Walks, words and wristbands: when Harrow’s VAWG “Day of Action” becomes a publicity exercise

Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG): Harrow Council’s latest publicity drive, branded “Harrow shows up to support end to gender-based violence,” is polished, upbeat and carefully staged. A mayoral opening, a short town-centre walk, partner speeches and safety packs create the appearance of decisive action. But read alongside our earlier article, “Harrow talks tough on violence against women – but the action still doesn’t match the message,” the contradictions are hard to ignore.
Around 60 people, apparently the majority drawn from partner organisations alongside council supporters, took part in the Walk for Women, listened to brief talks and were signposted to support services. This was presented as an “incredible show of support” and a flagship step towards a safer borough. Yet visibility is not impact. A one-off, choreographed walk does little to explain why women continue to feel unsafe in Harrow’s streets, or to change the behaviour of those responsible for harassment and abuse.
The council insists it is “showing up,” but there is little evidence of follow-through. The Safer Spaces Survey is again promoted, with claims that feedback leads to improvements such as better lighting or CCTV. Yet residents still cannot see where changes have been made, how priorities are set, or whether reported locations are safer. Without transparency, participation risks becoming performance.
Much of the council’s response focuses on reassurance rather than prevention. Safety packs, Safe Havens and short-term patrols may help at the moment, but they quietly shift responsibility back onto women to manage risk. Meanwhile, there is still no visible investment in tackling perpetrators: no behaviour-change programmes, no sustained prevention strategy, no attempt to address the roots of male violence.
The council’s pride in holding a “ninth day of action” underlines the problem. Counting events is not the same as delivering outcomes. What remains unanswered is whether fewer women are being harmed, whether repeat offenders are being stopped, and whether public spaces identified as unsafe are genuinely improving.
The presence of specialist charities along the route lends credibility, but it also exposes the imbalance. These organisations do the hard, long-term work with survivors every day, while the council amplifies its own visibility through managed events and upbeat press releases.
In the end, “Harrow shows up” feels less like progress and more like a photo opportunity. Awareness without accountability, symbolism without structure, and publicity without proof do not keep women safe. Until Harrow invests in transparent, preventative and perpetrator-focused action, its Days of Action will remain gestures that look good, sound right – and change very little.

£17.4m SEND boost for Harrow welcomed – but can troubled services deliver for children?

Harrow West MP Gareth Thomas has welcomed confirmation that Harrow will receive £17.374 million as part of Labour’s national programme to expand provision for children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND), promising new specialist places and improved local support.
The funding forms part of a multibillion-pound national investment aimed at creating around 50,000 specialist places across England. Mr Thomas said it would help deliver high-quality facilities more quickly, particularly for children with autism and ADHD, and described it as a decisive break from “years of Tory neglect”.
However, the announcement has reignited questions about whether new capital investment alone can address the deep-rooted problems in Harrow Council’s children’s services. The authority remains under a government improvement notice following Ofsted’s judgement that services were “inadequate”, citing systemic delays, weak oversight and inconsistent practice.
Leadership instability continues to dog the service. The recent departure of another Director of Children’s Services has left the council’s Managing Director temporarily holding the statutory role, reinforcing concerns that constant turnover is undermining sustained improvement.
Families continue to report long waits for Education, Health and Care Plans, poor communication and limited early help, leaving support reactive rather than preventative. High caseloads, staffing pressures and reliance on agency workers remain significant challenges, while placement shortages complicate decisions for vulnerable children.
Critics argue that without stable leadership, stronger accountability and a more child-centred culture, additional SEND funding risks being absorbed by a system still struggling to function effectively. They also question whether the council’s slogan of “putting residents first” reflects the lived experience of families navigating SEND services.
Findings from the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and recent monitoring by His Majesty’s Inspectors suggest that progress is emerging but not yet embedded, with improvements heavily dependent on new staff and developing systems.
As Harrow prepares to receive its £17.374 million allocation, the key question remains whether the funding will translate into lasting improvement for children with additional needs – or whether longstanding structural and cultural weaknesses will continue to limit its impact.

