‘For a quarter of a decade, RBKC’s Planning and Place division pursued enforcement action against me over a timber screen on my property. Their own files – and later the Planning Inspectorate – confirmed it was approved. Not once. Three times. In 2019, 2022, and 2023, they signed off. Then, in January 2024, they ordered me to tear it down. You do not need a planning degree to read your own files. You just need to read them.

The Inspector said the notice should never have been issued. The Council says they now “accept the decision” of the Inspector and will now close the file. But they do not apologise. They do not admit they were wrong. The Inspector found the breach never existed. You cannot have a different interpretation of something that was never there.

Even a week before the Inspector ruled, a senior planning officer sent an email – accidentally copied to me – insisting his concerns over the screen had been “proved correct.” The email was addressed to the Director of Planning and Place. She said nothing. That email is a window into how the Council thinks: certain they are right, even when they are wrong.

The Council’s mistake cost me nearly £10,000. Do you know what I could have bought with that money? A wheelchair for my father. He has dementia. He cannot walk. That money could have given him dignity, mobility, a bit of freedom. Instead, it went to lawyers, architects and planning consultants – defending my home against a notice the Council should never have issued. The Council sees a file to close. I see my father’s mobility taken away from him.

When I asked for disclosure under FOI, they refused. The ICO forced them. They sent me my own emails. No internal records. No notes. Just my words, returned. I am starting to think there were no files. Just “vibes”.

The Council signs off every email with “Our Values – Putting Communities First, Respect, Integrity, Working Together.” Let me translate. Putting Communities First? They chased me for years over a screen they had already approved. Respect? They refused to apologise. Integrity? They sent me my own emails as “disclosure.” Working Together? They refused every meeting. Those four values are not a promise. They are a punchline.

If the Council can spend so long chasing a screen that their own files showed was approved three times, what else are they getting wrong? A screen is simple. Planning is hard. But if you cannot get the simple things right, you should not get to be trusted with the hard things.

The Council has a choice. Admit they were wrong. Reimburse my costs. Or keep stonewalling. One choice shows accountability. The other shows they have learned nothing. I am ready to talk. The only question is whether they are ready to listen – to be honest with themselves, and with the residents of Kensington and Chelsea.’

© Dr Michael Young

A spokesperson for Kensington and Chelsea Council said: “We investigated reports of an unauthorised timber screen and served an enforcement notice after determining the structure breached Local Plan policy. Following an appeal, the Planning Inspectorate reached a different conclusion. The Council accepts the decision and the enforcement case will now be closed.”

In a humiliating defeat for RBKC, the Planning Inspectorate threw out the council’s enforcement case against Dr Michael Young and quashed the legal notice ordering him to tear the structure down.

The extraordinary ruling centred on a timber privacy screen on the roof terrace of Dr Young’s home in Victoria Gardens, Notting Hill. RBKC officers insisted the screen was unlawful and spent years demanding it be removed.

The wooden terrace structure

But when the case finally reached a government planning inspector, the council’s entire argument collapsed. The inspector found the timber screen had already been shown on approved planning drawings that had been signed off by RBKC in 2019, 2022 and 2023.

In the most devastating line of the ruling, Inspector J Whitfield concluded: “the alleged breach of planning control… does not constitute a breach of planning control.” In simple terms: the council tried to prosecute a planning breach that did not exist.

Dr Young told The Citizen: “This was never a grey area. The council simply failed to read its own planning permissions properly. They pursued me for two-and-a-half years on a false basis. They were wrong from day one.”

Dr Michael Young ©Photo: Michael Young

The case is potentially a major embarrassment for RBKC because an internal council email seen by The Citizen suggests that planning officers had disliked the roof terrace arrangement from the beginning.

In one message, an officer warned the terrace could lead to “unsightly rooftop structures”. Yet despite those concerns, RBKC still issued planning permissions with drawings showing the timber screening and trellis features that were later targeted by enforcement officers.

The affair raises serious questions over whether different parts of the council were even reading from the same script. Planning officers are separate from councillors sitting on planning committees — but once permissions are formally granted and approved drawings signed off, they become legally binding documents.

The inspector found those approved drawings clearly showed the screen. RBKC nevertheless pressed ahead with enforcement action.

Dr Young says the battle cost him nearly £10,000 in legal, planning and architectural fees — money the council has refused to repay. The controversy has also spread far beyond the original planning row.

Dr Young alleges RBKC repeatedly failed to comply with Freedom of Information and Data Subject Access Request deadlines during his attempts to obtain internal documents about the case.

Correspondence seen by The Citizen shows he complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office after delays by the authority.

