM, and the local government “representatives” who share their champagne, are responsible for the eviction of communities, the gentrification of our neighbourhoods, and the housing crisis itself. We believe that the representatives of any local authorities present at MIPIM will be seeking to sell our public land and infrastructure and that they will be approving ‘regeneration’ plans that respond to the interests of speculators: hotels, offices, luxury housing, shopping centres, etc.  Ordinary people who will be affected will know nothing of these deals until it is too late.  An example of what can be expected by delegates attending MIPIM can be found in the shocking article from The Independent newspaper (below) that clearly shows that the interests of working class communities are simply non-existent:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/mipim-housing-crisis-markets-insiders-what-they-say-london-conference-property-magnates-a7369621.html

In August 2014 the newly elected Leader of Kensington and Chelsea Council, Cllr Paget Brown was asked by the Grenfell Action Group if anyone from the RBKC organisation was attending the forthcoming MIPIM event at Olympia and, if so, what benefit they may gain by taking part in the property fair? We were informed by Cllr Paget Brown that “unfortunately I am unable to provide an accurate assessment on what people do at MIPIM as I have never personally attended” and he went on to state that “with regard to RBKC I can confirm that no members of the Housing or Property Departments are planning to attend”.

It was, therefore, very upsetting for the Grenfell Action Group to discover that Cllr Cockell (Pooter) the newly replaced Leader of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea was subsequently spotted attending MIPIM in 2014 . As the ex-Leader of the Council and still a serving Councillor it is fair to assume that Pooter still had great influence among his colleagues at RBKC and that this influence extended to both the Housing and the Property Departments at the Town Hall. We have no idea who Cllr Cockell was talking to at MIPIM in 2014 or who he was claiming to represent but we can be pretty sure that his presence at the property fair was not in the best interests of the constituents of North Kensington. Below is photographic evidence of Cllr Cockell pictured outside the entrance to MIPIM in 2014:

P1010059.JPG

When the Grenfell Action Group challenged Cllr Paget Brown in September 2016 about Pooters motives for attending MIPIM he responded by stating “Sir Merrick Cockell did not attend MIPM in 2014 as a representative of the Council. He stood down from the Council in 2015”. We believe that this response poses more questions than it answers and leaves us wondering why the ex Leader of RBKC would attend MIPIM if he was doing so on a purely personal basis? We have now written to RBKC to seek clarification about this matter and we have submitted a Freedom of Information request to ascertain who paid for Cllr Cockell’s entrance fee to MIPIM, if he was a guest of any particular company and whether he declared his attendance at MIPIM on his list of interests?

Next we come to Cllr Paget Brown himself. For a man who claimed in 2014 that he was “unable to provide an accurate assessment of what people do at MIPIM as I have never personally attended” he sure learned quickly! Fast forward to September 2016 and Cllr Paget Brown has been forced to admit that “last year (2015) I attended a MIPIM dinner in order to hear about some of the London-wide examples of estate regeneration which are underway”. So in 2014 the present Leader of RBKC claims to have no knowledge of MIPIM and a year later he is supping at their table. Again we have no evidence of what matters were discussed at the dinner Cllr Paget Brown attended but we can be fairly sure that they would have been of little benefit to those residents of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea who find themselves lined up in the sights of estate regeneration as faced by those currently living on the Silchester Estate! We shall be writing to the Council using Freedom of Information legislation to check that Cllr Paget Brown declared his attendance at this dinner and whether the cost of the dinner was paid for out of Council funds or was provided to him by a private property developer?

Finally, we turn our attention to the odious Cllr Feilding Mellen, the current Deputy Leader of RBKC, Cabinet Member for Housing, Property and Regeneration and a property developer in his own right by virtue of his involvement with a company called Socially Conscious Capital. The Grenfell Action Group do not believe that a RBKC Cabinet Member with responsibility for the regeneration of housing estates in North Kensington should also double jobbing as a property developer and when we received a tip off from the excellent Hornet’s Nest website that Cllr Feilding Mellen had been spotted attending MIPIM in Cannes earlier this year we contacted Cllr Paget Brown to find out whether there was any truth to this rumour.

We received the following tetchy and defensive response from the Leader of the Council who stated that “Cllr Feilding-Mellen is the director of a property company which has no interests in this Borough. This is properly and publicly declared on the Members’ register…….Decisions relating to the Council’s housing stock and estate regeneration are taken by the Cabinet collectively and in public. Key decisions are all subject to public scrutiny……We have a rule that no Councillor needs to travel abroad on Council businesses. Cllr Feilding-Mellen attended MIPM at his own expense to explore matters of relevance to his own company. Are you suggesting that this is irregular?”