City Hall welcomes Harrow Monitoring Group’s call for more accessible planning documents and consultations

City Hall has issued a formal acknowledgment of the Harrow Monitoring Group’s recent submission to the Mayor of London, commending the organisation for its “important” and “constructive” contribution to the ongoing debate about accessible and inclusive public consultation in the planning system.
In a detailed response (MGLA121125-8307), London Plan Manager Marissa Ryan-Hernandez thanked the Group for clearly articulating the challenges faced by communities – particularly those in diverse boroughs such as Harrow – when confronted with dense and technical planning documents. She noted the Group’s Response to the Harrow Local Plan Main Modifications (2025) as a practical illustration of these issues. City Hall affirmed that the concerns raised “align with our own priorities,” emphasising that the complexity of planning materials can create significant barriers to meaningful engagement.
The response highlighted the Greater London Authority’s commitment to improving accessibility through a combination of statutory consultation, digital engagement, and targeted outreach, including the use of “Easy Read” summaries, videos, interactive tools, and co-produced materials with inclusion-focused organisations. These methods, City Hall stated, are designed to support the Mayor’s Equality, Diversity & Inclusion Strategy and help ensure that Londoners from all backgrounds are able to participate effectively.
The Harrow Monitoring Group’s recommendations – calling for clearer language, visual aids, and more inclusive engagement methods – will now be fed into internal discussions and future reviews of public participation practices. City Hall confirmed that the issues raised will be shared with relevant teams and considered in the development of forthcoming guidance on community involvement in planning.
[Hope that Harrow’s planning regime will have no difficulties in following the good practices identified by the GLA, particularly in ensuring that planning documents and consultations are understandable, accessible, and meaningful for all residents.]
City Hall’s response concludes by recognising the Group’s engagement as a valuable resource for strengthening transparency, equity, and community trust in London’s planning processes.

Much of £11bn Covid scheme fraud ‘beyond recovery’: what does that mean for Harrow?

The Covid Counter Fraud Commissioner’s revelation that nearly £11 billion of Covid-era public money has been lost to fraud and error nationally – with most of it now “beyond recovery” – should prompt serious reflection in every local authority that handled pandemic funds, including Harrow. While the borough received substantial support at the height of the crisis and worked visibly to distribute help to businesses and vulnerable residents, the new national report exposes a vacuum of clarity about what happened to vast sums of public money. Against this backdrop, Harrow’s own Covid funding footprint now demands far greater openness than is currently available.
Harrow received significant Covid-related support: close to £589,000 in Winter Grant Scheme funding, around £67 million in business grants to some 2,500 firms, another £17.3 million in council-delivered business support, and more than £16 million in external recovery funding. The borough supported thousands of households, channelled money to local charities and community groups, and launched an economic recovery strategy intended to help rebuild after the crisis. These efforts were visible and, at the time, widely welcomed.
Yet the national picture – billions lost, weak oversight, and major gaps in data quality – raises unavoidable questions about how well local systems everywhere, including Harrow, functioned under pressure. The issue is not about accusing the borough of mismanagement; it is about recognising that the sheer scale of the Government’s pandemic spending, much of it rolled out through councils at speed, means the public is entitled to know precisely how local programmes performed. At present, residents simply cannot see a clear, itemised account of how much was reclaimed, how much was written off, and how much ultimately achieved the outcomes claimed for it.
One compelling reason Harrow is especially well-placed to provide that clarity is that the senior manager who oversaw key elements of the Covid-era response remains in a senior position at the council today. This continuity of leadership offers the borough a rare opportunity: firsthand institutional memory, deep knowledge of what was done and why, and the ability to lead a thorough, credible retrospective review without relying on incomplete records or faded recollection. If any authority can reflect meaningfully on the quality, impact and value of its Covid spending, it is one where those who led at the time are still present to account for the decisions made.
The lack of detailed, retrospective reporting from Harrow does not imply impropriety – but it does leave a transparency gap that should now be closed. If the borough’s processes were robust, a full, public breakdown would strengthen trust. If challenges emerged, residents deserve to understand what they were and how they will be addressed in future emergency spending. In a national context where billions have evaporated into unrecoverable losses, reassurance cannot rest on silence or assumptions.
Harrow’s Covid response undoubtedly provided essential support to thousands of people at a time of crisis. But good intentions do not replace clear accounting. The Government’s own findings show that extraordinary spending brings extraordinary risks – and that without transparent follow-up, the public cannot properly judge whether the system did what it was meant to do. With the national scandal now laid bare, the burden shifts to local authorities, including Harrow, to demonstrate that their handling of public money stands up to scrutiny. Residents have every right to ask for that clarity – and every reason to expect it. 

Arise makes its mark: Harrow’s new political party launches energised first canvass in Marlborough Ward

Arise, Harrow’s newest political force, burst onto the local scene on 7 December 2025 with its first canvassing session in Marlborough ward, the seat currently held by the Labour opposition leader on Harrow Council. The party, founded on 27 August and launched in Harrow with the support of Jeremy Corbyn MP, is led by former councillor, parliamentary candidate, and Peace and Justice Project director Pamela Fitzpatrick.
Ms Fitzpatrick, who is standing as Arise’s lead candidate in Marlborough, told residents that the party’s determination would not be dampened by weather or political pressure. “We’ll be out whether it’s raining or sunny because Harrow deserves better than what we’ve got. Whether it’s Labour or Conservative in council or in government, we have the same thing: people are struggling in Harrow, and they need change,” she said, as volunteers took to the streets for the party’s debut community outreach.
Joining Ms Fitzpatrick on the Marlborough slate are Sheila Guhadsan and Asha Mohamed, both long-standing community activists whose local engagement forms part of the party’s claim to offer a fresh, grounded alternative to traditional politics.
Arise’s introductory leaflet describes the group as an exciting new movement created by residents who feel that Harrow has been neglected for too long. While several candidates bring political experience, the party emphasises that its strength lies in those who are already embedded in neighbourhood initiatives, volunteering and organising to deliver practical support.
Arise’s early vision for Harrow sets out a bold local agenda, including new community spaces, free council-provided home care, publicly owned and operated care homes, and a civic centre restored to the heart of the borough. The party also pledges to address the persistent lack of support for children with special educational needs and to convert empty flats into council housing. With its first canvass complete and its message beginning to resonate, Arise has signalled that it intends to be a serious contender in next year’s council elections.

Harrow’s apparent rightward shift leaves vulnerable children exposed as poverty crisis deepens

The government’s new child poverty strategy risks having limited impact in Harrow, where rising child poverty, increasing numbers of children living in B&Bs and mounting failures across children’s services continue to place vulnerable families at risk. The borough’s recent political direction – giving an ever-stronger sense of a council shifting to the right with inadequate focus on inclusion – has only deepened concerns among those working with local families.
Ministers have pledged to stop children growing up in B&Bs, expand childcare support for families on Universal Credit, and introduce a new legal duty requiring councils to notify schools, health visitors and GPs whenever a child is placed in temporary accommodation, in an effort to create a more “joined up” system of support.
In Harrow, child poverty has risen sharply in recent years and frontline services are described by professionals as “stretched to breaking point”. The borough continues to rely heavily on emergency B&B accommodation because of a lack of suitable housing, leaving children for months in cramped, unsafe rooms despite the legal six-week limit.
Harrow schools say the consequences are now routine. Children arrive tired, anxious and unable to concentrate, while families placed suddenly in temporary accommodation often disappear from GP lists and health visitor caseloads because local services are not automatically notified. The government’s new requirement aims to close this gap, but professionals argue it will only work if Harrow’s children’s services – repeatedly criticised for delays, staffing shortages and missed opportunities to intervene – are properly strengthened.
Child poverty in Harrow remains among the highest in outer London, driven by soaring rents, frozen housing benefits and rising living costs. Although charities welcomed reforms such as ending the two-child cap, they warn the strategy falls far short of what is needed to move families into stable, permanent homes. Shelter said ministers must “get children out of temporary accommodation and into permanent homes”, while the Health Foundation urged the government to go further in tackling the structural drivers of poverty.
Locally, there is growing alarm that without urgent action, more Harrow children will remain stuck in unsafe B&B rooms, unsupported by overstretched services and exposed to the long-term harm associated with poverty and housing insecurity. Many say the real test of the government’s promises will be whether conditions for these children improve within months – not years – and whether the pledges made in Westminster translate into meaningful, visible change for families in Harrow now.

Harrow talks tough on violence against women – but the action still doesn’t match the message

[This article is written with reference to the Harrow Council website’s information titled Harrow speaks up about Violence Against Women and Girls]

Harrow Council’s recent work on violence against women and girls shows good intentions, but the substance remains thin and the impact hard to see. Its most concrete achievement is commissioning Cranstoun to deliver specialist domestic abuse support, giving survivors access to advocacy, refuge and practical help.
The council has also engaged residents through its Safer Spaces Survey, inviting women and girls to pinpoint unsafe areas, and claims to act on this through targeted “Days and Nights of Action.” Annual campaigns such as White Ribbon Day, the Walk for Women and messaging on online misogyny further signal a willingness to speak publicly and promote awareness.
Yet the limits of Harrow’s approach are stark. The Safer Spaces Survey has reached only a tiny portion of residents, producing too little data to drive real change. More seriously, there is no clear evidence that unsafe locations are being systematically improved. Those who report dark walkways or intimidating hotspots have no way of knowing whether anything beyond occasional patrols is happening. This raises the question whether community input is genuinely acted on or simply collected for show.
A deeper flaw is Harrow’s reliance on reactive responses. Supporting survivors is vital, but the borough offers almost nothing that targets perpetrators – no behaviour-change programmes, no community interventions, no serious prevention strategy. While neighbouring boroughs address the roots of male violence, Harrow leans heavily on symbolic actions: walks, awareness campaigns and online messaging. Useful for visibility, they are not structural responses and do little to shift the conditions that allow violence and harassment to continue.
Transparency is also missing. The council publishes crime statistics, but not outcomes. Residents cannot see whether survivors are safer long-term, whether reoffending is falling, or whether public-space initiatives make a measurable difference. Without this, the strategy is impossible to judge. Underreporting further clouds the picture; Harrow’s low figures may reflect silence rather than safety, especially without proactive outreach to build trust among marginalised or migrant communities.
The result is a strategy that looks active but lacks depth. Harrow talks about “speaking up,” yet its practical measures fall short of what is needed to reduce violence in any enduring way. Compared with boroughs that run multi-agency strategies, perpetrator programmes and long-term prevention work, Harrow’s approach feels piecemeal and under-ambitious.
If the borough is serious about protecting women and girls, it must move beyond symbolic gestures and invest in structural change: long-term prevention funding, targeted perpetrator interventions, safer public-space design and full transparency about what works. Until then, Harrow risks mistaking activity for progress.

Is Harrow really ‘putting residents first’ – or just leaving vulnerable children behind?

The administration-designed Harrow Council slogan, “putting residents first,” sits increasingly uneasily alongside the persistent problems in its children’s services. The departure of yet another Director of Children’s Services – requiring the Managing Director to assume the statutory role on an interim basis – underscores ongoing instability at a time when the service remains under a government improvement notice.
This disruption follows Ofsted’s “inadequate” judgement, which highlighted widespread delays, inconsistent oversight, and structural failings long raised by families. Despite previous redesign efforts, Harrow continues to experience lengthy waits for Education, Health and Care Plans, communication challenges, and gaps in early-help provision that leave services reactive rather than preventative. High caseloads and reliance on agency staff further strain frontline capacity.
These operational weaknesses have sharpened political scrutiny. Critics question whether the Cabinet has exercised sufficiently robust oversight throughout years of underperformance, arguing that continual turnover in senior leadership has overshadowed the need for consistent political direction and a genuinely child-centred strategy.
More broadly, some residents fear the administration’s vote-chasing priorities have diverted attention and resources away from children’s social care, SEND support and early help. They also point to what they see as deflections from how thinly vulnerability is cared for, noting that symbolic or nationalistic gestures – as well as repeated political attacks on London Mayor Sadiq Khan – are often foregrounded while core safeguarding duties remain under pressure. This, they argue, only sharpens the dissonance between the council’s slogan and Harrow’s historic motto, Salus populi suprema lex – “the well-being of the people is the highest law.”
Concerns about systemic shortcomings have been reinforced both by findings from the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and by recent monitoring from His Majesty’s Inspectors, whose cautiously optimistic assessments suggest that progress is emerging rather than embedded, with stability still heavily reliant on new staff and evolving systems.
Structural pressures also continue to affect the Independent Reviewing Officer function, where placement shortages, commissioning constraints and high caseloads can slow responses and result in disruptive moves for children.
Taken together, these issues point to deep-rooted structural and cultural challenges that require stable leadership, sustained investment in early help, stronger accountability and a more compassionate ethos. Until such changes take hold, many will continue to question whether Harrow is truly “putting residents first” – or leaving its most vulnerable children behind.

From ULEZ to police stations: Harrow Tories revive costly anti-Khan warfare

Harrow Council’s 27 November meeting became the latest stage for a familiar political drama, as the borough’s Conservatives once again used local issues to fuel an anti–Sadiq Khan campaign – likely under growing pressure from Reform UK. During debate on their motion opposing the closure of Pinner Police Station’s volunteer-run front desk, Tory leader Cllr Paul Osborn confirmed that Harrow is preparing legal action against the Mayor of London.
On the surface, this legal threat is framed as a defence of residents’ access to policing. But to many, it looked like a rerun of an old script. Harrow residents remember the failed Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) challenge, when the council joined four other Conservative authorities in a court battle widely dismissed as political theatre. That case collapsed in the High Court at public expense – and now another taxpayer-funded confrontation looms, aimed at the same political target and carrying the same undertones.
The influence of hardline anti-Khan figures within the local Conservative group remains unmistakable: headline first, evidence later. The Pinner Police Station dispute has simply provided a fresh opportunity to reignite that antagonism under the guise of defending local services.
At the same meeting, Labour tabled a motion condemning national Conservative and Reform UK figures for suggesting the deportation of legally settled migrants. In one of London’s most diverse boroughs, such rhetoric cuts directly into residents’ sense of security and belonging. Seen alongside the Conservatives’ motion, a wider pattern emerges. Harrow Tories are increasingly adopting the themes dominating their national party’s struggle with Reform UK  – anti-Khan posturing, populist “law and order” messaging, nationalist language and gestures, and escalating talk on immigration. Reform UK’s recent leaflet in Harrow has added further pressure to tack rightward. Meanwhile, new polling from The London Economic suggests the Conservatives could be reduced to just 14 seats in a general election, making their scramble for relevance even more visible.
None of this denies genuine concerns about police accessibility. Residents deserve serious engagement on how front-desk closures will affect vulnerable people. But instead of leading that discussion, the Conservatives group appears intent on replaying the ULEZ saga – another legal stunt with little prospect of delivering results. The question is no longer whether Harrow needs accessible policing, but whether these legal threats are truly about community safety or simply another act in ongoing Tory–Reform political theatre.
Harrow risks becoming collateral in a much larger feud. As Conservatives race rightwards and revive their anti-Khan crusade, residents are left with theatrics instead of solutions. They deserve leadership grounded in their needs – not recycled campaign scripts aimed at scoring points against City Hall.

Harrow Conservatives drift right as Reform looms

The two motions before Harrow Council on 27 November may appear unrelated – the Conservative motion attacking Sadiq Khan over the closure of Pinner Police Station’s volunteer-run front desk, and Labour’s motion condemning national suggestions of deporting legally settled migrants – but together they expose a clear political trend.
Harrow’s Conservatives are increasingly echoing the right-wing themes shaping their national party’s battle with Reform UK. That shift comes as the Conservatives face existential peril nationally: new polling reported by The London Economic suggests the party could be reduced to just 14 seats if a general election were held now.
The police-station motion, though framed as concern for volunteers, leans heavily on familiar anti-Khan and “law and order” narratives defining both Conservative and Reform campaigning. Its tone mirrors the nationalistic rhetoric in Reform UK’s recent leaflet in Harrow, which has intensified pressure on local Conservatives to tack rightward.
Labour’s motion underscores why this matters. When senior Conservative and Reform figures entertain deporting legally settled migrants, it sends shockwaves through communities in one of London’s most diverse boroughs. Local reassurance becomes necessary because national politics has grown so extreme.
Taken together, the motions reveal a Conservative group increasingly shaped by defections to Reform, by far-right populist themes, and by anxiety ahead of next year’s council elections. Instead of leading, Harrow Conservatives appear intent on shadowing Reform for political gain.
Harrow deserves better than a race to the right. Local politics should reflect the needs of residents – not the talking points of a party drifting further down the ideological fringe.