He claims one council response was dated 24th April but was not actually sent until four days later — after intervention by the ICO. Dr Young also says his formal complaints to the council have gone unanswered. The row even drew in local MP Joe Powell, who is understood to have written repeatedly to RBKC seeking intervention.

The council’s handling of the affair now raises uncomfortable questions:

Why did RBKC pursue enforcement for years against something already shown on approved plans? How much taxpayer money was spent? Did legal officers ever review the permissions properly? And has anybody inside the council been held accountable?

Dr Young told The Citizen: “How can any resident trust the council’s planning decisions when they cannot even read their own approvals? If they got this wrong for two-and-a-half years, what else are they getting wrong?”

A spokesperson for Kensington and Chelsea Council said: “We investigated reports of an unauthorised timber screen and served an enforcement notice after determining the structure breached Local Plan policy. Following an appeal, the Planning Inspectorate reached a different conclusion. The Council accepts the decision and the enforcement case will now be closed.”

Voice of the Citizen: Read Dr Young’s blistering retort to the Council’s statement

‘The Council’s mistake cost me nearly £10,000. Do you know what I could have bought with that money? A wheelchair for my father. He has dementia. He cannot walk. That money could have given him dignity, mobility, a bit of freedom. Instead, it went to lawyers, architects and planning consultants. The Council sees a file to close. I see my father’s mobility taken away from him.’

©Photos: Rob McGibbon/The Chelsea Citizen

Those three simply words rang out as Ciara Ryan launched the Justice for Jack Ryan campaign during an emotional interview on Good Morning Britain today.

Speaking to presenters Susanna Reid and Ed Balls, Ryan outlined the campaign’s twin aims: to secure killer Rashid Ali’s extradition from Pakistan and to reform the Bail Act to ensure defendants facing serious charges are not able to leave the UK before a trial.   

“What we’re aiming to do with this campaign is to make it mandatory for passports to be surrendered in serious criminal cases, such as the case of my brother,” Ryan declared.

The campaign, which is being run in partnership with The Chelsea Citizen, comes more than five years after Jack was killed on 13th January 2021 at the junction of Cheyne Walk and Battersea Bridge.

As he crossed the bridge at around 6pm that evening, Jack was hit by a black Range Rover driven at speed by Ali. Police later proved that Ali was driving south down Beaufort Street and had accelerated as the traffic lights switched to amber. He drove over the crossroads and hit Jack at a speed estimated at 40mph in a 20mph zone.

Jack’s death prompted an outpouring of grief and a large flower memorial appeared on the bridge near where he died. It also sparked a petition and a road safety campaign led by The Citizen’s editor Rob McGibbon.

Andy Byford, the then Commissioner of Transport for London, reacted to the campaign by instigating a review of safety at the junction. Ultimately, TFL installed  Green Man pedestrian crossings across all four arms of the junction. Before the accident, there were none.

Ali was convicted at the Old Bailey in September 2024 of causing death by dangerous driving and sentenced to five-and-a-half years in prison. However, he had fled the UK before his trial and remains in his native Pakistan. At the time of the accident he had been living in Britain on a student visa.

Before the interview on Good Morning Britain, a video of Rashid Ali talking to reporter Matt Shea on last week’s Channel 4’s Dispatches documentary was shown. This proved that Ali is living a carefree life abroad. Susanna Reid then asked Ryan for her reaction to the footage.  

“It’s painful, but it’s also quite surreal, to be honest,” she said. “I can only describe it as a living nightmare for the past five years, and I think seeing something like that just adds to the sense of this not being real.”

Ryan said one of the greatest shocks for the family came when they discovered Ali had left the UK before standing trial.

Reid told viewers she had been unaware that a defendant facing serious charges could retain their passport and travel abroad. Turning to Ryan, Reid asked: “Did you have any idea that a defendant, once charged, who was from abroad, could still hang on to their passport and travel? Because I have to admit, until I found out about your story, I didn’t know that.”

Ryan said her family had shared the same assumption. “We assumed that he would not be able to leave the UK, especially in a case that someone’s life has been lost,” she said. “I was naive in thinking that he would not have the freedom to travel outside of the UK whilst he was waiting for his trial.”

Ryan also dismissed Ali’s explanation to Shea that he had returned to Pakistan because he was ‘terminally ill’. “In the documentary, you also see that he’s travelling quite freely outside of the UK as well,” she said. “He’s going on holidays and things like that.”

The Justice for Jack Ryan campaign is calling for changes to the Bail Act that would make the surrender of passports mandatory for anyone facing charges that warrant a custodial sentence.

During the interview, Ryan said that her family had spent years attempting to raise the issue with government ministers, but had got nowhere. “We have throughout the past five years written to local MPs. We have had it passed on to the Home Secretary, but the response is very much that it’s being dealt with by the independent judiciary – the Crown Prosecution Service,” she said.

Balls questioned why ministers had not yet met with the family to discuss the proposed reforms.

“I think the individual case is being handled independently of ministers,” he said. “But the policy you’re talking about here, that the seizing of the passport should be mandatory, that’s not an individual case, that is a policy rule, that is for ministers.

“You should have a meeting with a Justice Minister, explain the wider campaign and see what they say.”

Reid also reflected on the impact the case has had on Jack’s family.

“That’s devastating,” she said. “You’re dealing with the grief, you think the person responsible is going to finally be held accountable. And not only do you find he’s not there to be in court, but he hasn’t been in the country for a number of months.”

Reflecting on the campaign’s aims, Ryan stressed that her motivation was not revenge.

“It’s not about retribution, it’s about someone doing the morally right thing,” she said.

The Justice for Jack Ryan campaign will now seek heavyweight political support within Parliament to change the law, as well as backing from the government of Pakistan to establish what needs to be done for extradition proceedings to begin, so that Ali can be brought before the UK courts. 

Mr Moffat has created an investment document in an attempt to attract investors to back him with a promised return of nearly SEVEN times over five years. It is thought that he is looking to raise as much as £35m – and wants the investment by 10th June.

The Citizen has gained exclusive access to the new prospectus, which has been drafted under a new company owned by Mr Moffat and his wife Charlotte called River Living London (RLL). The document lays out its grand plans to make a fortune by bringing in 20 new mega “vessels” to rent for more than £180,000 per year. 

Controversial former CYBC owner Andrew Moffat          ©Rob McGibbon/TCC

These 20 would be in addition to the seven big boats Mr Moffat had already installed during his tenure as the owner of the Chelsea Yacht & Boat Company (CYBC) – a business that is still trading and controls the historic and much-loved Chelsea Reach marina on Cheyne Walk.

For several years, the existing mega boats have generated a huge backlash from locals and a planning clash with RBKC council. The exuberant new pitch does not explain what would happen to the current houseboat owners to make space for so many new super boats. 

The scheme and its profit projections have been dismissed by experts with knowledge of the Chelsea houseboat business as a “work of pure fiction” and locals are furious that Mr Moffat is determined to remain in control of the houseboats, despite administrators FRP Advisory being dramatically called in on 3rd November last year.

“This new plan is breathtakingly brazen and is in total fantasy land,” one insider told The Citizen. “He is basically trying to shed all the debts he racked up during a nightmare ten years, so he can start all over again. And he is telling investors that he and his team, are the ones who can make it work. The man is not taking any responsibility for what has happened during the past number of years. It is all quite ridiculous.

“This is like a captain who sailed his tanker onto the rocks, asking people to buy him another boat, so he can get straight back on the water. If it wasn’t all so serious, it would be funny. Let’s pray that the administrator and the PLA (Port of London Authority) sees through it.”

Chelsea Reach ©Rob McGibbon/TCC

One long-term houseboat residents seethed: “Mr Moffat and some of his team has made life hell for us and yet he thinks it’s all fine for him to do it all over again, as if nothing had ever happened. We are spitting frogs. If he gets the chance, he will cause even more damage to our community. Surely it’s not possible that he can be given another chance?”

Ben Coleman MP, who has supported the houseboats residents in the past, said: “I’m amazed at the cheek. Just as the houseboat owners were beginning to breathe again, their former predatory landlord pops up like a bad penny. I’ll do all I can to ensure this doesn’t lead to further misery for Chelsea’s iconic houseboat community. ”

Mr Moffat’s extraordinary move comes as administrators FRP are still working to untangle the collapse of a number of companies owned by him and Mrs Moffat. 

Controversial former CYBC owners Andrew and Charlotte Moffat

Up to 32 investors were left high and dry despite the Chelsea-based couple’s promises to turn Chelsea Reach and Cadogan Pier into high-end residential marinas.

List of investors at risk from the previous houseboats venture

Now Mr Moffat is hoping to get new backing so he can run the same business all over again. It is clearly – and cynically – stated in the RLL document that one of the drivers for the next strategy is that the administrators FRP are ready to sell off both marinas cheaply – with all the previous debts wiped off the slate.  

In the opening line of his “pitch” for cash, it says that there is an opportunity to “acquire two prime Chelsea marinas at a substantial discount because the administrators are selling them purely as car parks for boats”. 

The “car parks” being referenced are the 57 moorings at Chelsea Reach and 35 at Cadogan Pier. The Citizen understands that Cadogan Pier is not currently permitted to have new houseboats under existing RBKC planning rules, or its PLA licence, which begs the question how future moorings can be part of a new business plan.

The prospectus goes on to boast that RLL has “10+ years of Chelsea marine experience” and that it will spend the first three years “stabilising the business” before “returning it to growth” in Year Four.   

The ten years of “marine experience” the document refers to represent a turbulent and devastating decade for the owners of houseboats at Chelsea Reach. Many accused CYBC and a small number of its on-site staff of creating a “poisonous environment” through sharp-elbowed practices.

Residents saw rents and moorings rates increased at extortionate levels and many long-term residents were evicted, or forced out when their licences were not renewed. Mr and Mrs Moffat also caused widespread dismay when the “mega” boats they brought in for the rental market entirely changed the cosmetic character of one stretch of Chelsea Reach. 

The workings of CYBC also put RBKC planning officers and lead members squarely in the frame for criticism after a new lease for Old Ferry Wharf was granted to Mr and Mrs Moffat in 2022, despite widespread concerns that the rights of houseboats owners were not being respected. This lease came with a special “letter of condition” that has never been released publicly.

Since the administration process began, Mr and Mrs Moffat put their London home – an impressive end of terrace mansion on one of the capital’s most famous streets – up for sale for £15.5m. The Citizen is not aware that a sale has gone through. 

The Citizen is contacting Andrew Moffat, FRP Advisory, RBKC and the PLA for comment.

Cadogan Pier houseboats           ©Rob McGibbon/TCC

©Rob McGibbon/TCC

Madam Mayor,

Can I just say… welcome to your new role.

It is fantastic to see such an esteemed and popular colleague in the chair, and you look resplendent in your…

…to borrow an American term…

…new threads…

And to fellow councillors across the chamber.

Welcome.

To those that are new…

Don’t worry.

I know how it feels.

…it’s like starting at a new school

…you might be worried about the teacher asking you to speak in front of the class.

…you might be worried about the homework you will be set.

But, on your first day…

… if you can figure out where to sit

…make some friends

…know your enemies…

You should just about get through…

Madam Mayor

It is the start of a new term.

Let me start by saying how wonderful it is to be stood here again.

Third time. But not by luck.

To be returned as leader of this council is not something I take lightly.

It is not a title.

It is not a prize.

It is a responsibility

And one that I accept with humility, with energy, and with a very clear understanding of what the people of Kensington and Chelsea are asking of us.

So let me start where I always believe we should start. With a thank you.

To every resident who cast their vote in this election – whether you voted Conservative, whether you voted for another party, or whether you came to the polls uncertain and hoping to be convinced – thank you.

You engaged.

You participated.

And in doing so, you reminded us that local democracy matters, that what happens in this chamber matters.

To those who did vote Conservative — thank you for your confidence.

We know it must be earned, every single day, through the decisions we make and the service we deliver.

So what did residents tell us at this election?

They told us something important.

Something that, if we are honest, politics sometimes forgets.

They did not come to the doorstep asking for grand visions or headline-grabbing announcements.

They came with the things that matter in daily life.

They came asking: is my street clean?

Are the parks looked after?

Is my bin collected?

Is the council there when I need it — and does it actually sort things out?
Madam Mayor

They want the basics done brilliantly.

And that is exactly what we will do.

Our manifesto made clear promises rooted in that exact same principles.

Cleaner streets.

Better maintained public spaces.

Faster, more responsive services.

A council that spends public money carefully and wisely.

A housing service that treats people with dignity and gets repairs done properly, first time.

These are not small things.

Done well, day after day, they are the entire foundation of what a good local authority looks like.

We will not be distracted by noise.

We will not be drawn into the kind of politics that prioritises announcement over delivery.

Kensington and Chelsea does not need to reinvent itself.

It needs to be excellent at what it does – and under my leadership, it will be.

I am proud of the team around me.

I am proud of the officers of this council, who serve residents with professionalism and dedication regardless of who sits in the leader’s chair.

And I am proud of every Conservative councillor who knocked on doors, listened to residents, and stood on a platform of practical, caring, competent local government.

But I want to take a moment now, and I hope you will forgive me if this becomes a little personal, to speak about someone who will not be sitting beside me in this new administration.

After nearly a decade as Deputy Leader of this council, Councillor Kim Taylor-Smith has decided to step back.

And I want this chamber, and everyone watching, to understand what that means.

Not procedurally.

Not structurally.

But what it means.

Kim took on the housing brief in 2017.

He did so in the immediate aftermath of the Grenfell Tower fire…

…the most devastating and heartbreaking event in this borough’s history.

There is no way to describe adequately what it asked of him.

To sit with families who had lost everything.

To navigate the grief, the anger, the trauma – not at arm’s length, not through briefing notes, but face to face, week after week, year after year.

To make decisions about housing and community in the shadow of such tragedy, knowing that every decision carried a weight that most of us in public life will never fully understand.

He did it because he cared.

Not because he was asked to build a career from it.

Not because it suited a particular ambition or profile.

But because there were people who needed someone to show up – and he showed up.

He didn’t get it right every time, and he would never suggest he did.

But he did give the role everything he had.

Every single time.

Kim is not a politician.

And I mean that as the highest compliment I know how to give.

He never sought the limelight.

He was never interested in how something would play, how it would be covered, or what it would do for his standing.

He just asked: what is the right thing to do, and how do we do it?

And then he got on with it.

Quietly, consistently, without fanfare.

In an age when politics too often attracts people who are focused on their own progression…

…Kim is proof that the most important work is usually done by the people who never once thought about themselves while they were doing it.

He achieved so much precisely because he was simply himself.

A decent, warm, principled human being who cared about people.

And now I want to say something that goes beyond the professional.

Kim has been my deputy.

But more than that, he has been my friend.

My anchor, in moments when I have needed one.

He has a quality that I think is rarer than any political skill…

…he always knew.

He always knew when something was weighing on me, when the pressure was building, when I needed someone to say the right thing at exactly the right moment.

And he always found a way to do it.

Not with grand gestures.

Not with long conversations (most of the time…)

Just with his presence, his positivity, and the particular kindness that is entirely and unmistakably his own.

I will miss his guidance more than I can say.

I will miss his instinct, his humour, and his steadiness.

The chair beside mine will feel different.

This council will feel different.

And I want him to know — truly know — how grateful I am.

Not just on behalf of this chamber, not just on behalf of the residents he served so faithfully, but personally.

As his friend.

Kim, thank you.

For your work on Grenfell.

For your work on housing.

For nine years of doing this the right way…

…and for every quiet moment when you knew exactly what I needed.

Madame Mayor

Kensington and Chelsea is a remarkable place.

It is diverse, creative, challenging, and proud.

Its residents deserve a council that matches their ambitions — not with rhetoric, but with results.

We got the basics right before.

We will get them right again.

I am honoured to lead this team and this council.

And we intend to make it count.

Thank you.

All photos ©Rob McGibbon |The Chelsea Citizen

To the Town Hall in Hornton Street. A building possessing all the reassuring charm of an East German embassy crossed with a 1970s insurance headquarters. Designed by the late Sir Basil Spence in the full flush of Brutalist confidence, it rises over Kensington like a red-brick battleship that accidentally docked in one of the richest postcodes on Earth.

It was a sweltering evening in W8 but inside the cavernous council chamber there prevailed the cool hush of refrigerated privilege. 

The air-conditioning purred away like the former municipal Bentley while councillors — tails up after the local election results — milled in cheerful little knots exchanging gossip, handshakes and the sort of booming bonhomie that flourishes whenever one’s seat has just been safely retained.

Friends, relations and assorted civic hangers-on occupied rows of gilt-backed chairs that looked as though they may have been borrowed from a Kensington wedding venue midway through canapé service.

Outgoing…

Greetings over, councillors eased well-turned-out backsides into the chamber’s leather chairs behind a vast horseshoe of leather-topped desks, each furnished with its own microphone and enough buttons to launch a NASA moon shot.

But this was no space mission. Kensington’s civic grandees had assembled for one of municipal life’s favourite rituals: the election of a new mayor.

The ideal RBKC mayor is not usually a table-thumper or ideological firebrand. Traditionally, the Royal Borough prefers its civic figureheads reassuringly upholstered, faintly clubbable and capable of unveiling a plaque without getting their fingers trapped in the ceremonial cord – the councillor least likely to get blind drunk in a Chelsea Flower Show hospitality tent.

Incoming (and outgoing)

The outgoing incumbent, youthful Cllr. Tom Bennett — still the youngest mayor in the borough’s history (playfully dubbed “Mayor Fearless” by The Citizen for his abseiling – although his wife Beatrice was first over the parapet that day) — was generally reckoned to have made a decent fist of the job.

Yet in nominating Conservative councillor Janet Evans of Courtfield ward, the ruling Tory group added a touch of Manhattan to municipal Kensington.

Cllr. Gregory Hammond introduced the Upper West Side-born Evans as “a sassy New Yorker”.

And added: “She’s been a fixture in this borough for well over 30 years. She’s nothing if not an extrovert in everything she does, puts on a good party and takes pride in her appearance.”

That prompted approving nods from the Conservative benches and more than a suggestion that the mayoral parlour might see the odd decent knees-up during the new mayor’s year in office.

Every mayor requires a spare and Somalia-born Abdullahi Nur — Labour and Co-operative member from what his leader referred to as “the republic of North Kensington” — was duly appointed deputy mayor.

After he was somewhat awkwardly manoeuvred into scarlet and black robes upon the dais, the new mayor swept into the chamber behind a mace-carrying factotum to be similarly adorned — gold chains all round.

We learned, too, that the new mayor intended to keep matters firmly in the family. Her daughter Cordelia will serve as mayoress. Whether she possesses the requisite stamina for the borough’s rubber chicken circuit remains to be seen.

Anyone expecting the “sassy New Yorker” to emerge as a right-of-centre fusion of Liza Minnelli and Judge Judy may have been left mildly disappointed. In a slightly croaky yet demure address, Evans struck a distinctly progressive note, typical of a brownstone town house on the Upper West Side.

“It is the honour of a lifetime to have been elected as mayor by my peers. I look forward to representing all our communities across the length and breadth of the borough,” she said, firmly pronouncing borough “boro”.

“My focus will be on further supporting our children and young people to thrive, as well as making sure our older residents feel respected, connected and never alone.”

Later, in the parlour, she told The Citizen that the families affected by the Grenfell Tower fire disaster would remain a priority. “They need to be heard always,” she said. “It’s important to me that their families and children are supported in education and employment.”

There was, inevitably, one slightly awkward moment as Evans concluded her opening address. A few eyebrows fluttered when she suggested deputy mayor Nur deliver his acceptance remarks “in English”. To his credit Nur allowed the moment to pass with a nervous laugh.

Electing the mayor and deputy was not the evening’s only ceremony. Conservative head girl Cllr. Elizabeth Campbell was comfortably returned for a third stint as council leader while Labour’s fiery Cllr. Monica Press became opposition leader.

At one stage during her acceptance speech Campbell grew deeply emotional, reaching for water as she paid tribute to former deputy leader Cllr. Kim Taylor-Smith, who found himself handling housing during the terrible aftermath of Grenfell.

“He did it because he cared,” she said tearfully, her voice cracking and made almost inaudible beneath the emotion. “People needed someone to show up — and he showed up.”

Then came Cllr. Press, all ginger hair, waistcoat and insurgent energy — a gust of left wing seminar room blowing through the Tory-heavy chamber. Looking directly at the new mayor, she delivered the evening’s sharpest line.

“Don’t worry Madam Mayor,” she said. “In North Kensington we speak English — with lots of accents.”

Thank you Madam Mayor and congratulations on your election. And congratulations to Cllr Nur on his election as Deputy Mayor. Just one of the many talented and dedicated individuals that come out of the North Kensington community. We hope you both have a very enjoyable and successful year and look forward to welcoming you frequently in North Kensington.

And thank you Cllr Campbell for your welcome …

You note that your vote share rose and we in the Labour party are happy to take some credit in saving you all in the south gym membership and getting you out on the doorstep far more than in previous elections as you faced opposition from 2 parties in the south and we recognise your

hard work in trying to take St Helen’s. Our commiserations. But the Tory party has never had a mandate in North Kensington and once again the Labour Party and 13 Labour councillors represent all 5 wards in the Republic of North Kensington.

Cllr Monica Press

And I want to note and congratulate the Lib Dems in now having all three seats in the Estate of Earl’s Court a mark of the three candidates hard work, the awful neglect of so many residents in Earls Court by this council and the many years of hard work and casework by Cllr Wade. 

Congratulations Cllrs. So we now have 16 alternative voices in this Chamber.

But jesting apart. It is a time for reflection for both we main parties as voters have made it clear they want more choice and the days of two party politics are numbered. A 37% turn out although a little better than usual is nothing to be proud of and within that % we must recognise that a number of voters who did turn out voted for other parties. Reform 10% and Green 8%.

National and International issues may have influenced our voters here in Kensington & Chelsea but this opposition party will be focusing on local borough level issues and the key issues impacting the just under 150,000 in our wards, and also the many hard working but struggling residents across this borough, such as the many forgotten and marginalised residents in council and Housing Association housing and over-priced private rentals in the south of the borough.

It is time for all of us in the chamber to recognise the importance of this Council’s Charter for Public Participation and how it is understood and implemented by all of us and officers, not just the final 6 week on-line consultation process but the key stages and the very first pledge this council makes as regards it’s values and behaviour that states this Council “accepts the principle that those impacted upon by major proposals or actions should be given an opportunity to be involved in advance” in advance.

The first pledge this Labour Group makes in its 2026 Manifesto is “to ensure that local voices are heard by decision makers” and that we will “Keep our residents fully informed and consulted on all changes in the ward that affect them and their neighbourhood”. This is a key priority for us in opposition as we pledge to work for all our residents regardless of who they voted for.

The majority party may be looking to celebrate as they enter the 61st year of controlling this Council but it is shocking and shameful that as RBKC remains one of the richest boroughs in the UK it remains the most unequal borough in Britain and this divide is deepening with stark contrasts in wealth, health and life expectancy between the North and South. 

We are here to work for a fairer Kensington and Chelsea. In the North we on average die 17 years younger than residents in the South and we have much higher rates of diabetes, hypertension and mental health issues. Low Pay, Unemployment and Child Poverty rates are significantly higher in North Ken than London averages. 

The borough has historically high rates of school exclusions mainly in the North. This divide was highlighted by the Grenfell Tower Fire a totally avoidable disaster. And we will continue to fight for truth and justice for the victims, survivors and bereaved this year as does our Labour MP Joe Powell.

Justice cannot be delayed or denied any longer. Individuals and companies need to be charged and brought to court this year. It may have been almost 9 years ago but we won’t forget and cannot understand the Leaderships’ decision to withdraw the Chairing of the Housing Scrutiny Committee from the Labour Group. This decision is yet another broken commitment made after the Grenfell Tower fire.

Nine years since the Grenfell Disaster, but only nine months since the UK Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) published an inspection judgement in August, 2025, which graded RBKC Housing a “C3” for “serious failings”. Noting major shortcomings, including:

• The high percentage of homes failing to meet the decent homes

standard.

• Backlogs in repairs and incomplete fire risk assessments.

What message does taking a North Kensington Labour Chair from the Housing Scrutiny committee send Grenfell survivors and bereaved and all of us in North Kensington and living in RBKC Managed homes. A council whose Housing Department is in “special measures” should be scrutinised by an opposition party chaired scrutiny committee. It’s unjust, illogical and plain unfair and could take us back nine years re relations with the North Kensington community.

International and National events and policies will continue to impact on us here in RBKC and we recognise the challenges to this council by the cost of living crisis and fair funding calculations for borough level funding and we are here to assist and help with the many difficult choices that this Council will have to take over the next four years. Although far less difficult than many poorer London boroughs.

We’re here to help…we’re here to work for a fairer Kensington and Chelsea…when tackling a reduced annual budget and funding, this Council’s instinct was to immediately focus on, briefly consult on and then reduce the Council Tax reductions offered to the poorest families in this borough. Saving a mere £440,000 at the expense of the very poorest 5,000 residents. 

And only later be reluctantly dragged into raising the Council Tax on second homes of some of the richest residents in the borough by 5% – a solution to the underfunding suggested by the Govt – and resulting in extra income calculated at £12million p.a. We’re here to ensure you take the fairer choice first time.

So we’re very pleased to be back in numbers. We’re skilled, organised, informed and united, and we will be a serious, responsible and active opposition. Committed to ensuring services, opportunities and funding are more fairly shared across this borough. 

And hopefully save this council enough money that by 2030 it can afford a few more chairs for candidates at the election night count!

Every main national newspaper covered it in depth and hundreds of news websites followed those stories.  Here is a small selection from the cuttings file.

The BBC’s news item by local democracy reporter Charlotte Lillywhite

A correction in The Guardian

How AI reacted …in typically puerile fashion!

Russell Harris KC (King’s Counsel) gave an impassioned statement last August at a meeting of Hounslow Council’s planning committee AGAINST a 42m high development known as 1 Burlington Lane by Hogarth Roundabout in Chiswick.

The Citizen makes no suggestion of any professional impropriety on behalf of Mr Harris for speaking out on this matter. Indeed, The Citizen applauds all campaigners who take a stand to champion the views of others, particularly in matters of planning.

Mr Harris is a pre-eminent planning KC who has successfully helped win consent for some of the largest and most controversial developments in recent times. As his chambers’ website proudly states, he fought for The Shard, Battersea Power Station, towers at Vauxhall, the £10bn Earl’s Court redevelopment and the scheme to build over Wimbledon Park golf course by the All England Lawn Tennis Club. He represents several Premiership football clubs and is “promoting for” a 42-storey development in Islington for Sir Norman Foster.

Most recently, Mr Harris has represented National Grid in its plans to install a 114-mile stretch of electricity pylons across the Norfolk/Suffolk border. Campaigners and Historic England argued that the pylons will damage country views, most notably of the medieval St Remigius Church in Roydon. Mr Harris told an inquiry last month that the pylons would cause “less than substantial harm” to the view of the much-loved church.

Planning Inspector Joanna Gilbert’s recent decision to dismiss Rockwell Property’s appeal to build its Battersea tower is a significant set back for the company and its legal team.

Mr Russell Harris on the opening day of the Battersea tower public inquiry Photo ©Rob McGibbon/TCC

The citation on Mr Harris’ profile page on Landmark Chambers in London is filled with glowing reports of his successes and professional portfolio. In the final section it declares: ‘He is described as “the king of complex and contentious tall building schemes in central London.”  Previous surveys describe him as having “carved out ‘a second-to-none reputation’ when dealing with major controversial schemes in London“, and as a “phenomenal advocate” who is “good on his feet on the day”.’ He has been nominated as Planning Silk of the Year on several occasions, but, sadly, has never won.

Last March, Mr Harris – a silk since 2003 – led Rockwell Property’s appeal at a public inquiry into Wandsworth Council’s refusal for it to build a 29-storey tower in Battersea. The planning application was unanimously opposed by councillors and by swathes of groups and residents, including rock stars Sir Mick Jagger and Eric Clapton.

During the public inquiry, Mr Harris spoke in defence of Rockwell’s bid. He called the tower “a tall landmark building” that is “entirely appropriate and justified for this location”. He described it as the “gateway to Wandsworth” and the “last work” of the late architect Sir Terry Farrell.

At a meeting of Hounslow Council’s planning committee on 7th August 2025, Mr Harris struck a quite different tone from the professional position he often has to take when it comes to tall buildings. He was critical of the council for granting planning consent for 1 Burlington Lane. He said that residents felt that it “destroyed” the view of St Nicholas Church as well as the “protected vista” from the south bank of the Thames.

The development will provide 132 flats is on the site currently occupied by the disused McCormack offices, which were built in 1985. There is much support for the project locally, not least from nearby businesses that are struggling to survive.

The Citizen has unearthed the filmed recording of the August planning meeting. Mr Harris was joined by Mr Simon Morgan, who was representing the St Nicholas Church.

In the video – which can be viewed on YouTube here –  Mr Harris talks eloquently of the concerns residents and groups have for the proposed development. He is also critical of the council’s procedures during the application process. He has also written critically in some detail about the council and its decision in a newsletter for the Old Chiswick Protection Society (OCPS). Mr Harris is its President.

Mr Russell Harris and Mr Simon Morgan prepare to speak at the Hounslow Council planning meeting on 7th August 2025

During a break in the public inquiry on 20th March at Wandsworth Town Hall, The Citizen asked Mr Harris if he would talk to us about a story. We made it clear that the dialogue would be “on the record”.

We convened to a seat in the hall outside the main chamber and we asked him directly about his opposition to 1 Burlington Lane. After a three minute conversation, Mr Harris abruptly ended the encounter stating that he was unaware it was “on the record” – which it clearly had been. He insisted that any comment he had made during the interview should not be directly quoted.

Mr Harris told The Citizen that he had announced his withdrawal from the campaign to stop 1 Burlington Lane at the AGM of the OCPS in December. At that meeting, he was also re-elected its President.

In February, the OCPS announced plans to seek a judicial review of Hounslow Council’s decision and a legal challenge was filed in the High Court. The case is being handled by Mr Andrew Parkinson, a lawyer in the planning department at Landmark Chambers. According to Landmark’s website, Mr Parkinson has worked with Mr Harris on the Wimbledon tennis club development.

During late March, the OCPS launched a crowdfunding campaign on Just Giving to raise £25,000 to pay for its legal costs for the high court challenge. As of today – 22nd May – the appeal had raised £17,186 from 110 supporters.

Earlier this week, The Citizen contacted Mr Harris to request a comment about the Planning Inspector’s decision as regards the Glassmill site, but has not yet received a reply.

Part of the effusive citation about Mr Harris’ work on Landmark Chambers’ website

The OCPS’s Just Giving appeal had raised £17,1861 from 110 donors by 21st May of its £25,000 target

The story behind the fund raising campaign

From the Landmark website, declaring that Mr harris and Mr Parkinson spoke for AETC

Architectural images of the proposed development 1 Burlington Lane overlooking Hogarth Roundabout and its flyover

Aerial view of the Hogarth Roundabout site Chiswick