Well, the Grenfell Action Group have no idea whether the attendance at MIPIM of Cllr Feilding Mellen was irregular or not as we have no idea who he was actually claiming to represent within the confines of MIPIM, who he had meetings with and what was discussed at these meetings. What we do know is that Cllr Feilding Mellen uses his Socially Conscious Capital website to boast that “in his spare time, Rock is a local government Councillor. He is now the Deputy Leader of the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea in London, where he is leading on some major regeneration projects” and that those he had contact with at MIPIM would have been well aware of this fact if they had taken the trouble to read his company’s freely available publicity or if Cllr Feilding Mellen had taken an opportunity to directly inform them of his position on the Council himself.

www.sociallyconsciouscapital.co.uk/our-team/

Despite Cllr Feilding Mellen’s claim that he “has worked as a property developer since 2003, giving him hands-on experience in the financing, planning, delivery, and marketing of development projects” and that “in that time Rock has managed private development projects with a combined gross development value of over £200m.” There is no evidence from Socially Conscious Capital’s financial records that there is any truth in his claim to be a successful property developer and we have to wonder if he is using his position as RBKC Cabinet Member for Housing Property and Regeneration to try and further the aims of his own private company or if he is using the pretext of Socially Conscious Capital as a cover for the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea’s ambitions to socially cleanse large swathes of North Kensington. We have written to RBKC to demand a full explanation as to his conduct in this matter and only then will be able to judge whether Cllr Feilding Mellen has acted in an “irregular manner”. In the meantime, we can simply observe that it does not look good for our Local Council representatives to be seen splashing about at MIPIM in Cannes with no accountability and no record of public transparency!

In conclusion, the Grenfell Action Group believes that MIPIM promotes an unsustainable business-as-usual approach to housing and land use that is privatised and profit-driven for the benefit the richest 1% whilst destroying our working class communities and keeping ordinary tenants and leaseholders, such as those facing regeneration on the Silchester Estate in North Kensington, in miserable uncertainty and poverty.

It is most worrying and disappointing to us that ex-Cllr Cockell, Cllr Paget Brown and Cllr Feilding Mellen have all attended this seedy property fair and that they could possibly believe that the inhabitants of North Kensington will benefit from their association with MIPIM. On the contrary, the Grenfell Action Group suspect that Local Authority Councillors that attend MIPIM are on the lookout for potential business partners and corporate interests who’ll collaborate on yet more ‘regeneration’ plans that will lead to the “social cleansing” of existing working class housing estates. We don’t want more boutique hotels, offices, luxury housing and shopping centres, we don’t want our neighbourhoods to be gentrified and entire communities evicted. We simply want honest and straightforward representatives whose objective is to provide quality affordable housing for all their constituents.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

The Royal Borough of Pure Hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy-Meter-crop-350x252.jpg

RBKC never known for straight talking!

The Grenfell Action Group are used to be kept waiting by the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea whenever we submit a Freedom of Information request and the Council behaved true to form by refusing to release the Financial Viability Assessment we requested on 23rd March 2016 concerning their plans to demolish the Silchester Estate in North Kensington.

RBKC are citing regulation 12(5)(e) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR) as their reason for not disclosing the information that we have legitimately sought claiming that doing so would infringe on the “confidentiality of commercial or industrial information”.

Despite submitting evidence to the Information Commissioner that included references to recent decisions finding in favour of issuing  disclosure notices in other London Boroughs’ and giving a robust argument in support of the public interest in favour of disclosure the RBKC have steadfastly refused to release the contents of the information that we have requested.

What makes the RBKC’s decision to withhold the Silchester Financial Viability Assessment particularly upsetting is that the Council have always claimed that they wish to act with the utmost transparency and work with the residents of Silchester Estate by allowing them to be involved with and participate in the planning  and decision making process. This clearly cannot happen when the residents of the Silchester are being denied access to the most important and influential document concerning the Council’s regeneration plans for their Estate!

We are currently waiting for the Information Commissioner to draft a Decision Notice concerning the release of the Silchester Financial Viability Assessment and when this takes place the Grenfell Action Group fully expect that the decision will be in favour of disclosure.

While we are not at all surprised by the decision of RBKC not to release the contents of the Silchester Financial Viability Assessment we are rather sickened that the same Council have the temerity to use many of the same arguments (public interest and past decisions by the Information Commissioner in favour of disclosure) in an attempt to gain access to the Financial Viability Assessment produced by property developers, Capco in relation to their regeneration plans at Earl’s Court. On 19 October the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Council passed the following motion unanimously at the Full Council Meeting in Hornton Street:

“This Council notes the announcement that CapCo is considering a significant change of housing mix and a significant increase in the density of its Earl’s Court redevelopment, which would impact on the wider masterplan for the area as reflected in the Earl’s Court and West Kensington Opportunity Area Joint Supplementary Planning Document adopted by this Council in March 2012. The Council also notes the very high level of public interest in the Earl’s Court development, as one of London’s major regeneration areas.

Such a change would require a new planning application to be considered in the normal way including:
• a policy compliant level of affordable housing and, where necessary, publication of a financial viability assessment consistent with previous decisions of the Information Commissioner on the balance between the need for commercial confidentiality as against public interest in disclosure; and
• public consultation.

In the interests of sound, open and transparent planning, the Council calls on CapCo to fully engage with the Council and local resident and business communities over any proposal to change the scale of development on the site from that already approved.”

So it seems that the hypocrisy of the RBKC knows no bounds. On the one hand the RBKC are using Environmental Information Regulations to justify the withholding of the Silchester Financial Viability Assessment while, on the other, putting pressure on CapCo to release the Earl’s Court Financial Viability Assessment “in the interests of sound, open and transparent planning”!

No wonder the residents of Silchester Estate view the Council’s claims that they wish to pursue the plans to regenerate their Estate in a transparent manner with contempt and assess that RBKC is duplicitous and has double standards and an overriding ambition of doing things “to” their community rather than “with” them. The Grenfell Action Group will update our readers with the Information Commissioners “Decision Notice” as soon as it is made and we hope very much that they will find in favour of disclosure.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , ,